More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Rev. Tom Davis

GET UPDATES FROM Rev. Tom Davis
 

A Modest Proposal -- In the Interest of Justice

Posted: 12/27/11 02:04 PM ET

The anti-abortion movement has been relentless in its determination to obstruct, block, prevent or make difficult any woman's attempt to obtain an abortion. By last April, over 900 measures were introduced in state houses to accomplish that task. But the movement has been strangely inactive in trying to stop men from getting vasectomies. What is more anti-life than a vasectomy? The obvious remedy for such inaction is to take the laws directed at preventing abortion and use them to prevent vasectomies. After all, isn't it a matter of justice to treat men and women equally?

So, first there should be a waiting period. A man may call his doctor to schedule an appointment for a vasectomy. He then must go to the physician's office, but he can't have the procedure right away. He needs to go home for a 24 hour period to think it over. (South Dakota would make it 72 hours.) If that means he has to make two long trips from a rural town or spend a lot of money on a hotel, so much the better. After all, this is a big decision.

Then there must be counseling. Again, following South Dakota's lead, the counseling must be given in person by the physician who will do the vasectomy. No other physician is allowed. That counseling must include all the risk factors of the procedure. However, this counseling can use scientifically inaccurate material.

Now before this can happen, we must have new regulations governing vasectomy clinics themselves. After all this is a surgical procedure so there must be at least two large operating rooms with hallways wide enough for two gurneys to pass each other. (I believe that is the new Virginia standard for abortion clinics.)

We must work to eliminate vasectomy insurance coverage in all private insurance plans including any that will be a part of the new state health exchanges.

Just like the Hyde Amendment, there must be no government funding of vasectomies. Any soldiers, sailors and marines who want a vasectomy cannot have one in a military hospital. If stationed in a foreign country, they must fly home for it at their own expense. Any poor men will just have to come up with the cash on their own.

If any physician who does vasectomies wants to open a new office in a town, zoning regulations should be used to prevent it. If the office does open there should be pickets present who can give the men "sidewalk counseling.

Before the procedure can be done, there must be an ultrasound to see if everything is in the right place. Then the doctor must explain that if this operation is done the man will become sterile. He might not have realized that. It is important to make sure that he knows that. The doctor should also offer alternatives to vasectomy, including films of happy children playing. The state legislature can write the script. (That's the North Carolina style.)

Finally, the doctor must meet privately with the man at least 24 hours in advance of the operation. This is to make sure that no one is pressuring him to get a vasectomy. Doctors will face a felony if they ignore this rule. (This is the Wisconsin model.) That is very important. We all know how impressionable men can be.

Well, there it is -- an agenda for equal treatment.

Oh, wait! I forgot the parental consent for teen vasectomy patients. Should it be one parent or two?

 
The anti-abortion movement has been relentless in its determination to obstruct, block, prevent or make difficult any woman's attempt to obtain an abortion. By last April, over 900 measures were intr...
The anti-abortion movement has been relentless in its determination to obstruct, block, prevent or make difficult any woman's attempt to obtain an abortion. By last April, over 900 measures were intr...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 292
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
photo
stloocardsfan
Tolerance ≠ Acceptance
10:26 AM on 12/29/2011
Whether this article is sarcastic or not, it is a ridiculous analogy.
vasectomy = sterile man
abortion = dead baby
01:18 PM on 01/03/2012
Nope, abortion equals terminated pregnancy, that is no baby is ever developed.
photo
stloocardsfan
Tolerance ≠ Acceptance
05:20 PM on 01/05/2012
When you're pregnant you have a baby growing inside of you. If you terminate the pregnancy the baby is no longer growing inside of you...it is dead.
12:51 AM on 12/29/2011
Come on guys.

This article is mocking the intrusive, inhumane treatment of women seeking abortion or parental planning and the legislative manipulations that "civilized" zealots will pursue to persecute those who fail to act in accordance with their personal convictions.

