The Obama adminstration has decided not to block the over the counter availability of "morning after contraceptives". Simply put, any woman or girl (or man, assuming he's either motivated or very confused) can buy a medication that prevents pregnancy up to 72 hours after sexual intercourse.
Naturally, the mainstream media is claiming that this move is fraught with negative implications for Obama, but as this polls well with one of the president's truest bases, single women, where might this be? In reality, this is not just a no-brainer among the supposedly "enlightened" progressives but should be very popular among the strong anti-abortion opposition of same--after all, no pregnancy, no abortions.
Of course it isn't. The "morning after pill" is considered an "abortifacient", even though its purpose is to prevent the very beginning of pregnancy. Plus, that the pill is available to young women without parental notification, this supposedly "encourages promiscuity" (much in the same way that a clean glass would encourage alcoholism, right?). As such, it removes more power from the parent and is a very easily attainable contraceptive which by fiat means acknowledgement of pre-marital sex. Yeah, I know it isn't the 1950's for the rest of us, but.....
What no one dares say, well, what the hell, I will: The real reason they oppose this availability is that is may render abortions obsolete. You'd think that as sanctity of life types they would applaud this. They don't--abortion opposition is a major industry and fund raising tool. After the 2010 midterms, the new Tea Party favorites in Congress introduced bill after bill limiting abortions (that they knew had no chance of passing the Senate). It's a game to them--fact is, with "pro life" President Bush/Speaker Hastert/Maj.leader Frist in power for 4 years and a weak opposition--the best they could do was a "partial birth abortion" limitation, a procedure that accounts for less than 1% of all abortions.
This terrifies the Planned Parenthood phobes to the core of their bones. No abortions mean no contributions. Means a new scourge is gonna have to be found fast and they don't have one.
Too effin' bad.
Most Commented On
- Is it normal for buildings to bow out and collapse like that? - March 11, 2014
- Use Leading Questions on Cross - March 11, 2014
- Ah, I'm just poking the troll - March 11, 2014
- He is a Steven Jones protege and clearly NOT a reporter - March 11, 2014
- Does anyone know who those women are? - March 11, 2014
- As a citizen of the city longer than - March 11, 2014
- I don't think so. This sounds - March 11, 2014
- progressives and the working class - March 11, 2014
- And whiney techies - March 11, 2014
- Self-absorption. He's still - March 11, 2014