Contraception = Less Abortion?

[Jedster]

One thing that has always struck me as stupid is the reluctance of pro-lifers to embrace contraception as a tool in fighting abortion. They always seem more interested in fighting a political fight than actually doing something productive.

With that said, I decided to take a look at attitudes towards choice in states and the policies of that state towards contraception.

It turns out that 23 states have requirements that health care plans that cover prescription drugs also cover contraception. One would think that pro-lifers would support this because it should lead to less unwanted pregnancies.

But of the 10 states that are majority pro-life (according to Survey USA), only 2 require prescription drug plans to cover contraception. In contrast, all 10 of the top 10 most pro-choice states (according to the same poll) require Rx drug plans to cover contraception. In fact, 17 of the top 25 most pro-choice states boast this requirement.

This just really baffles me. You'd think that we could find some common ground here among pro-lifers and pro-choicers, but apparently not.

Here's a link to the poll if you're interested:

http://www.surveyusa.com/50State2005...tedbyState.htm

[JackWhite]

This isn't totally responding to the point you made, but do people really need the government to pay for their contraception? I spend a few dollars for a box of condoms. Can't other people? It is not like these things cost $5000.

I agree that you would think pro-lifers would want to help people not get into the position to need an abortion. But, many of them are religious and, correct me if I'm wrong, much of Christianity disproves of contraception.
For the second point, last time I bought a box of condoms it was closer to ten dollars than a few. And no girlfriend? The pill is very cost-effective if you are getting laid constantly.

[JackWhite]

[ QUOTE ]
much of Christianity disproves of contraception.

[/ QUOTE ]

As far as I know, the Catholic church is the only major Christian group to have a position against contraception. But the majority of Catholics in the US and Europe do not abide by that official stand. I am willing to say that 80% or so of American Christians believe in contraception.

[bholdr]

[ QUOTE ]

As far as I know, the Catholic church is the only major Christian group to have a position against contraception. But the majority of Catholics in the US and Europe do not abide by that official stand. I am willing to say that 80% or so of American Christians believe in contraception.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd even say that that figure is low.


BUT...


Most american christians, especially modern-day evangelicals, are against teaching the use of contraception because they feel that such non-abstinence-only education increses promiscuity, which should really be the debate.

as far as i know, only looneys think that contraception is not effective as birth control, but there is a legitamate debate about weather or not teaching about condoms, etc in schools will increse teen promiscuity.

i geuss a lot of it comes down to weather one sees teen sex as an evil in itself, or if one feels that the harmful effects (pregnancy and thus abortion, disease, psychological damage from irresponsibile sexuality and so on) that result from teenage and premarital sex are the real problem. I aggree with the latter position, since stopping teens from getting it on is like trying to roll back the tides. we should thus, through responsible and balanced sex-ed, try to encourage responsible sexuality in the unmarried population.

btw, i still think you're jaxmike... [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]