This is not an attempt to literally equate a vasectomy with an abortion.
mamalisa38
I love you Thomas and I miss you like crazy RIP
09:02 PM on 12/28/2011
Jehovah's witness don't believe in blood transfusions. Should we ban those as well?
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ReasonIsMyReligion
Don't know much micro-bio-logy
06:34 PM on 12/28/2011
Well said, Rev.
03:59 PM on 12/28/2011
One is prevention, the other is termination. No comparison.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
eak125
05:52 PM on 12/28/2011
The pill is prevention as well, but the religious right also want to take that choice away from women.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
BlackJAC
It's better to be a black king than a white knight
06:26 PM on 12/28/2011
To the ultra-extreme pro-lifers, there's no difference between preventing a pregnancy and terminating one.  The technical term they use is "abortifacient."
09:45 AM on 12/28/2011
Thanks for the article! I agree if you want to have govt intrude in my body let men have the same fun.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Hector Boag
Fast & Furious? Not me!
05:44 AM on 12/28/2011
Sorry Tom, a vas is not killing a child, it's preventing one, apples and carrots here.
traceymarie
Independent to Dem in 2007
08:55 PM on 12/28/2011
what about contraceptives for women....those are being banned or harder to get.
03:48 AM on 12/28/2011
Wow, what a lame argument. A vasectomy is relevant to a hysterectomy not an abortion. Regardless of your position on abortion you have to agree that this essay is illogical. False analogy.
traceymarie
Independent to Dem in 2007
08:56 PM on 12/28/2011
Nope, both are an intrusion on a personal decision. Neither should be any of yours or the governments business.
03:20 AM on 12/28/2011
There's no definitive answer to vasectomies or abortions...every religion and members in a society have differing beliefs.

This article does point out very well that although having a vasectomy does prevent procreation (which is against the beliefs of some in our culture), males are not subjected to the same indignities and condescension as are females.

Every sperm has the potential of becoming a child, but most don't make it.
Every child has a potential of becoming an adult, but many never make it.

If someone believes in "God's Will," whether it's the child who never reaches its full potential for adulthood or the sperm that "falls on the ground," it wasn't meant to be.

If you believe that God gives us "free will," then, the woman needs to have that free choice to abort or not....and the man must decide for himself whether or not to have a vasectomy.
06:59 AM on 12/28/2011
"Every sperm has the potential of becoming a child, but most don't make it."

Patently false. Exactly zero units of sperm have the potential to become a child on their own. Fetuses on the other hand all have the potential to become a child.

This article is a tongue-in-cheek attempt to get men to realize the impact of abortion laws on women, but it's invocation of the argument that sperm can be babies just makes it sound silly and will fail to convince anyone...
12:48 AM on 12/29/2011
Fetuses have zero perecent chance of being a human as well unless they have a woman to grow in. If potential is all that matters, why isn't it wrong to destroy cancer?
01:21 PM on 01/03/2012
Exactly zero units of zygotes have the potential to become a child on their own, they require a functional circulatory system, since they possess none of their own they cannot "become a child" on their own.
03:11 AM on 12/28/2011
Cute, but you should be willing to go further in your article if you want to invoke Swift. If thick-headed people can't tell you're being sarcastic, you're not doing it right. =)
07:00 AM on 12/28/2011
Sarcasm has to be on target in order for it to work. Comparing a vasectomy to an abortion is comparing two procedures that have nothing in common. One is killing a fetus, the other is preventing sperm from reaching their target, like a condom...
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ReasonIsMyReligion
Don't know much micro-bio-logy
06:36 PM on 12/28/2011
So where's the fundie right wing support for condoms?
traceymarie
Independent to Dem in 2007
08:57 PM on 12/28/2011
Nope....both are intrusive and none of yours or the governments business
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
momoluvsu
We live in a parallel universe
02:43 AM on 12/28/2011
When will men realize that women can think for themselves........
03:34 AM on 12/28/2011
They alaready have... they just don't want most of us to know it, thus the 'father knows best' dynamic...
02:26 AM on 12/28/2011
I don't see any long lists of people who wish to adopt or women clamoring to have the fetus implanted into their womb.
photo
Papapaul49
Driver,chief cook and bottle washer, retired LO.
12:08 AM on 12/28/2011
Amazing how serious so many people take things.
Did the title not tip you off?
That aside this thread is a pretty reasoned and principled exchange---a dialoge almost?
Peace
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tuigim
The perils of benefactors...
11:58 PM on 12/27/2011
Swift is smiling although I think it a little tamer than his version.
Also, to be fair,
as the church is loudly pro-life it must also be loudly
anti-military, anti-soldiers and anti-guns (their function is to kill),
and pro-universal health care and prenatal care and post natal care and child benefits...
hmmm I guess that needs explanation in America http://alturl.com/iaucp
and paternal leave and maternal leave and that probably needs explaining too http://alturl.com/3d9vb
Pro-life sounds better and better.
Now we can try to wipe out female exploitation and sex slavery and reach for
'Every child should be a wanted child'
as family planning does not just mean "getting the kids to mass on time." BK
Thank you for the balanced view.
11:29 PM on 12/27/2011
While I get the gist of humor this is a non-comparison (except to the Catholics and some more radical protestant sects of Christianity. Cant comment on belief systems outside those two).

