... about the joint statement by Senators Harry Reid and Hillary Rodham Clinton supporting government involvement in the prevention of "unintended pregnancies" (e.g., subsidized contraception).
It's terribly ironic that abortion proponents decry "legislating morality" when child killing via abortion is on the table and then turn around and claim a moral imperative to use the power of the state for social engineering programs involving child planning and birth control.
Of course, the joint statement is framed using common ground rhetoric designed to guilt manipulate would-be critics into submission and set the stage for an indignant and politically motivated response to opponents.
Sex education has been the norm in secondary schools for decades and contraception is available in virtually every grocery store. $1.1 billion is already being spent on safe-sex, contraception, and pregnancy prevention programs. And yet there are over 4,000 abortions per day, the traditional view of the family has been eroded and promiscuity is on the rise (marriage is declining).
And Hillary and Harry want to dump more taxpayer's dollars into these failed programs that undermine the ethical foundations of our society under the guise of reducing abortions?
Matt Margolis rightly concludes,
Let's also face the truth, this is just a backdoor means of having the government pay for abortions. What would happen if any form of taxpayer funded birth control didn't work? We all know that no method of birth control (besides abstinence) is 100% effective in preventing pregnancy, so it is safe to assume that some on the receiving end of taxpayer funded birth control (in whatever form it comes) will eventually experience an unintended pregnancy. What is stopping the parents from saying "The government paid for ineffective birth control, they should cover the cost of my abortion, too."
Thomas Paine wrote about how government was a "neccasary evil." If we were all saints, then we would need no government. Government exists to stop people from waging war against ourselves, bassicly
So then it would seem Paine would say that the government is doing the exact opposite of what it is supposed to be doing