"By the end of last week, congressional Democrats and a few moderate Republicans succeeded in requiring most employers to include contraception as part of health insurance coverage, in spite of deep opposition from the GOP majority. Across the Potomac in Virginia, Democrats and, again, a few Republican moderates were able to soften or kill GOP bills that would have put into place humiliating obstacles to abortion. These are good things."

"Humiliating obstacles" to abortion? No matter what your stand on abortion a few facts are clear. One, it is a legal practice in this country. Two, it is a difficult emotional decision at best and a shattering personal experience at worst. Another is that "humiliation" comes with the territory. To have accidentally or irresponsibly created a life that you now wish to destroy "SHOULD" be "humiliating". Not public "humiliation", no one wants or expects that. But, if you are not personally, privately "humiliated" by the prospect, then we have a even greater issue with our society. This is not the same medical procedure as wort removal!

The second word in this phrase that jumped out at me, "obstacles". Abortion is legal in this country so the "obstacle" has been removed. Anyone can get an abortion. And since abortion involves terminating the heartbeat and therefore the life of a human being, it should not be as easy as wort removal. Accept it, a little deterrence to irresponsible behavior (the accidental pregnancy) is not inappropriate given the outcome of such irresponsibility and the drastic procedure necessary if someone wants to eliminate their (mistake?).

And by the way, this is a Birth control/contraception article Ms. Stepp wrote, not abortion, though I am glad that Ms. Stepp recognizes the close connection. Contraception is also legal in this country so what obstacle is being placed on contraception. Oh, that no other person other than the woman involved should be forced to pay for her contraceptive pills/devices and decisions? Sorry, that is not an obstacle, that is natural and part of the choice you make. There is no health risk that requires a woman to have sex and therefore require birth control. Both are a choice, as is abortion if I remember correctly. Before 1960, when the birth control pill was first approved, other forms of contraception (condoms, etc) existed and were used extensively. Why didn't those other contraceptives get paid for by some other person, company, church or insurance company? The same reason that cosmetic surgery doesn't get paid for by anyone other than the user, it is an individual decision (choice), necessity and not a medical procedure. So lets be consistent in our messaging at least.

Later in the article the phrase "cheaper contraceptive methods and greater access to abortion" came up too. Yeah, and I would like greater access to cheaper golf equipment. Come on, pursuing this line of thinking is totally perverse. So if you expect something as core to societal well being as the termination of babies to be fun, free and easy, you are irresponsible and selfish. As for "men speaking out who are in favor of birth control", you just heard one.

But Ms. Stepp did make one point that I agree with. "For baby boomer women, on the other hand, the ability to control when or if you have a baby is nothing short of a miracle." I couldn't agree more. And so is birth. We should begin to treat them both as such and be thankful for having the technology and capability. If only we were intelligent enough to know how to responsibly use the miracle technology we are given today.