Guttmacher Institute Study Casts Doubt on Contraception Use Reducing Abortions
http://www.lifenews.com/nat5579.html

But, Dr. Michael New, a University of Alabama political science professor, writes at National Review Online that Guttmacher’s own study shows how contraception doesn’t reduce the abortion numbers.

“The link between abortion rates and access to contraception is not as clear as the Guttmacher report might indicate. Furthermore, Guttmacher’s own research suggests that there is little reason to believe that contraception subsidies would do much to affect abortion rates,” he explains.

New says “there exists no consensus on the correlation between the availability of contraception and the incidence of abortion.”

“In fact, in 2003, Guttmacher released an article in ‘International Family Planning Perspectives’ that showed simultaneous increases in both contraceptive use and abortion rates in the United States, Cuba, Denmark, Netherlands, Singapore, and South Korea,” New points out.

So much evidence, but the pushers of the RH/Abortion Bill aren’t listening.

French Abortions Rise despite Increase in Contraception: Study
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/oct/09100805.html

France, October 8, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – According to a new study by the French National Institute of Demographic Studies (INED), although the number of unplanned pregnancies in France has fallen, the number of abortions in such cases has increased, reports the Monde Actu 24h/24.

Unplanned pregnancies fell from 46% to 33% from 1975 to 2004, ostensibly due to use of contraceptives, according to the study, but the number of abortions of such pregnancies increased from 40% to 60% over the same period.

The evidence just keeps piling up. Contraceptive usage leads to more abortions. How come so many of our legislators and Presidential aspirants aren’t listening?

Free to Choose

The comment, which he posted under the title “With a nagging tinge of irony”, is at: http://johnnery.wordpress.com/2009/01/12/with-a-nagging-tinge-of-irony/

£6 Million Government Reduction Program Resulted in More than Twice as Many Teen Pregnancies
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jul/09070904.html

A scheme to reduce teenage pregnancies that cost British taxpayers £6 million ($9.8 million US) has backfired, with girls in the program ending up more than twice as likely to become pregnant than those in the general population. The Young People’s Development Programme (YPDP) cost £2,500 ($4,085 US) per person and involved giving teenagers sex education and advice about contraception. At the end of the project a total of 16 percent of those involved became pregnant compared with just 6 percent in a comparison group.

And those trapo legislators actually think that HB 5043 — which promotes the same failed “solution” — will actually work? On the contrary, the deadly RH bill will make matters worse!

Love isn’t enough
http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/love_isnt_enough/

All else being equal, children do best when raised by a married mother and father. It’s within this environment that children are most likely to be exposed to the emotional and psychological experiences they need in order to thrive.

Men and women bring diversity to parenting; each makes unique contributions to the rearing of children that can’t be replicated by the other. Mothers and fathers simply are not interchangeable. Two women can both be good mothers, but neither can be a good father.

Curb brain deaths instead
http://randomthoughtsmusings.blogspot.com/2009/05/curb-brain-deaths-instead.html

Habit Persistence and Teen Sex: Could Increased Access to Contraception have Unintended Consequences for Teen Pregnancies?
http://www.econ.duke.edu/~psarcidi/teensex.pdf

The persistence in sexual activity is such that policies that affect access to contraception will have very different effects in the short run than the long run. Our results suggest that increasing access to contraception may actually increase long run pregnancy rates even though short run pregnancy rates fall. On the other and, policies that decrease access to contraception, and hence sexual activity, are likely to lower pregnancy rates in the long run.

How much more evidence do we need to convince rational people to kill HB 5043?

Unfortunately, that was NOT the intent of the survey, and neither was that the purpose for which the survey has often been cited.

I note that Mangahas claimed that there was no bias introduced by such questions, saying:

“I believe that the A/D battery, being evenly divided in slant, did not introduce affirmation bias to the succeeding items.”

As I have shown, however, the questions were NOT evenly divided in slant at all, despite Mangahas’s claims. It is therefore his characterization of the questions and the survey in general that I dispute.

Ultimately, the survey’s final question was to determine the extent of support for the Lagman bill. That is what this survey has been used for: to make it appear that there is overwhelming support for the bill even among Catholics).

As such, the questions ARE wrong and DO introduce bias in favor of the bill. The survey is deceptive and is being used to deceive.