The matter of whether “health insurance” will absolutely fix you up in the same way that “car insurance” will absolutely fix your car up, or get you a new one, is far beyond the scope of how it applies to birth control. It would be a good chat over curly fries and beer at happy hour though, and I will keep it in mind.
Yes the matter of birth control is a medical matter but I say that it is not a medical *insurance* matter. If pregnancy is to be considered a disease, it is by any measure the most preventable “disease” mankind has ever “suffered”. Only forcible rape comes to mind as an exception.
But re “Would you deny cosmetic surgery to those born with disfiguring birth defects? How about those with traumatic injury?”, no and no. My earlier definition could not be simpler, and has no implication whatsoever that there is a distinction to be made for life-threatening injuries or diseases vs those that are not. A traumatic injury is the very reason for health insurance or medical insurance or whatever we would agree to call it. And the “cosmetic surgery” of your example is well within my quick definition of “fixing something that doesn’t work” and can easily be defined and defended as something very different from a Hollywood nose job.
If I may expand on that point just a little, I see no slippery slope or hazy line here if we extend it to medical treatment in general. We can all agree that a broken leg in a car accident is the kind of thing health insurance is for, and at the same time agree that some kind of surgery or new science fiction genetic procedure to make our middle-aged legs as quick and as strong as our early-20’s legs were is not.
Your antacid question is another easy call for me: that’s fixing something that doesn’t work. Now as to whether an insurance company should pay for Tums, for for the latest, best prescription, for surgery, I say that’s for them to decide to include in a policy they offer — not for the government to mandate — and for you to buy or not buy that policy.
You are not following what "insurance" does in these cases. Car insurance will not absolutely fix up your car. It will only pay up to the policy limit for a mechanic or body shop to work on your car to fix it to the best of their ability within the financial constraints of the policy. Rare indeed is the policy which will pay for a new car if your old one is older. The only thing any car insurance can do is pay you money for the damage to your car. There are special circumstances where if your car is new enough theory will pay for a replacement new one, but they never give you the car -- they write a check and send it to you.
For medical care insurance, there is no guarantee they will fix what is wrong with you, all they promise is to pay up to the policy limit the medical bills you have for treatment which is very much different than a "complete cure". Yes the matter of birth control is a medical matter but I say that it is not a medical *insurance* matter. If pregnancy is to be considered a disease, it is by any measure the most preventable disease mankind has ever suffered.
Again, you are not seeing what insurance does. Both pregnancy and birth control require medical treatments, although this does not mean that pregnancy is any kind of a disease. Long ago, mankind discovered that the outcome of a pregnancy was frequently better if there were medical care during the progress of the pregnancy. Especially during birth, where medical intervention frequently saves the life of both mothers and children.
All insurance does is pay for this care. The concept of pregnancy being treated as a disease, is a red herring. Every woman knows this and when we make that claim we lose support, and their votes. Every woman I know would much rather give birth in a hospital than somewhere else. I have read about some who would rather do it at home or in a non-hospital setting, but all of them want an ambulance on call, a hospital somewhere nearby, and a midwife right there with them.
At least you recognize that birth control is medical treatment. Medical treatment does not always have to fix something wrong, but it always has to be paid for.
Notice I didn't say "abortion" anywhere in there. That is where I draw the line.
Anywhere else leaves us open to the charges of being conservative cave men. As much as I might not like the entire package, I would far rather give in on non-abortion birth control and let women hear about the values of other conservative positions, than have their minds closed before we even start a conversation on areas like school vouchers, safe housing, lower taxes, government overspending, and all the other things where we have positions and a message that most women are receptive to.