Obama "compromise" is not a compromise: Endgame? Imposition of sexual revolution on all of society.

The Obama Administration's efforts to deflect criticism of its contraception mandate for health by proposing a "compromise" isn't working. It's not a compromise.

The administration “shifted” on nothing. It simply decreed that insurers, not employers, must provide “preventive services” (including sterilization and abortifacient drugs), a shell game that has been variously and accurately described as a “fraud” (Andrew McCarthy, in the Corner) and an “absurdity” (the Wall Street Journal). More to the point, as Yuval Levin pointed out shortly after President Obama and HHS Secretary Sebelius announced their “accommodation,” the newly tweaked regulations “would not actually change the moral circumstances at issue in any way.”

Later in the day, on the PBS News Hour, Ray Suarez confronted Secretary Sebelius with the obvious: Someone was going to pay for the contraceptives provided, and who, if not those who purchased the insurance that had to include these “preventive services?” The secretary then took the absurdity to a new level by claiming that none of this would cost anyone anything, as there was empirical evidence showing that readily available contraception lowered the overall costs to the health-care system by reducing the rate of pregnancy. All of which was, on a much graver matter, reminiscent of an old WPA poster-turned-postcard that I recently saw at the Grand Canyon, which extolled Grand Canyon National Park as “A Free Government Service.” Right.

What's the goal here? Imposition of the sexual revolution on all of society. George points this out in an article entitled: "The Libertine Police State: Live-and-let-live is not the sexual revolution's endgame."

These actions highlight highlight the cultural radicalness of the Obama Administration. They want everybody to participate in their vision of condoms, contraceptives, abortificients, and sterilization - by paying for them.