The news you may have missed - 2 June 2015

• Even if most doctors would rather ignore the dangers of oral contraception, a.k.a. "the pill," Time magazine is warning women that "using the Pill was linked to anywhere from a two- to more than four-fold increased risk of developing clots compared to women who didn’t take oral contraceptives" in a new study published in The BMJ (formerly the British Medical Journal - I guess even science today feels the need to be 'hip').
• In other news regarding "the pill," it can now be had flavored like marijuana, but if that flavor doesn't suit you, you can also buy it flavored like chocolate or strawberry.
• Hundreds of Muslims gathered outside the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul last week on the 562nd anniversary of the fall of the Christian city formerly as Constantinople to the Turks to demand the Hagia Sophia be restored as a mosque. Though currently a museum, the Hagia Sophia, built by the Emperor Justinian, was a Christian church 916 years before it was taken by the Muslims and converted into a mosque.
• Security forces in the Archdiocese of Bujumbura (in Burundi) have foiled a second assassination attempt against His Excellency the Most Reverend Evariste Ngoyagoye, the Archbishop of Bujumbura.
• A divorced Italian couple went to court to settle the matter of their son's diet. His mother fed him a vegetarian diet, but the father wanted him to eat meat. An Italian court sided with the father.

A news round up - 9 August 2014

The news you may have missed:

• J.R.R. Tolkien's translation of biblical Book of Jonah is soon to be republished. Jonah's tomb was recently destroyed by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

• The Catholic apostolate Courage has produced a new 1-hour film titled Desire of the Everlasting Hills: Hope in Isolation. Courage in Turmoil. Grace in the Last Place You Expect about three people who left behind a homosexual lifestyle in favor of chastity.

•  A new study conducted by researchers at the Fred Hutchison Cancer Research Center - and published in the journal Cancer Research - shows that women who take oral contraceptives are 50% more likely to develop breast cancer. This isn't the first study to show this.

• Rome Reports has a short piece about Michael James Mette, a Catholic singer, song writer, and evangelist from Effingham, Illinois.

• The New York Post reports that summer 2014 is the coldest in a decade.

• Buddhist extremists oppose Pope's visit to Sri Lanki, which he is scheduled to make in January.

The Dirty 100 and the immaturity of NOW

At least twenty-four (24!) of the persons, businesses, or organizations named by the National Organization for Women as the "Dirty 100" are themselves Catholic, owned by Catholics, or made up of Catholics (there may be more; I know one the businesses is Catholic and I suspect others are, as well). Shockingly - and bizarrely - the Little Sisters of the Poor have, as it were, made the cut.

Now, pay attention (yes, that was purposeful): Notice the percentage of the groups that are Catholic: at least 24%. Yet we are to believe that our secular society does not have an anti-Catholic prejudice? Get real. And wake up.

Why are these the Dirty 100? Because they do not want to pay for their employees birth control, sterilizations, or abortifacients. How vile and cruel they are. You would think the NOW would be demanding instead that businesses provide mammograms for free.

An especially curious aspect of this list is its placement on NOW's web site: you can "take action" and "Ditch the Dirty 100" before you can even see the list NOW has compiled (you even have to click on "take action" to be able to click on the list).

The link to the list is at the very bottom of the page - beneath a declaration that "I do not believe that the religious beliefs of an employer trump the religious freedoms and bodily autonomy of their company’s female employees" and that "I cannot support businesses, nonprofits, and religious entities that do not respect the reproductive rights of their employees" and a spot for your contact information. It is almost as if NOW doesn't actually want you to know who the Dirty 100 are.

To my mind, this shows not only a certain mindlessness on the part of those who support the creation of such a list and insanely think that of all of the life-saving medicines and treatments available to women that only contraception should be free of charge, but also a certain immaturity on the part of NOW's leaders (and former leaders).

This immaturity also comes across in a recent - and impressive - interview conducted by Fox News' Megyn Kelly with Patricia Ireland, a former president of NOW:

Megyn's suggestion to call the list "groups with whom we disagree" is an excellent, reasonable, and civil suggestion, one met with disdain and mockery. Ireland claims she has "the right to say these people are wrong and to not patronize them," yet she patronizes them ("Bless their hearts") throughout the interview. It only shows her insincerity.

