Republican Lawmaker Says Pregnant Women Are Just ‘Hosts’

“I understand that they feel like that is their body. I feel like it is a separate — what I call them is, is you’re a ‘host.’”


Once again, a Republican has come up with a bill to decimate women’s rights to their own bodies, this time with the added bonus of comparing women to mere vessels.

Rep. Justin Humphrey (R-Lane) sponsored House Bill 1441, which would prohibit women from getting an abortion without the expressed permission of the father of the fetus. The unconstitutional piece of legislation also requires women to provide his name to her physician and has the power to stop the procedure if the man wanted to contest the claim on the fetus.

Humphrey said the original intention of the bill was to ensure that fathers play a supportive role in the child’s upbringing, starting from conception.

“I was wanting fathers to have to pay child support at the beginning,” he said. However, conveniently, this particular sentiment had no way of finding its way into the proposed law because the specific text was removed from the bill.

The only exceptions to the rule would be if the woman signs a notarized affidavit claiming the father is dead, the child was conceived of “rape or incest” or if her doctor deems her life is in danger from the pregnancy.

Soon enough though, Humphrey came out with his real intentions behind the bill.

“I believe one of the breakdowns in our society is that we have excluded the man out of all of these types of decisions,” he said. “I understand that they feel like that is their (women’s) body. I feel like it is a separate — what I call them is, is you’re a ‘host.’ And you know when you enter into a relationship you’re going to be that host and so, you know, if you pre-know that then take all precautions and don’t get pregnant,” he explained.

“So that’s where I’m at. I’m like, hey, your body is your body and be responsible with it. But after you’re irresponsible then don’t claim, well, I can just go and do this with another body, when you’re the host and you invited that in.”

The United States Supreme Court ruled in 1976 that “spousal consent” requirements are unconstitutional in “Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth.” In 1992, it once again struck down spousal notice requirements in the case of “Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey.”

In spite of these, lawmakers in several states are still in favor of acquiring “spousal consent.”

In 2012, former Alaska Rep. Alan Dick (R-Stony River) said he supported criminalizing women who had abortion without the knowledge of their male partners and also asked for “spousal consent.”

In 2013, Missouri Rep. Keith English (I-Florissant) complained the bill he introduced that would require forced counseling before having an abortion had too many loopholes and it should also have included taking permission from the male partner as well.

The misogynistic bill was thankfully shelved by the Oklahoma Legislature.

“I would say it’s certainly a new low for Oklahoma,” said Amanda Allen, senior state legislative counsel for the Center for Reproductive Rights. “This is, to my mind, a fruitless effort to shame and stigmatize women who are seeking abortion care and it is completely and unequivocally unconstitutional.”












Banner/Thumbnail credit: Reuters

View Comments

Recommended For You