Re: Yet, regrettably, not done misusing it.
Dreaded Anomaly Send a noteboard - 23/02/2012 10:59:32 PM
Yes, I am selecting only "greater than," because "equal to" is no more a possibility than "less than." Contraception CANNOT DISCOURAGE sexual activity, and significantly reduces the chance of something that deters sexual activity so much it motivates entire national policies aimed at reducing sex. If contraception even marginally encourages even one person to have sex, it encourages overall sexual activity, because it cannot deter anyone. The only debate left is HOW MUCH greater than zero its effect on sexual activity is. Common sense, which definitely includes experience with humans, dictates that, but logic is sufficient. Nothing suggests contraception deters sex, nor that everyone with access to it discounts it as a factor in sexual activity (in practice, for various reasons, many otherwise consenting adults refuse sex without a condom.) Therefore, contraception must encourage sex, to an undetermined degree.
Does refusing sex without a condom not count as the existence/availability of contraception deterring sex? If there were no condoms, some of those people might be more willing to take the risk because of the lack of alternatives.
In any case, it seems like this part of the discussion is going around in circles at this point. You seem intent on making simplistic statements about the complexities of human behavior and responses. My point is that there does not appear to be research backing such statements with any degree of strength.
Personally, I sure hope that the availability of birth control does encourage sex, because I'm not a repressed Puritan. I just haven't seen evidence for that.
"A primary effect." If we prefer to use "primary" to literally mean "first," then preventing implantation is a principle effect.
My impression is that the only people who think of that as a principle effect are the ones who are overly concerned with it, i.e. "pro-lifers." A quick check of WebMD: http://www.webmd.com/sex/birth-control/intrauterine-device-iud-for-birth-control
How it works
Both types of IUD prevent fertilization of the egg by damaging or killing sperm. The IUD also affects the uterine lining (where a fertilized egg would implant and grow).
Hormonal IUD. This IUD prevents fertilization by damaging or killing sperm and making the mucus in the cervix thick and sticky, so sperm can't get through to the uterus. It also keeps the lining of the uterus (endometrium) from growing very thick.3 This makes the lining a poor place for a fertilized egg to implant and grow. The hormones in this IUD also reduce menstrual bleeding and cramping.
Copper IUD. Copper is toxic to sperm. It makes the uterus and fallopian tubes produce fluid that kills sperm. This fluid contains white blood cells, copper ions, enzymes, and prostaglandins.3
Both types of IUD prevent fertilization of the egg by damaging or killing sperm. The IUD also affects the uterine lining (where a fertilized egg would implant and grow).
Hormonal IUD. This IUD prevents fertilization by damaging or killing sperm and making the mucus in the cervix thick and sticky, so sperm can't get through to the uterus. It also keeps the lining of the uterus (endometrium) from growing very thick.3 This makes the lining a poor place for a fertilized egg to implant and grow. The hormones in this IUD also reduce menstrual bleeding and cramping.
Copper IUD. Copper is toxic to sperm. It makes the uterus and fallopian tubes produce fluid that kills sperm. This fluid contains white blood cells, copper ions, enzymes, and prostaglandins.3
The focus is on preventing fertilization, not implantation.
The movement is very large, and almost inevitably diverse as a result. Very few people are completely apathetic about abortion; nearly everyone has at least some opinion one way or the other, and since the federal late term abortion law increased awareness in the late '90s polling has never shown less than 40% support for either side. Even at the lowest pro life ebb in Gallup polling, which was also at the lowest US population level in that polling, support was at 33% of 260 million, or 86 million Americans. I doubt there are 86 million anti-contraception Americans NOW, but polling says there are about TWICE that many pro lifers. You would be hard pressed to get all 160 million of them to agree even on what "pro life" means (nearly twice as many support restricted abortion as oppose/support it under ALL circumstances) let alone how they feel about contraception. I think I linked this at some earlier point, but just to be sure:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/118399/more-americans-pro-life-than-pro-choice-first-time.aspx
"The movement" reads more as a collective than qualified statement. I am unconvinced even a majority of pro lifers are anti-contraception, and strongly doubt most of them are, though many must be since there are around 160 million total.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/118399/more-americans-pro-life-than-pro-choice-first-time.aspx
"The movement" reads more as a collective than qualified statement. I am unconvinced even a majority of pro lifers are anti-contraception, and strongly doubt most of them are, though many must be since there are around 160 million total.
I have explicitly explained my actual usage of "the movement." if you want to keep interpreting it to mean every person who identifies as "pro-life", that is not my responsibility.
Also, time to update your polling data. Pro-choice now 49%, "pro-life" now 45%: http://www.gallup.com/poll/147734/americans-split-along-pro-choice-pro-life-lines.aspx
There are a lot of fluctuations in these numbers over the years. Any single data point is not worth much.
