The use of contraceptives in this country has lost its stigma in the past few decades. In the United States, the rise of contraceptives was controversial. Using birth control was a sign of debauchery. Abortions were seen as by most people as sinful, and premarital sex was relatively unthinkable. Trying to prevent unplanned pregnancy simply wasn’t accepted.

However, as times moved forward, several generations of feminists demanded better access to contraceptives as an integral part of female reproductive health. But measures being passed today under the influence of the current president seem to reverse some of the progress we have made in ensuring women’s reproductive rights.

Last October, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey sued the White House for allowing providers to not cover access to contraceptives if doing so contradicted with their personal religious beliefs. But a judge turned Healey’s lawsuit down, saying that it would not hold in court, and that not many women in Massachusetts would be affected by the new policy because of state legislation that protects women’s access to contraceptives.

While it is promising to see that the state does have measures in place to guarantee that women can get the contraceptives they need, the justification for dismissing Healey’s lawsuit does not seem convincing. Just because it won’t affect most women does not make the policy justifiable. In fact, more than 650 women in Massachusetts would be affected by this policy and lose coverage for contraceptives. These women matter.

However, this seems like the general attitude taken toward women’s rights: As long as the majority of women have sufficient coverage, it’s OK if a few suffer. Adopting a utilitarian philosophy for something affecting people’s rights and their health does not apply in this situation. The fact of the matter is that some women are hurting right now from this policy because employers don’t feel like supplying them health insurance that covers contraceptives.

Whenever there’s another attempt to prevent women from accessing contraceptives, we have to reiterate their importance once again. We must remember that contraceptives are important for reasons beyond just preventing unplanned pregnancies. They help women combat hormone irregularities and regulate acne. Many doctors also prescribe birth control to help alleviate the excruciating pain many women undergo during their periods. Even menopausal women take birth control to treat the symptoms they face when they are no longer menstruating. In general, taking contraceptives is critical for women’s health.

Employers are depriving women of this essential health care because of their religious beliefs. They have every right to those beliefs, but they do not have the right to impose them on others.

Employers shouldn’t have the authority to refuse health care to someone if at the end of the day, it doesn’t affect them personally. It’s not their moral decision to make — it’s another person’s choice to take a contraceptive. They provide birth control because their employees need it for their own reasons and lifestyles — none of which affects them. There are more consequences to not having access to reproductive health services than to having them. A lack of contraceptives could mean more abortions, which many people also find conflicting with their religion.

The lawsuit however brings up the historical debate about the separation of church and state. Our founding fathers wrote the concepts of religious freedom and tolerance into our Constitution for a reason. We owe it to our citizens to live up to these esteemed American values. In order to truly adhere to this freedom, policies that exempt people from doing things that contradict their religious beliefs may seem like the appropriate thing to do. However, if it’s a belief that hurts people, it should no longer be tolerated. We should stick to promoting policies that are meant to help people — regardless of someone’s religious stance on them.

If politicians don’t stand up for things like this, then we run the risk of letting other things slide. Things that don’t seem disputable like paid maternity leave and access to abortions might slip away from us. People have fought back and resisted against this administration for around a year now, and successfully so. Fighting for women’s rights and reproductive health is a noble cause. We shouldn’t stop now just because the majority of women are covered. In order to treat everyone fairly and ensure things like this don’t happen in the future, we fight for each and every woman.