Law proposes men be taxed for masturbation - highlights abortion issues

A Texas politician has proposed a bill which would fine men $100 for masturbating in a bid to flip the switch on the struggles women face in accessing reproductive healthcare — particularly regarding abortion — by targeting men.

House Bill 4260 was submitted by Jessica Farrar, a Democratic member of the Texas House of Representatives, and states that masturbation "will be considered an act against an unborn child".

As per the bill, "emissions outside of a woman's vagina, or created outside of a health or medical facility" would attract a $100 fine for "failing to preserve the sanctity of life".
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-14/satirical-law-proposes-men-be-fined-for-masturbating/8353194

I have to put in a warning for the sense of humour impaired this was meant and a tongue in cheek joke to highlight the difficulties women face accessing health care

 

I suggest banning the vasectomy procedure as well.....maybe using a plug or stitching up for menstral prevention.

 

OP

Sounds rather discriminatory, gender-wise, to me.

 

This is the level of intelligence of the abortionist movement? This fails on all levels.

 

This is an outrageous government intrusion into the personal sovereignty of a man's right over his body. Typical liberal authoritarianism that wants to see the government become our owners, telling us what we can and cannot do with the insides our of bodies.

Just who the hell does this lawmaker think that men are? Women? Because men are not women so this is wrong. Screw you *******s.

 

So is making abortion illegal....

 

Well, most people with any level of intelligence would've been able to read : """I have to put in a warning for the sense of humour impaired this was meant and a tongue in cheek joke to highlight the difficulties women face accessing health care""".

It was in the post you quoted

 

I read that the politician said it was a joke. It fails as a joke, as a metaphor, as legislation, as an attempt to gain empathy for her cause, its a waste of time, its a waste of other peoples time. It fails on all levels except for one - it makes the politician look like an utter fool.

 

Only according to you .......

 

There is no 'abortionist movement'.

 

Plenty plenty of others think it is funny

 

That would raise a shedload of money......

 

If the bill was truly submitted to the Texas House and for the purpose of a "joke" or "sarcasm", then Jessica Farrar should be facing impeachment for misusing her position as an elected representative of her constituents. We have far more than enough with corruption in local, state and the federal government to deal with, we don't clowns who think they're using their position to make some kind of point and not taking their position seriously. This one is way over the top.

 

And some of the nasty bills that have made it through mandating ultrasounds should also have been the cause of impeachment

 

Agreed. It could eliminate the deficit!

 

What fails is your comprehension.
There is no "abortionist" movement.
The satire is directed at the hypocrisy of penalizing women only - and eliminating their ability to choose if they want to have a baby or not.
The GOP is fond of holding women accountable - but only women. It is a biological fact (sorry, I know the GOP is allergic to facts) that a woman cannot become pregnant all by herself - men have to share responsibility.

 

That would be 160m men jerking off every day at $100 a shot (!), that's $5800 billion a year! The tax collectors would be busy though....

 

It was MEANT to go over the top to draw attention to Anti-Choicers needing to go "over the top" and take away women's rights.

It was meant to make fun of idiots and throw their sexism right back in their face.



And seeing how riled SOME here go it worked

 

Good post....ya the Repubs have their "alternative facts"

 

Understood and I fully agree with her point. My disagreement is with the venue and methodology used for this purpose, not the intent of the bill. No legislator should submit any bill not intended for serious legislation (in this case to make a point). Any bill submitted to any legislature that clearly violates the Bill of Rights (and that of course includes any bill that violate women's rights) should create a requisite for review of possible impeachment procedures for the author(s). All government SERVANTS must take the Oath of Office seriously or face impeachment, there should never be any exception. This is what riles me personally and the primary reason for rampant corruption in government, they don't give a **** about the Oath of Office.

 

Oh blarney!!! Bills are proposed all the time with no hope of going through....it hardly indicates VAST CORRUPTION in politics.....other things do that....

 

As soon as the same happens to the anti choicers who bring in bills that they know will not withstand a court challenge.....

 

Not by itself, it is just one of many symptoms of a corrupt system. Some of these "hopeless" bills actually get passed despite their blatant unconstitutionality. If a legislator proposes an obviously unconstitutional bill and there is the possibility of impeachment for violating his/her Oath as a consequence, this kind of garbage would cease pretty quickly.

 

Of course it has to work both ways.

 

Good satire points out the hypocrisy or unreasonableness of an act or policy through witty exaggeration of a parallel act or situation. The best satire is subtle and uses innuendo to make the point.

The legislation in question fails on all counts. I strongly suspect that only the most die-hard abortionists claim this legislation has any value, but they do that because they cannot bear to admit anything pro-abortionist is a failure.

This legislation is just another example of the desperation of abortionists.