Georgia Democrats propose limitations on vasectomies for men
State Rep. Yasmin Neal's bill comes in response to an abortion-restrictions bill that Georgia legislators are considering.
February 21st, 2012
06:23 PM ET

Georgia Democrats propose limitations on vasectomies for men

As members of Georgia’s House of Representatives debate whether to prohibit abortions for women more than 20 weeks pregnant, House Democrats  introduced their own reproductive rights plan: No more vasectomies that leave "thousands of children ... deprived of birth."

Rep. Yasmin Neal, a Democrat from the Atlanta suburb of Jonesboro, planned on Wednesday to introduce HB 1116, which would prevent men from vasectomies unless needed to avert serious injury or death.

The bill reads: "It is patently unfair that men avoid the rewards of unwanted fatherhood by presuming that their judgment over such matters is more valid than the judgment of the General Assembly. ... It is the purpose of the General Assembly to assert an invasive state interest in the reproductive habits of men in this state and substitute the will of the government over the will of adult men."

“If we legislate women’s bodies, it’s only fair that we legislate men’s,” said Neal, who said she wanted to write bill that would generate emotion and conversation the way anti-abortion bills do. “There are too many problems in the state. Why are you under the skirts of women? I’m sure there are other places to be."

Personally, Neal said, she has no qualms with vasectomies.

“But even if it were proposed as a serious issue,” she said, “it’s still not my place as a woman to tell a man what to do with his body."

The anti-vasectomy bill was a response to a bill that would punish abortions performed after the 20th week of pregnancy with prison sentences between one and 10 years. Georgia law currently prohibits abortion after the second trimester, except to preserve the life and health of the mother. Neal's bill borrows some language directly from the anti-abortion bill.

The anti-abortion bill makes exceptions to avert death or “serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function” of the mother, but doesn’t include “diagnosis or claim of a mental or emotional condition.” If an abortion occurs after the 20th week, the bill requires doctors to attempt to deliver a living baby.

Earlier discussions about the bill have been “outstanding,” said Rep. Doug McKillip, a Republican from Athens, Georgia, who introduced the anti-abortion bill this month. He said legislators are “drilling down" on questions about when a fetus can feel pain and what exceptions can allow abortions later in pregnancy, and he expects more testimony late this week.

“I’m just disappointed in my colleague, that they would take this opportunity to make light of a very important topic,” McKillip said. “I believe this is a serious topic deserving of serious debate. It feels like a poor attempt at humor.”

Neal said she's serious about making legislators recognize women's rights to make private decisions about their bodies.

"I hope that through the madness this has caused, it gets him to understand where the woman is coming from," she said. "There are a number of women in other states trying the same ploys we’re trying here."

Earlier this month, Democratic Oklahoma Sen. Constance Johnson added - then withdrew - a provision to an anti-abortion bill that read "any action in which a man ejaculates or otherwise deposits semen anywhere but in a woman's vagina shall be interpreted and construed as an action against an unborn child." The state Senate passed the bill this month.

In January, as the Virginia state Senate debated a bill that required women to have an ultrasound before an abortion, Democrat Janet Howell attached an amendment that required men to have rectal exams and cardiac stress tests before they could receive prescriptions for erectile dysfunction medication like Viagra. The amendment was rejected in the Senate, 21-19.

CNN affiliate WAVY reported that hundreds gathered this week to protest the ultrasound bill,  which is up for a vote in Virginia's House of Delegates, and another that says life begins at conception.

On the Georgia House floor, Neal doesn't anticipate her anti-vasectomy bill will generate much serious debate.

"If it moves anywhere," she said, "that’ll be a very interesting day."

Post by:
Filed under: Abortion • Georgia • Health • Politics
soundoff (1,943 Responses)
  1. John

    How about we stop legislating peoples bodies anyway, what's next? anti-masturbation laws because of all the wasted sperm? just ridiculous, we've got people starving on the street and getting thrown out of their homes while this type of this is debated? really people? I withdraw my vote and elect to pull your sorry excuses for elected officials out of office.

    February 22, 2012 at 11:03 am | Report abuse |
    • Carawaigh

      Welcome to sanity. It's all a circus. Unfortunately, the clowns have power over our lives.

      February 22, 2012 at 6:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jeff

      So, John..if I understand you then, when a woman is IN LABOR, and the head has crowned, you'd still think the gov should not outlaw that abortion, right ?

      February 22, 2012 at 10:08 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Frank

    I have great idea if women who want control of THEIR bodies and choose whether or not they want the responsibility of raising a child.

    Here it is:

    IF "YOU" the woman, "CHOOSES" to keep the child and the FATHER "Agrees" to assume the responsibility then fine, everyone is happy. IF YOU as the WOMAN, CHOOSES to keep the child and the father isn't ready for the commitment THEN YOU PAY FOR IT ALL! As opposed to the MAN TRAP of forcing the CHILD SUPPORT RANSOM on him for 18 years.

    Since its YOUR DECISION! YOU PAY FOR IT! YOU WANTED IT! YOU GOT IT!

    February 22, 2012 at 11:03 am | Report abuse |
    • filthburger

      You must pay child support and don't want to.