This immaturity is further shown by Ireland's refusal to answer Kelly's direct questions and her failure to acknowledge when Kelly shows her to be incorrect.

In the end, I suspect this campaign against the Dirty 100 will prove ineffective for NOW.

News round up - 8 July 2014

The news you may have missed:

• It may seem a piece out of a George Orwell or Aldous Huxley novel, but scientists in Massachusetts have developed a contraceptive computer chip. This, it seems to me, is a clear case of science not asking if it should do what it can do. The chip can be activated by remote control, which might make one wonder what would stop a government from deciding who can and cannot have children (or how many children a woman may have, not that we've seen governments do this before [note the sarcasm]). "The ability to turn the device on and off provides a certain convenience factor for those who are planning their family," said Dr Robert Farra. I wonder if he knows that are easier ways to do so. One might also wonder about the possibility of hacking into the computer chip.

• A Florentine (New Jersey) man was arrested for disorderly conduct and interfering with traffic by running football plays on a highway.

• After she posted a photo of herself holding a Chick-Fil-A cup in front of Hobby Lobby store, Holly Fisher has received death threats directed at herself and at her children. Oh, she was also wearing a pro-life t-shirt. And this from people crying for tolerance and for an end to hate. If only they could recognize their hypocrisy.

• In Illinois, Governor Quinn (D) recently signed SB 3434 into law, which allows the government to confiscate watercraft belonging to those caught boating under the influence. The new law takes effect July 1, 2015.

• The Louisiana Supreme Court may compel a Roman Catholic priest to reveal under oath what he has learned in the Sacrament of Penance. We have been warning you for years now about the growing threats to religious liberty in the United States of America. Here is yet another clear threat. And it won't stop here, you can sure. The case at hand involves sexual abuse, but if the court can force a priest to reveal what he may or may not have learned about such abuse, what is to stop the court from requiring a priest to reveal other things he may have learned from confessions. One might also wonder what impact such a decision might have on doctor-patient privilege.

• After being mocked for falling asleep during a baseball game (it is one of the most boring things anyone can watch), a man is suing for $10,000,000 because he claims his reputation was harmed and he suffered mental anguish. All that's needed next is for him to declare he was bullied. 

• A Kentucky woman has been fired for saying to her customers, "Have a blessed day." Personally, I find the phrase rather meaningless (a person cannot simply decided to have a blessed day; their day has to be blessed), but I understand what she means with the phrase. I wonder if a person might also be fired for saying to customers, "Have a cursed day."

News round up - April 30th

The news you may have missed:

• The State Journal-Register reports that a proposed tax in Illinois on sugary beverages "may be falling flat" with legislators. When news of this proposed tax first surfaced, I offered my thoughts on it: a foolish bill that, if passed, would simply backfire.

• President Obama told a gathering of Malaysian youth yesterday that "the world is less violent, it is healthier, it is wealthier, it is more tolerant and it offers more opportunity than any time in human history for more people than any time in human history." If you live in the Middle East or in Africa, you probably haven't noticed a less violent world. You won't have noticed a healthier world if you life in the U.S.A. where childhood obesity continues to rise, as reported by the Centers for Disease Control earlier this month. Likewise, the poor of the world aren't getting any wealthier and Christians throughout the world remain the most persecuted people in a more tolerant world, and face growing persecution besides as John L. Allen, Jr. has recently demonstrated in his book, The Global War on Christianity.

•  Bryan Singer, the director of the forthcoming X-Men movie called a lawsuit alleging he sexually abused a minor some years ago "a sick, twisted, shakedown."

•  After he quoted Sir Winston Churchill in reference to Islam, Paul Weston, who ran for political office, was arrested for racially aggravated crime.

• Tens of thousands of Hungarians marched on Sunday in protest to the growing anti-Semitism in Hungary after the Jobbik party recently won 21% of the national vote.

