BRIDGING THE ABORTION DIVIDE
A Modest Proposal for the Abortion Divide — the Most Essential Ban
Why reproductive fairness demands quelling the hands of death
N o person can move effectively on one leg and neither can this proposed legislation for resolving the most divisive issue of this decade. So, this article introduces a crucial second leg and addresses what has been the greatest threat to unborn life — yet few are daring to discuss it.
Will abortion-banning states ignore the hands of death?
I have previously taken liberals and conservatives on a metaphorical desert journey away from their respective political oases. This was done to scan the landscape of conservative thought.
Now it is time for pro-life advocates to take the second step necessary to demonstrate their convictions for protecting unborn life. Universal vasectomies, alone, are insufficient.
Central to all the petitions for abortion bans are arguments about when we should recognize unborn human life. The most zealous bans would apply at the point of conception — when a sperm is joined with an egg. Absolutists would also dictate prohibitions on contraceptives.
So, here is the slippery slope down which pro-life purists must slide. And they might find scorpions at the bottom of the dune.
If the male reproductive cell is an essential precedent for the creation of human life, then male seed must be subject to stringent protections by the state — as much as the eggs in female ovaries.
To deny this is tantamount to making Eve the solo actor in the Garden of Eden to the exclusion of any role for Adam. Accordingly, there must also be prohibitions against that which callously exiles the male carriers of life to certain death — and leaves them homeless in harsh environments which are not their natural habitat.
Hence, there must be bans on male masturbation. Not as a substitute for mandated vasectomies, but as a complement to protect unborn life.
The inconvenient philosophy of personhood
What is the proper milestone for recognizing the existence of a person? The infant’s time of birth? Before the third trimester? The time of a sperm’s connection with an egg? Or, perhaps more cautiously, the point of that tiny entity’s departure from its male anatomical source?
There will be those who argue a masturbation ban is unnecessary — if my vasectomy protocols are enacted. That is nonsense.
First, those requirements will take time to implement throughout the population. Tens of millions of scalpels and scissors cannot be put to work overnight. Second, even when that finally occurs, the surgical procedure provides no absolute guarantee that not a single sperm cell will be lost by the shameful act.
A microscopic holocaust
Consider that every day horny males secretly appoint themselves as the hand of God — and unleash their microscopic massacres in the privacy of their homes.
So, just as pro-life absolutists would block female access to birth control, in furtherance of a definition of human life, they must prohibit the genocide that ensues when males dispose of their carnal instincts by their own hands.
What is good for the goose is likewise good for the gander.
From VASTIDs to bedroom bounties
If we are to prioritize human life, we must have a means for enforcing proposed state bans on male self-stimulation. Accordingly, I will detail here the required legislative components. This, of necessity, involves my description of the indelicate:
1) Health, beauty, and carnal aids
Enforcement must begin with our local drug stores and outlets for health and beauty aids. Pharmacy personnel should be tasked with monitoring male purchases of common lubricants: Vaseline, baby oil, and body lotions. Purchases of such items should require presentation of identification — whether drivers’ IDs or vasectomy identification cards (VASTIDs).
And suspicious purchases should immediately be reported to local law enforcement.
2) Fund the police
Given the potential volume of such illicit activity, police departments will have to be expanded to process the anticipated caseloads — including special divisions for juvenile offenders. Coincidentally, this may become a useful conservative rallying cry for funding the police.
3) Shopping mules
There is a blind spot in this plan to be addressed. Surveillance of shopping habits could be skirted by high school boys and adult males enlisting a female ally. She might be a sister, cousin, or perhaps, a homely friend aching for any matter of male attention — but willing to purchase the contraband on their behalf.
Of course, male offenders would always run the risk of betrayal and the civil penalties described below. That becomes more likely if the shopping mules personally face prosecution.
4) Bounty hunters
Following the model pioneered by Texas, we could institute a system of vigilante law allowing citizens to collect financial awards from the male offenders or their parents (for boys who are underage). Photographic proof or video recordings of the illicit acts should be required, perhaps captured by a smartphone or hidden camera.
Additionally, the fear of such clips being uploaded to TikTok should serve as a powerful deterrent.
5) Lights, cameras, action
Regarding the use of covert cameras, parents should have them installed in their sons’ bedrooms and, covertly, in every bathroom of the house. Likewise, lavatory stalls in our high schools and dormitories should be affixed with hidden monitoring devices.
6) Ratcheting penalties
The bounty system’s fines could be incremental and implemented to increase over time. This would avoid radical change — facilitating a gradual evolution from the status quo. Since the fines for teenage boys would likely fall upon parents, the penalties would serve as hard incentive for policing long bathroom visits, as well as spot inspections of what happens behind closed bedroom doors.
7) Awkward auditoriums
Outside the home, school resource officers should be assigned to every high school and tasked with providing weekly counseling — that is, school assemblies in auditoriums warning of the legal perils which await offenders.
Of course, this would be on top of any SWAT training for brave officers. I refer to what will be required to prepare for the predictable assault rifle attacks from sexually-frustrated teenagers — particularly those turning 18 years of age in states allowing adolescents access to battlefield weaponry.
More thoughtful minds might have additional suggestions on how to implement these block-and-ban protections: the vasectomy block of VASTIDs and the ban on self-gratification.
SPOILER ALERT: My original intent was to finish this entire proposal in eight installments. However, the legislative case requires more. But, in the next post, I will move to my conclusion.
The prior post (Part 7) can be accessed here.
Thanks for your attention, and I welcome your robust responses. To follow future posts, you can press the button on the screen. — Geronimo Redstone
