October 17, 2012
AT LAST NIGHT’S presidential debate, Obama mentioned Planned Parenthood, which really should be called Planned Non-Parenthood or Eugenics Anonymous, no less than five times and spoke glowingly of the need for every woman to have contraceptives for free. Can you imagine George Washington or Eisenhower speaking of the need to widely distribute chemicals to prevent pregnancy and facilitate promiscuity? Read More »
October 12, 2012
MARY writes in response to the discussion in this entry about the pervasive ignorance of the cancer risks and health dangers associated with abortion and contraception:
Planned Parenthood is proud that it doesn’t just do abortions; it also offers pap smears and mammograms – the need for which is accelerated by the sexual freedom they promote. This is tantamount to McDonald’s offering cholesterol tests or Phillip Morris doing free lung exams. It’s ludicrous. In a country that has successfully banned smoking in public in the name of second-hand smoke and whose First Lady has managed to drastically change school lunches for children nationwide due to childhood obesity, why is no one screaming from the rooftops for people to stop sleeping around? We are in the midst of a sexual-activity related crisis and no one will say it. Where is the First Lady when you need her? Read More »
October 10, 2012
CHARNETTE MESSÉ had an abortion and used oral contraceptives. She believed these led to breast cancer in her thirties. In this video, she discusses her experience. As far as I know, it is not possible for Messé to have known conclusively that either the abortion or synthetic hormones caused her cancer. Nevertheless, there is reason to believe that they did and that these factors have led to the deaths of many others. Messé died last December.
Here is a video about the risks. According to the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer, five women have successfully sued abortion doctors for failing to warn them of the risk.
March 22, 2012
JANET BAIRD writes:
President Obama and the Department of Health and Inhuman Services, as you know, recently decreed that free sterilizations be available to all college-age women under Obamacare.
But the truth is even more sinister. Note the wording of the HHS regulation.
As reported at CNS news, ‘[a]ll Food and Drug Administration [(FDA)] approved contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity,’ as prescribed by a provider,” said the HHS description of the regulation. [emphasis added]
This clause caught my eye, “for all women with reproductive capacity.” Have you thought about the demographics included here? Girls obtain reproductive capacity these days as young as age nine or 10, but almost always by age 12 or 13. This is NOT just about college women.
Read More »
March 16, 2012
THE degree to which the Republican Party has failed to respond to the Democratic Party’s current “War on Women” campaign is breathtaking. Once again we see a GOP leadership that is spineless and lacking in the most basic understanding of what should be its core principles.
In the face of Obama’s dictatorial mandate that employers provide contraception coverage and rejection by Republicans of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), the Democrats are plugging away at the idea that Republicans are medieval misogynists. The Democrats had raised over a million dollars by early March with this utterly stupid campaign.
What should the Republicans say in response? Instead of shying from the battle, they should plunge in. They should point to what feminist values have brought to women: unwed motherhood, divorce, slavery to unsatisfying jobs, high rates of breast cancer, infertility, and sexual disease; demographic decline and children who are unhealthy, neglected and depressed.
Why can’t Republicans launch their own War on Women campaign? They can’t. The truth is, they think the Democrats are right.
March 14, 2012
EARLIER THIS month, Kathleen Sebelius, secretary of Health and Human Services, said Obama’s contraception mandate would not cost the country anything. Health dollars would be saved, she said, if fewer children were born. The Washington Times ran an editorial yesterday on her remarkably revealing statement. The editors wrote:
The secretary’s testimony reveals a diabolical view of the mission of Health and Human Services. For the agency, a human being now represents little more than a debit entry on a balance sheet. In other words, the fewer, the better. Accordingly, Uncle Sam recommends insurers achieve savings by preventing babies from being born and winding up in the expense column.
March 14, 2012
RICK SANTORUM’S continuing success in the Republican race, with his victory in primaries in Mississippi and Alabama yesterday, is remarkable. Though Romney is still significantly ahead and took more delegates last night, Santorum has gained momentum. A candidate who has said that artificial contraception is harmful to women and society at large, who homeschools his large family, who is a devout Catholic and who receives an A plus [correction below] from Numbers USA on immigration policy has captured national attention and is holding it. If Santorum ran against Obama, opinions rarely voiced by major public figures would be aired. That alone would be a great thing.
Truthfully, I am stunned by Santorum’s limited success. Santorum elicits intense hatred from liberals in Pennsylvania, where he lost the Senate race in 2008. But he also managed to alienate Republican centrist voters with his support for the war in Iraq. He is a flawed candidate, lacking in charisma, boyish in demeanour, but he is a man of principle. He will be hated – absolutely hated – by those on the left. But anyone who could change this country for the better would be despised.
Read More »
March 12, 2012
DANIEL S. writes:
While establishment feminism is often a force of left-wing social engineering and base power-mongering, it can all too often descend into an absurd narcissism that reveals how ridiculous, if still very dangerous, the movement is. Mark Steyn brings to our attention the following statement by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: Read More »
March 5, 2012
THE PUSH for free contraception is not simply about achieving women’s equality.
