OK, I’m coming out of the closet. I’m pro-life.

[iverglas]

100. yes, since you ask: you are the incivil one

The poster said "fuck rare" for a reason. If you really did not understand it (even after reading the several posts in this thread that explain it very clearly), you might have considered asking what was meant by it.

Instead, you made something up. You alleged that the poster objected to contraception.

That little effort was so utterly transparent I can't begin to imagine why someone would even waste their time typing it. Did you really think someone was going to believe, on reading your post, that the poster you were addressing objected to contraception?

How does that kind of tricky demagoguery advance anyone's understanding of an issue? It certainly doesn't seem to have advanced yours.

How does it advance the discussion? Did you really expect to get a reply explaining clearly and carefully why the poster objected to contraception?

I'd say you expected that as much as I expect you to give me a clear and careful explanation of why you beat your dog, if I ask you why you do it.

I want contraception to be readily available
which will result in unwanted pregnancies being rare, which will result in abortions being rare.

Do you honestly believe that? Do you believe that access to contraception in the US is so pitifully bad that boosting it will (not might) have that effect, will make abortion rare?

I'm in Canada. I'm somewhat rare in that I don't have a drug plan, being self-employed. People with secure jobs here tend to have supplemental medical insurance if they live in a province where the public health plan doesn't cover prescription drugs. If they are on social assistance benefits, drugs cost $2 per prescription, which many pharmacies waive. IUDs and long-term hormonal contraception are often available free of charge at community clinics, which also distribute condoms. Reading up, I see the pill is about $25/month, depo-provera is $35/3 months, and an IUD is $300! Mine were always free (and again, those charges don't apply to the low-income or people with employer-based supplemental plans). There is no stupid right-wing interference in sex ed in the schools ... but there is in the coverage provided by the public health plans, which successive right-wing governments have obviously been reducing when it comes to women's reproductive health. Both pregnancy care and delivery and abortion services are covered, of course. So there's no healthcare expense involved in continuing a pregnancy to term.

And you know what? Our abortion rate is not very much lower than the rate in the US. Ditto for European countries where there is ready access to contraception.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/article686691.ece

Abortion rate keeps dropping
Published Thursday, May. 22, 2008 9:00AM EDT
Last updated Monday, Mar. 30, 2009 3:40PM EDT

Between 2004 and 2005, the most recent data available, the number of induced abortions dropped 3.2 per cent to 96,815, continuing a five-year downward trend. The rates fell in every age group except for women aged 35 to 39, which remained the same. {population of Canada is roughly 1/9 the US population}

... The United States has also seen a decline in its abortion rates, with the annual number of abortions dropping from 1.3 million to 1.2 million between 2004 and 2005 - the fewest since 1975 - according to a Guttmacher Institute report released this year.

Almost two-thirds of the U.S. decline was traced to eight jurisdictions that had fewer barriers to abortion and had committed to sex education - a departure from the Bush administration's abstinence-only approach - giving ammunition to those who say that openness about sexual intercourse is the best abortion prevention strategy.

However, experts point out that Canada's patchy method of compiling abortion statistics means there could be thousands of abortions unaccounted for.

So an intelligent approach to sexuality and barriers to abortion seem to be what reduces the abortion rate.