I guess linking Dave Lipman was asking for that, but my is a movements leadership, particularly a large movements, does not always fully reflect all member views. I would not call Paul Ryan "ineffective;" last I checked, the leadership of BOTH major parties hope he will be VERY effective this November. 
In the main, I would argue pro-contraception pro lifers have a tremendous effect on the movement through votes, activists and funding. Various pundits claim that reality drove Obamas tactical decision to push for and then retreat on requiring Catholic hospitals and schools fund employee contraception. Personally, I still feel he can gain no sympathy fighting for something unless/until he actually FIGHTS for it, but the basic logic is valid. Barring large systemic polling errors, we must either accept that a near majority of America opposes contraception, or reject the premise most pro lifers do. They may not be a silent majority, but neither are they a trivially small minority.
In the main, I would argue pro-contraception pro lifers have a tremendous effect on the movement through votes, activists and funding. Various pundits claim that reality drove Obamas tactical decision to push for and then retreat on requiring Catholic hospitals and schools fund employee contraception. Personally, I still feel he can gain no sympathy fighting for something unless/until he actually FIGHTS for it, but the basic logic is valid. Barring large systemic polling errors, we must either accept that a near majority of America opposes contraception, or reject the premise most pro lifers do. They may not be a silent majority, but neither are they a trivially small minority.
What the hell does Paul Ryan have to do with anything? He's anti-abortion and anti-contraception.
I have little sympathy for people who choose to associate themselves with a movement which does not represent their views, and then complain when others also associate them with it.
As I have said before, a silent majority may exist, but if it does nothing to curb the failures of the movement and push it in the right direction, its existence matters little.
The notion the movement and its members are unworthy of respect is precisely the problem. Ethically, that people deserve respect even when they disagree with us, even for fallacious reasons, is a cornerstone of liberalism, as in Voltaires statement that "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Pragmatically, if 51% of America identifies with one position, respecting them encourages them to respect us enough not to marginalize our minority. Politically, denying them respect because of their views and/or the basis on which those views are held only supports pro life claims pro choice advocates cheerfully devalue and then eliminate everyone whose existence is unwelcome.
No, that's not what Voltaire's statement means. Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism, and ideas without merit still do not deserve respect. The "pro-life" movement has the right to say whatever it wants, but it does not have the right to be taken seriously.
People outside the movement by definition disagree with it, but the issue has never been and will never be decided on the basis of whether/when a majority believes a fetus is or is not an entity. The "critical masses" are the majority that believes a fetus an entity at various points prior to the third trimester, the critical issue how they believe that should be legally addressed. Beginning from the position they also oppose contraception due to provincial puritanical views of sex and therefore do not merit respect is a poor approach. It can only alienate them, and there is no better example of how counterproductive such alienation is than the support the pro choice position got when pro lifers started throwing around the phrase "baby-killer." Such an approach seems like it should be effective, but it backfires because the vast majority of people recognize it as specious slander against not only their friends, family and neighbors, but often against themselves.
If the supposed silent majority of "pro-life" people who support contraception are upset when the movement gets (correctly) painted as being more focused on enforcing Puritanical sexual mores, then they should speak up about their views and change that impression.
Susan G. Komen cuts funds to Planned Parenthood. (with updated edit)
- 02/02/2012 04:32:27 PM
2193 Views
The most annoying part is in the sixth paragraph- abortions are only a small part of their thing
- 02/02/2012 05:08:07 PM
1083 Views
I agree.
- 02/02/2012 05:20:17 PM
996 Views
Actually, there are longer-acting forms of birth control than the pill.
- 03/02/2012 12:37:42 AM
979 Views
I do think that preventing abortions is their primary goal.
- 03/02/2012 01:08:05 AM
941 Views
If they don't see that link, it's because they haven't looked.
- 03/02/2012 02:42:42 AM
1027 Views
That is a little unfair.
- 03/02/2012 12:48:46 PM
1236 Views
Won't someone please think of the children?!
- 04/02/2012 05:03:27 AM
1024 Views
I think you're leaving out some important points.
- 04/02/2012 03:40:48 PM
966 Views
Ah, the good ol' silent majority.
- 04/02/2012 07:32:29 PM
941 Views
So which moron is feeding you this crap?
- 04/02/2012 10:27:15 PM
965 Views
It worries me when we think alike.... 
- 05/02/2012 01:22:35 PM
1001 Views
- 05/02/2012 01:22:35 PM
1001 Views
Brain waves at 8 weeks are a myth.
- 05/02/2012 08:46:06 PM
1103 Views
"brain function... appears to be reliably present in the fetus at about eight weeks' gestation."
- 05/02/2012 10:42:35 PM
1015 Views
Oh please.