• Doctors in Britain who object to "any form of contraception" because of their conscience are no longer eligible for specialization as obstetricians or gynecologists. Roman Catholics are particular singled out. In all likelihood, we will see this soon in the U.S.A., as well.

News round up - March 5th

In case you missed it:

• Back in Illinois, Attorney General Lisa Madigan (D-Chicago) has told County Clerks they can immediately begin issuing "marriage" licenses to homosexual couples. As written and passed, the ill-named Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act does not take effect until June 1, 2014, but last month a federal judge ruled that there is no need to wait. Much like the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, one wonders why effective dates are legislated at all if they do not actually mean anything.

• You likely won't have heard that Pope Francis recently said there is no need to change the Church's teaching on contraception 

• Some parents in Italy are gently fighting back against the progressives who, as in many parents of the world, have legal forms to include spaces for "Parent 1" and "Parent 2" instead of
  "Father" and "Mother".

•  We've all noticed a curious increase in police presence on the highways near the end of each calendar month, though many police districts have long denied the existence of an actual monthly ticket quota as linked to performance evaluation. One Illinois legislator doesn't believe that claim and has introduced legislation to put an end to the quota system in the Land of Lincoln.

• Niagara Falls has frozen for the second time this winter.

• A state legislator in Hawaii has caused a bit of a ruckus when she commented on a bill in Hawaiian, and refused to translate her words in English.

Random bits of news, some important and some not

This morning I'm in a bit of a random mood, so I thought I'd share a few random news stories of varying importance with you:

• Forbes has ranked Honolulu the "most overpriced" city in the U.S.A.;
• The Clericus Cup soccer tournament will include 358 players from 60 countries this year in Rome;
• Green Bay has never had a colder winter;
• Oral contraceptives may double a woman's risk of developing MS;
• In testimony before Congress, co-founder of Greenpeace says there is "no proof" humans are causing climate change;
• Charles Krauthammer tackles the unscientific notion of "settled science";
• Planned President says it doesn't matter when human life actually begins, only when a mother says it does;
• A man pronounced dead in Mississippi is found to be alive before being embalmed; and
• Back in 2008, Sarah Palin was mocked when she warned that Russia might invade Ukraine.

Should I make a list of news items a daily post?

The new Kulturkampf

Just over a year ago when the Attorney General of the State of Illinois first moved to force Catholic Charities out of foster care and adoptions, His Excellency the Most Reverend Thomas John Paprocki, Bishop of Springfield in Illinois, made reference to the Kulturkampf of Otto von Bismarck.  Writing in his column in the Catholic Times, he said:

I write all this because we are seeing a different but very virulent form of Kulturkampf gaining ground here in the United States. In our American context, this has been referred to as the “Culture Wars,” which, like Germany in the 19th century, promotes a secular view of the world and seeks to diminish the role of religion and restrict the influence of Christians in general and Catholics in particular. Prominent in this secular agenda are the promotion of abortion and assaults on the traditional understanding of marriage and family life [more].

Bishop Paprocki is not the only one to make this connection.

A couple of weeks ago, His Excellency the Most Reverend Daniel R. Jenky, Bishop of Peoria, said, in a homily that has been very much taken out of context:

Remember that in past history other governments have tried to force Christians to huddle and hide only within the confines of their churches like the first disciples locked up in the Upper Room.

In the late 19th century, Bismarck waged his "Kulturkampf," a Culture War, against the Roman Catholic Church, closing down every Catholic school and hospital, convent and monastery in Imperial Germany.

Clemenceau, nicknamed "the priest eater," tried the same thing in France in the first decade of the 20th Century.

Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open, but would not tolerate any competition with the state in education, social services, and health care.

In clear violation of our First Amendment rights, Barack Obama - with his radical, pro abortion and extreme secularist agenda, now seems intent on following a similar path.

Now things have come to such a pass in America that this is a battle that we could lose, but before the awesome judgement seat of Almighty God this is not a war where any believing Catholic may remain neutral.

