Activists in the FDA?

I read this article about the Plan B pill controversy and I still don't quite understand why there's a controversy. Why is Birth Control objectionable? If science says it's safe to sell over the counter why can't we sell it over the counter? If science says that it will not harm teenage users, why not let them buy it too? We sell them gallons and gallons of Pepsi, which is probably a lot more harmful to their bodies than Birth Control. I agree, teenagers shouldn't be having promiscuous sex. But they do. We should teach them about sex better in school and we should let all these options on the table, including the Plan B pill.

But, in this letter from a couple of US Senators to Mike Leavitt, former activist Governer of Utah and current Secretary of Health and Human Services, the debate is spelled out clearly:

"Day by day, the public's confidence in the FDA's ability to make decisions based on scientific evidence of safety and efficacy is eroding," the senators wrote. "We urge you to allow science, not politics, to guide this agency and we insist that a decision be brought swiftly on Plan B's application."

Why should politics be brought into this debate when the scientific community has deemed it irrelevant? Why do we let these people advocate their morals? Is this any worse than the "actvist judges" the right wing blows so hard about?

It just seems as though the religious right is all about "personal freedom" as long as you're doing what they want you to do.