At long last, lawmakers have begun asking the difficult questions.

Questions such as: If life begins at conception, and conception requires sperm, and sperm comes from men, then why have men escaped accountability for what can only be described as one of the greatest humanitarian crises in modern history?

For generations, America has looked the other way while millions upon millions of potential children have been denied their opportunity to exist.

Every.

Single.

Day.

I am speaking, of course, about ejaculation.

Recent discussion surrounding Ohio’s proposed legislation regarding non-procreative ejaculation has opened a national conversation that is long overdue. Frankly, it is time. If we are serious people living in a serious nation, we can no longer permit men to recklessly discharge genetic material without first obtaining a notarized Statement of Intent to Create a Child.e

Freedom is important. Personal liberty matters.

But does liberty extend to the careless destruction of what could someday become a fourth-grade soccer player, a dentist, a tax accountant, or the next person to leave an anonymous comment under a Facebook article?

I think not.

Accordingly, I propose the Responsible Ejaculation and Child Preservation Act.

Under this legislation, every male citizen over the age of thirteen will be required to register with the National Potential Persons Database. Before any ejaculation occurs, the citizen must complete Form 69-B, indicating whether fertilization is intended.

Failure to file Form 69-B within thirty days shall constitute negligent destruction of future kindergarteners.

Repeat offenders may face fines, mandatory counseling, and temporary suspension of recreational thoughts.

Naturally, enforcement will require a new federal agency.

The Department of Pre-Crime Sperm Affairs.

Investigators will be equipped with body cameras, clipboards, and an unwavering commitment to protecting children who technically never existed.

Random audits may occur.

Men should expect occasional visits.

“Good evening, sir. We received an anonymous tip that an ejaculation may have occurred on March 17th at approximately 11:43 p.m. We are going to need a witness statement, three references, and access to your search history.”

The innocent have nothing to hide.

Critics will complain this sounds invasive.

Yet I have been assured repeatedly that government involvement in private reproductive decisions is completely reasonable and not invasive at all.

Surely those same principles apply equally here.

Fair is fair.

To further protect the unborn, I propose mandatory GPS tracking of all sperm.

Technology exists.

We put tracking devices on dogs.

We put tracking devices on packages.

We put tracking devices on our phones.

Are we honestly saying potential babies deserve less protection than an Amazon delivery?

Think of the children.

Every sperm should have a chance to fulfill its God-given purpose.

To support enforcement efforts, states may establish Sperm Bounty Programs.

Concerned neighbors can report suspicious activity through the “See Something, Seed Something” hotline.

Rewards will be available for information leading to successful prosecution.

Imagine the possibilities.

A citizen notices unusual behavior.

The curtains are drawn.

The lights are dim.

A romantic comedy is playing.

A report is filed.

Justice is served.

The founding fathers would be proud.

There are economic benefits as well.

Experts estimate the average healthy male produces staggering numbers of sperm throughout his lifetime. If every sperm represents a potential child, the annual loss of future taxpayers reaches levels that should terrify every fiscal conservative in America.

The national debt could be erased.

Social Security could be fully funded.

We are literally flushing economic prosperity down the drain.

Why is nobody talking about this?

Perhaps because powerful interests do not want us asking questions.

Big Tissue.

Big Lotion.

Big Privacy.

The conspiracy runs deep.

Predictably, opponents of my proposal claim that sperm alone cannot create a child.

They point out that conception is biologically more complicated.

They note that reproductive decisions involve complex medical, social, ethical, financial, and personal considerations.

Interesting.

Very interesting.

Those same people become remarkably quiet when women are involved.

Then suddenly nuance disappears.

Complexity vanishes.

Medical realities become talking points.

Personal circumstances become legislative debates.

Private healthcare decisions become campaign slogans.

One moment politicians insist that reproductive biology is simple enough to fit on a bumper sticker.

The next moment they insist my sperm legislation is ridiculous because reproductive biology is actually complicated.

Which is it?

If the government should regulate reproductive outcomes, why stop at women?

Why not monitor every male reproductive decision with equal enthusiasm?

Why not create criminal penalties?

Why not empower neighbors to report one another?

Why not let politicians with absolutely no medical expertise dictate intimate healthcare choices?

After all, we have been told this is perfectly normal.

At this point, the joke probably reveals itself.

The truth is that almost nobody wants lawmakers involved in these decisions when the spotlight is turned around.

The absurdity becomes obvious the moment men are asked to live under the same kind of scrutiny, judgment, regulation, and public debate that women have faced for decades.

The Ohio proposal was satire.

This article is satire.

The policies described here are ridiculous.

That is the point.

Women across America have spent years watching legislatures debate their bodies as though they were public infrastructure projects.

Their pregnancies become political battlegrounds.

Their medical records become talking points.

Their doctors become targets.

Their complications become opportunities for ideological grandstanding.

The people making these decisions are often far removed from the realities of pregnancy, miscarriage, infertility, sexual violence, maternal health, or the countless circumstances that shape reproductive choices.

What sounds absurd when directed at men has often been presented as serious governance when directed at women.

That should trouble every one of us.

You do not have to agree on every policy question surrounding abortion, contraception, IVF, or reproductive healthcare to recognize a simple truth: human beings deserve dignity, privacy, and the right to make deeply personal medical decisions without becoming political props.

The fastest way to expose a bad idea is often to reverse it.

Place someone else in the position of being regulated.

Place someone else’s body under scrutiny.

Place someone else’s healthcare in the hands of politicians.

Suddenly the flaws become impossible to ignore.

So no, I do not actually support a Department of Pre-Crime Sperm Affairs.

I do not support semen surveillance.

I do not support ejaculation permits.

I do not support sperm bounty hunters.

I do not support government ownership of anybody’s reproductive system.

And that, perhaps, is the real punchline.