Pelosi: Contraception is Economic Stimulus

by Sal on January 26, 2009

in Culture,Economy,Politics,Religion

According to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Contraception funding is an economic stimuls, apparently because less babies will save the states money.  In an exchange George Stephanopoulos on This Week:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?

PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children’s health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those – one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?

PELOSI: No apologies. No. we have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.

This is ripe for Republicans to pounce on.  Not only is her statement laughable, it is completely offensive, alluding that people having babies should be a state issue and subject to the whims of the state.  States are in financial crisis?  No more babies allowed!  Next thing you know, she’ll try to claim that being pro-choice is part of Catholic Dogma.

{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }

rightonoz January 27, 2009 at 4:22 am

I can understand her comment based on stats that seem to show that family planning does actually have a cost benefit, in reducing unwanted pregnancies and the cost to the country of supporting the mother’s involved. ON that basis alone I would say it is a fair comment, however, I would think there are FAR better ways of spending money that have a positive effect on the economy, rather than just reducing a negative.

Again, my view does differ strongly from the three of you in that I strongly support family planning with teen education and access to contraception. Remember, US stats show there is almost NO difference in the STD rates amongst those who openly admit to pre-marital sex and those who profess abstinence. They may not be actually having full sex “I did not have sexual relations with that woman!”, however are exposing themselves by not taking precautions in their “almost” sex. There is strong suggestion that lack of intelligent aducation is causing them to leave themselves exposed.

I have a question for the three of you, and I ask it not as ‘taking the p..s’, but as genuinely confused on teh Catholic stand on family planing/contraception. MY understanding of the ruling by John Paul? (it’s so long ago I forget..)was that contraception was banned based on the text, ‘cast not seed on barren soil’, and that contraception was in effect making ‘barren soil’. Does that mean that a Catholic should not have sex with a sterile partner? Always struck me as a weird justification, but then, perhaps I am missing something or taking only half the meaning….


Sal January 27, 2009 at 6:44 am

Oz, just a couple of points. First, while I am against contraception for moral reasons, the point of this has more to do with the fact that the point of the legislation in question is an economic stimulus. Even if you accept the premise that contraception funding would reduce costs to the state over the long haul (I’m dubious on whether that is true or not) and you throw out any moral concerns, the fact is that any potential cost savings would take years to realize and hardly act as a stimulus to this current economic situation. A provision such as this should not be buried in what is being touted as emergency legislation to help revive the economy fro this current recession.

On the Catholic teaching on contraception, I think it is one of the most widely misunderstood teachings, as most people have your particular perception of it. The Catholic teaching on contraception has to do with it’s views on sex, which are that sex has two purposes, the complete unity of two people and the potential for procreation. Catholicism looks as sex as both a physical and a spiritual experience between two people who have committed themselves completely to each other in marriage, as an act of beauty and complete selflessness giving of each other as a gift. Stemming from that self-giving gift is the potential for children. Contraception has the potential to remove both of those elements, by taking away the prospect of complete unity as well as the prospect of having children. That does not mean that if because of a natural reason, a couple is currently incapable of having children (whether it be because she is sterile, or because it happens to be at the point in her cycle where she cannot have children), it becomes then not a choice that acts as an impedement, but rather a product of nature.

Secondly, there is growing medical evidence the pill and other hormonal contraceptives may have serious health side-effects for women. There is a growing movement in this country of women who, for completely non-religious and non-moral reasons, are deciding that they don’t want any part of hormonal birth control because of the potential health implications.

I don’t expect to convince you by this, but I hope it gives you a bit of a better understanding. I am far from a theologian, and I am sure that my explanation above is not perfect, but hopefully it gives you at least some understanding of what the Catholic church believes.


mis July 8, 2009 at 7:28 pm

The catholic church are retards, im not even going to waist my time making my words eliquent, you are wrong about everything within the domain of the understanding of life. But how can you say that!? – you just need to put your faith aside and think for a while maybe even years for slower people but i assure you that you’ll get there in the end. please f**k off, PLEASE!? again you are wrong, your regressive regime defys natures most simple examples. honestly i know it sounds like an outragous claim but you are.. get there!


Mike July 8, 2009 at 8:31 pm

Way to show those “slower people” mis


Cancel reply

Reply to Sal:

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Previous post:

Next post: