Any teenage girl over the age of 14 will now be able to directly ask her doctor for a prescription for birth control, without authorisation from her parents, and the contraceptives must be provided free of charge by the public health system.
The new decree complies with the sexual and reproductive rights approved at the 1994 United Nations International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo.
The most controversial aspect of the Health Ministry decree is that it not only covers traditional birth control methods, but also emergency contraception, which up to now was only available free of charge in cases of rape, although it was available by prescription in the country’s pharmacies.
Although it is popularly known as "the morning after pill", emergency contraception can be taken up to five days (120 hours) after unprotected intercourse. The pill works by providing high levels of synthetic hormones, which interfere with ovulation and change the lining of the uterus, significantly reducing the likelihood of pregnancy.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) clarifies that emergency contraception is "not effective once the process of implantation has begun, and will not cause abortion."
But archbishop of Santiago Francisco Javier Errázuriz said the decision by the centre-left government was a blow to marriage, the birth rate, and the Chilean family.
A response from a blogger I occasionally read:
I never cease to be startled by men who openly state that if women have a choice to delay childbirth or limit their family size, that’s it for marriage and babies. In other words, they’re openly stating that they fear that if women aren’t forced into this life, they will never choose men and babies for themselves.
She then mentions how schitzo our attitude towards sexuality is in this country, and points out this article in Salon, which is no surprise to me but still makes me a little ill, here's a quote:
But have you seen these Bratz dolls and their provocative underwear sets? These little pink and purple numbers include padded "bralettes" to better enhance your 6-year-old's cleavage. According to a piece in Saturday's Australian Herald Sun, these sets are for girls who are 6 and 7 years old. That's kindergarten, first grade, second grade, folks. And don't let the diminutive "bralette" fool you. These are brassieres. For Broadsheet readers who may not have experience with this: Girls that age do not typically wear bras. At all. Because they do not have breasts. Because they are children.A spokeswoman from Bratz distributor Funtastic told the Herald Sun that the notion that the bras might sexualize children was silly. "The idea of the padding is for girls to be discreet as they develop ... It is more about hiding what you have got than showing it off." A Target spokesperson likewise argued that the padded bras "give girls modesty and style as they go through development changes." The message is that everyone should calm down: No one's trying to make your little girls voluptuous by selling them padded bras. They're just trying to make them feel shame about their bodies six years before puberty!
On a totally unrelated note, wasn't it Marx that said something about religion being the opiate of the masses? Maybe we could update it and say today's religion is the whiskey of the populace... check this out:
Gruber and Hungerman found that when states eliminated blue laws, church attendance declined while drinking and drug use increased significantly among young adults. Even more striking, the biggest change in bad behavior mostly occurred among those who frequently attended religious services, they report in a working paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, "The Church vs. the Mall: What Happens When Religion Faces Increased Secular Competition?"
..... Before the shopping ban was lifted, about 37 percent of people in a state on average attended religious services at least weekly, Hungerman said. "After the laws are repealed it falls to 32 percent" -- a drop "not driven by declines in religiosity prior to the law change."Instead of going to church, many of the faithful apparently were going astray. Marijuana use increased by 11 percentage points among church attendees, compared with those who never went to services, after the shopping ban was lifted. Cocaine use increased by nearly 4 percentage points, and heavy drinking increased by about 5 1/2 percentage points among churchgoers compared with those who never went to services, with frequent attendees even more likely to go on benders.
Well, I guess this is what happens when you use external things to replace your will, or self esteem, or rational view of the world, or whatever. Take away the external thing, and poof! I guess that's why right wingers are always trying to legislate morality - because they know that if their followers don't have somebody on the outside telling them what to do, that they'll go nuts.
I've watched the Princeton movie based on their study showing how they hacked a Diebold voting machine. I don't understand why we don't use what we've used here in Leon County - bubble scans. It's good enough for your SAT, isn't it? Heh. Anyway, they're very simple, and by their very nature there is a paper trail. And if you have halfway intelligent poll workers who can catch problems (like the dumbass voter filled in two bubbles rather than just one, or whatever) then there's no issue. Why is this even discussed? ARGH!!
And again, I say, we'll be in Iran by the end of 2007. Podhoretz thinks so, as does Krauthammer. I'm trying to figure out who was beating the drums before Iraq to see if they're saying the same things now about Iran. *sigh*
No comments:
Post a Comment