Connect With Us

FacebookTwitterRSSYoutube

How To Combat Banning Abortions- Ban Vasectomies

Posted by: Bridgette P. LaVictoire on February 22, 2012.

How do you counter the whole thing pushing to limit women’s rights? Well, restricting men’s rights would be a good start. Yasmin Neal and a group of female Democratic legislators have crafted a bill that does just that. According to Neal “Thousands of children are deprived of birth in this state every year because of the lack of state regulation over vasectomies. It is patently unfair that men can avoid unwanted fatherhood by presuming that their judgment over such matters is more valid than the judgment of the General Assembly, while women’s ability to decide is constantly up for debate throughout the United States.”

The ban on vasectomies is in response to HB 954. That bill, introduced by Republican Doug McKillips, seeks to ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Currently, in Georgia, abortions are banned after 24 weeks. The measure is based on the hotly debated but not necessarily accurate belief that fetuses can feel pain at 20 weeks. Evidence suggests that fetal pain does not develop until 26 weeks gestation when the thalamocortical connections are formed, but anti-choice activists insist that fetal pain begins quite early despite the lack of development of nerves for quite some time.

The anti-woman bill, HB 954, is scheduled to go before the Georgia House Judiciary Committee. At 3pm on 22 February, Democrats are scheduled introduce the vasectomy ban. House Minority Leader Stacey Abrams stated that “The Republican attack on women’s reproductive rights is unconscionable. What is more deplorable is the hypocrisy of HB 954′s author. If we follow his logic, we believe it is the obligation of the General Assembly to assert an equally invasive state interest in the reproductive habits of men and substitute the will of the government over the will of men.”

Of course, McKillips is less than amused saying “I think it’s disappointing that they would make light of something as important as protecting life. It’s just not a joking matter, and it’s a time for serious issues and serious discussion.” Of course, if he was actually honest about wanting to have an honest and serious discussion about this issue, he would do something like, well, rely upon actual data and discuss everything in an above board manner. He honestly wants nothing more than to restrict women’s rights and does not care about the consequences or about actually wanting to end abortions rather than driving them underground.

Of course, Jon Stewart had a lot to say about the recent drive to restrict women’s rights, including in Virginia:

Share This Post

Scotch, Cognac, Rum, Tequila, Single Malt, Vodka, Whiskey.

11 Responses to How To Combat Banning Abortions- Ban Vasectomies

  1. Steve

    February 23, 2012 at 3:39 pm

    @ adamas –

    While women (and men) fight the Catholic church for a woman’s constitutional right to control her body, you rarely hear anyone condemn Judaism for circumcising baby boys. I wonder, is criticising this Jewish ritual politically incorrect or does our society but less emphasis on the genital integrity of boys? Maybe a combination of both. I should point out I’ve attended a Bris and the boys mother started crying. The baby was in a lot of pain. We’ve all heard the hygnee debate but Jews don’t circumcise boys for that reason. Either way, amputation is the last resort when preventing illness. What I’m trying to say is the government and church has no right to tamper with a woman’s or man’s sexuality. Its 2012, I thought we were past this debate.

    • Bridgette P. LaVictoire

      February 23, 2012 at 4:18 pm

      The difference is this- the Catholic Church is demanding that every woman in the nation follow their faith and not the faith of the woman in question. Jews are not imposing laws demanding that every baby be circumcised.

      Now, you might have a better argument if you were to, say, argue about the differences between how society treats female genital mutilation and circumcision, but even then, a boy being circumcised is not going to lose the ability to have an orgasm, but the vast majority of women who have been mutilated in that manner lose the ability to orgasm.

    • Eric

      February 23, 2012 at 8:19 pm

      I am circumcised (and half Jewish), but it had nothing to do with religion. I was born at a time when almost all boys born in the US were circumcised. I’m very glad it was done, because I never have to worry about the disgusting cheese called ‘smegma’ or its equally disgusting odor. Circumcision also reduces excessive male sex drive because there’s no foreskin to constantly rub against the head all day. There’s nothing worse for a man than unsatisfied and unwanted sexual arousal in an inappropriate setting, such as the workplace or other public place.

