Keep your bills away from my balls.
At least that’s what they’re saying in Georgia, where Rep. Yasmin Neal, D-Riverdale, has introduced a bill to ban vasectomies unless men faced a serious health risk.
Since voluntary sterilization doesn’t cure a man of anything (other than having another mouth to feed), the bill would essentially ban the practice of vasectomies entirely. 
How senseless of a bill is this? Who in their right mind would vote for a law that prevents men from creating any future children?
For that matter, who would pass any law involving men’s testicles, our most sacred treasures?
Nobody. Which is exactly why Rep. Neal proposed this bill.
Republicans in the Georgia Legislature are backing a bill that would outlaw abortions past 20 weeks of pregnancy, the point at which a fetus can feel pain. 
Out of frustration with conservatives’ persistence to regulate women’s reproductive rights, Rep. Neal threw it right back in their faces. 
In a sarcastic statement, Rep. Neal said, “Thousands of children are deprived of birth in this state every year because of the lack of state regulation over vasectomies.”
If abortions deprive children of life, you bet your ass vasectomies do, too. 
No gravy, no baby. 
Rep. Neal has given the public a fresh perspective. How is it OK to repeatedly attempt to legislate women’s bodies but never men’s?
According to society, it’s perfectly acceptable to let a surgeon (or a veterinarian, depending on income) perform a little snippety-snip on the family jewels because a man doesn’t want to have children. 
Obviously, a woman can choose to have her tubes tied in order to prevent conception entirely, but that’s not Neal’s point.
It’s not the government’s place to legislate an individual’s body. Yet, through anti-abortion and anti-drug laws, they attempt to do it everyday.
Nobody loves abortion — not even the most leftist of liberals. Nobody likes to see women abusing the system by using abortion as a regular form of birth control. 
It’s not. It’s a last resort. 
That being said, if we are not going to outlaw the primary forms of birth control (condoms, the pill, etc.), then how is it within the government’s rights to outlaw a secondary or even tertiary method?
The issue of abortion has always been simple to me. Are the people protesting abortion going to help these women raise their children? Of course not — they have their own lives to live. 
If you’re not going to help raise the baby, who are you to decide if a woman has one or not?
Thankfully, I’ve got a solution to this problem. 
Here’s the deal, my right-wing amigos: We will let you outlaw abortion entirely if you promise to accept a modest tax increase, which will go toward providing 18 years of child support to the single mother whom you forced to give birth. 
Deal? I thought so. 
Parker Cramer is a 20-year-old political science junior from Houston. Follow him on Twitter @TDR_pcramer.
 
____
Contact Parker Cramer at [email protected]