Anti-abortion = anti-contraception?

One of the first posts I wrote at this site was an in-depth look at a "pregnancy resource center" which, to my dismay excelled at spreading untruths about abortion and did its best to discourage the use of effective birth control. What a strange thing, I thought, to discourage methods that would prevent accidental pregnancy which would, in turn, lower the abortion rate. Maybe fighting effective birth control (i.e., methods that don't exclusive rely on just say no) would be good for repeat business at the "pregnancy resource center," but it is terrible for the unwitting clients of these highly dysfunction centers. Along comes this Alternet post by Christina Page, "Why the Anti-Choice Movement Is on the Verge of Civil War." This is a fascinating look at the anti-choice movement's big schism:

The question now is: 'are you pro-life and pro-contraception, therefore trying to reduce the need for abortions, or are you pro-life and against contraception and you hope that people's lives improve just by hoping it, wishing it so.'"
And consider this--I think that Page's logic is impeccable:

It may come as a shock to most pro-life Americans, but there's not one pro-life group in the United States that supports contraception. Rather, many lead campaigns against contraception. As [anti-abortion yet pro-contraception] Congressman [Tim] Ryan explained, "I think the pro-life groups are finding themselves further and further removed from the mainstream; they're on the fringe of this debate." Considering that the average woman spends 23 years of her life trying not to get pregnant, the anti-contraception approach depends on a scourge of sexless marriages or a lot of wishful thinking.

Where does this lead? If you aren't for preventing accidental pregnancies, you can't truly be anti-abortion. Yet that is the situation with all major anti-abortion groups. For example, none of them support Ryan's legislation that would increase funding to make birth control available, promote effective sex-ed and provide financial incentives for adoption. Yet no pro-life group supports his efforts. Many groups staunchly oppose the use of real birth control (e.g., this one). On the other hand, most pro-life individuals support his efforts. Not surprising, in that 80% of pro-life individuals (90% of Catholics!) support the availability of effective birth control. Page presents many other eye-popping stats in her article. The bottom line?

The greatest opportunity to reduce the need for abortion is to focus the 95% of unintended pregnancies that are highly preventable. The plan is simple: address the lack of and incorrect use of contraception.

This is a solution that virtually all individuals agree on. But all we get from "pro-life" groups is defiance. Therefore, pro-life groups (such as Democrats for Life) are wholly unaccountable to their constituents.

Continue ReadingAnti-abortion = anti-contraception?

Defusing Gatesgate

Thanks to Barack Obama's ingenuity and his faith that human beings should always be challenged to figure out their differences with empathy, we have a wonderful resolution rather than an interminable ugliness. Bold, beautiful move. Here's how Henry Louis Gates now sees things:

Let me say that I thank God that I live in a country in which police officers put their lives at risk to protect us every day, and, more than ever, I’ve come to understand and appreciate their daily sacrifices on our behalf. I’m also grateful that we live in a country where freedom of speech is a sacrosanct value and I hope that one day we can get to know each other better, as we began to do at the White House this afternoon over beers with President Obama.

Continue ReadingDefusing Gatesgate

Verbing the net noun.

The word "texting" sounds harsh and garbled when it comes out of a speaker's mouth. A sentence where "text" is used as a verb, such as , "I texted him yesterday but he didn't text me back," instantly summons an image of a slack-jawed, gum-popping teenage girl- all ignorance and frivolity. The words just sound stupid. Don't blame me- some of us Gen-Yers fought off the term "texting" the same way we did bad fads like Crocs and Ugg boots. Even deep into the aughts, years after "texting", we still said "sending a text message" instead. "Texting" prevailed however, for the same reason that Crocs and Uggs became ubiquitous: aesthetics aside, it was damn comfy and easy. "Texting" might make for an ugly-sounding word, but it came out more smoothly and quickly than the correct "sending a text message".

Continue ReadingVerbing the net noun.

Nature video shows that turtles are full fledged animals

I once saw this activity at the turtle exhibit at the local zoo, and it didn't take a biologist to tell me that I was not misinterpreting what I was seeing. These turtles seem incredibly almost-human, even though they didn't smoke cigarettes afterward. Captured here in living color close-up, I'm posting this video as an animals-in the-wild education video: Watching this reminded me of watching David Attenborough "Trials of Life" series with my then four-year old daughter. One of these exquisitely filmed Attenborough videos, which was on the topic of animal reproduction, included more explicit animal sex videos than I could ever had imagined, including elephant sex. At first I wondered whether I should be letting the video keep running. While I was contemplating my options, my daughter looked up and asked, "Daddy, what are those elephants doing?" I found myself saying, "Those are elephants having sex." I didn't offer any further explanation and my daughter didn't request one. We quietly watched the entire video and now, 7 years later, my daughter doesn't seem to be emotionally damaged from having seen the episode. Oh, and according to doctors polled by the U.K. Guardian, having sex before going to bed is the second-best way to have a good night's sleep. The winning solution was for couples to sleep in separate beds.

Continue ReadingNature video shows that turtles are full fledged animals

To Read Or Not To Read, And Yet to Write—‘Tis A Conundrum Devoutly To Be Solved

I've heard of this phenomenon, but never before encountered it directly. Excuse me, I'm still trying to wrap my head around the utter vapidity of this... I have a MySpace page. Admittedly, I pay less attention to it these days in lieu of my Facebook page (all these Pages...for such a functional Luddite, it amazes me I navigate these strange seas), but I do check it at least once a week. I post a short blog there. And I collect Friend Requests. I received such a request the other day from someone whose name I will not use. Unless it's from someone or something I recognize, I go to the requester's page to check them out. Saves on a small amount of embarrassment. This person had a legit page. Aspiring writer. Claimed to be working on several short stories and a novel. Great. I'm all about supporting other writers. Sometimes we're all we've got. But I scrolled down to the section where he lists his interests and find under BOOKS this:

I actually don't read to much but I do like a few. Twilight, Harry Potter, Impulse, Dead on Town Line, etc.
I sat back and stared at that and the question ran through my head like a neon billboard, "How does that work? Just how the hell do you want to be a writer and not like to read?" So I sent this person a message and asked. I told him that to be a writer you have to love words, love stories... Well, here's the exchange, sans names:
Okay, you sent me a friend request, so I looked at your profile. It says you want to be a writer, but then under Books you say you don't read much. How does that work? You want to be a writer you have to love words, you have to love stories, you have to love it on the page, and that means reading A LOT. You might just blow this off, but don't. If you really want to be a writer, you must read. That's where you learn your craft, sure, but more importantly that's where you nurture the love of what you say you want to do.

Continue ReadingTo Read Or Not To Read, And Yet to Write—‘Tis A Conundrum Devoutly To Be Solved