      February 22, 2012 at 11:09 am | Report abuse |
    • huhb

      And what happens when the man wants the child, but not the woman? Force the man to carry the fetus to term?

      February 22, 2012 at 11:12 am | Report abuse |
    • Susan

      Oh Frank...what a tool you are. If a man doesn't want to put himself in a position where he has to pay child support for his offspring, he needs to keep it in his pants or always wear a condom. They have a responsibility to protect their financial stability just as much as a woman does.

      February 22, 2012 at 11:13 am | Report abuse |
    • Frank

      Boy you women sure hate it when YOU HAVE TO THE RANSOM though dont you? Keep your legs closed if you dont want to pay for it!

      February 22, 2012 at 11:18 am | Report abuse |
    • momoya

      I agree, Susan. The male bears 100% of the contraception responsibility when he does not want to be forced to pay child support for the next 20 or so years.

      February 22, 2012 at 11:23 am | Report abuse |
    • momoya

      @Frank

      The law is structured in such a way that the woman can spread her legs anytime she wants to, and she has ample time to decide whether or not she wants to become a mother. Males do not have such a right. Unless you want to take the risk of being financially responsible for a child for 20 years or so, you must be COMPLETELY responsible to make sure your partner does not get impregnated. It's not fair, but it's reality.

      February 22, 2012 at 11:30 am | Report abuse |
    • Viv's Mommy

      Here's a good addition to that:
      "YOU" the man, get a vasectomy if you don't want kids and stop trying to blame the 'man trap' on your obvious bad decision. And stop sleeping with woman that you wouldn't want to have a child with....or....GET THAT VASECTOMY 😀

      All better.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mike

      EIther you women are trying to give Frank a hard time or you are truly ignorant. The issue Frank is saying is that how can a man be held financially responsible yet isn't given any rights in deciding to keep the child. Its a woman's right to decide yet not her obligation to be fully responsible for a decision she makes unilaterally, that in and of itself is the definition of unfair (you can disagree with Frank's notion, but the logic is sound). Furthermore, to say that contraception is the responsibility of the man is insane. Women have countless more options for contraceptives, men have vasectomy for permanent and condoms for temporary. Women can use diaphragms, condoms (male or female), OCP, IUDs, etc.

      February 22, 2012 at 8:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • sharky

      Frank–

      Right because women can self fertilize and never need MALE SPERM to have a baby.

      February 22, 2012 at 8:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • Lemon

      Quit bitching. You're an adult, right? It takes two to make a baby. The reason men like you can be so critical is that your involvement is, at most, ten minutes. Paying 300 a month is no comparison to late night, non-stop crying and diaper changing. Maybe you should take a more active role in your children's lives. You might gain something out of it.

      February 22, 2012 at 10:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • M in Oz

      Here's a solution Frank, get yourself a vasectomy if you don't want any children because condoms and other contraceptives are not fail proof (even if you as the man can think for yourself and put one on).

      February 22, 2012 at 10:39 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Tom

    You're kidding....WHo the h...lll are you to tell me that i can't get a vasectomy, although I already did, but what about the other guys out there..I won't get racist here, but "some" people have 6, 8, or 10 kinds by different fathers, their not being supported, their running the streets, no direction no care, and you want to bring in more of these types of individuals into the world?...Then who gets to pay for their upbringing, medical costs, and when they get into trouble, then the real costs start, with court appointed attorneys, jail and prison time because "they" were brought into the world to make it better?
    Give me a break.. get real and keep you nose and hands out of my crotch...

    February 22, 2012 at 11:03 am | Report abuse |
    • Kristjan

      you realize that this isn't serious legislation; it's meant to show how utterly ridiculous abortion laws are

      February 22, 2012 at 11:10 am | Report abuse |
    • Jake

      Hahahaha, Tom getting riled up by this purely rhetorical proposal is just about the funniest thing I have read this morning.

      February 22, 2012 at 11:22 am | Report abuse |
    • cookiesandwhiskey

      Haha! Now you understand how women feel! Thanks for proving her point.

      February 22, 2012 at 11:57 am | Report abuse |
    • BG

      Except that you /did/ just "get racist." Good for you!

      February 22, 2012 at 2:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • emma

      Pal, you had better be this supportive and outraged over a woman not having the right to choose, or else you are one stinkin' hypocrite.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • TUMBLE WEED

      Tom, stop being racist against white women!! Been to a trailpark lately?

      February 22, 2012 at 3:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • tnana

      How about the "Father" that have multiple women pregnant at the same time? or over a 30 or 40 year time period. There are men that have fathered children into there 80's. Oh, is your racial comment about the woman that brought the bill forward? Grow up

      February 23, 2012 at 9:09 am | Report abuse |
    • pchsbenz

      Now you know how women feel!

      February 23, 2012 at 5:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • god

      that "whoooshing" noise you're hearing is the sound of the point sailing over tom's head at mach 3...

      March 8, 2012 at 2:57 pm | Report abuse |
  4. CJP

    Jane, do you have any idea of how mant men shirk their responsibilites for their children, if all parents paid up then would not be having these discussions. When men can conceive we can deliberate again, until then go for it Georgia.