This fall, every practicing Catholic must vote, and must vote their Catholic consciences, or by the following fall our Catholic schools, our Catholic hospitals, our Catholic Newman Centers, all our public ministries -- only excepting our church buildings - could easily be shut down. Because no Catholic institution, under any circumstance, can ever cooperate with the instrinsic evil of killing innocent human life in the womb [more].

On the Square, Leroy Huizinga recently wrote of The White House's Contraceptive Kulturkampf.  In this new culture war, he sees a difference:

Unlike the war waged against Catholics in the nineteenth century by Germany’s Iron Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, a devout pietist Christian, our battle has been joined not only by many of our Evangelical brothers and sisters but also by many Mormons, Jews, and others of good will [more].

Paul VI was right on government interference

Back in 1968 (two years before the Food and Drug Administration of the United States of America approved "the pill"), His Holiness Pope Paul VI published his prophetic - and so-called "controversial" - encyclical Humanae Vitae on the regulation of birth.

Why did he choose at that time to speak on such an issue?  Precisely because, as he said, the questions being raised about the regulation of human birth "concern matters intimately connected with the life and happiness of human beings" (1) and because they concern marriage, the Church's teachings on which are "based on the natural law as illuminated and enriched by divine Revelation" (4).  Because marriage is found in the natural moral law, it "declares the will of God, and its faithful observance is necessary for men's eternal salvation" (4).

None of these teachings, of course, that he expounded in Humanae Vitae were new and should have not have caused any surprise or anger in anyone.

What should have alarmed people, however, were the things Pope Paul VI foresaw as the natural and dire consequences of a worldview built upon the sandy foundation of contraception:

1. infidelity within marriage and a weakening of moral values (17);
2. men would lose respect for women and use them only as objects for pleasure (17);
3. and government interference within the marital act (17);

Clearly and without doubt, his first two predictions took hold rather quickly.  And now, in recent days, we are seeing all too clearly the fulfillment of his third prediction, which he expressed in these words (with my emphases):

careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife.

If you have not yet read Humane Vitae, do so today.  It is neither long nor difficult.  If it has been some time since you read Humane Vitae, read it again today.

Does contraception reduce "unwanted" pregnancies?

Writing in The Wall Street Journal, James Taranto traces the history of "the pill," and notes that after the Food and Drug Administration approved it in 1960 "the marriage rate declined and the illegitimacy rate skyrocketed," evidence to which Charles Murray pointed in the same publication.  Before 1960, the illegitimate birth rate was about 2% of white births; by 2008, it was 44%.  The rates, says Murray, are higher for black births.

Taranto counters the claim that contraception decreases unwanted pregnancy:

The usual criticism we've heard is that it is absurd to suggest a causal link between birth-control advances and illegitimacy because, after all, birth control prevents pregnancy, and giving birth out of wedlock entails pregnancy. By that logic, though, illegitimacy rates should have remained low, or even declined further, after the inception of the pill. The Santorum argument may be counterintuitive, but the counterargument flies in the face of the facts.

It is this reality that Taranto says is often thought of today as "downright unthinkable." Be sure to read his entire article.

News round up (with brief comments)

• Judge rules Washington pharmacists cannot be forced to dispense contraception.  One wonders, then, how the federal government can force people to pay for it.
• Vandals in San Francisco deface Catholic Church on Ash Wednesday.  But anti-Catholicism doesn't really exist.
• Archaeologists strike gold in quest for Sheba's wealth.  It's amazing how often archeaology confirms Biblical texts.
• A 14-year old girl has received death threats because of her defense of marriage.  And we're the intolerant ones.
• A boy born with his heart outside his body has astonished doctors.  Doctors don't always know what they're talking about.
• Latest temperature data shows planet has not warmed for past 15 years.  But global warming/climate change is based on good science.  Here's another article on the same.

