A controversial six-week abortion ban bill is headed to South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster’s desk to be signed into law after the measure cleared the state Senate Tuesday. The state Senate approved a House-amended version of the bill by a vote of 27-19, after that chamber passed it last week.
A bipartisan group of five women lawmakers in the state Senate banded together to try to stop the bill from passing Tuesday. Republican state Sen. Katrina Shealy, before she voted no, attempted to push through an amendment to change the limit on abortions to 12 weeks, and 20 weeks for victims of rape and incest.
“Men are 100% responsible for pregnancies,” said Shealy, as she introduced her amendment. “Men are fertile 100% of the time. So, it is time for men in this chamber and the ones across that hall and all across the state of South Carolina to take some ejaculation responsibility.”
“It’s time for men in this chamber and the ones across that hall and all across the state of South Carolina, to take some ejaculation responsibility,” South Carolina Sen. Katrina Shealy, R-Lexington, says in her remarks. pic.twitter.com/5o0x4CZFAS
The bill passed despite protest from the Senate's five women. “We in the South Carolina Legislature are not God. We do not know what’s going on in somebody else’s life. We do not have the right to make decisions for someone else," Sen. Katrina Shealy said.https://t.co/GnOxZpnLBW
If you’re a man, who isn’t a physician, you likely know diddly about women’s reproductive system. Women have ALWAYS carried the total responsibility of contraception, pregnancy and all that goes with it, yet it is primarily men making these arbitrary laws governing what women can and cannot do with our bodies, while they accept zero responsibility for the circumstance. All I have to say is, straight men better pray to their Jesus that women never rule because when it happens vasectomy, at the request of the woman, will become LAW. SNIP, SNIP mother Fuckers. Sorry boys, no ill will towards y’all. 😂
If they are going to pass laws prohibiting abortion, I have no problems with a law that requires vasectomy for all men over the age of 16. You can reverse it only upon proof of marriage, and a signed statement from your wife that you are ready and able to raise children. You will have to prove you have the income or assets to provide for your children, and the mental stability etc just like people have to prove for adoption. This will have the added benefit insuring that children have real parents.
Men never understand how difficult and dangerous contraceptive medications are for women. The pills are difficult to manage and are not 100% effective. They also pose risks of breast and uterine cancer and the devices pose risks of infection, sterilization and tubal pregnancy. Women’s choices for contraception all carry significant risks, including invasive surgical procedures. For men a vasectomy is a fast, in office procedure, with minimal risk and usually reversible. But, men don’t want to be bothered or have their potency jeopardized, it’s preferable to let women take 100% of the risk.
Well she definitely has addressed the unmentionable other half of the problem We always point the finger and point AT the pregnancy but never HOW the pregnancy began Oh no the male is always a silent champ
I am an older gay guy in a long-term wonderful relationship. My spouse and I are in our 33rd year together. I love politics and news. I enjoy civil discussions and have no taboo subjects. My pronouns are he / him / his and my email is email@example.com
View all posts by Scotties Playtime
2 thoughts on “South Carolina Republican Rep Calls On Men To Take “Ejaculation Responsibility” In Speech On Abortion Ban”
Unfortunately for Sam Handwich, these same states have already decimated their child&family services (there are many names for the social service agencies in the various states). It is unlikely that there is funding or personnel to help people prove paternity, track down the sperm donor, and then enforce payment of support. By the late 90s, many states began coming after the parent who raised the kids, after the children are raised, recovering the benefit dollars by suing and garnisheeing paychecks of the parent who raised the children alone. I saw one 58 yo woman who worked at Walmart, at Sonic, and at Pizza Hut, who was being dragged into court each month by the state to determine why her garnishments were so small, and how she spent her money. She lived with no TV or telephone, and walked to these jobs because she couldn’t afford gas, tags or insurance for her car. There were several of those cases in 1999 and 2000; after that I had another job.
The rightwing has been working on all this for a long time. It’s been difficult to get people’s attention, though. Also that pesky “welfare queen” frame…