The Left is trying to make political hay out of the lie that conservatives want to deny women access to contraceptives. Some have called the debate over contraception funding and opposition to abortion “The War on Women.” Democrat operative Wasserman Schultz said, “It’s time Romney and the rest of the Republican Party end the war on women they started.” Abortion kills 750,000 pre-born females each year. Abortion is America’s real war on women.

Of course, abortion is not a contraceptive device since conception has already taken place by the time an abortion is considered: sperm and egg have met. Millions of Americans believe that killing a pre-born baby is a moral evil and want it stopped.

A contraceptive device prevents conception. That’s why the word “contra” — against — is used. As far as I know, no one is opposing the use of contraceptive devices. Those opposing President Obama’s contraception mandate is being opposed because he is asking the taxpayers to fund it, and if not taxpayers then privately owned insurance companies that will pass on the costs to its consumers.

While the Roman Catholic Church is against artificial means of contraception, it does not impose that view on anyone. There are no civil sanctions for women who practice artificial contraception. The Church is not imposing its morality on anyone. If a member of the Church does not like the policy, she can leave.

The Obama Administration is imposing its view of morality on all of us. We are being forced to pay for birth control devices. This makes it more than a religious freedom issue. No one should be forced to pay for anything that another person wants to possess or use. Why is it wrong for someone to take money out of my bank account to purchase contraceptives, but it’s OK to elect someone to do it?

How can we get the attention of people who do not understand these issues? Here’s what I suggest. Conservatives should start supporting free contraceptives. Here’s what I would say if I were invited to address the subject on a talk show:

There was a time that I was against tax-subsidized contraception devices. Now I’m for it. Here’s why. I believe the more liberals who decide not to have children the better it is for America. A voluntary One-Liberal-Child policy through contraception would be a good public policy statement. The fewer liberals there will be in the future, the greater the chance that the United States will recover from its socialistic policies.

I would then encourage conservative families to participate in a More-Conservative-Children policy. The goal would be to out outbreed Liberals and take over the country by attrition. In time, liberalism would go the way of the Dodo bird.

I would then cite the following from an article by a Liberal columnist who understands the Liberal’s demographic problem:

[F]or the past 30 years or so, conservatives — particularly those of the right-wing red-state Christian strain — have been out-breeding liberals by a margin of at least 20 percent, if not far more. . . . One theory goes like this: Libs are generally more socially conscious and hence tend to actually give a modicum of thought to what it means to pop out a brood of children in this modern overstuffed age. Also, many other liberal[s] . . . are (admittedly) happy selfish suckwads who want all the modern booty for themselves and won’t want to give up the Ducati [motorcycle] and the plasma [television] and the biannual trip to Cinque Terre [Five Lands on the Italian Riviera] for the sake of a pod of rug rats and 15 grand a year (each) for private kindergarten. Translation: Libs just aren’t procreating like they could/should be.1

I guarantee that all the talk about contraception will go away, and if it doesn’t, liberals will go away.

1. Mark Morford, “When Liberals Rule the World: Stats say the GOP is dying. But red-staters are breeding like drunken ferrets. Who wins?,” SF Gate (March 28, 2007). [↩]