They're after you now. They really are.

[elfs]

One of the arguments against indefinite longevity research is the "No room" argument. It is therefore with sick irony that I point you to the No Room For Contraception website, wherein those who claim to know better than you are mobilizing to reduce your options. If you're a woman, they want your intimacy under their control.

Comments

[gromm.livejournal.com]

oh, but it's so much worse than that.

Their website states: "No Room for Contraception (NRFC) is an effort to expose the potential harms that contraception, birth control and sterilization bring to marriage and society."

Of course. Because now that our infant mortality rate is good and low, having 46 children per married couple will be good for marriage. Or maybe we should just control our sexual impulses. That, of course, would be a Good Thing because it will make us all Good and Pure.

[antonia-tiger.livejournal.com]

And the way they exploit known health risks from some types of contraception, without mentioning the health risks of pregancy, and the whole statistical hand-wave about availability and the collapse of decent society.

And their Golden Age is a myth anyway.

The nbet makes it easy for us to get our message out, but it makes it easy for them as well: it doesn't matter how you define "us" and "them".

And what worries me most about education is the appearnet lack of effort to teach critical thinking: how do you know you can trust what you read? Sites like that one exploit such weaknesses.

Reading your blog, I'm fairly confident that won't be a problem for your kids. Unless critical thinking becomes the sort of double-plus-ungood talent that makes escape and evasion courses a good idea.

[kenshardik]

It continues to amaze me that insane people can learn how to do HTML.

[(Anonymous)]

But they haven't. They just have money.

[adaveen.livejournal.com]

Oh yes, it was so much better in the old days, when women had to resort to abandoning babies on roadsides, dumping them in orphanages or just drowning them outright.

Or living in starvation and filth because you had more babies than you could reasonably feed, house and care for.

Or when you bled to death at back alley abortionists.

Or when you died of childbirth with your 8th baby, leaving behind the five that survived on some poor overworked and bedraggled husband.

I'm all for making SAFER birth control. I'm also for bringing a baby into the world only when you can care for it and give it a life worth living.

[lisakit.livejournal.com]

I couldn't get past this statement:

"It’s a common assumption that contraception reduces the need for abortion in the United States. Yet the history of contraception and abortion in the 60s and 70s shows this assumption to be incorrect."

Uh, did they forget to count all the back alley abortions before easily accessible contraception?

I don't even know where to begin with thinking like this. It seems such an incredible lack of intelligence and decency to me that I just lose my words.