Skip to main content

A Modest Proposal to Clarence Thomas

Dear Justice Thomas:

As you know, several states, newly emboldened by your colleagues’ overruling of Roe v. Wade, are now determined to enact laws defining life as beginning at fertilization — which is to say, at the happy moment when sperm meets egg.

I submit to you that this definition lacks both scope and ambition, and is not at all in keeping with your written concurrence with the majority opinion. While that concurrence is in many ways admirable, you nonetheless appear to place far too much value on the egg, and far too little on the sperm.

Sperm is, after all, the male component of the pregnancy process, and, as such, its rights surely must supersede those of any female component that might emerge later in that process.

Consequently, I feel your concurrence pays insufficient deference to the cornerstone of our culture, male dominance. It fails to grant personhood status to the sperm, despite the sperm’s preeminent standing, both as male and as unborn.

Therefore, in the interest of codifying such standing, I modestly submit that the time has come for the nation to enact a strict set of “Masturbation Acts,” and enforce them vigorously.

A Christian society demands that all sperm be reserved for deposit into a fertile female, willing or not, so that the fittest among them can successfully conquer its target egg. We must affirm, in law, the right of every sperm to compete for the impregnation of at least one egg in its lifetime.

A ban on male masturbation is key to meeting this societal imperative. Men shall be required to account for any and all sperm not currently engaged in egg conquest. Men must also prove that no sperm have been improperly handled or unlawfully discharged.

Under these seminal laws, every act of masturbation shall be considered a crime scene, and every man committing such an act shall be subject to charges of first-degree spermicide. Premeditation is assumed.

Performance of such an act in one’s sleep shall in no way mitigate the charges, since sleep, as is well-known, may be feigned.

Further charges may be codified based on extenuating circumstances. These might include masturbating while under the influence, while driving a motor vehicle, while piloting an aircraft, while operating heavy machinery, or while discharging a firearm. All except the last shall be deemed felonies.

Should you choose to commit to these Masturbation Acts, I am confident you will find many allies, including Justice Alito, a staunch originalist, who will be quick to affirm that nowhere in the Constitution do the Founders mention masturbation. Accordingly, there is no clear reason to believe masturbation to be a constitutionally-protected right.

Each sperm, on the other hand, must be thought of as a life in progress, and as such is endowed with rights that remain inalienable throughout the entirety of the long journey from ejaculation to birth.

At which point, of course, all rights expire.

It has been said that justice is blind. If so, I submit that excessive masturbation is surely the cause. You, sir, are invested with the power to cure this blindness, so that justice can see clearly what must be done in the name of personhood.

It’s time for you, Justice Thomas, to take matters into your own hands.

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

France and Britain Just Gave the Finger to Fascism

There is now ample evidence that people with democratic systems of government actually like them, and would just as soon keep them, flaws and all. There seems to be a strong backlash occurring in several European countries, a trend toward shoring up democracies threatened by toxic authoritarian forces. In Poland last year, then in France and Britain last week, actual voters — as opposed to deeply compromised opinion polls — gave a big middle finger to the fascists in their midst. I don’t pretend to understand the electoral systems of these countries — let alone their political currents — but I’m struck by the apparent connections between different elections in different countries, and what they might be saying to us. I’ve spoken before of Poland , where ten years of vicious minority rule was overturned at the ballot box. A ban on abortion was the galvanizing issue — sound familiar? — and it brought an overwhelming number of voters to the polls, many for the fir
1 comment
Read more

Don’t Let the New York Times Do Your Thinking

  My father would not live any place where the New York Times couldn’t be delivered before 7:00 a.m. To him, the Times was “the newspaper of record,” the keeper of the first drafts of history. It had the reach and the resources to be anywhere history was being made, and the skills to report it accurately. He trusted it more than any other news source, including Walter Cronkite. Like my dad, I grew to associate the Times with serious journalism, the first place one goes for the straight story. Their news was always assumed to be objectively presented, with the facts front-and-center. Their op-ed writers were well-reasoned and erudite, even when I thought they were full of shit. But there was more. The Times became — for me, at least — a sort of guide to critical thinking. It helped teach me, at an impressionable age, to weigh the facts before forming an opinion. And many of my opinions — including deeply-held ones — were formed around facts I might have read
1 comment
Read more

Democrats, Step Away from the Ledge

  Anxiety comes easily to Democrats. We’re highly practiced at perceiving a crisis, wanting to fix it immediately, and being consistently frustrated when we can’t. Democrats understand consequences, which is why we always have plenty to worry about. Republicans don’t give a rat’s ass about consequences — which is, let’s face it, their superpower. I wasn’t intending to write about last Thursday’s debate, mostly because I post on Tuesdays, and this could be old news by the time it gets to you. But then the New York Times weighed in with a wildly disingenuous editorial calling for Joe Biden to drop out of the race, and the rest of the mainstream media piled on. In the Times' not-so-humble opinion, Biden needs to consider “the good of the country,” something their own paper has repeatedly failed to do for almost a decade. And since this is now the crisis du jour for virtually every Democrat who watched that shitshow, I thought I might at l
Post a Comment
Read more