Today's post is about two political subjects, that neither should be.
Let's take today's Spokesman-Review editorial page. There were two editorials , one written by a journalism teacher, the other a nationally syndicated columnist.
In the first, written by Jamie Tobias Neely, generally approves of plan B without parental notification. One can only hope her children, if any, are grown up.
Her position which uses a fictitious movie comedy, "Juno," yes essentially, yes, why not, after all they are already screwing like rabbits and at lease the kids won't have unwanted babies.
The Second, is Kathleen Parker, a syndicated columnist who says no. Why make it easier to talk an eleven year old into having sex. (my Quote) I can see it now. The boy. "Hey it's alright and it's fun plus here's a pill that will keep you from getting pregnant." O.K, I used a fictitious conversation too.
There are two obvious conclusions that are not being discussed. First, why can a teen not be able to accept Tylenol at school or have any surgery other than life saving emergency, without parental consent? Why? Because sexual issues, are a defacto exception to the consent rules fostered by the the pro choice movement. Doesn't anyone feel this is strange? You can't have a wart removed, but you can take a sexual permission pill without discussing or even involving a parent or court.
If I'm a fourteen year old boy trying to get sex from a girl on the edge of refusal, I could hand her a vitamin pill and go after it. This is a political decision, period, not a health one. I am now 75 tears old. I can still remember the arguments used to seduce a teen. Sometimes they were successful, sometimes not, and in my day a kid couldn't even buy a condom and birth control wasn't invented yet. With the permissive political interference with parent/child issue, it is even easier.
So OK, Ms Neely, maybe your 13 1/2 percent of sexual activity is valid, but I wish to make two points in rebuttal. One, you made no reference to source of the figure, nor did you specify that the percentage were all girls or included boys who would generally outnumber the girls. Notice I'm using the terms boys and girls. Just passing puberty does not bestow adulthood.
One commentator a liberal, one a conservative. This conversation should be between a doctor, a parent and a girl-child, not political commentators. Oh, and maybe an attorney since statutory Rape may well be covered up, thus destroying evidence in a potential criminal case. Maybe fourteen year olds cannot afford the $37.00 pill, but I bet an eighteen year old can.
Prosecutor explains decision to punt
1 hour ago