Many pro-lifers here maintain that contraception and comprehensive sex education actually increase unintended pregnancies and abortions, this flies in the face of the available data that simply shows the opposite is true. Firstly lets get down what comprehensive sex education actually is, it is certainly not what is being taught in schools in the US at the moment, comprehensive sex education includes the following; Teaches that sexuality is a natural, normal, healthy part of life Teaches that abstinence from sexual intercourse is the most effective method of preventing unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV Provides values-based education and offers students the opportunity to explore and define their individual values as well as the values of their families and communities Includes a wide variety of sexuality related topics, such as human development, relationships, interpersonal skills, sexual expression, sexual health, and society and culture Includes accurate, factual information on abortion, masturbation, and sexual orientation Provides positive messages about sexuality and sexual expression, including the benefits of abstinence Teaches that proper use of latex condoms, along with water-based lubricants, can greatly reduce, but not eliminate, the risk of unintended pregnancy and of infection with sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) including HIV Teaches that consistent use of modern methods of contraception can greatly reduce a couple's risk for unintended pregnancy Includes accurate medical information about STDs, including HIV; teaches that individuals can avoid STDs Teaches that religious values can play an important role in an individual's decisions about sexual expression; offers students the opportunity to explore their own and their family's religious values Teaches that a woman faced with an unintended pregnancy has options: carrying the pregnancy to term and raising the baby, or carrying the pregnancy to term and placing the baby for adoption, or ending the pregnancy with an abortion As you can plainly see it includes stressing the importance of abstinence and religious values, what it does not do is try to use scare tactics and blame. I find it hypocritical that some pro-lifers are against a program that includes the very things they are screaming about. Now let us move on to contraception, I've seen studies published about falling abortion rates in Eastern Europe since the fall of the USSR and I've seen the responses from pro-lifers stating that those studies don't count as the countries involved already had abnormally high abortion rates . .which to be honest doesn't make the slightest bit of sense to me it strikes me as being a pathetic attempt to maintain the credence of an already failed argument .. but anyway, I'll stick to a small study conducted in the St. Louis area the results of which were published on Oct 4th 2012; In a study published today (Oct. 4) in the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology, researchers provided free methods of reversible, reliable contraception to more than 9,000 teens and women in the St. Louis area. They found that the program reduced the abortion rate among these women by 62 percent to 78 percent. "The impact of providing no-cost birth control was far greater than we expected in terms of unintended pregnancies," lead author Jeff Peipert, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the Washington University School of Medicine, said in a statement. "We think improving access to birth control, particularly IUDs [intrauterine devices] and [hormone] implants, coupled with education on the most effective methods, has the potential to significantly decrease the number of unintended pregnancies and abortions in this country." The findings have implications for public policy, especially given that President Obama's health-care plan requires employers to offer plans that include birth control coverage. This requirement has been a point of controversy in the lead-up to the 2012 election. Between 2006 and 2008, 49 percent of all pregnancies in America were unplanned, according to the CDC's National Survey of Family Growth. About 43 percent of these unintended pregnancies ended in abortion. Meanwhile, a 2011 study in the journal Contraception estimated that unintended births cost U.S. taxpayers about $11 billion a year. To see if access to free contraception could budge those numbers, Peipert and his colleagues recruited 9,256 women ages 14 to 45 living in the St. Louis area through flyers, doctors and word-of-mouth. They also recruited patients from the city's two abortion clinics. Participants were given the option of using any reversible birth control method, from the birth control pill to a hormonal birth control patch to a long-lasting IUD or hormonal implant. More than half of the women chose IUDs, 17 percent picked hormonal implants (tiny rods placed under the skin that release hormones), and the rest chose pills, patches and other hormonal