Horses for courses

Recent news item - offering long-term contraceptive injections to women rather than have them rely on other ad-hoc methods "could cut the number of unplanned pregnancies by 70,000 a year". The report went on to say that objectors rejected such an idea as it "could help fuel promiscuity". Question - is this a proper and relevant objection? Of course, not all unplanned pregnancies prove to be a problem, but to the extent that they are, the problem is a social one, whereas promiscuity, if indeed you see it as a problem, is a moral one. Here we are concerned with the treatment which doctors - i.e. the NHS, which in turn means the Government - should offer, and that is a decision which should be driven solely by what is best for society. Purely moral questions are by no means unimportant, but they are for parents, teachers, church leaders, philosophers and the like. Government is there to make decisions in the best interests of us all, and not to promote a particular attitude to the way we should live our lives.