      I also believe that male circumcision, by reducing sex drive, also reduces the incidence of sexual assault. It is said that rape is a crime of dominance/power rather than sex, but in men these often overlap. For the reason that male circumcision may reduce the likelihood of women being sexually assaulted, women should be in favor of it.

    • Chris Key

      February 24, 2012 at 8:39 am

      “I’m very glad it was done, because I never have to worry about the disgusting cheese called ‘smegma’ or its equally disgusting odor.”

      Regular washing prevents smegma.

      “Circumcision also reduces excessive male sex drive because there’s no foreskin to constantly rub against the head all day. There’s nothing worse for a man than unsatisfied and unwanted sexual arousal in an inappropriate setting, such as the workplace or other public place.”

      That’s your opinion. Your opinion is not a universal fact.

      “I also believe that male circumcision, by reducing sex drive, also reduces the incidence of sexual assault. It is said that rape is a crime of dominance/power rather than sex, but in men these often overlap. For the reason that male circumcision may reduce the likelihood of women being sexually assaulted, women should be in favor of it.”

      That’s one of the weakest arguments I’ve ever heard.

    • Bridgette P. LaVictoire

      February 24, 2012 at 12:06 pm

      Sigh…you know something….I couldn’t care if a man is circumcised or not. Male genitalia is incredibly ugly as far as I am concerned.

    • Chris Key

      February 25, 2012 at 12:22 am

      “I couldn’t care if a man is circumcised or not.”

      BUt you would care if a woman is circumcised, right?

      Not all forms of FGM involves the removal of the clitoris. In some cases only the clitoral hood (prepuce) is removed. I doubt you would support the removal of a woman’s prepuce.

      “Male genitalia is incredibly ugly as far as I am concerned.”

      Ever seen a woman’s vulva while her labia majora is spread apart? There’s nothing pretty about it. The organ looks like a badly infected wound when the labia majora is pulled back.

      I’d like to point out that it’s a lie to say that women cannot orgasm without a clitoris. The nerve that innervates the clitoris, the pudendal nerve, is also responsible for the g-spot sensation. About a cm or two up the vaginal passages it travels very close to the line of the vaginal cavity. Women can orgasm if they stimulate this area of the vaginal passages. The problem is most of them are too lazy and uneducated to know how to do it.

    • Bridgette P. LaVictoire

      February 25, 2012 at 10:24 am

      Chris,

      Personally, I would love it if we could get rid of the male part of humanity. I am lesbian, you know.

      Here is the thing. . .FGM is not equivalent to removing your fucking foreskin. . .it is equivalent to removing your ugly, gods damned penis. Got that? Damaging the nerves in the clitoris makes orgasm incredibly difficult to nigh on impossible. Understood? Oh, some women can orgasm without their clitoris, but not a lot of them. And there really is no instances of FGM where just the clitorial hood is removed. Class 1 FGM involves removal of the hood and the clitoris, and it gets worse from there.

      And yes, I have seen a woman’s vulva with the labia majora spread open, and I think it’s a lot more beautiful than your turkey neck of a dick.

      While I vehemently disagree with forcing anyone, including children, to undergo what is a medically unnecessary procedure, I really could care less men’s reproductive parts. I was trying to get you guys to grasp that you were off topic and that this is a site that deals with women’s and LGBT issues.

  2. FunnyFaceKing

    February 23, 2012 at 9:26 am

    childish

  3. Chris Key

    February 23, 2012 at 6:41 am

    Obviously the people who created this bill don’t know the basics about reproduction.

    The female equivalent of a vasectomy is a tubal ligation. Women are free to get a tubal ligation whenever they want.

  4. Steve

    February 22, 2012 at 4:51 pm

    Such a childish and vindictive way to support abortion rights. They feel women are discriminated against so their solution is to do the same thing to men. I should also point the Catholic church is against vasectomies.

    • adamas

      February 23, 2012 at 1:18 pm

      I believe they are going for the “Good for Goose, Good for Gander” approach to showing them that they have no business sticking their nose in. And as for the Catholic Church. I still have yet to find a damn to give about anything a bunch men wearing jewels worth enough to feed my entire town for a year has to say about anything.