Federally Funded Teen Pregnancy

I just read something that perplexes me...although I shouldn't be surprised. The first paragraph is rather confusing in how it reads. I'm SURE the writer didn't mean to say that there are actually "federally funded teen pregnancy" organizations. But even getting beyond the poor choice of sentence structure...my blood still boils:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration, to the consternation of its critics, has picked the medical director of an organization that opposes premarital sex, contraception and abortion to lead the office that oversees federally funded teen pregnancy, family planning and abstinence programs.

The appointment of Eric Keroack, a Marblehead, Massachusetts, obstetrician and gynecologist, to oversee the federal Office of Population Affairs and its $283 million annual budget has angered family-planning advocates.

Keroack currently is medical director of A Woman's Concern, a Christian nonprofit. The Dorchester, Massachusetts-based organization runs six centers in the state that offer free pregnancy testing, ultrasounds and counseling.

It also works to "help women escape the temptation and violence of abortion," according to its statement of faith. And it opposes contraception, saying its use increases out-of-wedlock pregnancy and abortion rates.

Now, I know I'm not alone in thinking that it is wrong (at least from my point of view) that someone who opposes contraception should be leading an organization charged with the oversight of the "Office of Population." I honestly can't believe that there are still people in this world that oppose contraception AT ALL, but they certainly shouldn't be leading an agency such as this. ARE THEY NUTS? Oh, wait...yes, in fact...they are.

Read more reaction by Melinda Henneberg on the Huffington Post.

Comments

[Margaret]

What is NOT crazy about this administration? I can't think of a single decision that Bush has made that I've agreed with.

[KIP]

I agree with Margaret. Just another strange tick on the list of policies that make no sense. Maybe someone should send that guy (and why is it a guy?, guess he knows more about pregnancy than a woman would) a copy of Freakenomics.

[Fidget]

why yes, just another assinine move by the adminnistration that illustrates how little they value womens' issues.

[Artemis Fowl]

It always amazes me how people so quickly class anyone who disagrees with them as "insane" or "stupid". Our society is failing because people have this fanciful notion that if the majority believes it, it must be so.

[True Feminist]

Interesting. Are we then to assume that the only people who should be in an office regarding population are those who oppose life? They oppose both the creation and the sustenance of life? THAT wouldn't make sense. It makes perfect sense that someone who is eager to allow us to continue our culture through reproduction should be put in such a position.
Perhaps you disagree with their statement that the use of contraception "increases out-of-wedlock pregnancy and abortion rates."
If they are right, then one should certainly be against contraception. Neither of the above are beneficial for women.
How could this be true, you ask? Both mean more freedom, right? No and I'll explain. Because contraception DOES have a failure rate. Women...unmarried women depend on it and it fails. And their lives are altered drastically in a way that would not have been likely to happen had then not relied on contraception. Some end up with a child while they're still a child. But then there's a worse situation. Some end up having abortions which, studies show, are incredibly damaging to women, mentally, almost always and physically frequently. No....contraception and abortion are great for MEN, NOT for women. It means MEN can act without responsibility. Women only, will have to endure the physical and emotional ramifications. To be an advocate for women one would have to focus on how women can suffer (mentally and physically) the LEAST.

[CreditApprover]

It's very sad that we voted for this administration and we have to admit its decisions, without a shade of agreement to them.