Wednesday, August 31, 2005

Michael: God Rejects Plan B

Susan Wood, director of FDA's Office of Women's Health, resigned in protest of the agency's indefinite delay (read: refusal) in making Plan B, the 'morning-after pill', available over the counter.

Once again, the Bush Administration has decided to elevate pandering to Christian conservatives above scientific merit and above womens' health and welfare. The worst hypocrisy is that by not making Plan B more widely available, unwanted pregnancies that could have been prevented will instead become abortions that could have been avoided. Nobody should want more abortions. But the holy logic of the 'culture of life' is above concern for such 'reality-based' consequences.

A process that should be grounded in medical science has instead been held hostage to a fine point of theological debate. Does life begin when the egg is fertilized (known in theological debates as 'ensoulment'), or when the fertilized egg is implanted in the uterine wall and begins to grow? Plan B prevents the latter from occuring, thus preventing pregnancy. But those who believe that 'ensoulment' occurs at fertilization see prevention of implantation of a fertilized egg as a murder. The simple fact is that an IUD does the exact same thing, but rationality has nothing to do with this decision. Thus Plan B gets punted down the road in order to pander to a fine point of theology.

People are upset and disappointed at the prospect that religious law may soon govern Iraq, but they would be do well to heed the creeping supremacy of religious law in America.

4 Comments:

At 5:31 AM, Blogger Dimension said...

Abortions and the morning after pill are nothing more than ways for people to avoid the consequences of their actions. One of the side effects of sex is pregnancy. Want to avoid getting pregnant avoid sex. Want to have sex? Then deal with the consequences.

 
At 6:17 AM, Blogger shrimplate said...

"dimension" applies an interesting kind of thinking to reproductive issues, a kind of thinking he probably wouldn't apply to others. A kind of thinking that would deny the advantages of technological advances.

For example, he probably wouldn't say, regarding transportation issues, that if you live a long way from your job that you should disavow technology that would allow you to drive a modern vehicle there. But he would deny a modern vehicle, that is to say a new drug, to those who wish to control their own reproductive lives.

Only a meddlesome fool would say what he said above. A malignant one, at that.

 
At 9:48 AM, Blogger Dimension said...

I don't know of any automobiles that use fetuses for fuel so no babies are killed in order for me to get from home to work using an automobile but I wouldn't mind riding a horse to work if we had a stable.

 
At 3:34 PM, Blogger Michael said...

Well, there's the problem. Plan B isn't about foetuses, it's about blastocysts. There is a difference, though admittedly not in certain theological domains. So here we have a perfect illustration of how religious convictions are being elevated above the law and science.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home




Feeds:
RSS/Atom Feed Site Meter
Powered by Blogger