NARAL is upset that the Republican Presidential candidates who spoke at the National Right to Life Committee Annual Conference support overturning Roe v. Wade but yet at the same time have not said anything about contraception.

To that end, they released 5 questions they would like for these candidates to answer. We would like to take a shot at answering these questions because they point out some flaws in the pro-choice arguments.

Here goes. Our answers are in red

1) You support overturning Roe v. Wade. Doesn't that mean you support government interference in personal, private medical decisions that should be made between a woman, her family, and her doctor?

We do not support continued government interference on a whole range of issues (see answer to question 4 below) and are of the opinion that the Supreme Court wrongly interfered with an unborn persons right to live in 1973 when it stated that "the term "person" does not apply to the unborn."

2) If you believe abortion should be outlawed and that doctors who provide abortion care should face criminal charges, then do you also believe women should be sent to prison for terminating a pregnancy?

No.

3) Ninety-nine percent of Americans believe it is appropriate for young people to have information about STDs, and 94 percent of Americans think it is appropriate to teach young people about birth control. Do you support honest, realistic, age-appropriate sex education?

We support what works over ideology and political correctness and it is becoming increasing clear that the continued massive increases in the use of contraception and sex education are not working. We know that abstinence, when taught and put into practice, actually works.

4) Do you think it's okay for a pharmacy to refuse to fill a woman's prescription for birth control based on an employee's personal views against contraception?

Wait a minute. Are you saying that the government should interfere with the right of a pharmacist in his/her ability to make a private, personal medical decision (see answer to question 1 above) and maybe even punish that pharmicist if they decide to follow that decision?

5) Do you believe hospital emergency rooms should be allowed to withhold information from a rape survivor about emergency contraception—which can prevent a pregnancy if taken soon after the assault?

The premise of your question is that one assumes that a pregnancy resulting from a rape is automatically an "unwanted" child that must be aborted immediately. However, we know that most women who abort their child conceived in rape come to regret it. The compassionate solution to such a problem is to counsel the women through the trauma of the rape and to provide for her needs in the future. Insisting on abortion as the solution only compounds the problem and makes recovery more difficult.

Labels: contraception, Simple truth

There is a huge effort to hand out free condoms to millions of people in New York under the authority of the City of New York. So far workers and volunteers have handed out more than 150,000 free condoms made and promoted by the City Health Commissioner and plan to make more available for free to anyone who wants one. They were handed out at subway stations and other areas in New York where millions pass through every day.

The goal is to hand out 26 million condoms. That's 26,000,000.

Cardinal Edward Egan, the Archbishop of New York, rightly blasts the effort saying, "the decision of the City of New York to distribute [26] million free condoms to the public - and minors as well, according to news reports - is tragic and misguided."

Here is the paragraph from the report that got me:

"While Dr. Frieden (New York City Health Commissioner) noted that condoms can prevent the spread of H.I.V. and other sexually transmitted infections, as well as unintended pregnancies, he added, “Abstinence is fail-safe, and reducing the number of sexual partners reduces risk of infections. But for sexually active people, using a condom is key to staying healthy."

So, if abstinence is "fail-safe" then where, exactly, is the effort to promote it? Why is there a gigantic effort to push condoms on everyone and yet they cannot bear to do the same with abstinence? I wonder.

And so from this effort, and others like it, we can tell where the next step will take us. Access to free contraception has been universally available for decades, now, and yet we do not see the fruit of such efforts despite fervent efforts like the one in NYC. What will the pro-contraceptiosn people do next?

The next step is to go door-to-door in your neighborhood asking to speak to your teenage son or daughter. They will probably not want you, the parent, present while they speak to them. They will not want you there because they will be informing your underage son or daughter how to obtain abortions without your permission or knowledge, how to get more contraception without your permission or knowledge and they will also give them the best, most medically accurate "sexuality education" on the planet.

The only other option is for the pro-contraception crowd to give up and admit that we were right all along. I am waiting.

Labels: contraception