PA State Representative Chris Rabb (D-Philadelphia) announced new legislation that would require men to receive a vasectomy as a form of birth control. The bill, if passed, would require men in Pennsylvania to receive a vasectomy within 6 weeks of their third child being born or upon their 40th birthday.

Though this is obscene enough, it gets worse.

A reward will also be offered to the sum of $10,000 for reporting someone who has not complied with the mandate.

In his memo, Rep. Rabb states: “In order to improve public health outcomes and release sweet justice into our households and bedrooms, we must wrap our love of individual liberty in the moral imperative of greater personal responsibility and acknowledge men’s essential role in procreation. Further, this legislation will allow Pennsylvanians to take civil action for unwanted pregnancies against inseminators who wrongfully conceive a child with them.”

Suggestions to limit the number of children families have are misguided and morally wrong – one easily thinks of China for its infamous one-child policy. Rep. Rabb’s memo brought an onslaught of uproar from citizens appalled by the suggestion as well as reminders of the Nazi-forced sterilizations that occurred during World War II.

Rabb is not the first elected official that has introduced the idea of mandatory vasectomies, as Alabama State Representative Rolanda Hollis introduced similar legislation earlier this year in her state that made it to committee. The bill she introduced, though similar, would require mandatory vasectomies for men shortly after their 50th birthday rather than Rabb’s mandate of the 40th birthday.

The bill, though likely intended as parody but using tax dollars to formally introduce it, is a failed attempt to defend the “my body, my choice” argument, which is of course misguided because there are two bodies, the unborn child has his or her own body and the mother’s body.  

Rep. Rabb chose not to use logical reasoning skills in creating this offensive bill. First, preventing pregnancy is not remotely analogous to ending the life of the preborn child after the child has already been conceived. Second, Rep. Rabb’s bill might have logic if some pro-life legislator had proposed a bill that forced sterilization of women to prevent pregnancy from occurring…but alas, China and U.S. Democrats have been the only sponsors of forced sterilization bills. Finally, Rep. Rabb’s own bill, even if passed, would require sterilization of women as well through operation of the equal protection clause, making the eugenics-pushing founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, proud.

With the Texas Heartbeat law being upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, the pro-life movement is quickly gaining ground in states across the country and the abortion industry is panicking. Rabb’s attempt is just another way that pro-choice lawmakers are trying to counteract pro-life momentum.

Seeing an elected representative suggest that people should be limited to three children enforceable by law should send chills down anyone’s spine. It also begs the question, “does the government have the right to limit family sizes under the U.S. Constitution when life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is protected?” Of course, the answer is no. Yet Rep. Rabb’s commentary indicates he sees no issue with putting population control on the table.

Rep. Rabb’s proposed legislation is quite frankly disgusting and Pennsylvanians should be appalled by his obscenely dark response to the Texas Heartbeat bill. He encourages population control while completely misrepresenting the pro-life movement which is always pro-family.  

Parody or not, it’s disturbing that these anti-family sentiments are planted so deeply within some of our elected representatives. In the meantime, we can look to the overwhelming turnout at the PA March for Life last week and take hope that Pennsylvanians will not tolerate such crass politicking.