Birth control laws : $b shall we keep them, change them, or abolish themDennett, Mary Ware
History
Birth control laws : $b shall we keep them, change them, or abolish them
Dennett, Mary Ware
Birth control; Birth control -- Law and legislation -- United States
If, as some of the Club women say, the chief reason for not endorsing
voluntary parenthood is because the Catholic members are opposed, it
would seem a perfectly simple matter to remind the Catholic women
in the first place that they are a very small minority, and in the
second place, that there is nothing compulsory about the use of
contraceptive knowledge. If Catholics wish to remain ignorant on the
subject, they are, and should be entirely free to do so, but they
should not seek to enforce ignorance on others. (_B. C. Herald._)
It is said that the Catholic Clubs have threatened to secede from the
Federation if a birth control resolution were passed, and that the
leaders are so concerned to keep up the membership in the federation
that they, like the political party leaders, have put organization
first and left fair play to the mass of citizens to take care of
itself as best it might. But there seems also evidence that the excuse
about the Catholics is in part at any rate, a cover for the underlying
excuse of embarrassment about dealing with the subject at all.
Practically all roads of investigation in this matter lead back to
this one difficulty. If that were overcome, the minor obstacles would
seem inconsequential. A situation similar to that found in the women’s
clubs has developed in public welfare organizations of many sorts. The
members were ready to move, but the leaders and officials were full of
doubts and excuses. Ever since 1918, various members of the Social Work
Conference, which annually gathers together representatives from nearly
all the public welfare organizations of the country, who have been
clamoring to have the question of birth control placed on the official
program of the Conference, but thus far it has been relegated to “side
show” meetings. In 1922 the request was formally made in a resolution
passed with but one feeble dissenting vote, at a meeting with several
hundred delegates present, but the officers have still held back at all
the subsequent Conferences.
This inhibition of leaders has been so persistent that a definite
effort was made by the Director of the Voluntary Parenthood League to
try to help them break through it, and release their naturally helpful
instincts so they could function without hindrance. It took the form
of a semi-open letter, which was marked, “Not for publication—at
present,” and read as follows:
Dear Citizen:
The Cummins-Vaile Bill has wide-spread, splendid and rapidly
increasing endorsement. But there are still some persons of
consequence, who believe in the aims of the legislation, who say, “I
do not feel free to express my opinion, on account of my position.”
They explain that as they are officially connected with this or that
organization, they are obliged to forego giving any endorsement,
though “personally in hearty sympathy.” They are fearful lest their
individual opinions should be deemed official.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account