II. The second opinion on impotence is that this condition is caused exclusively by those permanent disabilities which exist in the copula itself. If the sexual act contains in itself all that is essential to generation, if the copula is _de se apta ad generationem_, prescinding from all antecedent and subsequent, temporary or permanent, obstructions to generation, there is no impotence. In this opinion the woman without ovaries is not impotent, but the vasectomized man is; in the first opinion both the _mulier excisa_ and the vasectomized man are impotent. The second group says the vasectomized man is incapable of performing an act _de se apta ad generationem_ because his semen lacks the essential spermatozoa. If one objects that the spayed woman, who is not impotent according to some moralists that so interpret the decisions of the congregations, lacks the essential ovum, so that she cannot perform an act _de se apta ad generationem_ because she has nothing to generate with, they answer that her copula is _per se apta_, that there happens in it everything which takes place in a copula from which generation actually follows. The vasectomized man cannot go through the form of the act with all the elements which, _so far as the act is concerned_, are required and sufficient for generation because he lacks the spermatozoa, but the _mulier excisa_ can. His inability is intrinsic to the act, it vitiates the very substance of the act; her inability to present ova is not intrinsic to the act, they say. All that is necessary in her case is that she be capable of receiving the semen.