Why Planned Parenthood funding is wrong

Although I have been heavily criticised on these grounds, over 2011 I have argued that the controversial policy of de-funding Planned Parenthood was the correct one. The two sides of the political debate over Planned Parenthood have quite simply no means of understanding each other because they operate on utterly incompatible philosophical perspectives.

Whilst in other posts on this blog I have outlined the environmental factors that dictate which side ("Christian" or "Epicurean") will win out over a long enough period, I should emphasise that in general efforts by either side to dictate have largely failed. It is for this reason that I completely agree with this new article in The Atlantic Wire that both sides win if government ceases Planned Parenthood finding.

Susan Komen's recent decision to end funding to Planned Parenthood has attracted a lot of attention, since Rod Dreher and Ross Douthat have shown that, in contrast to the vigorous debate amongst ordinary Americans about abortion, the media is totally pro-choice and wants to effectively silence any organisation with different views. If the government of the United States was to cease funding Planned Parenthood, it would:

1. make those who do defend it (and whom I do not wish to offend) more generous in their funding of it and perhaps more willing to debate other viewpoints even though this is worse than tough
2. allow the public's viewpoint on Planned Parenthood to be more influential in North America than it is today, making for decisions that better reflect what the public wants
3. make the philosophical battle about birth control - and eventually even the environmental and resource forces that control it - better understood by the next generation