methods. As a result, the researchers found, both teen births and overall abortion rates plummeted. Among women in the free contraceptive program, the teen birth rate was 6.3 per 1,000 women, a huge difference from the national teen birth rate of 34.3 per 1,000 women. Likewise, the abortion rate among women in the program was 4.4 to 7.5 per 1,000 between 2008 and 2010. Nationally, there are 19.6 abortions per every thousand women, a 62 percent to 78 percent difference. In the St. Louis area, the overall abortion rate in that time frame was between 13.4 and 17 abortions per 1,000 women. The study highlights the importance of long-acting contraception methods such as the IUD, researchers said. Birth control pills have a higher failure rate than these methods, because women have to remember to take a pill at the same time every day. But IUDs, which last about 10 years, can cost more than $800, the researchers said, putting them out of reach for many lower-income women who may not be able to come up with that kind of money in one lump sum. "Unintended pregnancy remains a major health problem in the United States, with higher proportions among teenagers and women with less education and lower economic status," Peipert said. "The results of this study demonstrate that we can reduce the rate of unintended pregnancy and this is key to reducing abortions in this country." If even this small study can show a marked decrease in unintended pregnancies and abortions, just imagine what a country-wide incentive could achieve. If the figures on a country wide scale remained at the levels of this study (and I am not saying they would), the USA unintended pregnancies would fall from 3.4 million to 1.29 million and abortions from 1.2 Million to 264,000 .. how can anyone in their right mind object to free contraception? Now that I have mentioned free contraception it is time to look at where the most unintended pregnancies and abortions happen, it is no coincidence that the poorest are those who have the highest rates in unintended pregnancies. what may not be so apparent is that the poorest are LESS likely to get an abortion. Compared with higher-income women, poor and low-income women are less likely to end an unintended pregnancy by abortion. Consequently, poor women have a relatively high unintended birth rate Source - Finer LB and Zolna MR, Shifts in intended and unintended pregnancies in the United States, 20012008, American Journal of Public Health, 2014, doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301416. So this misplaced war on contraception and comprehensive sex education has the greatest effect on those at the lowest end of the wealth status, the most effective contraception is also the most expensive thus pushing it out of reach of the very people who require it the most, same goes for abortion, those that cannot afford it are forced to give birth thus continuing the cycle of the poorest begating more poor children resulting in a greater requirement on the welfare state. The logical thinking of the conservative pro-lifers breaks down completely when faced with the reality.
Made a mistake, my last comment should read The pseudo-logical thinking of the conservative pro-lifers breaks down completely when faced with the reality.
Absolutely And conversely nothing contributes to a national poverty level like large families which cannot be financially supported. Certain churches should be kicked in the ..pulpits
Funniest thing of all is that the religious conservatives accuse liberals of only living in the moment with no thought to the consequences in the future and yet their cry for large families IS living in the moment, we are already over populated on this planet to the tune of 5 billion people, we are consuming our resources 50% faster than they can be replaced (Americans are by far the worst) .. isn't it about time they started thinking about the consequences of their actions upon the whole human race, but no their capacity for consequences only exists in the here and now.
Agreed. Unfortunately we are not going to even start addressing overpopulation until we can stop this idiocy about "abstinence". Especially as there are FIVE BILLION examples of why abstinence does not work!
You can get pregnant from a swimming pool!!!!! OMG it is true You mean abstinence cannot be followed not that it doesn't work right?
People don't - abstain that is and we have 5 billion examples of people NOT abstaining Pretty clear fail eh?
Yes that's why the human race will eventually fade out and the next evolutionary step will take place. The earth cant support this many people and will eventually correct itself VIA famine and disease. My guess will be bugs next after us, its only logical, they are far more successful and organized. After their time its back to bacteria I suppose.
The argument from the "pro-lifers" that contraception and sex education lead to more abortions... would be like somebody arguing that seatbelts and driver's ed lead to "more traffic deaths".
