Why isn't Viagra fair game under the Comstock Act?

[tulipsandroses]

RWers want to not only ban abortions, they are coming for birth control. But if birth control is “obscene”, shouldn’t Viagra be considered as well. I mean if this ever becomes a matter for the “originalists”, they should consider that Comstock wanted to ban birth control because he thought it encouraged women to be “lewd, obscene and promiscuous.”
If that’s the rationale, then doesn’t Viagra “encourage” the same behavior?
Birth control is used for reasons other than birth control. Fibroids and PCOS symptoms are often treated with birth control.

I don’t know of any other reason for Viagra other than causing an erection for sex. I’m sure Comstock would find this obscene and lewd.

[Skittles]

1. if it's for men's pleasure

it's a completely different story

you never hear anyone whining that insurance should not cover viagra

[mitch96]

22. Follow the money. This would piss off a lot of wealthy men... nt

[Irish_Dem]

24. Or monitoring viagra use, making doctors turn over viagra records.

Making men jump through a gazillion hoops to get the prescription.

[BOSSHOG]

33. Ok Mr Smith

Prove you can’t get an erection without Viagara. Prove you will only use this product with your spouse, only in the missionary position and for no more than two minutes.

Mr jones you are not married. You can’t get Viagara. Shame on you for asking.

Gentlemen this is what happens when you vote for people who don’t give a fuck about freedom.

[Irish_Dem]

38. Send them to fake viagra clinics.

Where instead of getting viagra prescriptions, they get endless lectures and are shown pictures
of how bad erect penises look. And how immoral viagra is.

[BOSSHOG]

34. Doctors Visit

Prove you can’t get an erection without Viagara. Prove you will only use this product with your spouse, only in the missionary position and for no more than two minutes.

Mr jones you are not married. You can’t get Viagara. Shame on you for asking.

Gentlemen this is what happens when you vote for people who don’t give a fuck about freedom.

[getagrip_already]

42. Many men jump through those hoops to keep their wives from finding out

They don't want their wives to know they are using outside of their bedroom.

That will never be banned.

[Irish_Dem]

43. Men will always get what they want.

They won't be punished.

Men would never tolerate being treated like women are treated.

Men jumping through hoops keeping secrets from their wives to protect
their male vanity is no comparison to women being sent to prison or their deaths.

[louis-t]

44. Insurance. Does. Not. Cover. Viagra.

And Viagra started as a different kind of medication. No time to look it up right now, but it was one of those accidental discoveries, if I'm not mistaken.

[republianmushroom]

52. Some Health Insurance Companies do.

[Skittles]

59. the generic often is

and birth control pills are used for more issues than birth control, but repukes do not care

[chowder66]

2. Patriarchy.

[eppur_se_muova]

3. Dems need to keep citing the Comstock Act as a law that could ban "everything from condoms to Viagra" in the mail.

Not to mention "Men's" magazines, porn, etc.

[TSExile]

5. THIS, THIS, THIS!!

But of course, it'll never happen. Why? It's because men are special and only their pleasure counts. F%#@ the patriarchy!!!

[pnwmom]

4. Very good point! nt

[Silent Type]

6. I bet the majority of Viagra is bought by Incels, ammosexuals, trumpsters, etc. But haven't reviewed stats.

[Celerity]

15. Incels, by nature, don't have intercourse. Why would they be pounding Viagra?

Power wanking?

Walking around with a rigid member in their pants trying to impress the public?



Lord of the Incels

[onenote]

7. Because the Comstock Act specifically mentions abortion.

If it didn't mention abortion, and folks were arguing applied under separate provision relating to "obscene" material, you might have a point. But that provision isn't the one that is being relied on. It is the one that specifically refers to abortion. Specifically, it applies to:
"Every obscene, lewd, lascivious, indecent, filthy or vile article, matter, thing, device, or substance; and--

Every article or thing designed, adapted, or intended for producing abortion, or for any indecent or immoral use; and

Every article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine, or thing which is advertised or described in a manner calculated to lead another to use or apply it for producing abortion, or for any indecent or immoral purpose;

[slightlv]

8. This is just what I've been saying since they drug

the Comstock out of mothballs. It won't make any difference that birth control for women is used for issues beyond pregnancy prevention. After all, we're only women... our "female problems" are beyond belief and understanding for these men.

However, there is absolutely no reason why Viagra and Cialis is not fair game. Behind the Comstock Act is religious puritanism that sees ALL sex -- even that which produces an heir -- to be sinful. That's on the part of both male and female. I would expect not only Viagra, et al, but also penile implants, and everything else that has to do with sex to be considered illegal under this act.

And if it's not... well, we'll damn well see that it is. If they try to do a carve out, that's going to be so freaking obvious, that it will call for boycotts of anyone selling any form of male sex help, as well as marches every month, if not every week, about the blatant discrimination.

Lysistrata had one way of dealing with war and things of men... cut our sex for the men... period. Turning the Comstock Act on its side and demanding what's good for the goose is good for gander only makes sense, and is something that even the dumbest magat can understand. After all, do THEIR men want to go without sex?

