Imagine this hypothetical: A new pill is invented that eliminates homosexual desires, not just in the person who takes it, but if taken by a pregnant woman, in the baby also. And say it also alters personality and makes people very conservative and heightens gender complementarity (makes men manlier, women more feminine). The idea being, this pill would be offensive to many people, and it would change society, it would change behavior and morality.
OK, that sets the stage. Now, should this pill be legal? Remember it has side effects that make people more paternalistic and sexist, so it isn’t just something you can let other people take. When other people take it, it marginalizes those who believe people should be more liberal about sex and homosexuality. So there will be some radical feminists and gays who think the pill shouldn’t even be legal. But most people will think we should let people control their own body, so it should be legal. Now the analogy comes, should those people be forced to pay for it, so that those who want to be straight and very paternalistic get it for free? What if it was only about $10 or $20 a month, and there were already lots of places that helped poor people afford their straight pills? Doesn’t that make it even more offensive to force feminists and gays to pay for a pill which goes against everything they believe? Shouldn’t they be allowed to at least opt-out of having to pay for a pill which offends them and that they think is bad for society?