    February 22, 2012 at 11:07 am | Report abuse |
  5. Karen

    Equating making the choice to not reproduce with killing an infant 5 months in the womb- That's the irrational thinking here. A fetus 5 months old is not just a blob of flesh. It's a fully formed human that feels pain.

    February 22, 2012 at 11:11 am | Report abuse |
    • Tila

      Thank you. I couldn't agree more. At 20 weeks a fetus is the size of a banana, able to swallow, taste, touch, smell, hear and see. It can even recognize the voice of it's mother. It is alive.

      An abortion of a 20 week old fetus is not comparable to sperm or an unfertilized egg.

      February 22, 2012 at 11:24 am | Report abuse |
    • IndyWatcher

      Fine, get it out of my body and you can take it home with you – whether we're talking about 5 days or 5 months.

      February 22, 2012 at 11:24 am | Report abuse |
    • down by the river

      I'm in my 20s and I'm still not fully formed.

      February 22, 2012 at 11:31 am | Report abuse |
    • banasy©

      Doenbytheriver:
      Now *that* was funny!
      Thanks.

      February 22, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Zabbot

      @Indy,

      If you didn't want it: 1) use birth control or in the event you did and it failed 2) get an abortion within a reasonable time frame.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:17 pm | Report abuse |
  6. Dave

    There is a big difference between aborting a fetus after 20 weeks and not getting pregnant to begin with. It's disturbing that anyone would equate the two. At twenty weeks you find out if you're having a boy or a girl, see its face, its fingers. Both of mine were sucking their thumbs at twenty weeks; we have pictures. Killing it at this point and preventing sperm from entering a woman are entirely different subjects.

    February 22, 2012 at 11:12 am | Report abuse |
  7. colt45

    Ms Neal has a point. We need to legislate government control over mens' bodies like they have done over womens'. It is not "silly" at all. It is only until men understand how egregious the laws are becoming against womens' rights that they might step back and get the heck out of a woman's body.
    I would support any legislation to control mens' use of Viagra, and stop vasectomies. Can you imagine picketing urologists?

    February 22, 2012 at 11:12 am | Report abuse |
    • BG

      This is an amazing comment and you should feel amazing.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • X

      I think we should add that if a man wants to buy condoms he should also have to go through a physical exam and get a prescription.

      February 22, 2012 at 4:34 pm | Report abuse |
    • Carawaigh

      Welcome to sanity. Bring your family, bring your friends, there's too many vacancies as it is.

      February 22, 2012 at 6:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mike

      X you are a moron. Women go through physical exams prior to OCPs and IUDs because they are medical issues, not because they are mandated by any government. God I swear some people are too stupid to function

      February 22, 2012 at 8:05 pm | Report abuse |
  8. John

    True, but it's really just our politicians, not all of us.

    John

    February 22, 2012 at 11:14 am | Report abuse |
  9. Lucy

    Now the Democrats are getting in on the action. Or inaction if you get my drift. I just wish unmarried people would keep their you-know-whats in their pants.

    February 22, 2012 at 11:15 am | Report abuse |
    • BG

      And I wish intolerant people would keep their opinions to themselves. lol c wut i did thar

      February 22, 2012 at 2:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • becks

      you do understand that unmarried people aren't the only one's who get abortions right? What about the married career woman and her husband who don't feel they are ready for a child and the pregnancy was an accident? What about the married men who get their mistresses pregnant and want her to have an abortion? Married people get abortions too....

      February 22, 2012 at 2:32 pm | Report abuse |
    • Viv's Mommy

      I think the sentiment here is more that irresponsible/not-ready people should keep it in their pants. I hope that's more what you meant....or you're an ignorant religious meat-head.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • uu2

      I vote for option 2

      February 22, 2012 at 5:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • ldao

      So only married people should be allowed contraceptives or abortion rights?

      February 25, 2012 at 9:28 am | Report abuse |
  10. Marcus Aurelius

    where do these cretins come from? Who is electing this garbage – squidbillies? Are there too many inbred people in Georgia that this is happening?

    February 22, 2012 at 11:15 am | Report abuse |
  11. Marcus Aurelius

    Oh, a neglect...that figures....

    February 22, 2012 at 11:17 am | Report abuse |
  12. Ignacio

    I do hope this politician realizes the folly of her logic. If anti-vasectomy laws were passed, then, more men who get them to avoid impregnating a woman against her will would impregnate a woman against her will. The only real victim of this law would be the woman.

    February 22, 2012 at 11:18 am | Report abuse |
    • BG

      lol @ u

      February 22, 2012 at 2:33 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mike

      Ignacio, you buy the propaganda.

      Do you really think men are very affected by pregnancy and childbirth? I don't think it affects men as much, but to say ONLY women would be affected is to willfully close your eyes to reality.

      A guy from my HS got a girl pregnant while they were still in school He was a star football player, with a scholarship to a big time university. He had to give that up to go work in a factory to support the child that she, by law, didn't have to have. How many times do you think things like that happen?

      Momoyo is right. It's not fair, but it's reality. There are a LOT of things that aren't fair, but are reality. Only, nobody cares, if it's only men who are harmed. That's how effective the propaganda is.

      So, guys, we have to start taking care of other guys. We have to stop believing that most men are garbage, and that our most noble calling is to take care of women. Men are being screwed over in many ways. Women, for sure, don't care, and they do everything they can to make sure we only pay attention to what's hard for women. That's reality, too.

