The secular left is a diverse amalgam of various interest groups and
ideologies. Of course, the same is true to some extent on the
conservative end of the spectrum as well. But on some issues the
secular left is absolutely of one mind and voice, and the promotion of
birth control and contraception is one of these issues.
To the left, birth control is central to the modern project of
liberation. Pregnancy and parenthood limit other endeavors, to say the
very least. The project of liberating sex from marriage and sex within
marriage from reproduction is central to the modern quest for autonomy.
The Pill allowed a radical expansion in non-marital sex, for example,
now freed from concern about pregnancy. The Pill represented a moral
revolution of incalculable magnitude.
For the feminist movement, support for birth control and abortion on
demand is rooted in the explicit desire to "level the playing field"
with men. The Pill, feminists announced, was the liberation of women
from the problem of an unwanted and untimely pregnancy. If an unwanted
pregnancy did occur, abortion on demand would resolve that problem.
This drive for reproductive control is a central obsession of the left,
and it has infected many who would otherwise classify themselves as
conservative as well. It also explains what is going on with the
decision of the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] to allow the
morning-after pill to be sold over the counter to girls as young as 17.
That announcement came April 22, and is the essence of brevity for a
governmental agency:
On March 23, 2009, a federal court issued an order directing the FDA,
within 30 days, to permit the Plan B drug sponsor to make Plan B
available to women 17 and older without a prescription. The government
will not appeal this decision. In accordance with the court’s order,
and consistent with the scientific findings made in 2005 by the Center
for Drug Evaluation and Research, FDA notified the manufacturer of Plan
B informing the company that it may, upon submission and approval of an
appropriate application, market Plan B without a prescription to women
17 years of age and older. Plan B is manufactured by Duramed Research,
Inc. of Bala Cynwyd, Pa.
"Plan B" is the commercial name of the morning-after pill
(levonorgestrel). The tablet is indeed a form of birth control, and
some believe it potentially to be an abortifacient. According to the
Plan B Web site, the pill works this way: "Plan B contains two pills
taken 12 hours apart that contain a higher dose of levonorgestrel, a
hormone found in many birth control pills that healthcare professionals
have been prescribing for more than 35 years. Plan B works in a similar
way to prevent pregnancy."
The commercial name of the pill just about says it all. When "Plan A"
doesn't work, use "Plan B." Plan A, we should note, means using birth
control. No one in these circles would dare suggest that Plan A should
mean not having sex.
Last month, a federal court judge in Manhattan ordered the FDA to allow
over-the-counter sale of Plan B to girls as young as 17, reversing a
Bush administration policy. The left erupted in celebration. The New
York Times published an editorial declaring, "Judge Edward R. Korman
wisely ordered the Food and Drug Administration to make the pill
available without prescription to women as young as 17 and to consider
approving it for girls of any age, as major medical groups have long
advocated."
That's right, "girls of any age." Today, with the FDA decision just
released, the Times celebrates the news with this lead:
"Seventeen-year-olds will soon be allowed to buy morning-after
contraceptive pills without a doctor’s prescription after federal drug
regulators complied with a judge’s order and lowered the age limit by a
year."
The paper went on to report:
Like their older counterparts, 17-year-old women will now be able to go
to almost any pharmacy, clinic or hospital and, after showing proof of
age, buy Plan B without a prescription. Men 17 and older may also buy
Plan B for a partner.
So females of 17 are now "women" and 17-year-old males are now "men."
This is made necessary by the logic of the paper's worldview. They
argue that these young people are old enough to make this decision
alone, without parental oversight or medical advice.
The paper further explained:
Contraception advocates have pushed for easy access to Plan B for girls
and women of all ages because the longer a woman delays in taking the
medicine after unprotected sex, the more likely she will become
pregnant. Eliminating doctors from the transactions, it was hoped,
would lead to far fewer pregnancies and abortions.
Again, note the "of all ages" reference. In the March 24 editorial, the
paper included this sentence: "The harder question is whether to remove
all age and other restrictions, potentially allowing children as young
as 11 or 12 to take the drug without medical supervision." As young as
11 or 12?
Following this logic, 11-year-old girls will now be 11-year-old women,
able to purchase Plan B from the pharmacy without a prescription (and
long before they can legally drive themselves to the pharmacy).
Today, the paper began its editorial with this:
In a further break from the Bush administration’s ideologically driven
policies on birth control, the Food and Drug Administration has agreed
to let 17-year-olds get the morning-after emergency contraceptive pills
without a doctor’s prescription. It is a wise move that complies with a
recent order by a federal judge, based on voluminous evidence in F.D.A.
files that girls that young can use the pills safely.
Here is a clue - whenever anyone (including this writer) claims that a
policy reversal means a break from someone else's "ideologically driven
policies," it simply means that one ideology is replacing or modifying
another. The New York Times is the central media organ of the secular
left. It is as ideologically driven as any other sector of this
society. Furthermore, the idea that any serious policy discussion can
be free from ideology is a farce. The editors of The New York Times
merely prefer their own ideology to that of the Bush administration,
yet they write this editorial as if they have come from their own
private planet of ideological purity.
One key insight into the paper's ideology: Note the references in both
editorials and news reports to the claim that evidence proves that
young girls "can use the pills safely." Clearly, the paper means to
speak of medical safety. But what about other aspects of these girls'
lives? Is it morally safe? Spiritually safe? Safe to a tender heart?
No, the main issue in the FDA policy is this - safe from parental
supervision. The morning after pill is now a potent symbol of the end
of parenthood as we know it.
Contact: R. Albert Mohler, Jr.
Source: Christian Post
Publish
Date: April 28, 2009
Link
to this article.
Send
this article to a friend.
The IFRL is the largest grassroots pro-life organization in
Illinois. A non-profit organization, that serves as the state
coordinating body for local pro-life chapters representing thousands of
Illinois citizens working to restore respect for all human life in our
society. The IFRL is composed of people of different political
persuasions, various faiths and diverse economic, social and ethnic
backgrounds. Since 1973 the Illinois Federation for Right to Life has
been working to end abortion and restore legal protection to those members of the
human family who are threatened by abortion, infanticide and euthanasia. Diverse though we are, we hold one common belief - that
every human being has an inalienable right to life that is precious and must be protected. IFRL is
dedicated to restoring the right to life to the unborn, and protection
for the disabled and the elderly. Click here to learn more about the IFRL.
|