<![CDATA[In a shocking statement issued on Sunday, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said women can’t control their libido. Becerra’s statement was issued after a judge halted the Trump administration’s changes to the Obama-era birth control/abortifacient mandate.
Federal regulators are trying to reduce the mandate’s impact on employers.
Becerra’s statement framed his sexism behind support for women. As a male elected official, he was already suspect.
One close observer* noted that Becerra’s statement indicates that he doesn’t believe women can be fully female without sexual intercourse. That same observer was quick to clarify that despite appearances he was certain that Becerra’s support for mandating contraception insurance coverage by employers was in no way related to turning women into prostitutes.
However, that observer said it was clear that Becerra thinks women shouldn’t have financial independence about sex.
What Becerra Said
Here is what Becerra said in response to a judge’s injunction on the Trump administration’s rule:
“The law couldn’t be more clear – employers have no business interfering in women’s healthcare decisions,” California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement Sunday evening. “Today’s court ruling stops another attempt by the Trump Administration to trample on women’s access to basic reproductive care.”
Becerra is clever. He claims to support women against bad employers. But his claims fall apart upon close examination.
Other Reasons Becerra Is Just So Wrong
- Becerra is saying that abstinence is not a viable option for women. How dare he demand that governments push women to poison their bodies?
- A 2011 Guttmacher study found that 86 percent of women use contraceptives primarily for birth control purposes. Becerra’s statement assumes that women need an employer because women a) cannot control their libido and b) must have sexual intercourse in order to fulfill their femininity.
- Prostitutes receive cash for sex. Becerra is clearly intent on forcing businesses to act as legal johns. Instead of cash, businesses will have to pay for employees’ sex through insurance. Becerra should ashamed of treating women in such a callous and dehumanizing fashion.
- Finally, men dominate top executive positions in America. Becerra’s statement and lawsuit are clearly designed to keep women under the thumb of male bosses.
Politicians like Becerra often say that they don’t want to be in people’s bedrooms. So why is he trying to force employers to pay for what happens in bedrooms?
The mandate affects groups like the Little Sisters of the Poor. Why is Becerra telling nuns what to think and do?
The mandate requires coverage of abortion-inducing drugs and devices. Becerra’s sexism means girls will be aborted.
Birth control and abortifacients are available at stores and by government programs. Becerra thinks women can’t figure this out.
By The Way…
This piece’s sarcasm and snark aside, the judge in this case ruled
that states have standing to sue the Trump administration because of the economic impact of the mandate’s partial reversal. Specifically, the states which sued said that women would likely use government programs. Thus, having employers exempt from providing poisonous, abortion-inducing drugs and devices creates more expense for governments.
This would be a fair argument if society had no choice but to fund such programs. Instead, as an allegedly free society of humans – as opposed to children, dogs in heat, or automatons – other choices exist. California could eliminate the programs and save taxpayers money. Religious and secular educators could show how birth control and abortifacients poison women, incentivize sleeping around, separate couples from true unity, and kill babies. Individual citizens could – brace yourself – actually take responsibility for their sexual choices!
Instead, we have this stupid mandate and this stupid lawsuit from California and a bunch of other states. And we wonder why America’s been going down the tubes.
*Me. In this piece.]]>