      February 23, 2012 at 8:33 am | Report abuse |
    • Ozzi

      Mike, you idiot. All your "friend" had to do was use a condom. But you don't want to take responsibility for anything.

      Your "friend" didn't deserve that scholarship because idiots don't deserve free money to go to school. If he reallly wants an education, he can go part-time while he's working and start at the local community college. He could probably qualifty for a Pell grant.

      But he sounds like a dumb@s, so he probably should stick with factory work.

      February 23, 2012 at 12:08 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Marcus Aurelius

    ...with capital "C"

    February 22, 2012 at 11:18 am | Report abuse |
    • Chickie

      What with a capital "C"? Confusing? Yes, I agree it is absolutely confusing why the govt thinks they can tell someone what to do with their own body if they have boobs but not, apparently, if they have a peen. So confusing because it almost seems like they want to say women need permission to do grown-up things whereas menfolk don't. I'm sure that's not the case and it just looks like it, but until they clear it up, it most certainly *is* Confusing with a capital "C".

      February 22, 2012 at 1:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • Gloria

      So what about that 21 week old child's body? Why should the woman be able to have control over that childs body by destroying it. Where is that child's right to their own body? Seriously that woman carried that child for 21 weeks and can't carry it 3 more weeks til it could survive on its own? That's pretty messed up thinking.

      February 22, 2012 at 1:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • Whitney

      Child's body? Wouldn't it have more impact if you called them "almost adults" or possibly "height challenged people?"
      Just asking.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • midwestrngrl

      Im pro-choice very early on and I am for the morning after pill, etc., but I agree at a certain point when the fetus has developed a nervous system and the start of a brain (which is to me our soul) you lose that option. Then it should become about whether this child is a threat to your health or carry it to term.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • John

      It hasn't been born yet ergo it has no rights. Rights are only awarded to living people

      February 22, 2012 at 2:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jon

      So... why are people charged with double murder when they kill a pregnant woman?

      February 22, 2012 at 3:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • Greg

      Depends on the state

      February 22, 2012 at 4:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • LuckyLady13

      Really???? So if a woman after 20 weeks wants to have an abortion, they should make her wait till 24 weeks, so it has the chance to live outside the womb? Who pays for that? Can you imagine the hospital bills for all those preemie babies? And most wouldn't survive anyway. The person who is already here and living should have control over there own body.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ander

      No one should be required by law to use his/her body to provide life or sustenance for another. For example if your child needs a kidney transplant and you don't give her one, it is not against the law. It is not commendable ethically, but not legally wrong. Although it is commendable to have and raise a child in our society, no woman should be forced to use her womb for such a purpose.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:38 pm | Report abuse |
    • Ann

      Well said.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • GBG

      Outside the fact it is a fetus and not a child? Though actually I do agree somewhat with the abortion bill. I think there has to be a time during the pregnancy when it's too late to get an abortion. If a woman doesn't know she has an unwanted pregnancy by her fifth month she can give it up for adoption.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:44 pm | Report abuse |
    • Steve in Iowa

      Who are you to judge?

      February 22, 2012 at 3:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • Matt E

      Gloria both your math and medical knowledge are lacking. Pregnancy last for 9 months which comes to 36 weeks not 24. At the 21 week point (about the fifth month) the fetus is still not viable outside the womb.

      February 22, 2012 at 3:55 pm | Report abuse |
    • Stacie

      You are also wrong. A pregnancy is 40 weeks, the first two of which the baby isn't even conceived. The first 2 weeks are actually the 14 days days from the last menstrual cycle to ovulation.

      February 22, 2012 at 9:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • Stacie

      A pregnancy is 40 weeks.

      February 22, 2012 at 9:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • Steve

      Actually full term is considered 38 to 40 weeks not 36.

      The problem with this country is that there are too many self-centered people. Sure being a parent is very expensive and time consuming, but it is also worth every minute and dime!

      February 23, 2012 at 8:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • Nico

      Now put your money where your mouth is and stop voting anti-children and anti-mother and perhaps a young lady somewhere will change her mind knowing that people are willing to help rather than pontificate about what is right and what is wrong

      February 22, 2012 at 4:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • jenny

      a 21 week old fetus is not a "child"

      February 22, 2012 at 6:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • Keeper

      So who do you suggest pays the probably millions of dollars it will take to keep that "baby" alive in the NICU? Who do you suggest will want to adopt a child with very probable disabilities? I know, it will eventually all trickle down to the taxpayers to pick up the medical tab for this "baby" that no one wanted in the first place. Sounds like an awesome plan.

      February 22, 2012 at 7:00 pm | Report abuse |
    • tzvikf

      In your opinion it is messed up thinking. The woman also has a right on how she is thinking. And at the end of the day – how is it that the government gets involved at all? It is none of yours or the government's business? Period! Move on with your life and leave others alone.

      February 22, 2012 at 7:05 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jane

      It's your right to feel that way, but every other woman also has the right to believe as they do, and do what they choose with their own bodies. That is the material point. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.

      February 22, 2012 at 8:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jules

      Not messed up thinking if you are the person being invaded from the inside by fetus.

