If state lawmakers want to promote safe sex, they shouldn’t be the ones determining what kind of condom is used during sexual activities. It’s not the color of the condom that is important; it’s whether such protection is used in the first place.

According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Gov. Rod Blagojevich and other state lawmakers support providing free condoms to potential users. But they’re not big fans of the more exotic varieties the state has been providing.

Since January, the state’s public health department has spent about $115,000 in federal money for 5-cent condoms for distribution by public health clinics across the state as a tool to combat sexually transmitted diseases, particularly ones transmitted through oral sex.

However, when Blagojevich and other lawmakers found out the state has been providing not-so-typical “novelty” condoms – including brightly colored and even flavored ones – he drew the line, making only standard condoms available at clinics.

According to reports, the state purchased 360,000 of the novelty condoms, which ranged in color from orange and red to green and blue and in flavor from grape to lemon to cherry.

After learning about the distribution, Blago decided to yank the novelty condoms on the grounds that they undercut efforts to promote abstinence. The state, however, still plans to distribute basic, “boring” condoms.

If the state is distributing condoms at all, it is promoting safe sex – not abstinence. And if the state is going to promote safe sex, as it should, it should make any and all types of condoms – regardless of potentially “exotic” appearance – available to those who want them. After all, the color of the condom makes no difference in protecting users from sexually transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancy.

Maybe a choice of colors or flavors might entice someone to actually use the condoms. That is what the state should be focused on.