In response to:

Science, Sex and Birth Control

Nos Nevets Wrote: Apr 11, 2013 10:39 AM
Yes & No. GAO isn't definitive. It may prevent implantation of a fertilized egg. If you believe "life begins at conception", you can argue the woman hasn't really conceived until the fertilized egg is well ensconced in her womb, therefore no abortion. If you believe, as the newly passed Kansas law sitting on Gov. Brownback's desk says, "Life begins at fertilization" , then preventing implantation would be an early abortion. Plan B is not the same a RU486, (which I always thought should be pronounced "Are You For Aiding Sex". Just had to get that in there.)

Democrats claim we have one party that upholds science and one that rejects it. When it comes to climate change, presidential polling, evolution and other topics, we are told, Republicans have no use for actual experts. They'd rather listen to Rep. Michele Bachmann, who claimed the HPV vaccine causes mental retardation.

But today, I'm glad to report the Democratic charge has been discredited. We don't have a pro-science party and an anti-science party. We have two anti-science parties.

That's the clear implication of the controversy over Plan B, the "morning-after" pill that is used to avert pregnancy after unprotected sex. The GOP and...