- 05/02/2012 11:13:50 PM
980 Views
Re: Oh please yourself.
- 06/02/2012 09:15:26 PM
857 Views
Quite a telling reply.
- 07/02/2012 04:38:20 AM
922 Views
Re: I quite agree.
- 08/02/2012 06:03:23 PM
1127 Views
You're taking an issue of objective facts and treating it like a day of playground gossip.
- 09/02/2012 03:47:06 AM
966 Views
No, your source, in which there is very little that is objective, did that for me.
- 11/02/2012 02:59:45 AM
988 Views
I see you have continued to provide no factual arguments.
- 14/02/2012 04:53:28 AM
1225 Views
I presented factual rebuttals.
- 19/02/2012 01:56:45 AM
1017 Views
You continue to miss the point.
- 23/02/2012 10:22:24 PM
1108 Views
No, I got the point: You expect me to accept a heavily biased, partisan and combative "source."
- 07/03/2012 01:47:37 AM
1025 Views
The claim of brain waves at 8 weeks is still unsupported by evidence, i.e. a myth.
- 15/03/2012 09:16:14 PM
1065 Views
Well, yes.
- 04/02/2012 11:14:47 PM
1027 Views
A silent majority may as well not exist, if it has no tangible effects.
- 05/02/2012 12:54:34 AM
971 Views
You ignoring it is not the same thing as it having no tangible effect.
- 05/02/2012 02:11:36 AM
1065 Views
Since few people oppose ADULT contraception access, that might be wise in this case.
- 04/02/2012 08:25:49 PM
1055 Views
Re: Since few people oppose ADULT contraception access, that might be wise in this case.
- 05/02/2012 02:11:28 AM
965 Views
If you are arguing most sex ed opponents are naïve/ignorant, I agree.
- 05/02/2012 08:42:17 AM
799 Views
Re: If you are arguing most sex ed opponents are naïve/ignorant, I agree.
- 05/02/2012 10:04:59 PM
967 Views
Re: If you are arguing most sex ed opponents are naïve/ignorant, I agree.
- 06/02/2012 08:57:38 PM
948 Views
I'm done discussing my use of the term "oppression." The Tim Ryan stuff is interesting, though.
- 07/02/2012 05:37:05 AM
1044 Views
Yet, regrettably, not done misusing it.
- 08/02/2012 06:01:32 PM
1135 Views
Re: Yet, regrettably, not done misusing it.
- 09/02/2012 05:30:58 AM
1002 Views
Re: Yet, regrettably, not done misusing it.
- 11/02/2012 02:58:00 AM
1032 Views
Re: Yet, regrettably, not done misusing it.
- 14/02/2012 04:29:08 AM
1096 Views
Re: Yet, regrettably, not done misusing it.
- 19/02/2012 01:54:30 AM
1011 Views
Re: Yet, regrettably, not done misusing it.
- 23/02/2012 10:59:32 PM
1311 Views
There are problems with the implants
- 03/02/2012 01:42:55 AM
990 Views
Any form of birth control doesn't work for everyone, though.
- 03/02/2012 02:37:00 AM
1009 Views
Oh yes, I totally agree! My point is just that there are some barriers to handing out implants 
*NM*
- 03/02/2012 03:38:05 AM
468 Views
*NM*
- 03/02/2012 03:38:05 AM
468 Views
What on earth does that have to do with anything?
- 03/02/2012 01:47:42 AM
923 Views
I was actually kinda with you until you closed with that anathema I condemned in my response to rt.
- 03/02/2012 01:39:06 PM
954 Views
I agree that they have made Beast Cancer a cult but splitting with PP is just smart
- 02/02/2012 05:39:49 PM
1125 Views
I agree.
- 02/02/2012 06:00:17 PM
907 Views
yes she is going to have to piss off one group or the other
- 02/02/2012 06:12:31 PM
974 Views
Right
- 02/02/2012 06:24:14 PM
1025 Views
it is a judgment call and I hope her decision is based on more than my guesses
- 02/02/2012 06:53:50 PM
895 Views
Do you see a way Komen could have avoided pissing off one side?
- 02/02/2012 06:55:36 PM
973 Views
No, I don't. I don't believe I said that?
- 02/02/2012 07:53:50 PM
881 Views
You didn't; I inferred it from the way you phrased that ("if she HAS to..."). Sorry.
- 02/02/2012 08:06:11 PM
963 Views
I know I'm not always clear.
- 02/02/2012 08:32:47 PM
966 Views
- 02/02/2012 08:32:47 PM
966 Views
Just curious...
- 02/02/2012 10:07:49 PM
948 Views
Not at all.
- 02/02/2012 10:24:19 PM
1012 Views
Not at all?
