Broadcaster Pat Robertson recently issued a fatwa over the citizens of Dover, Penn., who voted out of office school board members who supported intelligent design in the school curriculum. "I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: if there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God. You just rejected Him from your city," Robertson said. Hmm … is this about science or religion?

Almost a year ago, I wrote a column expressing the hope that religion would not be an obstacle for those seeking contraception. The FDA has tap-danced around the issue of the morning-after pill's availability for years now, even though it is available without prescription in 41 countries, from Sweden to Sri Lanka.

In December 2003, the FDA's own scientific advisory committee voted overwhelmingly in favor of the agency granting swifter access to emergency contraception. Since then, nothing has changed, and last week, the Government Accountability Office issued a report suggesting the FDA reached its 2003 decision prior to hearing the advisory committee's recommendations.

In August, Susan Wood, the FDA's top women's health official, resigned in protest over the agency's dawdling over Plan B, and last month, Dr. Frank Davidoff, editor emeritus of the Annals of Internal Medicine and a consultant to the FDA's advisory panel, also resigned. Both claimed the agency was catering to religion rather than science.

It's amazing that contraception is so controversial in 2005. You need look no further than this campus to find a bill entitled the UW Birth Control Ban (AB 343), which could prohibit University of Wisconsin campuses from prescribing, dispensing and advertising all forms of emergency contraceptives. Wisconsin State Rep. Dan LeMahieu, R-Oostburg, introduced the bill based on the insulting claim that dispensing emergency contraceptives increases promiscuity.

Similarly, members of Concerned Women for America suggest that if Plan B were available without prescription, women would just "pop a pill in the morning" and lose the ability to turn down sex.

Then should condoms be prescription-only as well? Should all contraceptives? If contraceptives encourage such immoral behavior, why are they legal? I called the CWFA headquarters with a few questions, which a representative requested I submit in writing, but once my questions were submitted, they went unanswered.

The implication that the absence of contraceptives is all that keeps students from humping each other like sex-crazed rabbits is extremely offensive — not to mention inaccurate. The reality is that many (though certainly not all) young adults choose to be sexually active. Shouldn't the FDA and this public university help them to be safe and responsible?

Dr. Scott Spear, director of clinical services at UW's University Health Services, thinks so. Asked if access to contraception increased promiscuity, Spear said: "That's not how people make decisions. The evidence just isn't there to support those kinds of contentions."

Spear also said that students do not rely on emergency contraception as their regular form of birth control. "I think they understand that it's to be used episodically. But for some women, it can be an important backup," he said. "The vast majority of the time, we don't find people are repeat users." Spear added that frequently women came in for emergency contraception when another form of contraception had failed.

In France, girls and women of all ages have had access to emergency contraception since 2002, and each year, 10,000 to 15,000 boxes are delivered to French high schools, with no reported medical crises and fewer teen abortions. Why are the Concerned Women for America so unconcerned with foreign experience?

Emergency-contraceptive pills, taken within a limited time frame of 72 hours after sex, interfere with ovulation and fertilization or prevent the implantation of a fertilized egg, should there be one. The FDA and the medical establishment do not consider a woman pregnant until implantation occurs; if a woman takes a pregnancy test and implantation has not occurred, the test will be negative. Thus, Plan B is not abortive, but contraceptive.

Even if you did consider preventing implantation abortive, this would be equivalent to a pre-first-trimester abortion, and first-trimester abortions are legal. It's therefore illogical to ban the morning-after pill on these grounds.

Supporting the availability of emergency contraception is not an extremist liberal position — it's one many Republicans share. By turning the issue into a battle between liberals and conservatives, religious leaders have kept the FDA from making a sound medical decision.

Cynthia Martens ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in Italian and European studies.