To: OddLane
Then hysterectomies for women would be equally as useful, and perhaps even more so, as it would give the woman 100% confidence she wouldn’t get pregnant no matter what.
2 posted on
04/24/2019 12:03:31 PM PDT by
Secret Agent Man
(Gone Galt; Not Averse to Going Bronson.)
To: Secret Agent Man
Why castration? why not a simple vasectomy? female choice, they’ll kill a baby why not cut off a mans balls.. They hate that men have them.
17 posted on
04/24/2019 12:24:40 PM PDT by
Ikeon
(The road to hell is paved with good intentions usually built by angry libs - there any other kind?)
To: Secret Agent Man
Exactly.
If we neuter the men, then the women need to be spayed (I use the animal terms deliberately.)
To: Secret Agent Man
Hysterectomy is so permanent. Do it the Muslim way. Sew the uterus shut.
29 posted on
04/24/2019 1:35:31 PM PDT by
Louis Foxwell
(The denial of the authority of God is the central plank of the Progressive movement.)
To: Secret Agent Man
Yep - would make them “rape-baby proof” in case some men slipped through the cracks....;)
43 posted on
04/25/2019 4:17:51 AM PDT by
trebb
(Don't howl about illegal leeches while not donating to FR - it's hypocritical.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson