As a "P.S." to my last post about Plan B, I want to highlight a few more aspects of the underlying mentality of contraception proponents. Let me draw you attention to an article from an Australian news service. The article itself basically laments the underusage of the morning after pill (levonorgestrel), marketed as Plan B in the U.S. & (according to the article) under 3 different labels in Australia (Postinor-2, Norlevo and Levonelle-2), where it's been available at pharmacies for nearly 5 years. Some of the remarks made by supporters of the "back up your birth control" campaign are rather telling:
Studies have shown such a plan was very cost effective when compared to the costs of each unplanned pregnancy, she said.
"It will be controversial for sure, especially among people that believe kids don't have sex at that age when we know that they do," Dr Calabretto said.
A public campaign urging people to "back up your birth control" and adding emergency contraception to sex education classes in high school would also boost awareness.
"It's quite negligent to talk to young people about condoms and then to not talk to them about emergency contraception, especially when inexperienced users are the most prone to condom mishaps."
I just want to point out how very utilitarian this approach is toward the human person and his/her sexuality; they speak of one's sexuality in terms of cost effectiveness.
Additionally, I want to highlight - yet again - that the whole point of this "back up" campaign really just reinforces irresponsible sexual behavior. Is there anything that would keep someone from using this as birth control? Plan B gives people more reasons not to practice true sexual responsibility BECAUSE they have no consequences to suffer (in the short term - who knows what sort of long-term medical repercussions this drug will have on women).
Also, this mentality totally warps any idea of sex as something meaningful, something intimately shared between two people who are in a committed (married) relationship. When so much effort has to be put into "protecting" sexual partners from one another with barriers such as condoms, or else getting rid of the evidence (which is what Plan B does), how can sex maintain the fulness of which it is capable?
Posted by Genevieve Parker at ContraceptionBlog.com
I should think we could expect a measurable rise in the incidence of STD's as a result of pushing Plan B on the young. This idea isn't original with me, but I can't recall the name of the NRO columnist who first pointed it out. After all, Plan B doesn't protect against STD's, but condoms aren't much fun to use. If you tell kids (or even older people) that they can run out and "fix it" after the fact, this will tend to undermine the motivation to use a condom and will tend to encourage more promiscuous sex, both of which will increase STD incidence.
I'd also predict a _rise_ in unintended detectable pregnancies, because actually Plan B is not all that effective. So if you encourage more promiscuous sex and then put on the bandage of a fairly ineffective type of after-the-fact birth control, you're actually going to get a rise in pregnancies and probably of surgical abortions.