POLITICS, RELIGION, and BIRTH CONTROL
After reconsidering its position, the FDA approved the sale of the emergency contraceptive Plan B, with the condition that it will only be available to adult women 18 and older. However, the agency expects that Barr will work with pharmacies to ensure that the age restriction is enforced. At present, pharmacies must perform age checks for tobacco sales, so the condition should be easy to implement and enforce.
The morning-after pill is a high dose of regular birth control that, taken within 72 hours of unprotected sex, can lower the risk of pregnancy by up to 89 percent.
Plan B has the potential to radically alter the abortion debate, and in fact the process itself. Contraceptive advocates and doctors groups say easier access to the prescription-only pill could halve the nation’s 3 million annual unintended pregnancies, and FDA’s own scientists call the pills safe. In December 2003, the agency’s independent scientific advisers overwhelmingly backed nonprescription sales for all ages.
But the FDA rejected that recommendation, citing concern about young teens’ use of the pills without a doctor’s guidance. This was was clearly a political move meant to stall, or even halt, approval in order to appease Christian groups and other social conservatives. Barr reapplied and requested that women 16 and older be allowed to buy Plan B without a prescription. But last August, the FDA postponed a decision indefinitely, calling for new regulations on how to enforce age restrictions.
It’s difficult to discern what exactly made the powers at the agency suddenly change their minds, but undoubtedly there was pressure from family planning groups and other concerned citizens regarding the government’s attempt to moralize the issue. Senators Hillary Clinton of New York and Patty Murray of Washington had put a hold on the nomination of Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach to be FDA commissioner. That hold has now been lifted in light of the FDA’s new ruling.
The issue should never have become politicized in the first place. Policy decisions should be made on the basis of science, not ideology. The FDA’s intransigence is yet another example of the Bush Administration’s continued pandering to religious conservatives while attempting to enforce its own version of morality, without the legislation to support it.
Women who oppose Plan B aren’t content with personally choosing not to use it – they want to impose their will on everyone else too. Of course the men involved in the decision making process won’t ever take Plan B themselves, but perhaps they’re just concerned about their wives and daughters making that choice on their own.
It’s one thing for a religion to impose its faith values on its followers, but its entirely another for the government to do so. A religion makes doctrine for its followers, but governments make laws for everyone.
This sort of thing isn’t new for the Catholic Church, which has long opposed birth control. And many Christian conservatives oppose its use by teens, believing that it will promote promiscuity. But millions of Christians simply ignore their churches in favor of their own conscience and a desire to control their reproductive choices.
The problem with trying to impose ideology is that not everyone shares the same beliefs or values. Furthermore, religious or moral “values” can have devastating consequences. Condoms can help prevent STD’s, such as AIDS, as well as unintended pregnancies. Abstinence is not a realistic alternative for everyone. And Plan B will also allow women to control reproduction and avoid a surgical abortion procedure when a fetus is developed.
It is inexcusable for the religious right, and the administration, to have taken such a strong stance against birth control. It’s one thing to oppose abortion, but entirely another to oppose birth control. You can’t have it both ways. But religious conservatives like to exercise control. The Catholic Church, for instance, believes that nothing should interfere with the natural reproductive process, and that people should take the chance of pregnancy each and every time they engage in sex. This is irrational, illogical, and ill conceived. In many parts of the world it is just maintaining a cycle of poverty.
The Church may advocate the “rhythm method,” but most of the Catholic Third World seems to be entirely unfamiliar with it. At least in part, the Church shares the blame for the out of control birth-rate in places like Latin America and parts of Africa. Those large Catholic populations have been admonished by the Church against the “sin” of birth control. But millions of these people remain poor, uneducated and starving due to such high birth rates. Without birth control their lives will never change. The Church’s position is unforgivable and responsibility can be laid directly at its feet.
Having too many mouths to feed isn’t the only problem. The AIDS epidemic has devastated Africa, and the historical reluctance of African men and women to use condoms has contributed to the crisis. Millions of them have been dying in mass, and those who’ve witnessed the devastation may finally be getting the message the hard way. Sadly, those societies and their governments never provided education about condoms. As a result, adults behaved like school children when they were first shown condoms, and instructed how to use them. They were simply naive and uninformed. But the horrific effects of AIDS, and the eternal conditions of poverty, have taught them that condoms are a wise idea and, in fact, even vital to their survival.
Standing in the way of condom usage has the potential to be a matter of life or death. Sadly, religious conservatives have historically taken an anti-sex position that equates sex with evil and sin. Anyone raised Catholic has heard all of this way too many times. The Church still opposes masturbation and premarital sex. But if the events that have unfolded in the Church in recent years have taught us anything, it’s that the Catholic Church should stay out of people’s bedrooms, and concern itself with its own sexual issues. Focusing it’s time and energies on truly important issues like human rights, slavery, starvation, genocide, forced abortion and war – not the sex lives of consenting, responsible adults – would be more productive.
In America, religion and personal moral values have become intertwined with politics. The Bush Administration behaves just like a religious organization, trying to impose its values and morals on the public. But the government should concern itself with the war in Iraq, the bloated national debt, terrorism, immigration reform, health care reform, energy policy and global warming. Those are the tasks our government should perform, not acting as a nanny state, which is something conservatives allegedly despise anyway.
Unfortunately, we still live in a time when some people believe they know what “values” are best for everyone else. And they’d love to tell you just how to live your life. The consequences of their decisions on our behalf don’t really matter. What matters is that their will is is imposed on the rest of us. They think of it as “moral certainty.” But others among us think of it as self-righteousness.
Those who don’t approve of Plan B, condoms, or any other contraceptive devices, should exercise their freedom of choice and not use them. But they should allow the rest of us to exercise the same freedoms to make our own choices. We don’t want to impose our will upon them. They should honor the rest of us in the same way.
Copyright Ã?© 2006 Sean M. Kennedy. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without the author’s consent.
