The Oklahoma legislature has drafted legislation that would introduce a 37-question questionnaire that doctors have to fill out for each patient who comes to them for an abortion. It seems clear that the questionnaire will be a barrier that prevents some women’s access to abortion, creating a situation where they may be forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term.
The stated reason for the questionnaire is that Oklahoma is a pro-life state, and the collection of this information will help the legislature to prevent unwanted pregnancies in the future. Let us accept that the rationale given by the Oklahoma legislature is a sincere one, and that they are really committed to eliminating abortions.
The only way to do this will be to eliminate all unintended pregnancies. I would argue that if the Oklahoma legislature is really committed to the prevention of unwanted pregnancies, they ought to make sure that one of the 37 questions concerns the identity of the father of the unwanted child. Because what we really need to know is: why are men having sex outside of relationships intended for procreation?
Once that information has been collected, future unwanted pregnancies can be avoided entirely, by using one of several means to make sure that the men in question father no more unwanted children. Because without sperm that has made its way into the wrong wombs, there would be no unwanted children.
If we don’t accept the rationale from women that "birth control fails," we ought not to accept it from men either. Thus, men guilty of participating in the moral failure of producing an unwanted child might be presented with several options for ensuring that they don’t repeat this moral failure in the future. The state might present men with a menu of choices, including:
- Only licensing sexual relationships either are intended for the purpose of procreation, or are unable to lead to procreation (marriage in which future children are intended; homosexual relationships; or relationships between men and postmenopausal women).
- Chemical sterilization
- Mechanical sterilization
- Curtailing of the freedom of movement. A man could choose to be relegated to a single-sex environment—a monastic order, for example—to avoid coming into any contact with women.
An opponent of my plan might argue that such unprecedented meddling by the state in private affairs conflicts with every person’s fundamental right to privacy; but they would need to show me where in the Constitution it says that anyone has a right to privacy. The idea that there is no Constitutional right to privacy is one of the most-cited attacks on Roe v. Wade.
An opponent of my plan might argue that such unprecedented meddling by the state impinges upon a person’s fundamental liberties; but all I have done here is to accept their premise, that the right to life of a fetus trumps the liberties of all others, including any supposed liberty that a man might have to have sex with a woman who doesn’t intend to bear a child.
I think my logic is unassailable here; all I have done is accepted the premises of the opposition, but broadened their methods to catch ALL unintended pregnancies before they happen. I don't see how any person of good will who prioritizes eliminating abortions can possibly disagree with my argument.