Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Poison Pills
The New Republic ^ | 12.19.03 | Michelle Cottle

Posted on 12/20/2003 5:45:14 AM PST by samtheman

THAT'S LIFE
Poison Pills
by Michelle Cottle

Potentially huge news for women this week: On Tuesday, an FDA advisory panel voted 23 to 4 to recommend permitting over-the-counter sales of the emergency contraceptive commonly known as the morning-after pill. Available by prescription since 1999, Plan B, as the pill is also known, delays ovulation and/or prevents fertilization of an egg if taken up to 72 hours after sexual intercourse. The earlier the pill is taken, the greater its efficacy. If the FDA follows the panel's recommendation--which it typically does--soon women will be able, for about $30 a pop, to obtain Plan B without the delay of procuring a doctor's approval. News of this step toward greater reproductive freedom was splashed boldly across the pages of major dailies around the nation. Reading the headlines, I couldn't help but think that each story should have featured an equally bold subhead declaring: Democrats now totally screwed.

Without doubt, finding a scraggly Saddam lounging in a dirt hole behind some rundown mud hut just east of nowhere is the greatest Christmas present Karl Rove could have hoped for. But it is far from the only gift the porcine political strategist has received of late. Even completely disregarding events in Iraq--which Dems desperately wish everyone would do this week--news on the domestic front has overwhelmingly played favored Republicans, particularly in regard to social issues.

Many moons ago, when the Dems still dreamed of turning the election discussion from foreign to domestic matters, they were hoping to focus on populist economic favorites like free trade, rising unemployment, and the sad plight of the uninsured. What the Dems absolutely do not need to be chatting about this season (as Howard Dean recently noted) are hot button topics involving God, guns, gays, sex, or abortion. These are dangerous, divisive areas for a party facing yet another identity crisis in its primary, not to mention a general election battle with a popular president who most Americans still seem to regard as a moderate.

Unfortunately, events of late have conspired to push such delicate domestic issues to the fore. First the Supreme Court rules that sodomy is legal. Then the Massachusetts high court declares gay marriage to be an inalienable right--at least under that state's constitution. Now, the FDA is pondering making the prevention of a pregnancy as quick and easy as buying nasal spray.

Now, you may think all these developments are cause for celebration--time to break out the bubbly and invite your pals over to watch "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy." I myself think gay marriage is a smashing idea. And while I get queasy at the idea of some 13-year-old popping into the local Piggly Wiggly to buy a six-pack of morning-after pills, in general, I think anything that reduces the number of surgical abortions performed in this country has merit. And, hey, who doesn't like sodomy?

But you know who doesn't regard these developments as good news? Religious conservatives. In fact, they tend to view such social developments as another step down that long road to hell. The Christian Coalition has already issued an "Action Alert" over the gay marriage ruling. A quick trip to AOL chat rooms can give you a sense of how outraged many religious folk are about the possibility of easing access to this "pill to kill." The problem is that these people vote when they get nervous--and not for Democrats.

This could prove disastrous for the party come November. It bears remembering that the 2000 election was as close as it was in part because the Republican base didn't bother to turn out. As Karl Rove groused in December 2001, "We probably failed to marshal support of the base as well as we should have. ... There should have been 19 million of them, and instead there were 15 million of them." At the time, Rove fretted that religious conservatives might be returning to the notion that politics is too corrupt to participate in, and he vowed to reach out to white evangelicals in the future.

But Rove may not need to reach out to anyone if social conservatives get the sense that the only way to save their God-fearing republic is to make sure that God-fearing Republicans are steering the ship. This could be the final nail in the Democrats' political coffin, not only in the presidential race--where it increasingly looks as though the nominee will be the disastrously secular Howard Dean (see Frank Foer's cover story in this week's issue)--but also in all those nasty little congressional, state, and local battles now raging. It's like the Dems are trapped in the middle of a bad political joke: What do you get when you cross a court ruling on sodomy and a court ruling on gay marriage with over-the-counter sales of emergency contraception? A Repubilcan majority for the next 50 years.

Michelle Cottle is a senior editor at TNR


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; ecp; fda; morningafter; poison; politics
When I first started reading this I thought the author was going to say, "because abortion is becoming so technologically easy, pro-abortion women will feel less need to vote this issue", or something like that. Instead she is saying, "this, along with gay marriage" will help to turn out the Republican Right.
1 posted on 12/20/2003 5:45:14 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: samtheman
That pill can't really be called abortion, it could be listed under contraceptive, which is better than the single moms-to-be going on medicaid? what say you......

I am very much against anything abortion, but I beleive in contraceptives.
2 posted on 12/20/2003 6:12:08 AM PST by stopem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
A Repubilcan majority for the next 50 years.

Please let it be so!

3 posted on 12/20/2003 6:13:45 AM PST by TheGeezer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
A Repubilcan majority for the next 50 years.

From her keyboard to God's ears.

4 posted on 12/20/2003 6:23:54 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stopem
A 14 year old taking a massive doses of hormones everytime she has a chance a pregnancy doesn't sound like a good idea. Anybody casually taking a massive dose of horomes isn't a good idea.

I suppose Jr. High kids could drop by the nurse's office on the way out Friday afternoons and get their condom & pill supply for the weekend.

5 posted on 12/20/2003 6:27:06 AM PST by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper
They could get these pills already by stopping by their local Planned Barrenhood anyhow, right? Dr. Killum ready with prescription pad.
6 posted on 12/20/2003 6:30:21 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: stopem
but I beleive in contraceptives

And another thing...... this is not a contraceptive. It is, pure and simple, an abortion pill.

7 posted on 12/20/2003 6:30:44 AM PST by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: stopem
government studies in a couple of asian courntries say that the #1 buyer of this pill are men not women. Older men having sex with young girls is the leading cause of out of wedlock pregnancy. too many dots conntected to this drug besides the need because of broken condems.
8 posted on 12/20/2003 7:32:39 AM PST by q_an_a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper
And another thing...... this is not a contraceptive. It is, pure and simple, an abortion pill.

In the absence of fertilization, what is being aborted?
9 posted on 12/20/2003 7:58:15 AM PST by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
Amen.
10 posted on 12/20/2003 10:07:01 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: stopem
I think you're right about the distinction between contraception and abortion.
11 posted on 12/20/2003 10:09:01 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
It is a VERY large dose of contraceptives. It can cause severe nausea (and in fact usually does). But there's no provision for (prescription) anti-nausea meds. I'm also anticipating reports of the first blood clot harming someone. It's a risk with normal dose contraceptives, so at a very high dose for 48 hours who knows. Especially if teenagers will be using them. They're not always very precise about medication dosages (If one is good 5-6 are better). But of course no one will be there to talk to them about all the risks and benefits of taking the drug. And a golden opportunity will be missed to counsel them about pre-marital sex, pregnancy and STD risk.(sigh) In a perverse way I'm thinking the first lawsuit against the pharmaceutical companies will likely end this venture.
12 posted on 12/20/2003 10:56:10 PM PST by lainde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: lainde
I think you're right. In the absence of a fertilized egg, though, it muddles an important issue to call this abortion.
13 posted on 12/21/2003 7:41:55 AM PST by gcruse (http://gcruse.typepad.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson