Should IUDs and other contraceptive methods be free in states where abortion is banned?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     No, but I support benefits such as paid parental leave and tax credits for parents as a means of encouraging responsible childrearing. The health of the family is fundamental to the health of society, and needs to be the focus of prosocial policy ideas surrounding the topic. Not aiding and abetting the Peter Pan Syndrome of the modern American.

[Associate Justice PiT]

    No, but I support benefits such as paid parental leave and tax credits for parents as a means of encouraging responsible childrearing. The health of the family is fundamental to the health of society, and needs to be the focus of prosocial policy ideas surrounding the topic. Not aiding and abetting the Peter Pan Syndrome of the modern American.

Hm, interesting. Change begins at home, as they say.

Suddenly I'm interested in how the distinguished PiT believes my abstinence from sexual relationships or raising any type of family reflects on me either personally or mentally. But I do encourage total honesty. We're all adults here, after all. Except of course for those of us who are children for not fitting into that cookie-cutter mold.

     I think it's commendable that you practice celibacy given that you don't want to raise a family, and in fact exactly the right choice for you to be making. Adhering to a religion where monasticism is practiced, I would be a hypocrite if I said not raising a family was an unacceptable choice. My problem is that the topic question implicitly classes abortion as a form of contraception and thereby is asking if people should be guaranteed easy access to contraceptives. I call it a Peter Pan Syndrome because it strikes me that people think there needs to be an easy out from the responsibilities that life seeks to put on their shoulders.

[Associate Justice PiT]

    No, but I support benefits such as paid parental leave and tax credits for parents as a means of encouraging responsible childrearing. The health of the family is fundamental to the health of society, and needs to be the focus of prosocial policy ideas surrounding the topic. Not aiding and abetting the Peter Pan Syndrome of the modern American.

Hm, interesting. Change begins at home, as they say.

Suddenly I'm interested in how the distinguished PiT believes my abstinence from sexual relationships or raising any type of family reflects on me either personally or mentally. But I do encourage total honesty. We're all adults here, after all. Except of course for those of us who are children for not fitting into that cookie-cutter mold.

     I think it's commendable that you practice celibacy given that you don't want to raise a family, and in fact exactly the right choice for you to be making. Adhering to a religion where monasticism is practiced, I would be a hypocrite if I said not raising a family was an unacceptable choice. My problem is that the topic question implicitly classes abortion as a form of contraception and thereby is asking if people should be guaranteed easy access to contraceptives. I call it a Peter Pan Syndrome because it strikes me that people think there needs to be an easy out from the responsibilities that life seeks to put on their shoulders.

Alright, I do appreciate the clarification on that bit, but I want to emphasize that I have always separated abortion from birth control and contraceptives. I never held abortion as something not meaningfully different from the pill, including Plan B, or other conventional methods of birth control and family planning that exist as alternative to abortion.

But being responsible and accountable for another human life is one of the greatest challenges life can ever throw at you, regardless of circumstances, whether that involves one's offspring or another relative or a neighbor. You do, indeed, grow up. And present conditions make having a family practically impossible for young people. You can blame whoever you want for that being the case today, but the lack of confidence and the growing insecurity since the GFC will deter people from having families even if they feel ready to. Which is undoubtedly important to a child's formative years as those are easily the most important years of a person's life.

But multiple lawmakers have stated at least an openness to restricting access to contraceptives which, for all intents and purposes, make abortions less likely to be resorted to. IUDs can cost up to $1300 without insurance, assuming those aren't outlawed. And with the decision just out, women have every right to be concerned about whether those alternatives to abortion will remain available. This article, written by someone who supports overturning Roe and Casey, acknowledges that lawmakers hardly know what they're doing when they're putting exceptions in place. And that's just counting lawmakers who want to keep non-abortion contraceptives legal.

     And likewise I appreciate you clarifying your thoughts. Asking you a question so I don't misunderstand you again, is your main interest in supporting this proposal to reduce demand for abortion?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     And likewise I appreciate you clarifying your thoughts. Asking you a question so I don't misunderstand you again, is your main interest in supporting this proposal to reduce demand for abortion?

Yes.

     My problem is that it would continue to support the development of a culture centered around a self-serving mentality of "freedom from children". While enabling that effect through contraception is certainly a lesser problem than doing it through abortion, I would rather look towards a greater good of a culture that does not actively foster the mentality that I describe.