Xavier Becerra, California’s Democratic Attorney General, recently banned state-funded travel to the state of Iowa in response to a new Iowa law that prohibits Medicaid from covering gender transition surgeries.
The website of the California Office of the Attorney General states that with bill AB 1887, enacted in 2016, the California Legislature determined that “California must take action to avoid supporting or financing discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people.” It also decrees: “To that end, AB 1887 prohibits a state agency, department, board, or commission from requiring any state employees, officers, or members to travel to a state that, after June 26, 2015, has enacted a law that (1) has the effect of voiding or repealing existing state or local protections against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. In addition, the law prohibits California from approving a request for state-funded or state-sponsored travel to such a state.” (Italics mine).
Incredibly, Iowa is just one of at least 11 states to which California bans state-sanctioned travel. It is one thing to refuse to discriminate on the basis of gender identity, of which there are two. Neither men nor women should be the victim or beneficiary of discriminatory laws or labor practices. Gender “expression,” however, is in no way a biological or immutable fact. In fact, it is the obverse of race or sex, in that it is totally fungible. A man can claim to be a woman, but that doesn’t make it so-- just as a “honkey” can claim to be an African-American, albeit with no basis in reality. I can claim to be a gerbil or a giraffe, but that simply does not make it so. If a woman with ovaries and a vagina says she is a he, that claim has no more veracity than if Oprah Winfrey attempted to identify as Abraham Lincoln.
When states, nations or societies begin to take these preposterous claims seriously—and sanctimoniously sanctify and sanction them—they are saying that nothing matters, truth is only in the eye of the beholder, there are no absolutes, no constants, nothing real. They are denying physical reality as well as logic and reasoning. They are stripping words—and life—of meaning.
Moreover, if every state acted as California has, the concept and practice of republicanism would be irreparably harmed. I could see Alabama banning state-sponsored travel to California because it is hostile to rednecks. Who could then blame Georgia if it prohibited travel to New York because it is insufficiently welcoming of evangelical Christians? Decent, God-fearing, pro-life states should long ago have put the kibosh on travel to those that have permissive abortion laws. And why should Montana, Wyoming, Texas or even Kentucky put up with the discriminatory—and probably unconstitutional—gun restrictions in place in Washington, D.C., Chicago, and other hotbeds of violent crime? Those states should ban government-sponsored travel to any other state or municipality that infringes on the rights of its citizens in that manner.
The Constitution and the Bill of Rights guarantee Americans freedom of speech and the right to self-defense. They do not guarantee the “right” to pick your own gender.
And the right to life is granted by the same Creator who determines one’s sex.
California's Attorney General can ban his state's public employees from state-funded travel to other states. Ironically, if California doesn't soon dramatically change course, no one from the other 49 states will want to travel to California.
Post a Comment