      February 22, 2012 at 9:39 pm | Report abuse |
    • Really

      A 24-week old fetus cannot survive "on its own."

      February 22, 2012 at 10:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • M in Oz

      You are using an extreme example. Most abortions are early term.

      February 22, 2012 at 10:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • K

      It's also pretty messed up to demand a woman carry a child that could potentially harm them mentally and/or physically. Abortion isn't as easy a decision as people like to make it out to be. People convenientally forget this.

      February 22, 2012 at 10:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Lars

      I agree. But I also agree that once the child arrives there needs to be help for all these moms and kids.

      February 23, 2012 at 8:38 am | Report abuse |
    • brock

      Its called a father

      February 23, 2012 at 9:25 am | Report abuse |
    • tnana

      Gloria, until you have been in the position to make that choice you will never understand, no one expects you to. Men have no place in making unilateral decisions about the medical decisions women make about health care issues. Yes that fetus is part of a womans body until it is born. then it becomes a child. Until then it can not survive without it's host....a woman. I would think our government would have more pressing issues to deal with than the heath care issues of women. Really!!

      February 23, 2012 at 9:00 am | Report abuse |
    • G8r

      88% of all abortions are done within the first trimester. Conservatives are pro-life . . ., between conception and birth. After that, they could care less. Every child born, wanted or unwanted costs taxpayers well over $100,000 each JUST for their public school education. Add an undetermined amount for post-secondary education, or incarceration as the case may be, and multiply that by 1.3 million abortions currently performed per year that would have to paid for by the taxpayers if abortion were to be completely illegal and you are costing the taxpayers billions every year to subsidize some peoples religious principles. And we say that Liberals spend too much of the taxpayers dollars!

      February 23, 2012 at 3:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • Lisa

      Gloria, there is a word for life forms that require a host in order to survive. The words defiinition does not include words such as "person" or "baby" or "child".

      February 24, 2012 at 3:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • Kat

      Because that body inside of MINE, using MY body as a resource. If you were to crawl up inside of me, I'd still have final say over what you get to do with my body.
      Pro-choice isn't a "yay, abortion kicks arse!" kind of thing. It's more, that the mother's body is more important, because the fetus, infant, whatever, is using her body, as a host. SHE is the one providing the housing.
      Sean, so-domy laws were ruled unConstitutional in Lawrence vs. Texas.

      February 24, 2012 at 8:27 pm | Report abuse |
    • ldao

      Ok, from your argument then would it be acceptable if the women didn't abort the fetus instead she evicts it from her womb?

      February 25, 2012 at 9:26 am | Report abuse |
    • jez

      Imbecile – the fetus is not viable without the woman. My guess is you have no chance of getting pregnant (ugly). Stay out of the rest of our bodies and mange your own dull life.

      February 27, 2012 at 9:58 pm | Report abuse |
    • Zabbot

      Cite one example of something men can do that women can't?

      Women can kill living fetuses at their discretion, men can't. Women can decide to have a child against the father's wishes, men have no say.

      You're not thinking, your letting your emotions get the better of you.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:10 pm | Report abuse |
    • NitPikkr

      Apparently one thing men can do that women can't is make decision about how women are allowed to make decisions that effect their own bodies.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:16 pm | Report abuse |
    • Phil

      What women need to understand is that abortion isn't about JUST their own bodies, but it is most importantly about the baby who isn't able to speak for itself yet. Actually, I don't think abortion is about a woman's body at all (let the hate responses begin now). it's 100% about the baby.

      I used to be pro-abortion, but after hearing my son's heartbeat over 4 yrs ago when my wife was 10 weeks pregnant, my feelings about abortion changed a lot. I'm not 100% against abortion but I think the cutoff should be much sooner than 20 weeks. I don't know when life (consciousness more specifically) begins but 20 weeks IMO is way too far in the process to end a life. I wish there were more scientific evidence on when consciousness begins, but you can't really ask a 20 week old fetus if they are aware of anything.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • X

      Well put NitPikkr.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • BG

      And you're being a misogynist, so . . . congrats?

      February 22, 2012 at 2:26 pm | Report abuse |
    • becks

      men do have a say – it's a called wear a rubber

      February 22, 2012 at 2:28 pm | Report abuse |
    • LuckyLady13

      That would be too easy. They aren't that smart.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • X

      Here here.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • MikeMazzla

      Well when you are the one carrying the baby and fing up your body then you can make the decision..until than its the lady's choice.

      February 22, 2012 at 2:45 pm | Report abuse |
    • Emmaleah

      If the man has a fetus growing in his body, he is welcome to terminate his pregnancy—because it is HIS body.

      He also does not have to donate organs or even blood to another human being he doesn't know or want to know. Thousands of viable, conscious, contributing human beings die every day in this world for lack of an organ or blood. Why should they suffer so someone else doesn't have to give up a kidney or some bone marrow or some cells? This is no different than refusing to allow a fetus to use one's body and resources.

      February 22, 2012 at 3:56 pm | Report abuse |
    • Katie

      So which is it? You want women to have children they didn't plan for because abortion is evil? Or you DON'T want women to have these children because the father doesn't have enough say? So only if the father approves can a woman have an abortion? Because that what it sounds like.

