See the infographic below, which can also be found at this link from a pro-choice organization.
At the highest, only eight percent of women don’t use contraceptives for lack of access.
I am glad to see a pro-choice agency putting out information that detracts from their push for access to contraception. Clearly, there are other major reasons why women don’t choose to use it.
Expect the unexpected: Heather Mallick’s commentary on C-36 hearings is good.
Childless people often don’t consider a central issue in prostitution: would you want your daughter to do this for a living? If you are blithe about this question, you do not have a teenage daughter who is rebellious or indeed walks along a local prostitution “stroll” on her way to school. I have talked to career brothel managers, to pimps, who got defensive about this. But then some people don’t like their children in the first place, another issue that runs very deep beneath the prostitution story.
I’ve bolded the parts I find most interesting. People who blithely say we should de-criminalize don’t appear to care about where it happens or who does it. And this is the family angle on the whole thing–can we not have communities that at least pretend to think that children are the future?
Doctors must be able to follow their conscience. An article in today’s Post.
That someone was offended because they had to walk a few extra blocks to renew their birth control prescription does not justify the CPSO forcing doctors to contravene their Charter-protected freedom of conscience.
Great article, as Canada considers C-36, which would essentially implement a Nordic Model on prostitution in Canada.
Europe as a whole is in fact moving towards the Nordic model or even stricter laws. Spain effectively operates a prohibition regime. Earlier this year the European Parliament passed a resolution calling for all European nations to employ Swedish tactics to combat prostitution. In France legislation similar to Bill C-36 is currently before parliament. The United Kingdom already has laws which punish those who purchase sex from forced or underage prostitutes, and a parliamentary group has recommended full-scale implementation of the Nordic model.
In western countries outside of Europe, only the United States is still officially prohibitionist, with the exception of the state of Nevada. Australia and New Zealand have gone further than any country in deregulating the sex trade. But both are struggling with human traffickers, increasing street prostitution, and brothels operating outside the law, prompting a growing debate about how successful legalization has been for those countries.
I just KNEW there was a simple solution here. Rather than curtailing conscience rights, if you want the birth control pill, and your doctor won’t prescribe it, why not… wait for it… go to a different doctor?
If a doctor, based on her experience and research, believes that liberation therapy (dilating and opening blocked neck veins) is not a good option for patients suffering from multiple sclerosis, must she provide that therapy simply because the patient demands it?
What about a doctor who is convinced that anti-cholesterol pills do more harm than good? What if a doctor refuses to prescribe birth control pills because she believes, apart from any religious teaching, that they compromise women’s health? Should this physician disregard her own research, analysis and conclusions and prescribe what she considers to be a dangerous product?
Does it really matter whether the doctor’s belief is characterized as scientific, religious, metaphysical, conscientious, or something else?
Certainly a doctor’s beliefs about what is, or is not, good medicine will sometimes inconvenience a patient. But what would be the consequences of forcing doctors to abandon their professional judgment and violate their conscience in order to pander to patients’ wishes? If the government compels doctors to supply whatever patients demand, this presupposes that a patient’s knowledge, training and judgment is at least equal to that of the doctor’s. And if so, why bother with a medical profession in the first place?
Those who cannot win an argument often fall back on ad hominem attacks. In the past we could ignore such attacks — indeed, they often worked in our favor. But lately they have taken a dramatic turn for the worse. Those who dissent from the prevailing liberal dogma are quickly branded as extremists and declared to be bad people. Do you support the traditional view of marriage? You’re a homophobe who wants to deny equal rights to gay Americans. Do you question the economic benefits of raising the minimum wage? You are a selfish Scrooge who hates the working class. Do you want America to establish control over its borders? You hate hard-working immigrants who just want to enjoy the American dream. Do you believe a human fetus has legal and natural rights? You are a misogynist who wants to control women’s bodies. …
This report addresses some of the wrongheaded ideas out there. The only places, I repeat, the only places a woman can go for effective pregnancy counseling are these crisis pregnancy centres. The only places women can go for effective post-abortion counseling are these centres. That they remain the target of some is unconscionable.
…But truly, writing a statement as bland as this one should be illegal:
The only stories I’m interested in are the ones that tell the truth. Maybe it’s not my truth, or even the truth of the person sitting beside me in the theatre, but I want to see films made by people telling their truths.
I’m not going to link to the article, because it’s a review of Obvious Child--an abortion-themed comedy. Ha ha! What could be so funny?!? I’ve read pro-life reviews saying I should watch it, to be in touch with what people out there are thinking. This may well be true, but right now, I won’t. Because I can’t. Because there’s always been a limit for me–how much I have to repress what I’m really thinking and feeling simply to get by. Going to a theatre where others may laugh at child killing surpasses that limit just now. I will perhaps consider renting this DVD later on with people I trust. So, for now, if you need me I will be 1) at work 2) outside in the great outdoors enjoying summer 2a) in the pool. Thank you.
A beautiful story of a little girl who wasn’t supposed to live at all, and did until she was four. It strikes me that the family benefited from her presence. Aka, what would appear to be a burden was actually a blessing to them, and taught them new things. We choose to artificially push these things out of our lives so very often.
