The Blue pill or the Red pill?

A major problem in Texas is our Teen Birth Rate; We regularly rank in the top 10 (even top 5) of number of teenage pregnancies (pregnancies that occur between 15-19). So, naturally, there is a lot of debate over how we can solve this problem. One way, argues freelance writer Natalie San Luis in her Burnt Orange Report post, is through state support of Free to Low-cost birth control programs like the one Colorado has implemented since 2009.

This question is prime real estate for an old-fashion Liberal vs Conservative showdown. Luis is writing for a liberal blog and is a self-declared feminist, so her audience is probably going to be those who are already a little left-leaning. Her argument breaks into 3 points. 1. It's hard for low-income families to get birth control. 2. Programs like this actually save money! and 3. Lower cost of birth control = Fewer abortions.

Similarly, I'll break my counter argument into 3 parts:

1. Show me the money!
Luis states "Since 2009, Colorado has covered the cost for more than 30,000 IUD's (Intrauterine Device) for low-income women in the state." which raises the question: how much was Colorado spending on this? Turns out, not much. According to this article in The Denver Post, The Colorado Family Planning Initiative was "funded by a private anonymous donor for five years" (Later clarified in this article to be a foundation made by Warren Buffet). Taxpayers sure do save money when someone else is footing the bill. What this shows is that private individuals and institutions can and often do just as much good, if not more, than government spending in terms of benefiting others and saving money. Luis makes no mention of this private funding and makes no mention of taxpayers having to pay for these costs. So where would this money come from?

2. "The Talk" can be scary.
A significant cause of high pregnancy rates in Texas often occur because of poor sex-ed. This usually stems from nervous parents/children and conservative school reforms that try to avoid sex talks rather than understand the issues. Luis doesn't seem to want to encourage the battle on the home front when she says "Teens who don't want to tell their parents that they are sexually active—because it could require an uncomfortable and potentially dangerous conversation." That's precisely where parents should be taking action. Luis states that the barrier placed in Texas law that teens must have parental consent for birth control makes it harder for them to get access to it. Speaking from experience, those under the age of 17 are not the most rational of people, and allowing young adults to do things like receive an IUD without parental consent or knowledge really steps over the boundaries of parental rights.

3. Less babies, but more Sex.

The last issue I see arising is the increase in sexual activity. I'm all for proper sex education (that pushes the idea of safe, protected sex and the option of abstinence), but at the same time, state funding of any private sector issue often does not produce the best outcome. With more birth control many young adults and their
"I'm invincible!" mindsets might not see a need for using condoms or other safe sex prevention methods, thus raising the STD rate among young adults and their partners. My point is that, again, sex-education is more important than loosened barriers for birth control, and being open about your sexual activity can help the child and parent best combat possible pregnancies and STD's among teens.