I’ve been reading about a program, recently ended, in Colorado whereas women were given easy, inexpensive access to IUDs (intra-uterine devices) for birth control. This program is apparently ending due to some moral (they claim it’s a fiscal issue. I don’t buy it), crisis on the part of Colorado legislators, who don’t think that their august body should insinuate itself into a woman’s reproductive choices, in spite of the fact that it has caused teenage pregnancy in that state to drop by at least 40% and abortion by at least 35%, among women under 20 years old. Yes. Abortions are down 35% in the last 4 years in Colorado, simply by giving women incentives to use birth control. If Repubs were true to their word, and really wanted to stop abortion, they’d be handing these things out like balloon animals at a kids birthday party.
But that’s not what I’m writing about today…
I’m writing about the fact that legislators, in Colorado and elsewhere, get to decide what is good or bad birth control, but only for women. I’m curious as to why vasectomies are not as much of a concern for those in authority with the power to control these things through legislation.
I’m curious why men are left to their own devices regarding whether or not they want to impregnate women, but female birth control is a constant subject of debate, including whether companies can be forced to offer insurance that covers it, as in the Hobby Lobby case. Apparently, women need legislative help to lead them along the primrose path to virtue. Or some bullshit like that…
It seems that if we think it sinful and unbecoming a woman to use a temporary device which can allow her to have sex without fear of pregnancy, we might consider the same attitude toward vasectomies, wouldn’t you think? And, yes, vasectomies are, in fact, covered by most health insurance, which was not, apparently, a big concern for Hobby Lobby. Hmm.
Now, I wouldn’t go so far as to suggest that this is further evidence of the conservative war on women, but it appears to be a least a bit of a punch in the gut, no?