The New York Times reports on a common trend at religious private institutions; an inability to access what their beliefs and values disagree with. On college campuses today, one of the most controversial withholdings of the Catholic communities is access to contraception. However, a recent ruling by the Obama Administration follows the advice of the federal Food and Drug Administration in stating that access to contraceptions is a necessary component of women's health, seeking to prevent the 50% of pregnancies that are unplanned, and the 4 in 10 of those that end in abortion.
These issues are a hot political topic today, as each Republican presidential primary candidate weighs in against increased access to birth control. Mitt Romney has stated that he would end Title 10, which provides family planning for women. Rick Santorum would end health insurance codes to provide these services for women, and he and Newt Gingrich would seek to make fertilized eggs considered people. Gingrich would also withdraw all federal money from planned parenthood, although currently federal dollars going to planned parenthood cannot be used to fund abortions.
Despite the catholic teachings, 98% of sexually active catholics report having used contraceptives. This figure is identical to that in the general population.
The frame of the argument in this article is from the left-slanting New York Times. With the presidential campaign gearing up, the political background of each candidate and how is relates to the issue is an important contextual note for readers. However, the linguistic choices the author uses to describe each candidate as "taking away" funding and rights is very liberal-slanted, and implants negative connotation to those behaviors.
The author also attempts to reduce the credibility of their sacred teachings by pointing out that the teachings apparently have no effect on the behavior of their followers, because if they are sexually active, they use contraception anyway.