Liberals such as Obama genuinely believe that some of our worst social problems are caused by “unplanned pregnancies.” Think of Obama’s statements about the horror of a woman being saddled with an unplanned pregnancy. Like many liberals, he believes there are few things worse in life than having one’s career interrupted.
It’s not successful women such as Sandra Fluke whom they are really worried about. It’s the uneducated who continue to have children before getting college degrees and settling themselves in lifetime careers.
When liberals read about the rising rate of illegitimacy, they don’t think, “Gee, we need to return to traditional morals.” They think, “Why are these women giving up the opportunity to improve themselves? If only they had been smart enough to use contraception, their whole lives would be different.”
That’s why liberals are rabid when it comes to sex education in high school and to providing teenagers with condoms. They believe if contraception were cheap and widely available, everyone, including blacks who now live on welfare, would behave reasonably.
The liberal’s entire identity revolves around career and achievement. To him, those with unsatisfying or low-level careers suffer unimaginably. Children are great but only at the right time. Society could run at previously unknown levels of efficiency and prosperity if only people were given the adequate means to restrain their reproductive capacities. That’s why cheap contraception is important. Let synthetic hormones flow from the water fountains if need be. Save the common man from his own worst instincts.
March 3, 2012
HENRY McCULLOCH writes:
Thank you for another thought-provoking thread about contraception and politics. While you may have seen it already, I thought I should bring to your attention that a genuine expert on the subject has weighed in, in the Congress, no less. Testifying before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Health, HHS Secretary and “Catholic” Kathleen Sebelius assured the assembled Representatives that they really have nothing to worry about with respect to the costs of HHS’s mandate of free coverage of contraception and abortifacients arising from Obamacare.
You see, silly Congressmen, it is really all quite simple if only you will look at the matter from the social-engineering perspective of Ms. Sebelius: Read More »
March 1, 2012
RICK SANTORUM, whose political shortcomings are serious, deserves immense credit for his statements on contraception in recent months. Santorum is making points that no mainstream politician has dared to make, principally that artificial contraception has led to a catastrophic increase in illegitimacy and single parenthood. Furthermore, he has said, artificial contraception is harmful to women’s health. This is true. According to the Abortion/Breast Cancer Center, approximately half of the increased cases of breast cancer in recent decades is attributable to oral contraception, abortion and delayed childbearing.
In a column yesterday at the Wall Street Journal, James Taranto praises Santorum and seems to agree with his points. But then he makes this stunningly clueless statement:
Santorum has come under particular attack for saying that contraception is “harmful to women.” Read More »
February 22, 2012
AT VFR, Kirstor points out what I have noted previously and, that is, even if the Catholic Church is exempt from the abortion and contraception mandates of Obamacare, ordinary citizens who are conscientious objectors will still be required to pay for these services through the required health plans. Therefore, it is not enough for the Church to seek an exemption for itself. It should fight Obamacare as a whole.
Also, leaving aside the moral objections, any health plan that funds abortion and oral contraceptives is not a health plan in anything but name. Abortion and contraceptives harm the physical health of women. They are known causes of cancer. A health plan that subsidizes abortion and oral contraceptives is like an exercise plan that requires people to sit and not move.
February 12, 2012
ANDREW writes:
I read your recent blog posts on contraception, culture, white fertility and parenting with great interest.
Artificial contraception was introduced in Europe and North America decades before Asia, Africa and Latin America. I am a cancer specialist, and I can assure you that growing evidence clearly shows the link between hormonal contraception and breast cancer. Ovarian cancer may also be linked to estrogen pills.
Further, landmark studies have found that prostate cancer is linked to oral pills used by women. Here is one study. At this point it is not known whether it is due to direct absorption of estrogen by penis from vagina, or due to ingestion through water and food items. But the link is incontrovertible.
February 8, 2012
KEVIN STAY writes:
In much of the recent discussion on contraception and children, contributors mention the idea of happiness. Many today are misled down dead end paths in its pursuit.
I do not know how to better state this without sounding unduly Eastern and metaphysical, so forgive that in advance. But the beginning steps on the path to true and enduring happiness require certain realizations. First, we are in fact the children of a Creator every bit as real as you and I. Second, one of the primary goals of the Creator is that each of us receive a full measure of joy/happiness. Third, all of existence is described and governed by laws and rules. (We have at best a very limited understanding of those laws and rules.) So, given those three things how do we best go about finding real happiness? Read More »
February 3, 2012
MARY writes:
Mike Adams writes eloquently about the issue of abortion and he is right: pre-1973 thinking about abortion is not enough. How about pre-contraception?
Elizabeth Anscombe wrote this of contraception in 1972: “… what can’t be otherwise we accept; and so we accept death and its unhappiness. But possibility destroys mere acceptance. And so it is with the possibility of having intercourse and preventing conception…This can make the former state of things look intolerable…” Read More »