NFL must "man up and bring the truth to light"

So says Matthew Hanley concerning the NFL's support of Breast Cancer Awareness Month.  Writing at MercatorNet he says:

The linchpin uniting the reproductive risk factors is their relationship to the hormone estrogen. Overexposure to estrogen is carcinogenic – which is one reason why oral contraceptives and Hormone Replacement Therapy leads to more breast cancer. And in the early phases of pregnancy, a woman is exposed to massive amounts of estrogen, which triggers a proliferation of the types of breast lobules (Type 1 and 2) most susceptible to cancer. It is only in the weeks prior to birth that other hormones begin to help transform those vulnerable lobules into (Type 3 and 4) cancer-resistant lobules. A woman who terminates her pregnancy thus experiences a dangerous spike in estrogen without acquiring the protective tissues that emerge only by bringing a child to term. 

Most pink campaigns avoid any hint of these factors like the plague; the Susan G. Komen Foundation, a prominent advocacy and fundraising group, vehemently and unequivocally denies the link between abortion and breast cancer, citing Beral’s shady “study”. Komen is evidently content to ignore mounting epidemiological evidence along with current knowledge of breast physiology which makes such a link all the more creditable. 

Curiously, Komen also funnels millions of dollars to Planned Parenthood – already a recipient of considerable governmental largesse. By doling out tons of contraceptives and providing for more abortion than any other outfit in the country, Planned Parenthood virtually ensures that the breast cancer epidemic will persist, not shrink. 

You don’t have to be a cynic to find this cozy relationship a bit fishy.

His entire piece is worth reading, especially since he offers links to demonstate the truth.

The truth behind condoms and "safe sex": It isn't

From Joe Carter, writing On the Square, with my emphases and comments:

A few weeks ago, the promoters and supporters of World Contraceptive Use Day received the latest news of their continued failure. Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals released results of a survey that questioned more than 6,000 young people from 26 countries on their attitudes toward sex and contraception. The report revealed, among other findings, that over the past three years the number of young people having sex without a condom with a new partner increased by 111 percent in France, 39 percent in the U.S., and 19 percent in Britain.

In response to the report Jennifer Woodside, spokeswoman for the International Planned Parenthood Federation, replied, “What young people are telling us is that they are not receiving enough sex education or the wrong type of information about sex and sexuality.” She’s absolutely right. Many teens have been receiving the wrong type of information about sex and sexuality because groups like Planned Parenthood have conspired to withhold the truth from them.

For over twenty years the pattern has been the same: Whenever surveys and studies reveal a rise in sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and unintended pregnancies, the advocates of “comprehensive sex education” feign surprise and stammer that the results prove that we need to double down on an approach that has consistently proven to be a failure. Any evidence presented to show that pro-condom sex-ed is failing is seen by them as evidence that condoms need to be promoted even more [because, you know, they've worked so well in the past].

A prime example is the reaction to the separate reports issued in 2004 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the University of North Carolina. Both organizations found that in 2000 there were 9 million new cases of STIs among teens and young adults aged 15 to 24. The response by Planned Parenthood’s Guttmacher Institute was to double-down and claim that that sex education that includes information on condoms was vital to preventing STIs. James Wagoner, president of Advocates for Youth, added that, “Given the prevalence of STDs, young people need all the facts—including medically accurate information on condoms.”

But the Clinton Administration had pushed “safe sex” education for nearly a decade prior to the results. Why had years of “medically accurate information on condoms” led to such a growth in the rates of STIs? An examination of the evidence by the pro-comprehensive sex-ed advocates at the University of California, San Francisco showed that lack of knowledge wasn’t the most significant factor:

• In 1999, 51% of high school seniors said they had been sexually active within the last three months. (p. 3)

• From 1991 to 1997, the use of a condom during the last sexual intercourse increased from 46% to 58% (p. 6) Condom use declines, though, as young people get older. Also, the longer a sexual relationship lasts, the less likely they are to use condoms.

• 52% of teens say that one of the main reasons that teens do not use birth control is because their partners don’t want to.

• 53% of teens say the main reason teens do not use contraception is because of drinking and drugs.

• 66% would be suspicious of their partner’s sexual history if they suggested using a condom.

• 30% want more information about how to use a condom.