A sperm is not alone a human being. It will die a sperm regardless unless it fertilizes the egg which creates an entirely different creature.

A zygote though is a different story all together (note the term zygote not egg). A zygote if left unhindered by human intent to kill, will continue to develop and to grow barring a serious genetic defect of which I cannot think of any specific example.

A sperm only contain 1/2 of the gentic code of the resulting zygote.

The comparison of a form of reversable sterilization to the unreverseable termination of the life of another human being in its most defenseless stage is one that is not equal.

Yes, biology put the biggest physical and mental (debateable but commonly accepted) burden of reproduction on women, but to attemp to even the playing field through means of terminating life is not justice, but is quite the opposite.

It is injustice.
Maybe I'm blind but that seems a bit unbalanced to me.
12:43 AM on 12/29/2011
An unhindered zygote expires and expelled during menstruation. It (not he or she) is completely dependent on a host body. How does it's right to that body take precedence over the fully formed, sensient being that is the host?

Does it end at childbirth?

Is it limited to offspring or can anyone have an organ if their life depends on it? ;-)

Seriously though, is forced pregnancy justice?
Is contraception an "intent to kill"?
06:17 PM on 12/29/2011
To the first question- The precidence of the "fully formed" human does not take precedence when that "fully formed" human made a conscious and informed (or even uninformed. Ignorance is not an excuse) to have sex which is how this other creature was created. Its not like the stork comes and forcibly implants a zygote. (Though that would be an awesome story to tell).

Does what end at childbirth? After birth there is no longer a necssary requirement to sustain life through use of one's body. I mean somebody has to take care of the child after childbirth but in our current system that does not have to be either biological parent.

I dont think anybody has the right to somebody elses organs except in this particular case. The reason being this creature was did not simply just appear out of nowhere and it was not like it was some forced on her. The woman and man consented to have sex which almost every near intelligent American knows can cause a pregnancy.

Forced pregnancy is not justice. I'm not talking rape or some comic book type forced implantation. I'm talking two people making a consented choice and responsibly dealing with the possible consequence should it come to that.

Depends on the type of contraception. I'm no expert but I know a condom and spermacide is a safe and effective choice. Also a vasectamy for men.
01:24 PM on 01/03/2012
Not without a functional circulation system, this is a requirement. It taps into one, without regard for the health or desire of the host. Life is terminated on a daily basis, many of these terminations are due to the effects of these embryos.

It's injustice to allow one life to take precedence over another without due process or just consideration. You're quite blind, it's a bit unbalanced, in what other case is a foreign invader given greater status than the organism it invades?