How thoroughly depressing. What is with these people?

It's like slipping through a time-warp back 35-40 years ... honestly no other "Western" country has this sort of crap going on ... you people need to lose religion in a big way. Before you know it you'll be back to burning witches at the stake.

I am totally against abortion beyond a certain point but that is only because people here and elsewhere have that choice ... with choice comes awareness and responsibility, and the freedoms to make appropriate choices early without judgement ie contraception, "morning after" pill, medical abortion.

With choice comes education as a matter of common knowledge. What right do these people have to force an individual to bear children against their will. Yes I know you play, you pay ... what a crock of shit, we're just fucking animals. Sheesh! we can't even look after those of us who are here, let alone poor miserable little soles who don't have a chance. Yeah, then they throw out the old adoption line ... well sorry if your gene pool is stagnant, that's tough.

(Sorry I've lost all sympathy when I see (on TTC boards) the way women jump down the throat of any woman who has had an abortion, they absolutely pick her to pieces ... one of the reasons I am not a "western" feminist, we are the problem, not society.)

I don't think the American people would accept a roll back of contraceptive rights, so talk of ending contraception as we know it doesn't scare me. There are of course the negative consequences of the mentality that some of these people have when there is a White House and Congress who panders to them unceasingly, such as the rejection of scientific reccomendations in favor of cultural engineering on things such as Plan B, and failed abstinence programs that increase the abortion rate and home and divert money from effective AIDS prevention programs abroad.

But I think the real value of this article is exposing the mentality of these theocon groups (as Andrew Sullivan calls them) and how they operate. Despite their rhetoric about a culture of 'life', contraception has nothing to do with that since even by (their own) definition, there is no life before conception. What they are really concerned about is sex: the entire theocon movement traces its foundation to the reaction against the sexual revolution. In a way, all the debates about abortion, contraception, STDs, and the like are sideshows. They abhor sex as a form of pleasure, period.

What we can learn from articles like this are the terms under which these people really must be engaged in order to interact with them.

Willfully ignorant is right, it seems anyone allied with a conservative political agenda has put their axioms ('contraceptives kill babies') before their proofs. The way I look at it, we can't "help" them, they likely already know the truth. As always, it boils down to the swing voters, those who wouldn't want to take a contraceptive because it might prevent implantation, where we might make some headway.

I wish I had your optimism about the American public, Tony, but today I'm feeling like a frog in hot water. If the public doesn't get concerned over the abortion bans, spying, and detention centers, what will they be concerned about?

I can't decide if this is a battle they actually think they can win, or if it is just meant to make their pro-life stance seem less radical. Either way, it is pretty scary.

I wonder how many of the commentators so far have actually read the Russell Shorto article in its entirety; as apposed to Ann’s brief take on it. Before reading it yesterday I took the time to re-familiarize myself with other articles Mr. Shorto has written. It seems he has been the point man for the NYT magazine’s articles concerning social conservatives. I found his other articles (and this one) informative yet lacking. I could go on at length pointing out his willful obfuscations and clever slant. Instead I’ll just try and point out a couple of germane facts that add context to both Ann’s painting of the article, and the way the cover headline does the same.

As the law stands, the ability of anti-contraception advocates to have any chance of effectively regulating ANY type of contraception method is zero. The line of cases starting with Griswold v. Connecticut and more importantly Eisenstadt v. Baird, make access to contraception a Federally protected Constitutional right. Chief Justice John Roberts openly re-affirmed this right in his confirmation hearings (unlike Roe). This is why FDA approval has become so contentious. Once the drug is declared safe for prescription or over the counter use, no Federal or State action can thwart its widespread dissemination and use. It doesn’t take much empathy to realize how disfranchised from the political process the social conservatives are on this subject. More importantly, even under the most favorable circumstances to federalists, regulation of contraception would be returned to the State Legislatures were people would be voting on it. It strains credulity to maintain that some wholesale rollback is possible. Shorto says as much in his article and the anti-contraception forces are aware of the political/legal terrain. It takes a certain crass opportunism to paint our rights to contraception as under a likely, much less immanent threat. As the article points out, the social conservatives are attempting to focus the nation’s attention on the larger issue of the effects widespread use of contraception has had on our social life as a nation and a people. After all, the didn’t name it a sexual “revolution� by accident.

I think I'll stack up on hundreds of condoms, just in case.

I too Tony ... I think in your current climate it is folly to assume that it will never happen. These people have an agenda, their puritanical grumblings are just the beginning, they don't care how long it takes, hell they have been going for decades.

Remember most are "sheep" and very easily influenced and in a country where free-thinking is not exactly encouraged it's dangerous ground. Yes, you are correct, eventually people will revolt but at what cost.

This is a country that has actually given credence to one of the most ridiculous ideas (apart from the flat-Earth society) the world has ever seen ... ID ... if something like that can see the light of day then anything is possible.

Well nottrue,

One, what are TTC boards?

Two, what feminists jump down the throat of a woman that has had an abortion? As a feminist, I don't know another feminist who would.

Not feminists, just women who jump down other women's throats ... which is why I am not fond of my own gender. I've listened, watched this and similar for more years than I care to remember. I said that we are our own worst enemies, this is why I am not a feminist.

TTC = trying to conceive (boards).

nottrue and Glimmering, it's true that the political environment is further to the right that what could probably have been imagined 10 or 15 years ago. This has had, and will continue to have, large costs, which even now probably lie mostly in the future.

However, theocons who are opposed to contraception outright simply have no chance of succeeding. It just hurts Republicans to highlight these differences: that Republicans will no longer protect the scientific integrity of the FDA (or NASA, or EPA, etc etc). That serious Republican senatorial candidates are now comparing stem cell research to the holocaust. That our President can no longer answer the question "Mr. President, do you support the right to contraception?" That Republicans are now willing to sacrifice our teens' access to health education, our unwanted pregnancy rate, or our falling abortion rate on the altar of the culture wars. We do not live inside the pockets of special interest groups that believe that when a fertilized egg fails to implant, this is the equivalent of your father or your sister or your daughter dying, and give people who believe these things a veto over health policy. The American people are NOT on the side of the theocons on this.

The issue is not contraception, ID, the effectiveness of abstinence vs sex ed, when "life" begins, etc. etc. The real issue has always been the role of religion in public life and whether or not it is possible to view openness and liberty in matters of sexual pleasure as something other than "moral decay", but a behavior, like any other behavior. That was one of the points raised in the article and is where liberals and feminists can most directly rebut the theocons.

PS Fitz: I'd read the entire article, and you're putting way too much faith in formal rules and precedents, and too little appreciation of the role of social norms and popular opinion. The former are worth no more than the paper they are printed on; the latter will always be the key element important in shaping our society. But I agree with you that "our social life as a nation and a people" is precisely the point. And that's precisely where the social conservatives are the most wrong.

Fertility-awareness family planning isn't just "the rhythm method," fyi. Women who take this sort of thing seriously often use a more comprehensive system: calendar + thermometer + cervical mucus observation. And for those who are willing to abstain (or use a barrier) a few days a month, it works, and it actually works quite well. Planned Parenthood actually has a good description of how these methods work together on their website.

You can say that it's not a choice you'd want to make, but please don't criticize other women who decide that it's right for them.