The only downside I can see to this is the possibility of more attempted rape, as men can go without (or so I've been told). Once men start having their own sexuality restricted, we might well see things like the Comstock Act, female birthing slavery, etc., go the way of prohibition. After all, it is religion that is behind all this. THEIR religion... not ours!

[littlemissmartypants]

9. As long as rape is an option for these a holes "Lysistrata" will never work.

It's a great play though.

The real issue here is power and control. Denying women bodily autonomy is the result.

[Irish_Dem]

27. I think Lysistrata might work to some extent.

At least it would get the attention of men.
They might notice they are sleeping on the couch.

[raging moderate]

30. No. Most men do not sleep on the couch.

In most homes, it is the woman who is driven out of the bedroom.

[Irish_Dem]

31. So they create their own Lysistrata.

Maybe they will notice they are sleeping alone.

[onenote]

36. You should read the Comstock Act. It specifically mentions abortion. Viagra and Cialis don't cause abortions.

If folks were arguing that the Comstock Act applied to the morning after pill because it was an "obscene" article you might have a point. But that provision of the Comstock Act isn't the one that is being relied on. It is the one that expressly refers to abortion. Specifically, it applies to:
"Every obscene, lewd, lascivious, indecent, filthy or vile article, matter, thing, device, or substance; and--
Every article or thing designed, adapted, or intended for producing abortion, or for any indecent or immoral use; and
Every article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine, or thing which is advertised or described in a manner calculated to lead another to use or apply it for producing abortion, or for any indecent or immoral purpose."

[Irish_Dem]

40. We are not legal experts arguing the law.

This is the court of public opinion.

We are women arguing about the hypocrisy, patriarchy, and misogyny.

We are arguing the double standard, attack on women, women as subhumans.

If you wish an educated, erudite, legal argument that can be presented to a high court,
it most likely will not be found here.

All the mansplaining in the entire world will not change our minds one iota.

Pets and livestock get better treatment and medical care than American women.

We are fighting for our lives. Not pretending this has anything to do with legit legal issues.

[tulipsandroses]

47. Were they not people who were prosecuted for other " obscenities" in the past?

So therein lies my question.

[emulatorloo]

51. Thank you.

As I note below Viagra is most analogous to topical estrogen, which post menopausal women use to treat vaginal atrophy, obviously neither are birth control and neither are comparable to abortion.

Every time DU’ers bring up this false analogy they believe it is an effective argument. But it is not in any way shape or for effective or logical. There are much more effective ways to argue for full reproductive rights/abortion rights than false analogies.

Expect to be castigated for being fact based.

[The Roux Comes First]

10. Excellent Point!

The man was so determined to interfere in all aspects of sexuality that he would have had to weigh in on that little blue pill!

As I posted elsewhere here, "The Man Who Hated Women" should be in wide circulation these days but alas copies are scarce.

[In It to Win It]

11. Condoms too

[onenote]

37. Condoms don't have anything to do with terminating a pregnancy.

The provision of the Comstock Act that is being cited by the anti-abortion is the provision that expressly talks about abortion.

Fortunately, we don't have to mis-read the statute to argue against its application to mifepristone. The better argument is that it only applies to the mailing, etc of drugs that are used unlawfully.

[In It to Win It]

49. I get that part but isn't the Democratic message also that the GOP are coming after contraception

If I recall Comstock correctly, it applies to “obscene” things like abortifacients, contraception, sex toys, etc. Correct me if I’m wrong on that.

My point is moreso that Comstock can be used more broadly than targeting abortion. If the message is expanded to Viagra, it could to apply to condoms as well. Condoms probably hit “closer to home” for men than Viagra.

[Maraya1969]

12. Yes it should. And if they continue to say life begins at conception then they need to start charging

the men with child support from the moment of conception.

[BigmanPigman]

13. I think that was the winning argument

from the film Legally Blonde.

?si=bmhDpltBhoQunFJA

There is a double standard since men are the ones who make the rules and enforce the laws and have for thousands of years and they intend to keep it that way. "Might is right" as far as they are concerned. Men continue to think like cave men dragging their knuckles and pounding their chests.

I was watching Murphy Brown and an episode showed how even liberal men are pigs, they know they are pigs and they intend to remain pigs because "that is what manly men do".

They know have it made in the shade and they know it is NOT fair but they are going to continue to do the same thing for thousands of more years. Why not? Really, why not?

This is one reason my name on DU is Bigman Pigman.

[malaise]

21. An excellent post

Rec

[BWdem4life]

14. Not to mention it's unlikely to be procreative sex. n/t

[SamKnause]

16. Simple explanation:

Men having sex=good

Women having sex=bad

[raccoon]

17. Right you are. But if the women aren't supposed to have sex, who are the men going to have sex with?

[SamKnause]

18. They never explain that part.

[Irish_Dem]

28. Women can have sex with men, but they will be severely punished for it.

Death, prison, torture.
That'll teach women.

