Yostivanich

Two arti­cles today stood out in my mind today as I went through the day’s news. The first is from New Sci­en­tist, say­ing that access to fam­ily plan­ning and con­tra­cep­tion low­ers the rate of abor­tion. The sec­ond from a fem­i­nist blog, Feministing.com, talked about the Bush administration’s appointee to the fam­ily plan­ning office. This appointee doesn’t approve of con­tra­cep­tion or com­pre­hen­sive sex-ed. The issue I have here is that con­ser­v­a­tives are all about end­ing abor­tion and then they take steps that increases the like­li­hood of abor­tion being used as a form of birth con­trol. It seems to make per­fect sense to me, if you want to end abor­tion that pro­vide for other avenues to elim­i­nate the con­cep­tions that make abor­tion nec­es­sary by peo­ple. Most stud­ies show that 90% of females under 30 to age 18 use con­tra­cep­tives. No mat­ter where you stand on the issue, it seems to make obvi­ous sense that if you don’t like abor­tion that elim­i­nate the need for abor­tion and presto abor­tion becomes a null and void issue. Absti­nence only sex-ed doesn’t work, out­law­ing abor­tion doesn’t work. so what does? Maybe pro­vid­ing con­tra­cep­tion for cheap so every­body can afford it, pro­vid­ing the infor­ma­tion so peo­ple are knowl­edge­able about their choices, and mak­ing adop­tion a cheap alternative.

P.S. Fem­i­nist­ing is a good blog, but they need to learn to tone down their adjec­tives, call­ing peo­ple names makes you look stu­pid and destroys your credibility.

jtyost2

Pow­ered by ScribeFire.