Overturning Roe should boost domestic supply of infants. Let’s also ban condoms and porn.
Opinion by Rex Huppke, USA TODAY , 5/10/22
ike most wholesome Americans, I’m deeply concerned about our domestic supply of infants. I went shopping for one this weekend and couldn’t find a single store that sells them, leading me to believe that once-great infant distributors like TotMart and Bambinos R Us have been driven out of business by radical leftists.
Clearly, something needs to be done, and it appears the U.S. Supreme Court is on the case, so to speak.
The draft opinion that leaked last week showing a majority of Supreme Court justices are poised to overturn Roe v. Wade included a reference to a 2008 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that said, based on data from 2002, “The domestic supply of infants relinquished at birth or within the first month of life and available to be adopted had become virtually nonexistent.”
Where might one procure an infant?
Concern about infant availability clearly factors into the high court’s current thinking, and it was hinted at in December when Justice Amy Coney Barrett, while hearing arguments over Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban, said she doesn’t see how “pregnancy and then parenthood are all part of the same burden” because adoption is an option.
She said the choice, in her view “would be between, say, the ability to get an abortion at 23 weeks, or the state requiring the woman to go 15, 16 weeks more and then terminate parental rights at the conclusion.”
What’s an additional 15 to 16 weeks of pregnancy when the country’s domestic infant reserves are tapped out?
Now I know the folks who disagree with this argument will claim that, as of 2020, there were more than 400,000 children in foster care in the United States, but that’s just a rumor based on facts from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Let me ask you this: Have you been at home lately watching television and had the sudden urge to add another human baby to your family only to realize you can’t just run to the store and pick one up? Of course you have. And nobody should have to live like that.
Heck, even if there are hundreds of thousands of foster children, don’t Americans deserve the largest selection of infants possible?
GOP now eyeing contraception
The fact is, the Supreme Court ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade may not be good enough to solve the infant supply problem, and I’m happy to see a number of Republican lawmakers gearing up to help out.
Last week, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell told USA TODAY “it’s possible” that his party would pursue a national ban on abortion if Roe is overturned.
Blake Masters, a GOP Senate candidate in Arizona backed by billionaire Peter Thiel, has said that he would like to see Griswold v. Connecticut – the Supreme Court ruling that blocked states from banning contraception – overturned. Before the recent Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee released a statement calling the Griswold ruling “constitutionally unsound.”
Sunday on CNN, Republican Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves wouldn’t rule out banning contraception if Roe were overturned.
Next step: Require a license for sex
While I appreciate these forward-thinking steps to maximize America’s baby production, more can still be done.
I’ve been surprised that the deeply moral Republicans angling to erase women’s reproductive rights have been silent thus far on banning online pornography. I can’t imagine why these predominantly male politicians wouldn’t want to do away with porn they could easily be exposed to on their phones or laptops at any time of the day or night, not that they would ever allow that to happen.
Bottom line: In an infant-crisis situation, the last thing we need are seeds getting spilled.
It’s equally clear that sex should be banned, unless it’s of the baby-producing variety. This can be accomplished through a relatively simple process of forcing all men to lock their penises in steel boxes.
In order to have sex, a couple would procure a copulation license from the state, at which time a key to the man’s steel box would be released and the couple could then engage in procreative intercourse under the watchful eye of a government-appointed monitor and a small but enthusiastic group of “fertility cheerleaders.”
While this may sound slightly onerous, what other options are there? Continue as we have since Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973 and, rather than taking rights away from women in acts of draconian misogyny, actually find ways to better support mothers and ensure that children have access to the best food, education and medicine available?
Hah! I know, it’s almost too ridiculous to imagine.
Now let’s get out there, turn the clocks back 50 years and get the shelves stocked with infants, folks. This is America.
Unfortunately.
Follow USA TODAY columnist Rex Huppke on Twitter @RexHuppke and Facebook: facebook.com/RexIsAJerk
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Overturning Roe should boost domestic supply of infants. Let’s also ban condoms and porn.