Valentine’s Day is sometimes seen as a cheesy hallmark holiday that causes awkward “I love you” moments, filled with expensive dinners, flowers, and chocolates. But if you take a break from the Hallmark attacks, there is something nice about taking time out of your busy life to acknowledge your commitment, love and trust to your significant other. Or to do something sweet for friends and family you love.
Valentine’s Day was also the beginning of National Condom Week, which runs February 14 – February 21st. What better way to show love for your partner than to have safer sex, and talk about condoms, sexual health and love?
During National Condom Week, Planned Parenthood distributed as many free condoms as possible—thousands all over the U.S. You may have seen our Vox chapters spreading the love at SUNY Brockport, SUNY Cortland, or SUNY Geneseo. Perhaps you ran into one of our educators at the Tap & Mallet last weekend giving out fun valentine’s-day themed condom and candy gift bags.
Getting condoms to everybody is an important first step in promoting safer sex. However, once you have the condom, it is just as important to know how to properly use it, and what your back up plan will be if it breaks. (For example, having a packet of emergency contraception in your medicine cabinet just in case.) Discussing these options and ideas with your partner before sex is just as important as making sure you have plenty of condoms onhand.
Remember that male condoms are not the only way to practice safer sex. Female condoms, when used correctly, have been proven to be 79%-95% effective in preventing pregnancies. Also available are hormonal types of birth control, such as the patch or the pill (although these methods do not protect against STIs).
Safer sex isn’t only important for vaginal sex, but for oral or anal sex, too. Yes, the risk of pregnancy goes away. However, it is still possible to transmit STIs via these methods. So use a barrier method like a condom or dental dam for oral and anal sex, too.
In conclusion, stock up, discuss, and have lots of fun. But don’t forget about respecting yourself, and for THAT reason alone insist on condoms.
Hope you had a HAPPY NATIONAL CONDOM WEEK! What did you do to celebrate?
Monday, February 22, 2010
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Superbowl Sunday Ad: Controversial?
Pizza, football, chicken wings, beer….and anti-choice commercials? The biggest buzz about the Super Bowl this year is not the teams playing or the half time show but a 30-second ad by the anti-choice group, Focus on the Family. The ad, featuring football superstar Tim Tebow, has both anti-choice and pro-choice groups up in arms. According to Focus on the Family, the commercial will share the personal story of Pam Tebow, Tim Tebow’s mother. Mrs. Tebow has spoken in the past about her difficult decision to continue her pregnancy during a serious illness, against her doctor’s advice. Her pregnancy resulted in the birth of her son, Tim Tebow, who is now a famous football player.
As this ad shows, because of Roe v Wade, women have the legal right to make decisions about their health that are best for them and their families. This is a right that must be preserved to strengthen the health of women and their families. However, this is not an ad that has a pro-choice message. If you look at the Focus on the Family, their long-stated agenda has been to overturn Roe V. Wade. If Focus on the Family is successful in repealing a woman’s right to choose, women facing a high-risk pregnancy like Pam Tebow’s would not have the ability to make the personal health decision that is right for them. Women with high-risk pregnancies, who know that their lives or the lives of their fetuses are at risk, deserve to have every medical option available to them to consider in consultation with medical professionals. Pam Tebow made the choice to keep her child and the right to do so.
Despite the appeal of the Tebow family story, it is important to remember that Focus on the Family’s goal is to overturn Roe v. Wade and outlaw abortion. This is a position that runs counter to what the majority of Americans believe. Focus on the Family has every right to spend $3 million as it chooses, but it is surprising, at a time when so many individuals in the U.S. and around the world are in need of aid, that a Super Bowl ad is the organization’s priority. The commercial is slated to air on this Sunday’s Superbowl broadcast.
The following is a video featuring Sean James that has been put out by Planned Parenthood:
As this ad shows, because of Roe v Wade, women have the legal right to make decisions about their health that are best for them and their families. This is a right that must be preserved to strengthen the health of women and their families. However, this is not an ad that has a pro-choice message. If you look at the Focus on the Family, their long-stated agenda has been to overturn Roe V. Wade. If Focus on the Family is successful in repealing a woman’s right to choose, women facing a high-risk pregnancy like Pam Tebow’s would not have the ability to make the personal health decision that is right for them. Women with high-risk pregnancies, who know that their lives or the lives of their fetuses are at risk, deserve to have every medical option available to them to consider in consultation with medical professionals. Pam Tebow made the choice to keep her child and the right to do so.
Despite the appeal of the Tebow family story, it is important to remember that Focus on the Family’s goal is to overturn Roe v. Wade and outlaw abortion. This is a position that runs counter to what the majority of Americans believe. Focus on the Family has every right to spend $3 million as it chooses, but it is surprising, at a time when so many individuals in the U.S. and around the world are in need of aid, that a Super Bowl ad is the organization’s priority. The commercial is slated to air on this Sunday’s Superbowl broadcast.