[intheflow]

48. Women aren't supposed to enjoy it.

Only penises have the right to pleasure and they’ll take that right forcefully because vaginas and the people who have them only exist for male pleasure and egotism (spreading genes).

[Lonestarblue]

19. Republicans can use the Comstock Act to ban all sorts of things.

Moms for Liberty claimed that the statue of David was obscene and should not be in any books for school kids. Republicans see the human body as obscene, so does that mean that no biology books can be sent to schools? Any mention of LGBTQ+ is considered obscene, so no books or art or anything about them can be sent to schools or to libraries or to bookstores.

I think we are being naive if we believe that Republicans would stop at abortion if they regain the presidency and control of Congress. They are extremist in every way now, and the Christian Nationalists would use the Comstock Act in every way possible to enforce their religious beliefs. Unfortunately, this Supreme Court would support them.

[malaise]

20. Hmmmmmmmm

I’jj take patriarchy for a true daily double.😂

[Irish_Dem]

23. Because men scream bloody murder when you even mention viagra

and taking it away.

They are furious and claim sexual pleasure is a basic right.

Of course, women getting emergency medical treatment is not a right.
And sending women who travel to anther state for healthcare to prison is just fine.

But don't take away their viagra.

Total hypocrisy.

[Scrivener7]

46. OR they say, "Lots of women like Viagra too!" As if the vast majority men weren't completely

dependent on birth control to maintain sanity in their lives. So the argument that "Lots of men like birth control too!" somehow isn't convincing enough to save women from gestational slavery, though "Lots of women like Viagra too!" IS convincing enough to save men from lack of stiffies.

[Irish_Dem]

25. If we could link viagra and abortion laws, abortion would be permanently legal immediately.

[eShirl]

26. What's wrong with being "lewd, obscene and promiscuous?"

Are they saying people shouldn't be like Trump?

[Irish_Dem]

29. Trump has total permanent immunity from all laws, rules, norms, traditions, agreements.

He's special.

[Conjuay]

32. Actually, Viagra was developed as a cardiology medication

Once in trials they realized what a Cash cow they had.
It was designed to improve circulation, and boy, it's done that.

[Irish_Dem]

41. Abortion must not be a cash cow for our oligarch overlords.

Or it would be available on demand 24/7 everywhere, no questions asked.

[Voltaire2]

35. Because it's not porn or birth control.

Comstock is a horrible law, a law that to our party’s shame was never repealed while we controlled Congress, but it clearly does not apply to viagra.

[onenote]

39. And, moreover, no one is relying on those portions of the Comstock Act that go beyond abortion.

The Act applies to "every article or thing designed, adapted, or intended for producing abortion, or for any indecent or immoral use."

Arguing that the first clause applies to mifepristone doesn't impact how the second clause is interpreted, and no one is arguing that the second clause is relevant to the application of the law to mifepristone.

[Scrivener7]

45. You know why.

And it amuses me to see the posts in this thread that parse the particulars of the law to show that all is well, there is a good reason why Viagra is not implicated.

Do those people think if republiQans wanted Viagra to be covered by the law, they would not make up a way for it to be covered under the law? I just can't believe some people here are still arguing that this is an issue of actual laws and not people just fucking with laws and twisting them for their own purposes.

[emulatorloo]

50. Because Viagra isn't birth control? It is analogous to topical estrogen,

which menopausal women use to treat vaginal
atrophy. Are Republicans going after vaginal
atrophy meds yet? I guess I would not be surprised if they were.

[Kaleva]

53. Too many women love Viagra for that to happen

[Scrivener7]

60. See post 46.

[muriel_volestrangler]

54. Has a right-winger said that Viagra *isn't* "fair game"?

I don't think it's an argument worth having - the fundamentalists would happily ban carriage of Viagra too if it meant they could ban drugs and tools for abortion, and birth control. After all, they're happy to ban IVF to justify their complete ban on abortion. Don't expect them to say "but this is popular".

[Model35mech]

55. It's all a matter of picking definitions.

Pregnancy isn't a condition of physiological dysfunction and so isn't an illness. Rather, abortion is the "m" word as it applies to what they call persons. At least until they are associated with the reproductive organs of their mistresses and teenage daughters.

Erectile Dysfunction, well there, it's in-the-name, so E.D. meets the traditional definition of pathology and requires treatment to restore function, or is that FUNction?

Once your sex partner adapts to such dysfunction, most of the shame and embarrassment of dysFUNction dissipates as nature's path leads to alternative sources of pleasuring for all.

We are after all primates. And our early primate ancestors apparently evolved those alternatives before humans existed. Now, humans, our primate relatives, as well as dogs and pigs have given different meanings to rubbing-it-in.

[BlueTsunami2018]

56. Because it promotes "life" and the ability to create it.

Birth control thwarts life.

C’mon now.

[senseandsensibility]

57. Because white males want to use it

It's as simple as that.

[Bettie]

58. Because men's boners

are sacred and need to be protected.

Women, on the other hand, need to be regulated as harshly as possible in every way possible, because, um, "original sin" or some such nonsense.