Oklahama Democrat Adds ‘Every Sperm Is Sacred’ Amendment to Personhood Bill
By ABL 2.0 February 9th, 2012
Wins at life
Oklahoma state senator Constance Johnson has a great sense of humor. To poke fun at the sheer absurdity of the Personhood Amendment which would give zygotes the same rights as extra-utero-American citizens, Senator Johnson added the following language as an amendment to the bill:However, 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.
Of course, such an amendment would ban all sexual activity, including masturbation.
I have to say, while the amendment was intended in jest and as a nod to Monty Python’s “Every Sperm is Sacred,” if the bill defines human life as beginning at the moment of conception, before it’s even implanted in the womb, then why shouldn’t life begin as soon as sperm squirts its way out of some dude’s penis?
And, to quote Think Progress commenter Donna Foust: “So, if a man uses a condom, is it kidnapping?”
Indeed.
[via Think Progress]
[cross-posted at ABLC]
Posted in Vagina Outrage
You say that like it’s a bad thing.
February 9th, 2012 at 10:54 pm
A murder of tadpoles.
February 9th, 2012 at 10:57 pm
I think the Dems in various legislatures have figured out that mocking these asshats, and demonstrating just how absurd their “pro-life” fetish is, is a good approach to defeating such foolishness.
February 9th, 2012 at 10:58 pm
Winning!
February 9th, 2012 at 10:58 pm
Can’t wait to see the job descriptions for the anti-protected sex, anti-masturbation enforcement unit. How exactly would that work?
February 9th, 2012 at 11:00 pm
I’m loving the Dem legislative snark coming out of Greater Southern Wingnuttia Proper. Every sperm is sacred in the Gulf of America.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:01 pm
Awesome! If the wingnuts vote against her amendment, she can accuse them of condoning all sorts of things they don’t want to even think about.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:01 pm
Getting angry, even visibly frustrated with a wingnut just eggs them on. Laughing at them, however…well, that turns the tables a bit. I applaud these merry pranksters in statehouses across the country, and wish them well in future pantsings of Republican fuckwits.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:02 pm
Actually, what that proposed law is doing is banning the practice of Onanism (pulling out and spilling the ejaculate other than in the vagina). It’s purely Biblical: Genesis 38, 8-10. I don’t see how conservative Christians or Jews (it’s in the Torah too) would object to this Onanist ban…
February 9th, 2012 at 11:07 pm
Back in the 1980s National Lampoon magazine had a bit about Dan Quayle & co declaring a holy war on unfertilized eggs and that they were going to break into women’s uteruses to rectify that, afterwards they’d found that every sperm was “sacred” and continue the attack to ensure they weren’t spilt.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:09 pm
@PaulW:
Money shots are against the teachings of scripture?
Why am I not at all surprised…
February 9th, 2012 at 11:10 pm
The law would have a great motto
“spank it and you go into the tank”
February 9th, 2012 at 11:13 pm
“So, if a man uses a condom, is it kidnapping?”
This line so reminds me of the last vignette in Woody Allen’s
“Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex…”
February 9th, 2012 at 11:15 pm
@PaulW:
Not that anyone actually cares (especially Christianists) but Onan’s sin was that he was greedy and tried to keep his dead brother’s property for himself instead of obeying the law and impregnating his brother’s widow to try and create a child who would inherit all of his brother’s property. The fact that he tried to pull off the con via coitus interruptus is a mere detail in the original story.
Though I guess I can see why it would get simplified over the years into “God kilt him dead for masturbation.” The whole property law thing just gets too complicated to explain.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:17 pm
“So, if a man uses a condom, is it kidnapping?”
Genocide.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:20 pm
Actually, the whole chapter of the Bible that includes Onan is pretty effed up, especially when you get to the part where Tamar disguises herself as a prostitute to get her father-in-law Judah to impregnate her.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:21 pm
@Mnemosyne: Dorothy Parker had a messy parakeet named Onan.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:24 pm
I don’t want to even think about what felony a frothy mix would qualify as.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:24 pm
@balconesfault:
“I heard that sometimes you jump right into this big rubber barrier…”
February 9th, 2012 at 11:24 pm
Only for the men. =P
Actually, when you wrap a baby in latex and throw it in the trash, it’s murder. However, I’m sure the fundies and Catholics would be fine with outlawing condoms.
So, if he/she swallows, is that cannibalism?
And anally ejaculating is child abuse, as you’d probably be charged if you threw your kids into the sewer.
Oo, I like this game. I could play all day.
The only worry I have is that they will fail to see the snark and actually pass the law thinking it a good idea.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:26 pm
@Mnemosyne:
Let’s face it, it’s not nearly as interesting as the sex part, too.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:27 pm
@Villago Delenda Est:
“Suppose he’s masturbating? We could end up on the ceiling!”
February 9th, 2012 at 11:27 pm
And since I seem to be in a “Wow, there’s some weird shit in the Old Testament!” mood tonight:
The Most Insanely Violent Cartoon Ever (Is About The Bible)
February 9th, 2012 at 11:29 pm
Speaking for myself, I would rather not see masturbation and oral sex outlawed.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:35 pm
I love this new (?) trend of legislative mockery. In hindsight it seems obvious, but it never occurred to me before. Outrage can make your adversary feel strong, but mockery hits him where it hurts.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:36 pm
@sfinny: I do believe it already exists, and is called The Catholic Church.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:37 pm
hey ABL -
Catholics, especially like, priests, bishops, and higher, actually DO Believe that the spirit enters through the sperm, and thats why they actually are anti-contraception and anti-masturbation. like, in jest, you stumbled upon the truth.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:44 pm
Sweet Jesus, a good bass line is everything.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:47 pm
This a slap in the face of actual human cells, which are murdered by the millions during exfoliation. Sperm, on the other hand (cough), contain only half the DNA of the fully realized skin cell.
