Catholic Exchange

Unsafe Sex and Pregnancy the Fault of Government

Written by

Jeff Poor

in

The Big Mac McDonald's Extra Value Meal — $4.75. A book bill for a semester of college — $450. Having the federal government subsidize your sexual behavior — priceless.

The August 22 CNN American Morning, as part of its "College Week" celebration, featured a segment about the rising cost of birth control at college campuses and provided an interesting peek into the background of one of CNN's own employees.

"When I was a student here at Columbia, birth control was cheap and plentiful," said a giddy CNN medical correspondent Elizabeth Cohen. "Well, not anymore. When students hit this campus next week, they are in for some sticker shock."

That sticker shock of course is the rise in the cost of birth control — primarily birth control pills and the birth control patch. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 pared $39 billion in spending on federal programs, including reductions in Medicaid. That reduction changed the way Medicaid-related rebates that pharmaceutical companies pay to states are calculated and that has forced birth control manufacturers to stop offering colleges and universities discounted oral contraceptives.

For the story, CNN paraded out several people who saw this as a serious crisis and to explain why the government should act.

"It will mean that more college women will become pregnant in an unwanted pregnancy during their college student years," claimed Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) to CNN. "It will mean that many will have to drop out of school or face an abortion. It is a difficult situation to put college women in."

However, the CNN report didn't offer anyone who would regard a birth control subsidy as excessive government spending nor did they report on the moral elements involved with birth control financially supported by their government on college campuses.

But, Cohen did manage to find someone to point out the tough choices ahead for some student. "[Stephanie] Davidson [a Columbia University student] worries that these students will have to choose between food, books and birth control," said Cohen.

Comments

  1. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    I have an idea!  The girls can charge the boys per each sex act to cover the cost of birth control!

    For instance, if the pill costs $20.00/month.  And she has 20 sexual encounters a month, then the boy would pay 50 cents per orgasm!  The girl would have to pay the other 50 cents.  One wouldn't want to give the impression that "Johnny" was paying for sex.  Or that "Suzy" is a prostitute.  Certainly, 20 great sexual encounters is worth 10 bucks a month per person!  Shoot!  Even my 10 year old could come up with that pocket change dug out of the couch….(don't get any purient ideas)

    Oh!  And when will Uncle Sam start footing the bill for Big Macs?  We wouldn't want anybody to go hungry.

  2. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Elkabrikir, you are too funny!  You really hit the nail on the head about the absurdity of this.  God forbid these students make the tough choice for food, books and abstinence.

  3. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    But, but, but, but!  Can you not hear what the World is telling you?  "Abstinence is not a choice, it is clinical insanity!"

  4. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    God loves you .

    Careful what you put in writing on this w.w.w, elka –

    The government just may make your 10-year-old subsidize his immature, concupiscent elder youth.

    The CNN buffoonery failed to make note that beer costs more due to government interference in energy resources that are also food and beverage resources. Hence, too, this cuts into their various funds. O, my Bob, they likely will have to stay 1. sober and 2. abstinent.

    And, when it comes to clinical mental problems, there is likely a direct correlation between the prevalence of abuse of sex and such as depression, suicide, etc., among youth in high school as well as college.

    ‘O, my Bob!’ – a line I gave my granddaughter to replace ‘O my God!’ – Bob’s a plush penguin she owns, and the new line is spreading to her Mom and her MySpace friends to give Bob the profanity and God’s dear name a rest. Once ‘OMG!’ is now ‘OMB!’ Pass it on!

    Remember, I love you, too

    Reminding that we are all on the same side – His,

    Pristinus Sapienter

    (wljewell @catholicexchange.com or … yahoo.com)

  5. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Dearest P.S.: Thank you for a lovely solution to a nasty problem in our "secular" society!  I love it (although, perhaps, all those named Bob might object…..!)

    Have you noticed that, in our secular society, it's quite all right to use OMG (whether abbreviated or fully pronounced), but if you ask why they are taking God's Name in vain, you get the blank stare?  I've used this with my daughter (the one who's studying to become a United Methodist minister!), and she says, "It's just a word, like any other word".  So, I say, "then why don't you say, 'Oh my Joe'?, or 'Joe damnit'?"  (My apologies to all those named Joe.)  This otherwise reasonable, intelligent 38-yr-old woman rolls her eyes at me and goes right on using God's Name!  I'm thinking, what's wrong with this picture?  If He doesn't exist, or is irrelevant, why bring up His Name?  The inconguity, the dissonance just floors me!

  6. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    God loves you .

    Aww, I just tell ’em what a dear old lady I knew used to tell ’em: “Call on someone you know better!” And, that – truth, God – NOT to know is the problem. I think even incongruity and dissonance would require more than their apparent ignorance.

    It is one aspect of the modern Protestant feel-good religiosity is that it is a know-nothing, faux religiosity. (For one thing, to Whom do they pray? Or, do they pray? Perhaps, they just mouth words to hear, to ‘feel better’?) It is not only Catholics who require trua catechesis.

    I don’t anticipate catechesis in college except as given through campus ministries like the Newman clubs; now, there’s a thought. But, rational, commonsense, prudent measures are not inherently ‘religious’, even as they are covered in Commandments.

    And, though the so-called ‘clinic’ folk won’t admit to it, a condom offers a minimum of a one-in-eight chance at failing for contraception; and in some diseases, a one-in-two chance to fail protection. Hence, it is boneheadedly imprudent – stupid! – to encourage their use.

    Remember, I love you, too

    Reminding that we are all on the same side – His,

    Pristinus Sapienter

    (wljewell @catholicexchange.com or … yahoo.com)

  7. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    PS

    My husband thought my comment was unworthy of a Christian woman's mouth.  Sorry for posting trash.

    My poorly made point follows.

    Because of easy and cheap access to the pill, men have continued to use women as objects with few costs attached.  It is only fair that they shoulder the burden of what is a two person act.  And, believe it or not, I have discussed this issue with younger people and the girls do feel resentment at the unfair situation.They bear the burden of purchasing  the pills and ingesting them while the boys just show up.

    Thanks for keeping me on track.

  8. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Dearest Elkabrikir, I disagree with your husband (even if he is your "head").  This is an issue of personal responsibility, and until the world wakes up and begins accepting personal responsibility, I have no problem with "calling a spade a spade"……. or a dumb idea a dumb idea.

    And, btw, I am delighted to hear that you are talking to young women about being "used".  They are too inexperienced to realize that they are being "objectified".  Rather like having toilet paper stuck to one's shoe, somebody has to tell them!

Leave a Reply

More posts