Abortion is big business. Merchants of death such as Planned Parenthood, and now apparently the White House, know this. Therefore they promote promiscuity, which will lead to more abortions which will produce more profits. It isn’t difficult. As part of the process, they will try to make sure there are free contraceptives (not to mention abortifacients) for as many people as possible. The result will be “failures” of contraception, which then leads to more abortions. This is why Planned Parenthood would hand the stuff out. It’s good for the bottom line. See this for more on the tactic.
With that as a preamble, I read this at CNA:
Denver, Colo., Feb 24, 2012 / 09:21 am (CNA).- Advocates of President Obama’s contraception mandate should admit that its main purpose is sexual liberation and not “women’s health,” according to a feminist author who supports the mandate.
“The phrase ‘women’s health’ in the birth control dispute is the latest nimble euphemism,” author and blogger Pamela Haag wrote in a Feb. 17 essay.
Access to contraception, she said, “isn’t really about my ‘health.’ It’s not principally about the management of ovarian cysts or the regulation of periods.”
“Birth control isn’t about my health unless by ‘health’ you mean, my capacity to get it on, to have a happy, joyous sex life that involves an actual male partner,” wrote Haag, criticizing White House supporters for discussing contraceptives mainly as “preventive services” for women’s health.
“The point of birth control is to have sex that’s recreational and non-procreative,” wrote Haag approvingly. “It’s to permit women to exercise their desires without the ‘sword of Damocles’ of unwanted pregnancy hanging gloomily over their heads.”
Haag, a supporter of “reproductive rights” and “women’s sexual liberty,” accused “mainstream liberal voices in Congress” of publicly ignoring the real purpose of mandatory contraception coverage.
“Barbara Boxer frames the birth control issue ‘a la mode’ as about ‘defending women’s health,’” she noted. “EMILY’s List refers to the ‘war on women’s health.’”
“I understand why they’ve done this, in terms of narrow political expediency. We’ve been on the defensive about reproductive rights and women’s sexual liberty for decades. We’ve used a euphemism of ‘choice’ for years.”
[…]
Read the rest there.