- 02/02/2012 10:32:31 PM
903 Views
No.
- 02/02/2012 10:47:04 PM
864 Views
My argument is based on my belief that the pro-choice women are more dedicated to women's causes
- 02/02/2012 11:17:24 PM
956 Views
Re: My argument is based on my belief that the pro-choice women are more dedicated to women's causes
- 03/02/2012 12:08:01 AM
954 Views
wow that may be the worst advice I had in weeks
- 03/02/2012 12:13:18 AM
917 Views
- 03/02/2012 12:13:18 AM
917 Views
Ooor, the best.
- 03/02/2012 12:25:56 AM
900 Views
ok now you are just being mean *NM*
- 03/02/2012 12:46:12 AM
588 Views
The thread was going too well - I thought we needed the meanness. *NM*
- 03/02/2012 11:30:39 AM
534 Views
Never having heard of any of those except PP, my opinion may not be the most relevant...
- 02/02/2012 08:32:48 PM
1032 Views
You don't know stuff.
- 02/02/2012 08:43:38 PM
995 Views
I know the stuff that matters. 
- 02/02/2012 09:55:08 PM
897 Views
- 02/02/2012 09:55:08 PM
897 Views
they may also be a afraid that PP will go the way of ACORN
- 02/02/2012 11:04:16 PM
1039 Views
"Accused" of = unfounded slander.
- 03/02/2012 12:13:30 AM
1049 Views
did you notice I called tactic disgusting? That doesn't mean it isn't effective
- 03/02/2012 12:45:10 AM
982 Views
The investigation by Congress is well-known to be specious. It's the House GOP abusing their power. *NM*
- 03/02/2012 12:41:58 AM
644 Views
This is so foreign a debate for me
- 02/02/2012 10:16:15 PM
1015 Views
Re: stuff
- 03/02/2012 09:18:53 AM
913 Views
I'm sorry, but what're we talking about when we're talking about "cancer"
- 03/02/2012 12:49:34 PM
945 Views
Obviously not adenocarcinoma, no.
- 04/02/2012 07:36:06 AM
957 Views
I"m not that fussed. I'm just generally leary of research that has results like that
- 04/02/2012 08:35:04 PM
903 Views
Once I looked up Nancy Brinker at Wikipedia it all made sense.
- 02/02/2012 10:54:34 PM
995 Views
Re: Once I looked up Nancy Brinker at Wikipedia it all made sense.
- 02/02/2012 11:03:32 PM
920 Views
After a little more digging I have to say you are probably right.
- 03/02/2012 02:23:14 AM
857 Views
They restored funding incidentally
- 03/02/2012 05:43:47 PM
891 Views
Unless I've missed it
- 03/02/2012 05:56:15 PM
979 Views
You must have missed it then
- 03/02/2012 07:07:13 PM
895 Views
If you're referring to Cannoli
- 03/02/2012 07:19:25 PM
1047 Views
Multiple was not an accidental choice of words
- 03/02/2012 11:46:30 PM
923 Views
Then I agree that maybe this is not the thread for you.
- 04/02/2012 12:41:42 AM
957 Views
Re: Then I agree that maybe this is not the thread for you.
- 04/02/2012 01:53:25 AM
1147 Views
well at least there will not be any doubt about this being a political decision
- 03/02/2012 06:24:14 PM
1091 Views
Re: well at least there will not be any doubt about this being a political decision
- 03/02/2012 06:29:34 PM
864 Views
I do wonder a bit which lawmakers Fox thinks "pressured" Komen.
- 03/02/2012 08:29:50 PM
893 Views
Beyond the 26 senators, I'd imagine rumor of the more reliable sort
- 03/02/2012 08:46:31 PM
962 Views
Well, if they wrote AS senators rather than friends of Nancy Brinker, that probably qualifies.
- 03/02/2012 10:24:11 PM
1009 Views
Judge for yourself
- 04/02/2012 12:01:06 AM
1020 Views
Well, a public letter makes whether they signed it "Sen. so-and-so" irrelevant: It is political.
- 04/02/2012 04:07:20 PM
947 Views
are you trying to disprove the study you posted?
- 03/02/2012 09:20:12 PM
1022 Views
To me, it depends on the nature of the contact, which I have not dug enough to discover.
- 03/02/2012 10:43:45 PM
923 Views
you admit you have no incite into what happened
- 04/02/2012 04:27:17 AM
946 Views
Actually, it looks like Komens new VP (and former GOP GA gubernatorial candidate) had the incite.
- 04/02/2012 04:24:14 PM
995 Views
- 04/02/2012 04:24:14 PM
995 Views
educated guess don't work when you are tinfoil hat wearing kool-aid drinker
- 04/02/2012 09:33:49 PM
893 Views