It does when ideological rightwingers are appointed to head agencies that distribute family "planning" services to the poor. Bush just appointed the medical director for an anti-abortion, anti-contraception agency with apt name "Women's Concern":
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/112806J.shtml
Women's Concern...has a policy against dispensing contraception, even to married women. Its web site claims that the distribution of contraceptive drugs or devices is "demeaning to women, degrading of human sexuality and adverse to human health and happiness."
Dr. Keroack has also pushed the quack-science argument that sex with multiple partners alters brain chemistry in a way that makes it harder for women to form bonding relationships..
The head of the FDA, on the other hand, only opposes distributing contraception to UNmarried women. Ugh.
How many Americans oppose distributing contraceptives to the poor? Ten? Granted, such a position with some may not be motivated by nobel reasons, but I don't judge what people think, only what they advocate and do (or willfully ignore).
I think all these cultural arguments come down to this...what are WE, as a nation, willing to take responsibility for?
I wager that most Americans are willing to take responsibility for funding preventative measures that will reduce the number of unplanned pregancies.
Contraception may not improve our behavior, but it does reduce abortions.
Update:
So this anti-contraception issue is a big problem. Someone anonymous left a misleading comment below that argues that contraception leads to more abortions. Here is an article that profiles the context of why there is currently a religiously based fight AGAINST contraception of all kinds:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/07/...
This gives you a good indication of the lack of accurate statistical analysis and skewed logic involved in the method of the article's argument:
"The fact that an increasing number of people engaged in pre-marital sex without even using contraception also factored into the increase in abortions. Paradoxically, the contraceptive mentality does not foster increased contraception use or perfect use of it. Instead it fosters increased pre-marital sex, with or without contraception."
So even people who don't use contraception are having abortions that are blamed on the use of contraception? Huh?
If this guy/gal can show me that people who use contraception have as many abortions, or more, than people who don't use contraception, I'll buy the argument.
Otherwise, he/she is skewing statistical data in a twisted attempt to blame a tool that helps PREVENT unwanted pregnancies and LIMIT the number of children families conceive. It is beyond the pale, it seems to me, to ask MARRIED people or even IRRESPONSIBLE people to stop using contraception so that couples may bear the CONSEQUENCES of sex. How much more personal can the right's politics get? When did they appoint themselves the judge and jury of every intimate encounter? What's more, those consequences take a bigger toll on women's lives and well-being so I see this attack as very centered on our livelihoods.
But most of all, why is limiting contraception more important than educating people about emotional and physical health and relationships in an honest and family-friendly way? There are also differences in the way men and women see the role of sex in relationships that hardly gets addressed in a productive way. We can educate people without stepping on American's private choices with extreme policies. I'm all for our Presidents and Congresspeople modeling and discussing their joy in committed, monogamous relationships. Tell me when that happens.
Obviously, contraception does not cause more abortions, more sex causes more abortions. Uncommited sex happens when people are searching for something that they don't already receive: attention, love, respect, non-sexual affection, a mirror of who they are and can be.
It's also very difficult to statistically argue a direct causation that the invention of birth control alone is what caused more sexual interest considering that the 1960s and 70s also saw huge social changes, splintering of families, higher work production for men and women, and especially, the dissolution of close communities.
When our culture's values become more centered on the wholistic health of children, spouses, and all families, we will become a nation that does not need to fight battles against abortion and contraception--in short--we will all respect those very personal boundaries.
We should all be allowed our own moral choices, thank you.
2 comments:
You should read this article -- you'll understand why contraception leads to abortion in unmarried women.
The Role of Contraception in Increasing Abortion
Lunacy. Stupidity.
Don't you have an I.Q. bar for this site, Pinks?
Post a Comment