We now have the answer to decreasing abortion rates and teen pregnancies: supplying women with contraceptives through health care plans.

With the contraceptive mandate outlined in the Affordable Care Act, health insurers or employers who provide health insurance to their employees must include contraceptives in their health insurance plans.

Society, as well as women, benefits from the inclusion of birth control in health insurance.

How do we know that this mandate will actually decrease abortion and teen pregnancy rates?

A four-year study was conducted in St. Louis, Mo., where women were offered free contraceptives, and not just cheap condoms. Expensive long-term implants were offered, giving the experiment more validity.

Dr. Jeffrey Peipert, a Washington University School of Medicine professor, set up the Contraceptive CHOICE Project in 2007, with a total of 9,256 women enrolled.

About 75 percent of the women chose a long-acting method of contraception.

While abortions, repeat abortions and teen pregnancies remained stable in other areas, those rates dropped in St. Louis over the course of the experiment.

Not only that, but rates of teen pregnancy dropped substantially among the girls, ages 15 to 19, who enrolled in the study.

Even though this study is not proof that improved access to birth control caused these drops, it would be foolish to assume that the available contraceptives did not play a role in decreasing abortions and teen pregnancy rates in the area.

Think of a country without unplanned pregnancies, where there is never an “accident” in the bedroom causing nine months of anxiety and pain for both partners.

You would never have to worry about having to drop out of school or taking a sabbatical from work due to a one-night stand.

Don’t forget about single motherhood, though. It’s not as easy as “Teen Mom” makes it out to be.

Of course, there should always be an option to not receive or pay for the contraceptives. If we cross the line into forcing women into accepting something they don’t wish to pay for, we might as well tell them when they can have a child.

Many Christian groups are against this mandate due to their stances that any form of birth control does not coincide with their religious beliefs. This is where opting out of the program would be beneficial to women and companies, instead of stomping on their religious rights.

If a Christian based company self-insures its employees, should they be forced to provide birth control for women who want it? Which is the lesser evil — abortion or birth control?

Sex is going to happen whether Christian organizations like it or not, and abortions have more consequences than condoms or IUDs.

So let’s go ahead and prevent emotional and mental damage and provide women with the means to choose when they want to get pregnant.

It’s a talent to find the equilibrium between giving individual rights that don’t weigh more heavily than religious rights; otherwise, people get offended and criticize America for not being open to all beliefs.

Women have it harder than men in life, worrying about pregnancy from an unexpected encounter or even from rape. If a woman opts for an IUD or contraceptive ring, she will have one less thing to worry about.

All the facts just make sense.

Don’t forget that this only applies to those with health insurance. The government isn’t going around shoving contraceptives into the lives of every woman in the United States.

Religious beliefs aside, creating this optional addition to health insurance is a smarter idea than making it mandatory. Everyone wins and no one gets unexpectedly knocked up.