Conservative manhandling is not restricted to the executive branch of government. On the judiciary front, right wing Christian groups are seeking to overturn a woman's right to choose. Their cries for Supreme Court nominees with documented anti-abortion positions were tempered when the president nominated Judge Samuel Alito. As a Federal Appeals Court Judge, Judge Alito argued on several occasions for the restriction of abortion rights.

Conservatives now have another demand, which, if met, would stifle a revolutionary breakthrough in the battle against cancer. Fortune Magazine recently reported that religious conservatives are opposing the widespread use of a newly developed vaccine for a disease linked to cervical cancer.

The vaccine, designed to target specific strains of the Human Papillomavirus (HPV), is generating a lot of attention in conservative circles because HPV is a sexually transmitted disease. HPV is fairly common, affecting roughly 20 million people in the United States alone, but because most strains are asymptomatic, a majority of those infected never know it. In fact, most men carry the virus without suffering any ailment. Only a few "high risk" strains of the virus are the root cause of cervical cancer. But for thousands of women in the US and tens of thousands more abroad, however, infection leads to death.

American women who follow through with an annual gynecological exam undergo routine screening for abnormal cervical cell growth. If abnormalities are detected, treatments can range from time-consuming, often painful, surgery to debilitating chemotherapy. Women who undergo these procedures are the "lucky" ones. Approximately four thousand others in the US (or double the amount of American lives lost thus far in Iraq), are not as fortunate -- they die.

Cervical cancer is an even bigger killer in countries where preventative health care is in its infancy and a yearly gynecological exam is a luxury, not a staple. Every year, cervical cancer claims the lives of 273,000 women worldwide (almost a third of them in India and Bangladesh). Mandating the vaccination of girls in their teens, before they become sexually active, could halt the virus's spread.

Ironically, the HPV vaccine's commercial availability is being challenged by some of the very pro-life groups who claim to be the guardians of innocent life. They argue that shielding young women from HPV infection will encourage more teens to have sex outside of marriage. Under the right to life doctrine, a fetus, whose status as a living being is still hotly contested, is seemingly afforded greater protection from mortal harm than an adolescent girl. As the debate over the vaccine unfolds, Christian groups seem more concerned with preserving ideology than protecting life.

Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, a conservative religious organization that seeks to influence key policy issues, has openly denounced the vaccine. Instead, he insists young people should be inculcated with "abstinence" messages, not inoculated with HPV vaccines. Perkins even went as far as to pledge the life of his 13 year old daughter to his religious cause, vowing that she will remain "safe" and unvaccinated.

Peddling abstinence as a sexual health panacea is dangerous, because abstaining until marriage, while decreasing the chances for HPV infection will not necessarily prevent it. A "good" unvaccinated Christian woman who "saves herself" for her husband has not saved herself at all -- she could be infected with HPV by her new husband on their wedding night.

The HPV vaccine will most likely be available in US as early as next year. Whether or not physicians adopt HPV vaccination as standard practice, however, depends on the recommendations issued by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), advisory arm of the Centers for Disease Control.

The ACIP issues a list of "recommended vaccinations," which most physicians use as a guide in deciding which vaccinations to administer. If excluded from ACIP's list, the HPV vaccine necessity will be called into question. As a result, parties that often foot the bill for vaccination, such as managed care organizations or government programs, will be less willing or able to do so if the vaccine is not ACIP recommended. Weak domestic sales of the vaccine will undermine the manufacturer's expected profits which subsidize discount to other countries, where the vaccine is even more desperately needed.

The vaccine's fate is further shrouded in uncertainty by the appointment of Reginald Finger to the ACIP. In 2003, Finger accepted the Bush administration's offer to sit on the committee after serving as Medical Issues Analyst for the religiously conservative Focus on Family organization. Want a clue on what Dr. Finger thinks women's health policy needs? Pick up a copy of his study entitled, "Association of Virginity at Age 18 With Educational, Economic, Social, and Health Outcomes in Middle Adulthood." Although the title connotes a co-ed investigation, extra emphasis is placed on women. The study's conclusions: "Abstinence is, without a doubt, the only choice to give our next generation the best chance at life."

"Life" and its "culture" is both a convenient and popular tag line for groups like Focus on the Family in their anti-abortion campaigns. It is a message that resonates with millions, and has swayed many to believe the rights of a fetus trump the fundamental rights a woman has to her own body.

But how will conservatives continue to market "life" after having sentenced thousands of women to a senseless death for the sake of ideology? It is time for mainstream America to recognize that religious zealots at home, like those abroad, have only one thing on their minds: imposing their dogma on secular society.

Perhaps Americans will wake up when Christian fanatics start meddling with men's health policy -- but they know better than that.

The author is a freelance contributor to The Daily Star.