      February 22, 2012 at 4:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • Katie

      Can you please make up your mind? Do you want women to have abortions? Or do you want to force them to have their babies, even when the father objects? What you're whining about, it makes it sound like you're only ok with women having children if the father decides to man-up and help. But if he doesn't want it, then it's ok for an abortion? Sorry bub, you can't have it both ways.

      February 22, 2012 at 4:37 pm | Report abuse |
    • uu2

      We can write our name in the snow!

      February 22, 2012 at 5:14 pm | Report abuse |
    • vance

      men can write their name in the snow with urine. women- not so much.

      February 22, 2012 at 6:12 pm | Report abuse |
    • Kay

      And you obviously don't realize what a blatant contradiction you just said. On one hand, you don't want women to have abortions, but on the other hand you don't want them to have the baby and make a man a father against his wishes. What if she wishes to not be a mother? Or doesn't that count?

      February 22, 2012 at 6:15 pm | Report abuse |
    • marge

      When ya get a Uterus..we'll talk.....

      February 22, 2012 at 6:50 pm | Report abuse |
    • Athensguy

      Oh, shuddup... That,s so 1850s of you.

      February 22, 2012 at 6:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • sharky

      Urinate standing up, without having to drop pants, and having relative aim.

      February 22, 2012 at 8:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • Lemon

      So there has never been a case where a man aborted a pregnant woman's fetus against her wishes?

      Men can choose to father a child and then bail. You sound like the kind of person who rages against abortion, and then turns around to attack single mothers with the same zeal.

      I think you're letting your "rational" thought process cloud your mind when it comes to understanding social stigma.

      February 22, 2012 at 9:53 pm | Report abuse |
    • M in Oz

      Men can decide to abuse their girlfriend/wife/child or children without asking anyone...look at Josh Powell he got away with killing his wife and then the kids.

      February 22, 2012 at 10:36 pm | Report abuse |
    • USmominUK

      Unfortunately biology isn't fair. If men were the ones carrying the fetus, I doubt this would be an issue. I personally don't find it "fair" that I had to suffer through 6-months of hyperemesis gravidarum, followed by 2 months of bed rest, while my husband got to carry on as "normal". I'm not sure how to put it delicately, but generally the man's contribution is pleasure- the woman may not even get that much. Nope, not fair at all...

      February 23, 2012 at 2:24 am | Report abuse |
    • Redcloud09

      Are you for real? Men have no say as to whether they father children or not?? Ever heard of a vasectomy, or a condom, or abstinence. Why is contraception the woman's responsibility only?

      February 23, 2012 at 8:38 am | Report abuse |
    • brock

      They can also take the men to court for child support and say they cant make it unless they get their money, but when the man says I would love to raise the children without childsupport or foodstamps. Then nobody listens.

      February 23, 2012 at 9:19 am | Report abuse |
    • Ozzi

      You could use a condom if you want to prevent a baby and make certain that the child doesn't belong to you.

      Sperm is a living, moving, thinking cell. To kill that cell is to kill something that is living.

      Ban condoms.

      February 23, 2012 at 12:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • pchsbenz

      No most of the time they kill the pregnant mother.

      February 23, 2012 at 5:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • Alyssa

      Men certainly can kill a living fetus at their discretion, and they've been doing it for as far back as women have been pregnant. Through violence.

      February 24, 2012 at 8:53 am | Report abuse |
    • ZACHARY QUINTO

      Women cannot write their names in the snow, nor can they produce any sensible contributions to society aside from breeding, cooking and cleaning.

      February 28, 2012 at 5:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • Doh

      here's hint: rhymes with "runt"

      February 22, 2012 at 2:25 pm | Report abuse |
    • Reginald

      I know it's hard, but try not to talk about your mother that way.

      February 28, 2012 at 5:09 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jean

      "I'm sure that's not the case..."

      I think that is exactly the case.

      February 22, 2012 at 3:41 pm | Report abuse |
    • craig

      Nope, that is EXACTLY the case. In ancient societies, and even some today, women are simply property, to be controlled, used, and traded/sold like a pig, cow, or parcel of land. They have no rights beyond the right to exist...subject to the whims of their male relatives. THAT is the world to which the GOP wishes to return, partly because it's a party composed largely of old white men, partly because that's on the Conservative side of things, and partly because it would make men's lives so much simpler. They wouldn't have to listen to the stuff their wives say any more! What could be better?

      February 22, 2012 at 3:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • msk

      Well said!

      February 22, 2012 at 3:52 pm | Report abuse |
    • X

      Not to mention all the jobs that would be created by sending your pink-collar work force back to the private sphere.
      Our economy would see a sharp dip however as spending on shoes, clothes, groceries, child products and other items drop off from both lack of income and ability to leave the home without a male relative.

      February 22, 2012 at 4:30 pm | Report abuse |
    • iris651

      Yes, you're right. And as a woman, I resent these white men bitterly. The only explanation is that they are very young souls, and will, someday, in another life, have the experience of being a woman, and will finally understand the ugliness of their current thinking. Good luck boys, you've got a lot to look forward to!