Why would 70 percent of the students not want more information on condom use? Perhaps because they already know how to use condoms. (How long does it take to learn all you need to know?) The problem is not a lack of education but a lack of application.

Although I’m in favor of abstinence-based education, I believe that if sex education teaches about condoms then “medically accurate information” should be provided. And what is the most accurate medical information about condoms?

In 2000, a Federal panel surveyed the published epidemiology literature and found there was not enough evidence to drawn an adequate conclusion. In other words, while we have sex educators claiming that condoms can “effectively reduce” the spread of STIs, we have known for a decade that there is no scientific basis for that broad-based claim.

What the evidence does show is that men and women who always use a condom can reduce their risk of being infected with HIV and men can limit their exposure to gonorrhea. When it comes to chlamydial infection, trichomoniasis, genital herpes, syphilis, and chancroid, and gonorrhea in women, the evidence is inconclusive. And there is no evidence at all that condoms can prevent the transmission of the HPV infection.

Additionally, three percent of couples that reported “perfect use” every time they used a latex condom will be surprised to find themselves pregnant.

The “medically accurate information on condoms” is that while they are adequate for preventing the spread of HIV, nobody really knows how effective they are for most other STIs. In addition to this risk, you have a three percent chance of getting pregnant if you use condoms “perfectly.” No wonder the sex-ed advocates conspire to downplay this information. Telling kids that using condoms is only moderately safer than unprotected sex is not an appealing message, especially in an age when STIs like gonorrhea are becoming uncurable.

When the report was released, Tom Coburn, who at the time was a Congressman, told the Secretary of Health and Human Services, “this report means that when condom use is discussed, it is no longer medically accurate—or legal for the CDC—to refer to sex as ‘safe’ or ‘protected’.”

Of course, truth in advertising is not a priority for the propagandists. Ten years later their program to mislead the public about condoms has been effective while the actual effectiveness of condoms to prevent disease has not. Each year millions of teens are surprised to find they contracted an STI even though they were “protected” and “practiced safe sex.” What they should have been told is the truth: The only completely effective method for avoiding an unwanted pregnancy or STI is for both partners to abstain from sexual intercourse prior to marriage. There are no other options. There is no magical contraception that will allow you to have all the sex you want with whoever you want and remain perfectly healthy. Reality doesn’t work that way.

The fact is that while you have almost no chance of getting an STI by being abstinent, you have a high probability of acquiring some type of disease if you are sexually active. Rather sobering, isn't it? Maybe instead of keeping a condom in their purse or wallet a teen should carry a photo of genital warts. Look at those types of photos enough and abstinence will seem a more rational option.

Joe Carter is Web Editor of First Things and the co-author of How to Argue Like Jesus: Learning Persuasion from History's Greatest Communicator. His previous articles for “On the Square” can be found here.

RESOURCES

National Institutes on Health, Scientific Evidence on Condom Effectiveness for Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) Prevention [PDF]

WCD 2011: Clueless or Clued Up media report

Reuters, Half of young Americans to get sex diseases

University of California, San Francisco, Abstinence Only vs. Comprehensive Sex Education

Reuters, More youngsters having unsafe sex: global study

BBC, UK doctors advised gonorrhoea has turned drug resistant

Pope right, New York Times wrong

The New York Times today has an article - "Contraceptive Used in Africa May Double Risk of H.I.V." - proving that Pope Benedict XVI was correct when he claimed the distribution of contraception increases the spread of AIDS, a claim for which the New York Times rebuked him severely.  While the Pope spoke of condoms, the same proves true for other forms of contraception.

I note with some disappoint, but no surprise, that nowhere in the article does the Times apologize for previously condemning the Pope for speaking the truth.

Despite known risks, FDA won't withdraw the pill

From Catholic World News:

The US Food and Drug Administration has announced that some birth-control pills may cause a 50% increase in the risk of blood clots for the women who take them.

In reaction to the finding about several popular contraception pills that contain the ingredient drospirenone, the FDA has not called for a ban on the pills. On the contrary, the Boston Globe reports, the federal agency “advises women taking birth control pills with drospirenone not to stop the product before talking to their doctors first” [more]. 

