Pro-life, pro-contraception blogswarm May 31

Are you as tired as I am of the linking of opposition to abortion with opposition to birth control?

If so, please write a pro-life, pro-contraception blog post on May 31 and leave a link in the comments here. I will do my own post, plus a roundup of all your posts. Note: though I’d love to see some thoughtful discussion of the Pill, the post doesn’t have to be specifically about that.

Eighty percent of pro-lifers are for contraception. Eighty percent. It’s time for our voices and our arguments to be heard for a change. Please spread the word!

EDITED TO ADD: Blogswarm, not blogstorm. Which I actually knew, but I’m not getting a lot of sleep lately.

20 thoughts on “Pro-life, pro-contraception blogswarm May 31

  1. >> I just think they’re incorrect

    Why do you think that?

    Take a look at these quotes from some well known studies:

    In a 2007 study released by the Guttmacher Institute, researcher Lawrence Finer said that the increase in premarital sex among a group of teenagers turning 15 during the years 1964-1973 “may be partly due to increased availability of effective contraception (in particular, the pill), which made it less likely that sex would lead to pregnancy”. (Finer, 2007, p. 78)

    Douglas Kirby, also acknowledged how contraceptives have helped to increase the incidence of premarital sex:

    In addition, access to contraception has greatly increased, and society’s values about sex before marriage—even pregnancy and childbearing before marriage—have changed considerably. For these and other reasons, many young people began having sexual intercourse at increasingly younger ages during the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. (Kirby, 2007, p.29)

    Finally, why this is a problem:

    It should be noted that the pregnancy rate among sexually active teenagers actually declined throughout the 1970s, probably as a result of increased use of contraception. Yet because so many more teenagers had become sexually active, the overall pregnancy rate (the number of pregnancies per 1,000 women aged 15-19) increased substantially. (Hofferth et al (1987), p.46)

    The data reflects this problem as well – taken as a whole, the data does not support the idea that contraception is the answer to adolescent pregnancy and abortion.

    The high rate of people having sex outside of marriage – and dependent on contraception to do so – only sustains the demand for abortion.

    So, my question is, on what *basis* do you think the arguments are off track? I mean, what evidence and what data did you use to arrive at your conclusions that those who oppose birth control are wrong?

  2. Why do you think that?

    Tune in for the blogstorm, and you can find out why a number of people think that!

  3. Jen,

    Nice duck!

    So I’ll repeat the question:

    So, my question is, on what *basis* do you think the arguments are off track? I mean, what evidence and what data did you use to arrive at your conclusions that those who oppose birth control are wrong?

  4. So I’ll repeat the question:

    And I’ll repeat my reply.

    I can get dragged into an endless debate in comments which will be probably only seen by one other person, or I can post my arguments the way I planned to. It’s my blog, so I choose the latter. (You may have noticed from my posting schedule, I’m kind of a slow writer and don’t post that often. So I need to plan my time accordingly.)

  5. Hi, Jen! I will definitely participate in the blogswarm.

    I am encouraged by your information about the percentage of pro-lifers who support contraception. I’d love to quote that on my blog as well. What’s your source?

  6. Hi, Jen! I will definitely participate in the blogswarm.

    Fantastic! I look forward to your post.

    I’m getting my information from this poll. I sanity-checked that figure by checking it against a poll that asked about views on contraception in the population at large, but I don’t have a link to that at the moment. I can look for it if you’d like.

  7. Pingback: LAmom
  8. LAMom, thanks for mentioning the Manifesto. Yes, please do sign, and publicize to anyone who might be interested. In fact…that might be a topic for the blogswarm!

