Watch out for those rightwing pill snatchers!!

Cristina Page has an editorial in the Baltimore Sun which borders on the delusional. Supposedly "contraception is the ultimate corruptor" in the eyes of the prolife movement and the "unspoken rule" among prolife candidates is they also must be "anti-contraception." All this because Mitt Romney told the crowd at National Right to Life's convention he vetoed a bill to make emergency contraception over-the-counter and he thinks pregnancy begins at conception not at implantation.

Cristina also uses Fred Thompson's campaign's original disavowal of his lobbying for the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association and label's them a "contraception advocacy group" without ever mentioning they wanted help with abortion related issues. Toss in Brownback's effort to defund America's largest abortion provider and McCain not wanting tax dollars to pay for contraceptive programs and Cristina comes to the obvious conclusion (at least for someone not taking their meds) that it's all about contraception.

Cristina, for some reason, fails to mention any actions by National Right to Life with regards to contraception. But then again, it's a "quiet campaign" which she somehow has found all this (less than solid) evidence for.

What I'm wondering is - what does Cristina mean by "anti-contraception?" Does she mean "wanting to make the use of contraception illegal?" Does she mean "being opposed to tax-dollars being used to fund contraceptive programs?" What does "anti-contraception" mean?

Tags: cristina page, abortion, contraception