      February 22, 2012 at 5:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • stew

      true

      February 23, 2012 at 12:56 am | Report abuse |
    • rick

      What world are you living in. I am a old white male. Give me a break. Is that really honestly what you think "we" want. I think your insane! You are so twisted in your views that you have convinced yourself that the GOP is your enemy on every front. You are a sad little man and you have my pity.

      February 23, 2012 at 1:41 am | Report abuse |
    • US Voter

      You're Craig, return to male dominance seems to be on the GOP agenda...Wouldn't you love to see one of our fine Female Marines kick their butts for it? I would

      February 23, 2012 at 9:51 am | Report abuse |
    • Truth Seeker

      Craig, You honestly think that you can steriotype an entire group of men because they have conservative beliefs. you have a lot to learn if you think that conservative Christians are out to repress women. there are groups that do repress women. However, it is my understading that this occurs mostly in Middle Eastern countries with strong Muslim beliefs. My wife and I are both strong Christian conservatives and I don't repress her I. I don't feel that she, or and woman is worthless in any way. Some call the "thing" growing insde a woman a "parasite", or a "hunk of meat", or just an "extension of the womans body". However, the fact of the matter in this debate is that what is growing inside the woman is a baby human being. It is my belief, along with many other conservative Christians, including women, that the baby human being growing inside has just as many rights, if not more, as the woman who is deciding the babies fate. The baby didn't ask to be conceived but once it has been, then there is a God given responsiblity for the woman to care for and nurture the child to the best of her ability. Therefore it is our belief that the babies rights neglected, not to mention the fact that I believe it is also a slap in God's face to abort such a gift from Him. It is my belief that when the time comes we will all stand before God and have to explain why we didn't do as much as possible to stop the pain and suffering of a baby, whether it be born or unborn. I also believe that the aborted babies will be standing with God waiting for an answer. My prayer is that those of you who believe that you know better thatn God have a good answer ready when that time arrives. p.s. The GOP has nothing to do with my beliefs I know that I will stand before a higher power and have explain my actions. God doesn't care about our party affiliations when it comes to caring for his own, especially helpless babies and children.

      February 23, 2012 at 11:58 am | Report abuse |
    • fred gray

      It's not that women are property, it's that babies are persons.

      February 23, 2012 at 5:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • Firefly

      The GOP has lot of women too – obviously without a brain of course.

      February 24, 2012 at 3:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • Rob

      Those were the days, back when society was not squeamish in letting a Man remind Women exactly where to stand, how to stand, when to stand and why. We used to let Men control their households, but now we've neutered them with this false mythology that Women are full sentient beings deserving of male rights. They are not. They are flawed creations to be perfected with aid of a male hand. If we want society to survive, All Women must be led back to their matrimonial bonds, which is their divinely designed role; to serve and bolster the achievements of Men. It begins with our Daughers, and re-establishing a righteous education, rater than robbing a young woman of her true education, that in attaining perfection for her male master.

      February 28, 2012 at 5:03 pm | Report abuse |
    • Robert M

      Replace 'Women' with "Men" in your comment and you have the exact agenda of the radical feminist movement, a major wing of the Democrat party. It is much like the goal of Atheism: to prevent a religious theocracy...by forcefully implementing their own anti-religious theocracy.

      February 29, 2012 at 9:19 pm | Report abuse |
    • David

      I believe he was saying she is a peice of flabby taint meat.

      February 22, 2012 at 4:21 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jeff

      Chickey – let me ask you something. (understand that I am VERY pro-choice).
      Assume for the moment, that life begins at BIRTH. Would you advocate the right of a woman to get an abortion an hour before birth ? How about at THE TIME of birth, but before it leaves the birth canal ? IF you believe that a government has the right, in the above scenario, to outlaw the abortion, then, you are admitting that the gov. HAS that right, and, if so, how about a month before..how about "x" before ? I(t is at that point that you dont say the gov. doesnt HAVE the right, but rather, the entire argument is on the issue of "when" – and then you MUST agree that reasonable minds can differ without denigrating government because they dont agree with your idea of "when".

      February 22, 2012 at 10:07 pm | Report abuse |
    • John

      The when should be when the fetus can breath on its own without any life support and with just basic care available by the state. Along with any anti-abortion legislation should be a budget to pay for 18 years of state provided medicine, education, and foster care services. IF the government is going to start forcing unwanted children into the country then the government needs to be able to pay for them.

      February 23, 2012 at 3:02 pm | Report abuse |
    • standup

      Good point, not to mention, what about all of the potential abuse towards these unwanted children?

      February 23, 2012 at 3:42 pm | Report abuse |
    • Jason Cushman

      You aren't dealing with just your body, that is the obvious fact that you seem to be missing. You are dealing with your body AND a child's. Therefore YES the government has a say on what you do to that child's body since they don't have the power to kick your butt yet.

      February 23, 2012 at 1:23 am | Report abuse |
    • Sean

      That’s incorrect actually as sod.omy is illegal is most states. This isn’t a gender war it’s a culture war. I am male and fully support pro-choice.

      February 23, 2012 at 8:24 am | Report abuse |
    • Primewonk

      Nope. Sodomy is legal every where. State laws were overturned with Lawrence v. Texas.

      February 23, 2012 at 8:56 am | Report abuse |
    • Primewonk

      Nope. Sod.omy is legal every where. State laws were overturned with Lawrence v. Texas.

