Why do some people draw conclusions or inferences that are not supported by information? There are numerous examples of this; one that has been in the news recently is the Hobby Lobby decision.

Some people have expressed alarm because they’ve concluded that employers have been enabled to interfere in the intimate health decisions of female employees.

This is just not so; the decision simply says that employers in a very narrow class do not have to pay for contraceptive products that can cause abortions. The decision does not prevent women from buying any products that they want at their own expense.

I do not understand why it is the responsibility of employers, insurance companies or taxpayers to pay for the cost of contraceptives. I do not understand why it would not be much more fair for the cost of contraceptives to be paid by the males who benefit from intimate activities that lead to a desire for contraceptives.

David W. Knudsen

Gray