contraceptives

High-availability abortions and contraceptives given out in schools are just examples of governments giving people what they want.

Cheap / free access to contraceptives - it can be a joint effort with some charitable organizations 3.

Low survival rates of children in Middle Eastern and African states and the lack of easily accessible contraceptives (or cultural implications of using contraceptives) have led to a dramatic upshoot in population there.

See the debate surrounding contraceptives and the ACA, or sex education in public schools.

It's about how certain abstinence-only programs, which presumably doesn't include access to contraceptives, can legitimately prevent the onset of teenage sexual activity.

Also, as many of the folks at work discovered, the free contraceptives were accompanied with a larger than cost increase in premiums.

That's why they are ineffective, not because partners lie to another about using contraceptives.

Your chances of successfully preventing pregnancy go down if you can't use hormonal contraceptives.

There are already lots of fertile girls who have adverse reactions to hormonal contraceptives.

Here they're not being discussed because this program is not using oral contraceptives.

Female empowerment seems to share high correlation with the availability of contraceptives.

That's a potential problem with most hormonal contraceptives, not just the implant.

I suspect that the thought behind not making it available is the same line of reasoning that leads to various prohibitions on contraceptives: "if they use it, then the 'bad' behavior will increase."

I don't understand how a religious stance of "don't use contraceptives" can be an abuse of human rights, when anyone is free to decide whether they follow the teachings of said religion or not?

Contraceptives exist and work (for the most part), so caring for children is an opt-in activity.

Contraceptives require a lot of discipline to be used correctly.