      February 23, 2012 at 8:57 am | Report abuse |
    • Ben

      sodomy laws were struck down by the US Suprme court years ago. If your stupid or not up with laws don't talk out loud

      February 23, 2012 at 10:25 am | Report abuse |
    • Mike

      Completely wrong. The government tells almost every person with a peen what to do, and far more often than they tell people with boobs what to do. In this case, they tell us we have to support children based on your decision about whether or not you're ready to have a child.

      You really don't want to think about how unfair that is, do you? Most women don't. They only want to think about their own issues. They want everybody else to be concerned only with their issues. In fact, it's very, very important to women that our society doesn't think about the expectations we have of men, that we don't have of women. That would diminish the unending care and concern we exhibit towards women. Can't have that, now.

      February 23, 2012 at 8:49 am | Report abuse |
    • Smarter than you

      OK Mike, if this is the case, then my question is, why wasn't the "sperm donor" wearing a condom? It's not unfair to men if they won't wear that great magic invention to prevent not only pregnancy but STIs. The government essentially says, you can't carry the fetus but you did contribute to it's creation, therefore, you are 50% responsible for providing for it. You bet your butt it is a woman's decision whether or not to carry that fetus to term, unless you know of some way a man can do it. As an educated woman, I have yet to hear or read of that scientific discovery (save for that wretched Arnold Schwarzenegger movie). You aren't ready for a kid? Then wear a condom, or better yet, don't have sex. Simple as that.
      Is it fair that I have to carry pepper spray because I've been stalked, harassed and cornered by men? Of course not. I shouldn't have to worry about being attacked because I'm out by myself. But women do. Society, for some sick and twisted reason, has created an idea that rape is okay. Women who are raped are victims not just of the attack itself but character assassination when they speak up. So we don't report it. Conservatively speaking, half of rapes are reported to police. The conviction rate of cases reported stands at 17% nationwide. So I really don't give a flying fig about what you think is fair considering the mother of that child you don't want, has a 25% chance of being sexually assaulted before she finishes college. Women do not exist for the pleasure of men, to be commanded what to do by men, or to be subjected to dangers we face everyday we walk out the front door. Granted, we have it a hell of a lot better here than in, say, Afghanistan. Writing a check every month for the child you don't want is the least you can do for refusing to wear your rubber.

      February 23, 2012 at 8:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • Manny!

      The thing is that God, or whatever higher power/spirit you believe in, entrusted women to nurture the life of the baby. BUT the baby is aa separate LIFE AND BODY. This bill is just a ridiculous and emotional retaliation that has the hint of feministic tendencies. The world is running low on resources due to over population and here we are arguing "why does he have a pen!s and she doesnt?" Its smart for men to do a vascetomy iIF DESIRED SO AS TO PREVENT ABORTIONS/UNWANTED PREGNANCIES.

      -24 yr old with a vasectomy

      February 23, 2012 at 10:28 am | Report abuse |
    • Denise

      I am sorry but how is taking away a man's ability to not have children anymore equivalent to a woman having an abortion. I am assuming that they are NOT taking away a woman's ability to get a tubal ligation, right? And yet to punish men because they want the women to not abort a child after 20 weeks into pregnancy, this woman wants to take away the man's ability to get a vasectomy.

      And, if that goes through MORE women will have to go get tubals which means serious surgery with general anesthesia as opposed to a vasectomy which is done in a doctor's office under local anesthesia. Way to think this through Rep Neal.

      BTW I am not for abortions, but I am sure you will never stop a woman from killing her baby if she does not want it. And yes, it is a baby, people. Call it a blob of cells all you want, if that gets you through the night, but it is a baby. I have had 5 pregnancies. One died in miscarriage, one was stillbirth and the others were all healthy births. But ALL of them were babies.

      February 28, 2012 at 2:35 am | Report abuse |
    • Mr. Scratch

      Exactly, I don't believe in God, just Christians. They know what I want, even if I don't want it! 🙂

      February 24, 2012 at 2:18 pm | Report abuse |
    • Robert M

      Kind of like Atheists: I don't care what you believe, unless it's different from what I don't believe, and if it is, we'll sue you until you conform to my beliefs.
      I've been labeled an Atheist by Atheists, but I don't see myself as one, because I don't believe in their mission to force their non-beliefs on everyone else. Atheists are far worse busy-bodies than any Christian Fundamentalists I've ever met.

      February 29, 2012 at 9:39 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Michael Suhr

    This is just another reason to kick out all the politicians in office. It has become very clear that once they go in office, they stop working for us. Evidently, their brain also stops working. This is totally unbelievable. What planet is she from? Or what has shee been smoking.

    February 22, 2012 at 11:18 am | Report abuse |
    • Ozzi

      I love listening to how stupid you sound.

      February 23, 2012 at 12:09 pm | Report abuse |
  15. Don

    For that matter, any masturbatory emissions, where the sperm is clearly not seeking an egg, could be termed reckless abandonment. – Legally Blonde

    February 22, 2012 at 11:18 am | Report abuse |
    • Athensguy

      In fact, under Christianity, it is a sin.... So much bs

      February 22, 2012 at 6:52 pm | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56