None of the resident pro-lifers feel up to the challenge of disputing this thread, one has to wonder why that is
Mostly because I've never held this stance. But it's not so much whether Contraception prevents unintended pregnancies or not, as to the reality that "Unintended pregnancy" is largely an idea. Economically, it's true that women are impoverished who are impregnated.(But the reverse of this is also true, there are men who simply cannot be fathers, who are made into fathers and then made penniless by the abrasive State). However, Philosophically I have an outlook on "Unintended Pregnancies". Unintended Pregnancy is another word for a 'cop out'. The truth of the matter being, the male and female engaged in sex. And while Fugazi, we've had this debate before about the randomization of pregnancy, that doesn't take 'step 1' out of the equation. It just means that 'Step 1 the first time' doesn't necessarily equate to pregnancy. It's because of said randomization that one-night stands have a much lower percentage of pregnancy(the variable being however, does the woman herself know of her own 'cycle'. You yourself as the man walking into this trap don't know lol). Since randomization in pregnancy has a generally low percentage, it's safe to assume that the more you have sex, the higher the probability of pregnancy. So, is it really "unintended" or is it "unwanted"? Because these two words have entirely different meanings. The woman didn't "want" the pregnancy, but if she didn't "intend" for it to happen, she shouldn't have had intercourse. "Unintended pregnancy" to me, doesn't exist. If it does exist as a concept, does it exist equally for men? A woman can choose to carry a baby to term, even if it's "unintended" on the man's part.(And women can play with birth control, the same way men are often accused of doing). Abortion's lack of morality will always be the crux of my argument. It lacks morality, or a sound standing in ethics. The extent of Abortion's standing is either "We're poor, lulz" or "It's our body". I'm sorry, that's not good enough for this important decision. If life is that inherently worthless then we should pretty much forgo all laws altogether as it pertains human value. If it is deemed to be enough in higher standing, as long as equity isn't reached in the decision it still doesn't pass the "smell test". I don't think that having control over one half of the reproductive process(birthing) means that you have complete control over the entire process. But, supposing that were true then why have the government go after child ailmony? After all, the woman has control over the entire process. If she chooses to bare the child, it's hers to take care of. Not the man's, he had no input on the decision to begin with. Indeed, Fugazi, you're a smart person. Let's try to twist logic where men are politically inferior to women but somehow, they are to take 50% of the "collective responsibility". You and I both know that's unfair and not reasonable at all. In fact, it's the same reason why the woman's rights movement was so prevalent to begin with. Women needed the same political rights in order to exercise them. If men are politically insolvent compared to women, asking them to bare a burden they have no input in whatsoever is akin to slavery. The modern sexual experience in America is slavery of men by women.(of course, it extends beyond the bed and into daily life in this country). If there was a patriarchy(which I've always denied), it died in the 60's and was replaced with the matriarchy. (I'm of the belief that the matriarchy always existed. It's just, whereas men had been able to successfully carve a personal identity for themselves, women took over those same spaces and now men are isolated as well as enslaved. Brilliant).
Nice post. Of course, I disagree with free contraception on the grounds that it requires theft from others - but the rest seems reasonable. If you're going to have sex, and don't want to get pregnant, use contraception. Simple as that. If the state tries to cage you for using contraception, use it anyway - in secret.
You mean like police and fire protection, and street and highway maintenance, and libraries require theft from others?
Does Contraception Cut Unintended Pregancies & Therefore Abortions? Does not drinking poison lessen the risk of death?
It is a straw man argument no one on the right with any influence has ever made the argument about contraception increasing pregnancy rates until you provide a creditable source you are full of crap
Untrue and irrelevant. Feel free to give me no contraception. Feel free to not send police to my house if called. I do not consent. Of course, my consent is not required by thugs with guns.
"...contraception increases sexual activity...And more sex means more pregnancies." http://www.lifenews.com/2012/02/17/studies-birth-control-contraception-dont-cut-abortions/ (Not a credible source, but certainly one with influence.)
Well....your post doesn't compute with reality. You can swing studies but its harder to manipulate the obvious. Are you saying that the number of unplanned children brought up in single parent poverty homes and the number of abortions being done in our society have decreased since the start of easily available contraception? And I'm not against contraception mind you-----but I am against a liberal pro-abortion, pro-"sex in the teenage years is normal"---person talking to my kid. I've been that kid in the 70's....and distinctly remember leaving sex ed class feeling abnormal because the lecturer made it sound like normal, mature 16 year olds were having sex. Guess I was immature! You "progressive type" guys are dangerous when put in a school setting. Keep in mind---when this was going on in the classroom--this is when the abortions and single parenting started to skyrocket. I would say the evidence shows that liberal progressive world-changers need to stay out of the schools.
If you are alluding to taxes being theft then we can agree to disagree, some taxes are required in order to maintain the society, I just personally believe that sex education and free contraception are part of that.
Nice ad hominem, really does your creditability a whole load of good. What do you consider creditable sources, would any of the following pass your judgment level http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/contraception-increases-abortions-heres-why http://old.usccb.org/prolife/issues/contraception/contraception-fact-sheet-3-17-11.pdf http://www.goodmorals.org/smith4.htm http://prolifeaction.org/faq/stand.php http://studentsforlife.org/contraception/ and from this very site http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=314506&highlight=contraception,+abortion,+increase http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/how-planned-parenthood-hooks-kids-on-sex-warning-graphic-material
and rightly so, however I've been here long enough to know that my 'many' is in fact a reality, and of the forum rules allowed it I would place the forum names of those that do right here.