The following is a video featuring Sean James that has been put out by Planned Parenthood:
Monday, February 1, 2010
Scott Roeder found guilty
“At this time, we hope that George can be remembered for his legacy of service to women (and) the help he provided for those who needed it and the love and happiness he provided us as a husband, father and grandfather.” – Statement on behalf of Jeanne Tiller, Dr. Tiller’s wife
This past Friday, a Kansas jury convicted Scott Roeder of first degree murder in the killing of Dr. George Tiller. I was happy to learn that it only took jurors 37 minutes to find Roeder guilty. He was also convicted of two counts of aggravated assault for pointing his gun at two church members. This verdict is important because it sends the message that a difference of beliefs is never a justifiable reason for murder. Cecile Richards, President of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, issued a statement affirming support for Roeder’s conviction. She said, “Doctors who perform abortions deserve and must receive the full protection of the law. To that end, we are gratified that Judge Warren Wilbert prohibited the argument that Scott Roeder’s deeply felt anti-abortion beliefs made him less culpable for Dr. Tiller’s murder, therefore not allowing the jury to consider the lesser charge of manslaughter.” Family Planning Advocates of NYS President,Tracey Brooks, said the “conviction reinforces the strongly held American value that violence is never the solution to our differences."
Roeder’s trial began on January 22, which was also the 37th anniversary of Roe. V. Wade. Before the trial had even started, Roeder publicly admitted to shooting Dr. Tiller at his church on May 31st. During the trial, Scott Roeder also admitted he had planned to kill Dr. Tiller for many years and had even taken a gun to Tiller’s church before. Roeder argued that his reason for committing the murder was to “halt the death of babies”. This chilling “reason” made Judge Wilbert publicly admit the importance of keeping the issue of abortion, and even the word itself, out of the courtroom. From what was reported from the trial, it seemed that he did a great job at doing just that.
Judge Wilbert originally considered giving jurors the option of convicting Roeder of voluntary manslaughter, which is defined as "an unreasonable but honest belief that circumstances existed that justified deadly force" under Kansas statute. If convicted for voluntary manslaughter, Roeder would have only received a sentence of around five years, as opposed to a possible life sentence if convicted of first-degree murder. The possible use of this defense worried me that a conviction of voluntary manslaughter would have negatively opened the doors for many other killings of this nature. However, as hoped for, Judge Wilbert rejected this defense.
Although I am relieved that justice has been served in this trial, it is impossible to forget the loss of Dr. George Tiller. His bravery to continue working despite numerous attempts on his life and threats to his practice showed his dedication and commitment to helping women. Tiller is the fourth abortion doctor to be killed in the United States since 1993. While I applaud the jury for their fair and honest conviction, it is impossible to overlook the fact that the issue of protecting abortion providers is still far from being resolved.
This past Friday, a Kansas jury convicted Scott Roeder of first degree murder in the killing of Dr. George Tiller. I was happy to learn that it only took jurors 37 minutes to find Roeder guilty. He was also convicted of two counts of aggravated assault for pointing his gun at two church members. This verdict is important because it sends the message that a difference of beliefs is never a justifiable reason for murder. Cecile Richards, President of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, issued a statement affirming support for Roeder’s conviction. She said, “Doctors who perform abortions deserve and must receive the full protection of the law. To that end, we are gratified that Judge Warren Wilbert prohibited the argument that Scott Roeder’s deeply felt anti-abortion beliefs made him less culpable for Dr. Tiller’s murder, therefore not allowing the jury to consider the lesser charge of manslaughter.” Family Planning Advocates of NYS President,Tracey Brooks, said the “conviction reinforces the strongly held American value that violence is never the solution to our differences."
Roeder’s trial began on January 22, which was also the 37th anniversary of Roe. V. Wade. Before the trial had even started, Roeder publicly admitted to shooting Dr. Tiller at his church on May 31st. During the trial, Scott Roeder also admitted he had planned to kill Dr. Tiller for many years and had even taken a gun to Tiller’s church before. Roeder argued that his reason for committing the murder was to “halt the death of babies”. This chilling “reason” made Judge Wilbert publicly admit the importance of keeping the issue of abortion, and even the word itself, out of the courtroom. From what was reported from the trial, it seemed that he did a great job at doing just that.
Judge Wilbert originally considered giving jurors the option of convicting Roeder of voluntary manslaughter, which is defined as "an unreasonable but honest belief that circumstances existed that justified deadly force" under Kansas statute. If convicted for voluntary manslaughter, Roeder would have only received a sentence of around five years, as opposed to a possible life sentence if convicted of first-degree murder. The possible use of this defense worried me that a conviction of voluntary manslaughter would have negatively opened the doors for many other killings of this nature. However, as hoped for, Judge Wilbert rejected this defense.
Although I am relieved that justice has been served in this trial, it is impossible to forget the loss of Dr. George Tiller. His bravery to continue working despite numerous attempts on his life and threats to his practice showed his dedication and commitment to helping women. Tiller is the fourth abortion doctor to be killed in the United States since 1993. While I applaud the jury for their fair and honest conviction, it is impossible to overlook the fact that the issue of protecting abortion providers is still far from being resolved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
