Since When Is Giving 12 Year Olds The Morning After Pill “Science”?
Then again, Liberals are the same people who think that blaming Mankind mostly or solely for warming that followed a typical cycle is “science”
(The Politico) Was there science, and not just politics, behind the Obama administration’s decision to stop young teens from getting the morning-after pill without a prescription? Probably not.
Will it work as a political decision? That’s trickier – because for every independent voter who is reassured that President Barack Obama doesn’t want 12-year-old girls buying emergency contraception, there may be another one who thinks he ignores science for political gain.
It wasn’t just Democrats and abortion rights groups that howled when HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius overruled the FDA on Wednesday and declared that Plan B shouldn’t be available over the counter to girls under age 17. It was medical groups, too – because in their view, the evidence is already settled that the emergency contraception is safe and effective, regardless of age.
“This was a poster child of an issue of science being trumped,” said Wood, now the executive director of the Jacobs Institute of Women’s Health at the George Washington University. “It’s very distressing.”
So, how is this related to “science”?
In her letter Wednesday to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, Sebelius said she blocked the FDA’s recommendation for over-the-counter sales to young teens because the studies submitted to the agency “do not include data on all ages” and because “it is commonly understood that there are significant cognitive and behavioral differences between older adolescent girls and the youngest girls of reproductive age.”
Ah. Because there isn’t enough data. But, the liberals who are slamming Sebelius and Obama think it is anti-science to restrict the use of the morning after pill for kids under 17 without parental consent. Is it science? Is it politics? No, it’s neither, it’s simply basic common sense, the same way that parents should be notified when their underage daughter wants to get an abortion, a measure that freaks out liberals. Unless the child in question is their own. Then THEY want notification. In Liberal World, it’s always about Someone Else. And, give Sebelius some credit, she did say that “that allowing girls under 17 to purchase this hormonal drug over the counter without the supervision of an adult or doctor is” a bad idea.
Abortion on demand is the holy grail of Democrat issues, and you know that any interference means that the legislation/measure and the people who propose them are “anti-women” or something.
Good question (The Blaze) The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)’s official embrace of same-sex marriage at its General Assembly meeting in Detroit,
Michael Barone, one of media’s sharpest observers of America’s political scene, has noted an interesting trend in Democrat politics: unions
Isn’t it funny how the methods to deal with anthropogenic global warming always seem to revolve around Someone Else Doing