    A visitor to the Nonviolent Choice blog has debated me at length on contraception. My responses include some relevant studies on abortion rates vs. contraception use:

    http://nonviolentchoice.blogspot.com/2007/06/are-feminists-for-life-really-feminists_9275.html

    Along with the scientific evidence about rates, there are some very strong ethical and political grounds for access to voluntary contraception: freedom of speech, freedom of religion, privacy, freedom of religion, freedom of expression including sexual expression among consenting adults,,,the right to one’s own body (because one’s body is not already nurturing a small body that also has a right to bodily integrity)

    The same rights that protect the choice of contraceptive opponents to voluntarily refrain from the practice contraception and to practice abstinence and fertility awareness/natural family planning methods instead…If anyone still reading is opposed to contraception, please make a note of this!

  9. To be honest, you really should make the distinction between pro-lifers who disapprove of contraception (a sizable minority) and pro-lifers who actually want to ban contraception (practically none).

    There are many thorny issues around contraception, including:
    * Does contraception actually increase abortion rates, STD rates, and other bad things?
    * Which contraceptives are actually early-term abortions?
    * Are contraceptives inherently immoral?
    * How did the Supreme Court’s invention of a Constitutional “right” to contraception lead to their invention of a Constitutional “right” to abortion?

    Even with all of these issues, it should be noted that I’ve never seen any pro-lifer argue that contraception should actually be banned. Folks will argue that contraception shouldn’t be given out in our schools, or that it shouldn’t be promoted as the answer to every problem … but I haven’t seen anyone arguing for an outright ban on contraception. (NOTE: Abortifacient contraceptives may be the exception to this rule, but I haven’t yet seen someone arguing to ban them either.) Yet Marysia’s comment about “rights” leads me to believe that she thinks otherwise. Pro-lifers should be able to disagree on these issues without attacking each other or lying about each other.

    I sincerely hope that your blogswarm will be respectful of those pro-lifers who disagree with you. Given other posts on your blog, I am suspicious … but hopeful.

  10. To be honest, you really should make the distinction between pro-lifers who disapprove of contraception (a sizable minority) and pro-lifers who actually want to ban contraception (practically none).

    I agree that this is an important distinction. (And this is where I wish that I kept better track of my blog comments, because I know I’ve had this conversation with JivinJ before.) I don’t define someone as opposed to contraception if they simply don’t think it’s right for them. But neither do I limit the category to those who think it should be banned. I consider someone opposed to contraception if they think that it isn’t right for anyone, and that its use should be discouraged.

    I’m sorry you don’t find my posts respectful. I do my best, but when I find someone’s beliefs and actions actively harmful, I’m not going to pretend otherwise. I hope that even if I can’t respect a person’s views or actions, I can respect their inherent human dignity and treat them as everyone deserves to be treated.

  11. There is a very long, historically based conflating of contraception with abortion on *both* sides of the abortion debate. One extreme tries to make abortion acceptable by equating it with contraception. The other tries to render contraception unacceptable by equating it with abortion.

    This is definitely still going on, and it needs to be understood as part of any debate or conversation on the subject.

  12. Naaman, this blog doesn’t have to respect your views. It’s not geared toward traditional pro-lifers. The blogger seems to be decent about it though, but I think your taken offense because somebody has an opinion you don’t like.

  13. Naaman, this blog doesn’t have to respect your views. It’s not geared toward traditional pro-lifers. The blogger seems to be decent about it though, but I think you taken offense because somebody has an opinion you don’t like.

  14. I may attempt to participate, not that I am likely to have much of anything intelligent to say and not that my journal really qualifies as a blog or anything. Maybe I’ll just applaud and link to those of you who are actually good at this sort of thing. ^_^

  15. Anthea, please feel free to participate! It doesn’t have to be a long post, and LJs definitely count — in fact, that reminds me that I meant to post an invitation in badprolife.

  16. Naaman’s conversion story, as printed on Jill Stanek’s website, is a piece of fiction. I don’t know why anyone would believe anything else that he writes.

  17. Thanks for letting me know about this! I’ve only ever participated in one blogswarm, but this sounds like a worthwhile second. I very seldom blog about life issues, but I need to.

Comments are closed.