She's not demanding that *YOU* pay for anything. You are paying for insurance as a part of your employee's benefit package. You do not get to pick and choose what is a part of that package. It's not like the money comes straight out of your pocket, your part in the insurance premium doesn't change whether your employees take advantage of it or not.The analogy that produces the hypocrisy is that such as Sandra Fuxalot demands that I pay for her contraception, but then feigns the liberal outrage that I would expect some standard of performance from her in other areas related to birth control.
If you were really libertarian, you wouldn't want to pay for insurance at all, it should *ALL* be up to the employee and you're not complaining about all the other things included in the insurance package that you're paying for, so clearly this has nothing to do with being libertarian and everything to do with religious stupidity.I am very libertarian on such. I do not care if Fuxalot wants to fuxalot. What I do object to is having to pay to enable her own elective recklessness, much less the consequences of such. I want nothing to do with either, and feel I have zero obligation as well. A view chimed by many here who are not nanny-state liberals.