Surprise, surprise

Life News reports the findings of a recent study on birth control: It doesn't stop unwanted pregnancies or abortions.  Who knew?

With my emphases:

A new study conducted by a former research arm of Planned Parenthood shows the policies of the abortion business promoting contraception and birth control to poor women aren’t working, as unplanned pregnancy rates are rising.

The Guttmacher Institute released a new study Wednesday showing considerable decline between 1981 and 1994 in the overall unplanned pregnancy rate has continued recently and remains relatively stable at 5 percent of American women having an unintended pregnancy annually. However, the rate has increased dramatically among poor women, while among higher-income women it has continued to decrease substantially. 

With the Planned Parenthood abortion business, which the pro-abortion institute is formerly affiliated with, targeting lower-income women with contraception, birth control and abortion, the new study is a blow to its agenda.

Lawrence B. Finer and Mia R. Zolna conducted the new study, which compares the 1994 data to 2006 figures, and it found that, in 1994, the unintended pregnancy rate among women with incomes below the federal poverty line was 88 per 1,000 women aged 15–44. That increased to 120 in 2001 and 132 in 2006—a 50% rise over the period. At the same time, the rate among higher-income women (those with incomes at or above 200% of the poverty line) fell from 34 in 1994 to 28 in 2001 and 24 in 2006—a 29% decrease. 

“Poor women’s high rate of unintended pregnancy results in their also having high—and increasing—rates of both abortions (52 per 1,000) and unplanned births (66 per 1,000). In 2006, poor women had an unintended pregnancy rate five times that of higher-income women, and an unintended birth rate six times as high,” the new report showed.

“Analyzing U.S. government data from the National Survey of Family Growth and other sources, Finer and Zolna found that of the 6.7 million pregnancies in 2006, nearly half (49%) were unintended. Although some unintended pregnancies are accepted or even welcomed, more than four in ten (43%) end in abortion,” the study indicates. The figures make it clear that the birth control and contraception Planned Parenthood and abortion advocates promote are not working to prevent either unplanned pregnancies or abortions.

This new study follows another Guttmacher Institute report, issued in January, showing the decline in abortions that had been taking place over the last two decades has finally stopped. The stoppage of the decline in abortions come as Planned Parenthood and abortion advocates successfully lobbied the Obama administration and Congress to shift taxpayer funding from abstinence education to family planning, arguing it will decrease abortions further. Yet, the report indicates a majority of abortions took place after contraception failure.

The Guttmacher report shows “54 percent of women who have abortions had used a contraceptive method *usually condom or the pill) during the month they became pregnant.” These figures are similar to those of a report in Spain showing abortions doubling despite increased family planning promotion.

And, of the women who say they did not intend to become pregnant, the report said “most of these women have practiced contraception in the past.”

The reasons women give for having an abortion are birth control in nature. Asked to check off a list with more than one reason, 75 percent say they can’t afford to have a baby, 75 percent say having a baby would interfere with work or school, and half say they don’t want to become a single parent or have issues of having a child with their husband or partner.

More dangers of birth control

The average person seems to think that birth control is a safe drug, perhaps because of how regrettably common it is, but researchers have announced a study that shows quite the opposite:

August 10, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – While use of the birth control pill raises the risk of deadly blood clots by 500 percent, the risk shoots to over 1,700 percent for U.S. women with a common vein malformation, California researchers have found.

In the study published by the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stanford University School of Medicine’s Dr. Lawrence Hofmann and his team noted that up to 25 percent of the population has a vein malformation or narrowing, known as stenosis, in the left common iliac vein [more].

New birth control pills increase risk of blood clots

Recent studies have shown that women taking newer forms of the birth control pill are 2-3 times more likely to develop blood clots.

If the moral reasoning against the use of oral contraception isn't good enough for some women, maybe the risk of their life is.

Contraception and Vocations

Writing for Inside Catholic, Fr. Dwight Longenecker examines "Contraception and the Vocations Crisis."

His is an excellent and sharp analysis, and well worth your time and consideration.