September 24, 2006

*Sigh*

It really depresses me sometimes, that with shit like this , I'm really glad that every day brings me closer to menopause. If my mom is any guide to the timeline, unfortunately, I've got about 20 more years of menstruation to worry about.

Emboldened by the anti-abortion movement's success in restricting access to abortion, an increasingly vocal group of Christian conservatives is arguing that it's time to mount a concerted attack on contraception.

Their voices were raised in Rosemont on Friday and Saturday at an unusual anti-abortion meeting that drew 250 people from around the nation to condemn artificial birth control. Experts at the gathering assailed contraception on the grounds that it devalues children, harms relationships between men and women, promotes sexual promiscuity and leads to falling birth rates, among social ills.

"Contraception is more the root cause of abortion than anything else," Joseph Scheidler, an anti-abortion veteran whose Pro-Life Action League sponsored the conference, said in an interview.

...

"It is clear there is a major rethinking going on among evangelicals on this issue, especially among young people" disenchanted with the sexual revolution, said Rev. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. "There is a real push back against the contraceptive culture now."

Whether or not Mohler is right about young people, the sympathetic sentiments of a key leader in the nation's largest Protestant denomination adds fuel to the debate.

"It's always been a touchy subject, but you have to stand strong on your beliefs. Contraception is the root cause of the explosion of the amount of abortions in the world," Mazur said.

OK, let's review that one for a second. Contraception is the root cause of the explosion of the amount of abortions in the world. Oooo-kay. Maybe on planet "Stick my fingers in my ears and sing la la la la la" it is.

"It's new to some aspects of the pro-life world, and it's old news in other parts of the pro-life world. It's just beginning to be embraced more fully by the whole pro-life world," said Mary Turner, 42, of La Crosse, Wis.

That possibility alarms abortion-rights advocates, who warn that birth control, taken for granted by millions of women, could become a battleground.

"You would think that the pro-life community would agree that the best way to reduce abortion is to reduce unintended pregnancies, and the best way to do that is make sure contraception is widely available," said Larry Finer of the Guttmacher Institute, a public policy group.

"But clearly, that is not the case. Instead, we see groups extending their traditional position on abortion into the realm of contraception."

Yes, but this requires us to make the assumption that they really care about reducing unintended pregnancies. That's not what they want. They want to create the reproductive version of the New Socialist Man, but she's a Reproductionist Woman.

It's the difference between good old fashioned authoritarianism and totalitarianism. Thugs generally don't care so much what you do with your own life, especially in private, as long as it doesn't get in their way, and doesn't impede the cash flow they plan to use on their villa in the French Riviera. For the totalitarians, especially the communists, that's not good enough. Not only do they want you to not get in their way, they want you to help with their program... to join up. And even worse, they want you, need for you, to believe what they believe. Or at least do an outstanding job pretending that you do. And if they can't make you, well, they can at least beat you down so hard that you don't have time to worry about your beliefs, because they've manipulated the system and forced you into a de facto adoption of their behaviors.

And the first ones to be brought on board are those without the resources to flee, find other routes, or "corrupt" the zealots behind the scenes.

Unlike abortion, birth control is part of the daily lives of most women of childbearing age in America. A stunning 98 percent of women 15 to 44 who have had sex report using at least one method of contraception; almost 40 million women of that age use birth control, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

Meanwhile, 91 percent of Americans agreed that couples should "have access to birth-control options" in a new Harris Interactive poll of 1,001 likely voters, conducted in July.

"You're going to tell women they can't try to prevent unwanted pregnancies, they can't take steps to make sure they're economically and emotionally ready to have a child? No way," said Kirsten Moore, president of the Reproductive Health Technologies Project.

What's more likely, experts suggest, is an ongoing "chipping away" at access to contraceptive services. This could entail cuts to federal programs that pay for birth control.

That's right, the poor women who already receive so much compassionate care and attention from the dogmatists are going to be the first to lose access. Like the low income and rural women who have already lost access to abortion, and are unable to access emergency contraception already.

Likely it also would involve a state-by-state push to allow pharmacists to refuse to fill birth-control prescriptions for reasons of "conscience."

Rev. Thomas Euteneuer, president of Human Life International, opened Saturday's session with a clear tactical agenda for the budding movement: "It's time to get serious about denying Planned Parenthood funding for birth control or sex education and abortion. We need to hold them accountable for this contraceptive welfare. We have to work very carefully to keep that sword away from Planned Parenthood."

Euteneuer believes a single argument holds the greatest potential for changing how the anti-abortion community thinks about birth control.

"Chemical contraception doesn't prevent abortions, it causes abortion," he said in an interview. "If we believe life begins at the moment of conception, we have to defend it against [this] chemical attack."

