Why is the WaPo pro-cancer?

The Washington Post runs this editorial from the crackpots at the "Family Research Council". Realizing that opposing the HPV (cervical cancer) vaccine because it promotes sluttines was a bad idea and alienated the mainstream Americans. They have started a disinformation campaign that the HPV vaccine is not 100% in preventing cervical cancer, so your preteen daughter shouldn't get vaccinated. It is true that Gardisil only targets the viruses that cause 70% of cervical cancers. But the vaccine combined with consistent condom use can make HPV an extremely rare STD. Not only that, a substance in carageenan has been found to kill HPV in the test tube. Carageenan is used in some sexual lubricants.

The FRC is all up in arms about the 30% of HPV infections that aren't covered by the vaccine, but safe sex practices like using a condom will stop the transmission of those viruses. Of course the FRC's editorial doesn't say anything about that. If the FRC wanted to truly inform the public about preventing the remaining 30% of HPV, they would write in their editorial that condoms help prevent the spread of HPV. But nooo, they want to stop a woman from having sex, instead of truly protecting her health. Yes, they want to micromanage the sex lives of women they do not know.

How effective are these disinformation campaigns? Can you get Plan B over the counter in the United States? Will your family doctor write a prescription for it? Does your local pharmacy stock it?