February 9th, 2012 at 11:54 pm
@Arclite:
Will never happen. Men will never pass a law that infringes on their God-given rights to do whatever they damn well please with their body parts, even by accident. That’s reserved for women, dontcha know.
February 10th, 2012 at 12:01 am
its all fun and games until they have to keep the jurgen’s lotion behind the counter with the sudafed. hell kleenex and socks too. there will be so much stuff behind the counter, they will have to legalize cigarettes just to make room back there.
when you outlaw waxing the carrot, only outlaws will wax carrots.
February 10th, 2012 at 12:06 am
Oklahoma is High-larious.
or at least Meth-larious.
February 10th, 2012 at 12:07 am
You can also go the other way: any action in which a woman ovulates or otherwise produces an egg which is not subsequently thereby fertilized but is instead flushed from her body (heretofore this action shall be designated as “the period”) shall be interpreted and construed as an action against an unborn child. So women can still masturbate but not ovulate. Of course all sperm are sacred and all eggs are holy!
February 10th, 2012 at 12:23 am
@General Stuck:
This HAS to be a contender for comment of the year. I’ve read it five times and keep cracking up at the double entendre.
February 10th, 2012 at 12:26 am
@sfinny: They put a metal jockstrap like the one from love guru on you…
February 10th, 2012 at 12:33 am
“You can also go the other way: any action in which a woman ovulates or otherwise produces an egg which is not subsequently thereby fertilized but is instead flushed from her body (heretofore this action shall be designated as “period”) shall be interpreted and construed as an action against an unborn child.”
Since it would be considered murder, it would give the phrase “period of mourning” an entirely new meaning.
And would using a vibrator possibly be deemed as assault with a deadly weapon? Would masturbating into a sock be akin to smothering someone with a pillow?
February 10th, 2012 at 12:35 am
I just don’t get the Republican worldview. A zygote is a person with rights. A corporation is a person with rights. The top 1% of people by wealth have special rights. But the other 99% ? ...Meh.
February 10th, 2012 at 12:44 am
Constance Johnson is reminding me of Reese Witherspoon in Legally Blond now. And I mean that in a good way! That scene she does about sperms and fatherhood? “Why now? Why this sperm? . . . “And for that matter, all masturbatory emissions where his sperm were clearly not seeking an egg were reckless abandonment.”
Who knew Elie Woods would be so timely 11 years later?
February 10th, 2012 at 1:23 am
@YellowJournalism:
A vibrator as assault with a deadly weapon—hahahahahahahahahaha
February 10th, 2012 at 2:04 am
@Mnemosyne:
Never heard that one before – the story is pretty clear as to why he had to die:
Genesis 38: 8 Then Judah said to Onan, “Sleep with your brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to raise up offspring for your brother.” 9 But Onan knew that the child would not be his; so whenever he slept with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from providing offspring for his brother. 10 What he did was wicked in the LORD’s sight; so the LORD put him to death also.
February 10th, 2012 at 3:48 am
This Constance Johnson gal’s got SPUNK!!
February 10th, 2012 at 5:05 am
If the GOPers object, Sen. Johnson should quote the Bible at them. (Genesis 38:9-10.) May the heads explode!
February 10th, 2012 at 5:24 am
@Mnemosyne:
Here’s the LOLCat Bible passage in question:
February 10th, 2012 at 7:44 am
@Ms.B: I had the same thought. If anyone wants to see the clip in question, this is a Youtube clip from the movie, but you need to jump ahead to about 9:45.
February 10th, 2012 at 7:55 am
@schlemizel:
You’re right. Contra Mnemosyne, the Genesis story isn’t about Onan’s greed or his trying to keep Er’s property. It’s true that the whole mishigas is about birthright, but Onan’s role in it is incidental.
What I found appalling when I first read the story was how casually All-Smitey god would extinguish his pet monkeys’ lives. He whacked Er because he had been “wicked in the sight of the Lord,” though we never learn what the little wanker had done.
February 10th, 2012 at 8:12 am
Cheeky Senator pulled it out. She should have pushed it harder! Make those jerks stand up for what they believe in.
February 10th, 2012 at 8:16 am
@Arclite: What is it if a man has a wet dream? Manslaughter in the Nth degree?
February 10th, 2012 at 8:35 am
Captain, worry not regarding the misdeeds of my pet monkeys. Trust that those being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it; and all for good cause.
February 10th, 2012 at 8:51 am
@Mnemosyne:
Ahh, but it’s not masturbation if there’s coitus. The Bible isn’t clear on “polishing the bishop”, only on Money Shots (yes, porn actors are in a heap o’ trouble).
The amendment could well be applied on Onanism (coitus interruptus as it were)... but it’ll have to take another section of the Bible if there is one to justify banning “launching the pocket rocket”.
February 10th, 2012 at 8:56 am
@Captain Howdy:
I think it was for double-parking his mule in a handicapped zone.
February 10th, 2012 at 8:58 am
@Mnemosyne:
Also too, the Brick Testament version, in Legos.
February 10th, 2012 at 9:04 am
You can also go the other way: any action in which a woman ovulates or otherwise produces an egg which is not subsequently thereby fertilized but is instead flushed from her body (heretofore this action shall be designated as “the period”) shall be interpreted and construed as an action against an unborn child.In their jihad against the pill they are getting very close to this, no?
February 10th, 2012 at 11:39 am
@schlemizel: gotta love the old testament. where else will you find out that god demands you not only fuck your sister-in-law, but knock her up too?
February 10th, 2012 at 12:00 pm