Female Senator Introduces Ohio Bill That Would Require Men To Prove Erectile Dysfunction By A Sex Partner Before Receiving Viagra To Prove A Point
An Ohio State Senator is turning the tables on men seeking to regulate women’s access to reproductive health. Sen. Nina Turner (D-Cleveland) has introduced legislation regulating men’s access to erectile dysfunction drugs. The Dayton Daily News has the details:
Before getting a prescription for Viagra or other erectile dysfunction drugs, men would have to see a sex therapist, receive a cardiac stress test and get a notarized affidavit signed by a sexual partner affirming impotency, if state Sen. Nina Turner has her way.
The Cleveland Democrat introduced Senate Bill 307 this week.
A critic of efforts to restrict abortion and contraception for women, Turner says she is concerned about men’s reproductive health… Turner said if state policymakers want to legislate women’s health choices through measures such as House Bill 125, known as the ‘Heartbeat bill,’ they should also be able to legislate men’s reproductive health.
Turner’s bill tracks FDA guidelines which recommends doctors determine whether the root cause of men’s sexual disfunction is physical or psychological. She describes her bill as an effort to “legislate it the same way mostly men say they want to legislate a woman’s womb.”
There have been similar efforts in other states. An Illinois bill would require men to watch a “horrific video” on the side effects of Viagra.
In Virginia, Sen. Janet Howell (D) submitted a bill requiring men to undergo a digital rectal exam before recieving a prescription for erectile disfunction drugs.
Conservative commentators such as Sean Hannity have dismissed the comparison, claiming that Viagra — unlike birth control — treats a “medical problem.” Most women, however, use birth control for medical purposes other than family planning.
Response: While I disagree with the ‘War On Women’ that has become a debate topic this year, this response by female politicians is just as wrong and should have been handled differently. Two wrongs don’t make a right and all of this is really childish.
What do you think?
Childish or no, it gets the point across I think.