Recently, the Obama administration released a mandate that would force religiously funded organizations (such as schools, but not churches themselves) to bundle contraception in with their health insurance plans. This caused an outcry from Catholics whose religious doctrine forbids all artificial contraception. They viewed it as a direct violation of the First Amendment and the separation of church and state.

Although President Obama did propose new regulations that would not force the institutions to cover the insurance directly, contraception will still be covered for free from the insurance companies.

The outcry is completely understandable – this mandate attacks religious views and liberties. But the answer to whether or not President Obama is in the right lies in one question: Should women’s health rise above religious beliefs in the eyes of the State?

In short – Yes.

A longer argument – The protection of the people must be the first priority of the government. Their general safety and health is paramount above all else. If this means bending a few constitutional laws, then that is something we just have to risk.

In the end, the mandate (especially the reformed one) is not asking too much. The government is neither taking away the right to free religion nor the right to express one’s beliefs. And while church doctrine is against contraception, many Catholics still use it, anyway.

And once again, the organizations that would cover for contraception are not even the churches themselves. They are only church funded. The wall between church and state cannot be built so high as to make the church completely autonomous from the government. Church run businesses cannot play by their own rules and must subject themselves to the same rules and regulations as the rest of the country’s businesses.

While his contraception mandate is a risky move, President Obama made the right choice. The health of the people must come above all else.