Planned Parenthood is doing something good for once. It will offer 60 free vasectomies to uninsured men in Missouri next month. It will then provide 40 free vasectomies in Iowa.
Say what you want about Planned Parenthood, but this is a good idea. If more pro-choice and promiscuous men had vasectomies, it would reduce the number of abortions occurring in the United States.
Some men don’t want children, and that is fine. However, if men want to sleep around and have no intention of having children, they should take precautionary measures to prevent the unborn from being killed. Other than abstinence, a vasectomy is the most effective form of male birth control. Vasectomies are more than 99% effective, according to the National Health Service. And it’s often possible to reverse a vasectomy if one changes his mind. By getting vasectomies, men who don’t want children can prevent unintended pregnancies, which can have two unfortunate scenarios.
PARSING THE POLLS: STILL NO EVIDENCE THE DOBBS DECISION IS HELPING DEMOCRATS
The worse scenario of the two is an abortion; 42% of unintended pregnancies in the nation end in abortion, according to the Guttmacher Institute. And 45% of U.S. pregnancies are unintended, according to that same report. Men who don’t want children often encourage their wives, girlfriends, or partners to have an abortion because they don’t want to have a child. The Charlotte Lozier Institute says that anywhere between 30% and 60% of women seeking abortions in the U.S. do so, at least in part, as a pressure put on them by other people, including the father of the unborn child. Some of these men would rather pay an abortionist to put their unborn child to death out of personal convenience.
The other scenario is a child being brought into the world with poor prospects. It’s clearly a better option than abortion. However, some men who don’t want to pay child support or be responsible for a child would prefer an abortion, even if they have to pay several hundred dollars.
Getting vasectomies can help men who don’t want children avoid both scenarios. If states and clinics want to fund this for low-income, uninsured under the guise of abortion reduction, family planning, reproductive freedom, or whatever they want to call it, they should go for it. Not every state can restrict abortion, but they all should try to reduce the demand for it.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Tom Joyce (@TomJoyceSports) is a political reporter for the New Boston Post in Massachusetts.
