Replies

If opposition to an aggressive expansion of the ingredients of Plan B (The morning after pill, not the tax plan) to be made freely to children anywhere and everywhere is not controversial among conservatives, then it would have simply happened long ago, unless it really is a drug that requires a doctor's supervision for safe (to the taker) use.

The topic is standard birth control pills. The ones tens of millions of American women use. No, those are not controversial to most Americans - and no, those are not controversial to most conservatives. You seem to be conflating morning after type pills with regular old birth control pills. And besides, there are all sorts of ways to self induce a miscarriage, we don't go around banning everything that might be used to do that.

Contraception is not controversial. Only a tiny percentage of people would oppose it. Supporting making birth control pills 'over the counter' is most certainly not going split the conservative coalition. YOU apparently don't like birth control pills and are trying to claim you have huge numbers that agree with you. The truth is you just don't.

Lets get the government out of regulation so many pharmaceuticals. Many more drugs that currently require a prescription should be sold 'over the counter'. Let the consumer that is willing to do their own research save money by not having to go to a doctor every time they need an antibiotic, skin creams, things like birth control pills, etc, etc.

those are not controversial to most conservatives.

Even if it is controversial to a sizable minority among those who describe themselves as conservative, that would constitute a wedge issue.

The topic is standard birth control pills.

There is no "standard" birth control pill just as there are no "standard" analgesic (to compare with something else widely available OTC). There are many distinct types. I don't claim there are a huge number who agree with me, but abandoning truth is no way to promote it.

All of us here have some opinions that are held by only a tiny number of those who describe themselves as conservatives, let alone Americans at large. And yet we do stand up for our beliefs.

You seem to be conflating morning after type pills with regular old birth control pills.

No. Plan B is primarily a strong dosage of the same ingredients used in some of the more popular artificial contraceptive pills. From wikianswers (a presumably not conservatively biased source)

Will plan b have side effects on babies later in life? Answer: Plan B doesn't affect future fertility or the health of future children, and it doesn't end or harm an existing pregnancy. Remember that the ingredients in Plan B have been used for many years in birth control pills. They have a long safety record.

Most modern "standard" birth control pills have several mechanisms to prevent a baby, some of those mechanisms come into play after implantation. The very early birth control pills were high-estrogen, with more side-effects. The move to remove the side-effects introduces a significant number of conceived children who die. Before Plan B was formally marketed, using multiple "standard" birth control pills was promoted as an off-label way to get the same effect.

Many more drugs that currently require a prescription should be sold 'over the counter'.

I agree that this could be considered. I am always amazed that the libertarians don't use this approach to move towards a relaxing of attitudes towards narcotics. They will argue that they have a right to put LSD or heroin in their bodies if they see sit. I want to say, "Whoa, man! Let's start with Amoxyicillin, and see how that goes?" I can only be led to believe that they aren't really thinking of higher concepts of individual liberty, but that they mainly want to get wasted. (BTW, I am of course familiar with arguments against widespread non-prescription use of anti-biotics, it just shows that this is not always an easy issue).

One last reason why this is a wedge issue: for whatever size minority holds my position, there is not a lot of room to compromise like one can on tax rates, or penalties under the Endangered Species Act. Even if the use of oral contraceptives were morally good or neutral (and I am of course omitting the less common use of these pills for therapeutic treatment, such as endometriosis which should remain by prescription), the movement to change the current regs through the political system would be more libertarian than traditionally conservative (which would tend to maintain things that are not broken). A conservative position (IF the use of these things were morally neutral) would be to let the states decide for themselves, knowing that some would stock up over the state border the way they do for cigarettes and vodka.

Because this is an issue of Natural Law, those of us who strive to abide by it feel repelled by anyone who would make the existing regulations that much worse.