Democratic State Senator Constance Johnson, representing Oklahoma City, has taken an opportunity of her state’s personhood legislation, SB 1433—introduced by Senator Brian Crain (R-Tulsa)—by attaching a satirical amendment defining sperm as sacred. Precious bodily fluids, if you will.
Johnson’s hand-written amendment reads:
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.
Indeed, there are many sheets, rags, carpets, blankets, Kleenex, socks, bathtubs, underwear, towels, stomachs, backs, hair, mouths, buttocks, nostrils, hands, cups, ears, nipples, plates, spoons, forks, rubber gloves, and various other surfaces, both animate and inanimate that have been the receptacles where sperm have gone to die.
As Johnson wrote in an op-ed for The Guardian:
As a woman and a 31-year veteran of the legislative process in Oklahoma, I am increasingly offended by state law trends that solely focus on the female’s role in the reproductive process. With Oklahoma’s new, never-before-experienced Republican majority, we are seeing enactment of more and more measures that adversely affect women and their rights to access safe medical procedures when making reproductive healthcare decisions…
The Personhood bill would potentially allow governmental intrusion into families’ personal lives by policing what happens to a woman’s eggs without any similar thought to what happens to a man’s sperm…
Finally, this amendment seeks to draw humorous attention to the hypocrisy and inconsistency of this proposal – from the Republican perspective of down-sized government and less government intrusion into people’s private affairs.
Well-argued by the State Senator from Oklahoma City, but one final question: would Johnson’s bill, though an exercise in absurdity, govern nocturnal emissions?






February 09, 2012 at 5:00 pm, Maurice Person said:
Just because now one wants to give you a child, you want to make it illegal to masturbate?
February 09, 2012 at 5:17 pm, Mike Lewis said:
Maurice: I don't think you understand the article due to a lack of necessary context. I would recommend reading about this type of "personhood" legislation http://parentsagainstpersonhood.com/resources/what-is-personhood , looking up Oklahoma bill SB 1433, and also ensuring that you understand the use of the word "satirical" in the first paragraph of this article.
February 09, 2012 at 5:21 pm, Maurice Person said:
Mike Lewis I was being facetious, dude Find something useful to do with your time…..smh
February 09, 2012 at 5:29 pm, Mike Lewis said:
It's great news that you really might understand the article, but if your joke involves pretending to think the state senator is unhappy because "no one wants to give [her] a child," then I'm quite sure that no one will get the joke.
February 09, 2012 at 5:30 pm, Maurice Person said:
Mike Lewis I dont even get this website. Is it news, is it comedy?….. Most of the shit they post is just that…shit. Move on bro….
February 09, 2012 at 5:36 pm, Mike Lewis said:
This article deals with an actual issue: one senator's protest (through a satirical amendment that she knows won't pass) of a right-wing bill that could essentially ban abortion. Death and Taxes often describes the news in a comical, informal way, as they do here. Now that I have finished answering your question and SMH, I will move on, according to your request.
February 09, 2012 at 5:32 pm, Ditty Nicolaides said:
Brilliant!
February 09, 2012 at 5:38 pm, Maurice Person said:
Well that just ruined all the fun…..
February 09, 2012 at 7:15 pm, Michael Criger said:
Good job, Senator!
February 09, 2012 at 8:31 pm, Noelle Dalton said:
That's Fuckin AWESOME.
February 11, 2012 at 2:11 am, Heather Harris said:
Love it!
February 16, 2012 at 6:53 pm, Ben Mitchell said:
Absolutely brilliant!
February 23, 2012 at 11:07 pm, Kathleen Huffman said:
Love her!