[nmh]

Excerpt:

...

“Alaska, Alabama, and South Carolina scored very high, even though we think of them as having an anti-abortion environment,” says Ms. Dailard. “But they’ve really stepped up to the plate in terms of making family-planning services available, particularly to low-income women.”

All 50 states and the District of Columbia were rated on three criteria: service availability, laws and policies, and public funding.

In Alaska, for example, 85 percent of counties have at least one family planning clinic. The state also devotes major funding, both from its own budget and from federal block grant dollars, to family planning.

...

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0301/p02s02-ussc.html

[MIT-Elephant]

““Alaska, Alabama, and South Carolina scored very high, even though we think of them as having an anti-abortion environment,” says Ms. Dailard.”

So this woman’s idea of curtailing unwanted pregnancy necessarily includes abortion. Hey sweetie, by that point, the “unwanted pregnancy” is sort of out of the bag. It doesn’t “not count” as a pregnancy if an abortion takes place.

[ASOC]

There no counties in Alaska

There are
The State of Alaska
Borroughs (like the Mat-Su borough)
Municipalities (Like Los Anchorages
Incorporated cities
Unincorporated cities and
villages.

Odd that they would report things like that.

[caveat emptor]

"Alaska, Alabama, and South Carolina scored very high, even though we think of them as having an anti-abortion environment", says Ms. Dailard

Well, there you go. Curtailing unwanted pregnancies is equivalent to abortion, which is

compared to pills, condoms, cervical shields, vasectomies, ridin' dirty, coitus interruptus etc, and for unmarried teens, abstinence.