Ben Kinchlow is a minister, broadcaster, author and businessman. He was the long-time co-host of CBN's "The 700 Club" television program and host of the international edition of the show, seen in more than 80 countries. He is the founder of Americans for Israel and the African American Political Awareness Coalition, and the author of several books.More ↓Less ↑
(Warning: I am going to use a word not often heard in enlightened discourse today.)
The argument rages almost daily on national TV and radio, college and high-school campuses, and now elementary schools (I am not sure about kindergarten – but maybe in some of the more progressive schools). It has been heard in Congress and has reached the White House. It has the potential to become another addition to modern rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
The right? Subsidized sex. (You are probably more familiar with the term free contraception.) Just as the Supreme Court declared that abortion was a “fundamental right” because it falls under the “penumbra” (whatever that means) of the “right to privacy,” is there any reason why advocates should not also expect to be granted yet another right? After all, it is for the common good.
Listen carefully to the impassioned arguments, and you will doubtless hear how all of society will benefit from providing free contraception. You will also hear that it is our duty as good citizens (rich misers that we are) to provide for the sexual pleasures of those less fortunate. After all, just because someone is poor is no reason they should not have unrestricted access to sexual enjoyment. Besides, if we subsidize sex among the less fortunate, this will doubtless result in fewer childhood deaths and better overall health among the poverty stricken, who are no longer burdened with an unwanted child. This will somehow magically translate into huge savings in overall social and medical costs which, of course, will benefit us all.
It seems to me I recall reading in a major newspaper somewhere (probably online) that birth-control pills can also cure acne, regulate menstrual periods, clear up pelvic infections and, if I am not mistaken, protect against cancer. (My apologies if I did not get that exactly right.) Why would you be against such advantages?
Subsidized sex will also help improve race relations. I am fairly confident that a report, in the not too distant future (if it has not already), will surface that clearly indicates poverty, violence and high-school dropout rates among blacks are all tied to a lack of subsidized sex. Rich white folks (and some right-wing rich blacks) should be forced to ensure that poor black women (poor whites, too) have access to free birth control. After all, don’t the shocking abortion statistics in the black community support a need for free contraceptives? If they had free contraception, they could have all the sex they want without impacting the already out-of-control welfare budget.
We have all heard the phrase “babies having babies.” That would be so easily rectified if conservatives would stop waging their war on women and get behind free contraceptives for women. Yeah, I know, there are already free condoms passed out in many high schools, but sometimes in the heat of the moment, well, you know.
Can’t Republicans and conservatives see that this would reduce (some would say dramatically) the number of unintended pregnancies? This subsequent reduction would stop the dramatic rate of abortions in the black community, which would make them feel better about themselves and white folks, thereby generally improving race relations. This would also, without a doubt, convert these same potential candidates for single-mother welfare benefits into qualified applicants for high-paying professional careers! How can you be against that?
So, now that the benefits of access to free contraception are clearly obvious to us all, how do the recipients proceed? First and foremost, they must determine whether they will be engaging in intercourse or outercourse (real word). Once that decision is made, there are a variety of methods to deter (though not necessarily guaranteed to prevent) pregnancies and protect against venereal diseases.
There are even websites that carefully explain to teens such esoteric concepts as, “What is birth control?” “What is meant by having sex?” One site even has a pregnancy quiz to “make sure that you really know what causes a girl to get pregnant.” (What, you’re knocked up? Get rid of it!) Once you have ascertained what causes pregnancy in careless females, she can take steps to prevent that. There are chemicals, drugs, natural and surgical procedures available. One can also use FAMs (fertility awareness methods), which include the calendar days, standard days, cervical mucus, symptothermal and temperature methods (to name some). Then there are various birth-control implants, IUDs, birth-control patches, birth-control shots, birth-control sponges, diaphragms, birth-control rings and cervical caps – not to be confused with female condoms. (There really is such a thing.)
There are pills, implants, latex and mechanical devices that control hormones to prevent pregnancy. But if you don’t want your hormones controlled, there are other methods that don’t interfere with hormone production and others that contain no latex. However, if you were “caught up in the moment” or “forgot,” there is always the “morning after pill.” (If you live in the UK, you can choose from at least 15 of these different methods, most all of which are free.) Finally, as a last resort, there are spermicides, male condoms and (“Don’t talk to me about”) vasectomies.
Think of a few of the statistics cited by sociologists – the expense, social concerns, social and economic costs associated with single motherhood in the American community at large. For example, a welfare mother might simultaneously receive benefits from: TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families), Medicaid, food stamps, public housing, WIC, Head Start,and the Social Service Block Grant. Keep in mind, the federal government currently runs more than 70 major interrelated welfare programs.
According to testimony before the Committee on Budget, U.S. House of Representatives, Aug. 1, 2000:
On average, the annual cost of the welfare system amounts to around $5,600 in taxes from each household that paid federal income tax in 2000. (That’s you!) Welfare spending is so large it is difficult to comprehend. Adjusting for inflation, the amount taxpayers now spend on welfare each year is greater than the value of the entire U.S. Gross National Product at the beginning of the 20th century.
For once, I am forced to agree (somewhat) with liberals!
We do need a dramatic reduction in the pregnancy rates for unmarried women. What is needed is an extremely affordable concept, method and solution that will, in one simple, inexpensive easy-to-implement step be applicable to all who will utilize it, regardless of economic status, language or social standing. (Of course, nothing will work if not implemented and every one of the aforementioned products and concepts comes with specific directions).
Ideally, the concept should offer a 100 percent guarantee, prevent pregnancies and when used according to instructions, be warranted to prevent 100 percent of sexually transmitted diseases. In the best of all worlds, such a method would meet all the above requirements, and would be within a price range attainable by all, even the most poverty stricken. Sounds too good to be true, doesn’t it?
Well, I have some great news! Not only is there just such a concept, method and plan available, but it is absolutely free. That is correct – 100 percent free, entirely without cost to taxpayers! In fact, when employed according to directions, it totally eliminates unwanted pregnancies and the accompanying costs and problems associated with fatherless children among the underprivileged and teenage girls. (Plus you’re not spending five grand on a “good time” for somebody else). It is simple, already immediately available without a prescription and will eliminate the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.
Warning! “C” word ahead! Extremely offensive to some, especially liberals!
The solution? The concept? The method? The plan to save billions, put an end to tens of thousands of abortions and address many of the social, economic, educational and health problems associated with lack of government-sponsored “free” contraceptives?
Here it is …
Ladies, keep your dresses down, your underwear up, and mean it when you say, “No!”
The “C” word you will almost never hear in any high-level, so-called intelligent discussions about this problem (because it offends many liberals) is “chastity” – you know, all those old-fashioned, out-of-date, unhip words like “celibacy, virginity, abstinence, self-restraint, self-denial, innocence, purity, virtue, morality.”
All you old guys will remember we called those girls “squares,” unhip” and decidedly not “neat-o,” ‘awesome,” “rad” or “sick.” They were the “good girls,” and everyone knew who they were. No one wrote their names and phone numbers on bathroom walls or text messages about where to go for a “good time.”