This is good news :

A U.S. advisory panel on Tuesday voted to recommend allowing the Plan B “morning after” contraceptive pill to be sold without a prescription.

The Food and Drug Administration will make the final decision, but the agency usually follows the advice of its advisory panels.
. . .
The panel’s 23-4 vote came after testimony from the product maker, FDA staffers and members of the public for and against making Plan B easier to obtain.
. . .
Others spoke against Plan B because they view emergency contraceptives as equivalent to abortion. Some research suggests the pills prevent implantation of a fertilized egg, although Barr said Plan B simply prevented ovulation.

Supporters said the pills should be made available over the counter to give women a second chance to prevent an unwanted pregnancy after unprotected sex, when a condom breaks for following a rape.

“If we are truly dedicated to lowering the number of unintended pregnancies and abortions in this country, let’s prove it by making Plan B emergency contraception available over the counter,” said Dr. Vivian Dickerson, president-elect of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Okay, for all you “pro-lifers” out there, here’s a brief explanation of how Plan B works : It’s essentially an overdose of the same kinds of birth-control pills that have been available for a few decades now. The result is a disruption of the woman’s hormones that will either stop the egg from fertilizing, delay ovulation, or prevent the egg from becoming implanted in the uterus, depending on when the pill is taken in relation to the woman’s menstrual period and when the woman had sex. In short, the morning after pill doesn’t terminate a pregnancy, it prevents a pregnancy.

So if abortion protesters are going to extend the definition of “abortion” to include anything that can prevent pregnancies, then what’s next? Are they going to organize protests against dry humping based on the reasoning that underwear is blocking sperm from reaching an egg??

And speaking of pro-lifers lying so they can win arguments, abortion foes were recently caught in Minnesota peddling another bit of misinformation.

Abortion politics led the state Health Department to publish unreliable information about a link between abortions and breast cancer, state health workers wrote in e-mails obtained by the Star Tribune of Minneapolis.

Government e-mails obtained under the state’s open records laws reveal that a division director and others questioned an assertion on the department’s Web site and in a pamphlet that having an abortion may increase the risk of breast cancer.

The statement, posted in late September, was viewed inside the Health Department as a disservice to citizens and damaging to the department’s credibility, according to e-mails circulated in the department in October.

Critics of the department’s position on abortion and breast cancer say the statement is designed to frighten women considering abortion.
. . .
The e-mail cited findings of the National Cancer Institute. A panel of 100 breast cancer experts reviewed all the research and concluded last spring that some small, flawed studies published before the mid-1990s had found a link to breast cancer, but larger, more reliable studies showed no connection.
. . .
Dr. Steven Miles, a professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota’s Center for Bioethics, said of the abortion-cancer link: “Every medical association that has looked at this says the matter is closed. There is no relationship here.”

Now, I know that abortion is a very tricky issue. Even though I strongly disagree with it, I understand the “abortion is murder” argument. That said, it’s completely unethical for abortion opponents to blatantly lie in order to get people to take their side. Oh yeah, well two can play this game :

“According to a recent scientific study, there has been a significant link shown between being a Pro-Lifer and impotence, sterility, & being a total asshole.”