Biased and Unscientific: Washington Post, "Unborn Baby not alive"

In a Washington Post Editorial that attacked Virginia Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Ken Cuccinelli, there were a few errors about the candidate's position as well as in biology.

The Post said:

Mr. Cuccinelli insisted that government should not interfere with contraception and denied that he ever backed legislation that could do so.

The facts suggest otherwise.

Cuccinelli has not advocated banning of products that keep conception from happening, he has only advocated the banning of drugs and procedures that destroy the ability of the newly conceived life to develop. The term contraception means "to stop conception" - once conception has taken place there is no way to reverse it. The only way to stop the pregnancy prematurely after conception is abortion. Cuccinelli has not hidden his disagreement with abortion.

If the “preborn” are protected “from the moment of fertilization,” as the 2007 bill [which Cuccinelli co-sponsored] demanded, then contraception — which defeats a fertilized egg’s chances of becoming a living being — could be prohibited.

The "contraception" that the Washington Post is referring to are drugs that keep the embryo from implanting into the wall of the uterus, and without this implantation the child dies. Contrary to the Post's claim. the child is indeed alive at this point, which is evident by the fact that the child will have grown substantially between conception and implantation.

Today because of the early point in the pregnancy that chemical abortifactias can be taken, these drugs have been mislabeled by the public as contraceptives. The media has been all to happy to oblidge refusing to tell the real story behind what these drugs do. Perhaps we need to be more clear, but the Washington Post's blatant refusal to look at the facts shows the need for a media that cares about the truth.