And it sounds like they believe conception happens at the moment of ejaculation. You know what's next on the hit list then, don't you? Teh Masturbation!

Euteneuer was referring to the possibility that hormonal birth control, including the pill, the patch, injections and some IUDs, might prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in a womb. Scientific evidence suggests that this occurs infrequently, if at all, and that birth control works primarily by preventing a woman from ovulating.

But there is no way to prove that interference with implantation doesn't occur, which disturbs anti-abortion supporters.

"We can't say it's true, and we can't say it's not true, because there is no test for fertilization" and therefore no opportunity to study the question in humans, said James Trussell, director of Princeton University's Office of Population Research.

Another line of argument against contraception, that it harms relationships between men and women, is advanced by Janet Smith, professor of moral theology at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit.

"When people use contraception, they're not asking themselves, do I want a lifetime relationship with this person or would this person be a good parent," Smith explains. "They're simply hooking up, typically because of sex, and sliding into marriage."

The result, Smith says, is disappointment and divorce.

Which is never the result for people who were virgins until marriage, who married for lifetime commitment, or who have so many children they can barely feed them. No, never any disappointment there.

Damon Clarke Owens, another speaker and president of New Jersey Natural Family Planning, believes contraception changes sex from a "unconditional gift of self" to a conditional act that turns away from "God's gift of children."

"If the sex act has nothing to do with a child, then what happens if contraception fails?" he asked. "Abortion becomes a backup for failed contraception, another way of getting rid of the unwanted and devalued child."

...

But Scheidler is anxious to take advantage of the anti-abortion movement's successes.

"We've been trained to steer clear of discussing contraception, as if it were a distraction," he said. "I'm tired of this `Don't get off the subject' mentality. Contraception is the subject."

"It's not just a side issue from pro-life, it's the core issue," Libby Gray Macke, director of Project Reality, an abstinence program in Illinois, told the crowd Friday evening. "Abstinence is the way to prevent abortion."

"Abstinence is the way to prevent abortion." Except that it's not. And never has been. And never will be. Going back to planet "Stick my fingers in my ears and sing la la la la la" might help with the self-delusion, but it's not going to make abstinence effective.

Not that reality is any obstacle to the truly delusional, or more likely in this case, the dogmatic totalitarians. If they won't join you, beat 'em.

Via.

Posted by binky at September 24, 2006 11:47 PM | TrackBack | Posted to Extremism | Health | Liberty | Religion | Reproductive Autonomy | Shine the Light on It | Sperm Worship


Comments

"When people use contraception, they're not asking themselves, do I want a lifetime relationship with this person or would this person be a good parent," Smith explains. "They're simply hooking up, typically because of sex, and sliding into marriage."

By this gal's logic, then, sex with contraception actually promotes marriage.

And if they can't make you, well, they can at least beat you down so hard that you don't have time to worry about your beliefs, because they've manipulated the system and forced you into a de facto adoption of their behaviors.

Have you read Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi? In the second volume, she writes about the restrictions on women in post-revolutionary Iran, something to the effect of, if you're scared that your headscarf isn't long enough, that your ankles might show, etc., then you don't have time to think about what's happened to your freedoms. There's a lot in there that reminds me of what's happening here today.

Posted by: kcb at September 25, 2006 01:47 PM | PERMALINK

Ni, I haven't read that. I was thinking about it as a deliberate perversion of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, in which subjugated populations are forced down from self-actualization to preoccupation with basic survival. Some studies suggest that it is,quite literally, crazy-making.

Posted by: binky at September 25, 2006 02:00 PM | PERMALINK

Okay, kind of off topic, but for whatever it's worth I think Persepolis (the first one) is great, and I have assigned it in Politics of the Middle East.

But I've only done that once or twice and I don't know if I'll do that again. While those who read it seemed to like it and get a lot out of it, clearly a bunch of students had a tough time with the idea that we should give serious consideration to a text when the text is a graphic novel. Not that that's enough to make me drop a text, but it's hard to work around.

Posted by: Armand at September 25, 2006 02:23 PM | PERMALINK

Well then, can I borrow yours? And I'm surprised about their view of the the graphic novel. I am going through the opposite right now, in that they all love reading Thomas Friedman, which is a book that I chose to show them how not to think about the subject, but also to give them a "mainstream" perspective. They claim not to be able to "get" anything out of Keohane and Nye.

Posted by: binky at September 25, 2006 02:33 PM | PERMALINK

So who should we blame for this - the people who assign and write textbooks for grade school? Those responsible for the low-content articles you read in glossy magazine or Gannett newspapers? The average student does seem to want to cling to familiar reading norms - and be threatend or scared by going outside them. And sure, you can borrow my copy.

Posted by: Armand at September 25, 2006 03:11 PM | PERMALINK
Post a comment









Remember personal info?