“Contraception and Abortion”

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook

In this FindLaw column Sherry Colb “discuss[es] a recent speech by a spokesperson for Feminists For Life (FFL), in which she said that FFL does not take a position on contraception (because some members favor it and some oppose). [Colb] criticize FFL’s failure to take a position and argue that especially for an organization that is categorically opposed to all abortions yet prioritizes feminism, it is critical to support women’s access to contraception.

In a post at Dorf on Law, Colb considers:

… an argument that some people have made about one form of contraception: birth-control pills. The argument has several components. First, birth-control pills have side effects that its makers did not initially fully appreciate and thereby gave women the illusion that they could “harmlessly” avoid the risk of pregnancy. Second, birth-control pills provide protection against one risk of sex (pregnancy) without doing anything to protect against sexually transmitted diseases (STD’s). As a result, some have suggested, various S.T.D.’s have proliferated to a point at which virtually everyone above a certain age is a carrier. And third, birth-control pills suppress women’s natural hormonal cycles, which has the consequence of obscuring an important physiological basis for selecting a mate: pheromones (which, among other things, attract women to men with whom they are unlikely to be close genetic relations).

Via Nariessa Smith

This entry was posted in Feminism and Law, Feminist Legal Scholarship, Reproductive Rights. Bookmark the permalink.