NYT Editorial: Republicans Want to Punish Women for Having Sex

At the end of the proverbial day, politics is all about connecting dots. That is to say, politics is about connecting the policies of a political party, for example, to voters — and ultimately to votes. Yep, it’s all about connecting dots to the ballot box, gang. Always has been; always will be.


Understanding the differences between how conservatives connect dots and how liberals connect dots goes a long way toward understanding the differences between not only how the polar opposites view themselves and their policies, but also how they view their respective supporters.

Generally, while conservative dot-connecting is based on facts, data, logic, common sense, or history, liberal dot-connecting is based mostly on emotion — and manipulation of the left’s power base through a variety of methods, most notably disingenuousness and outright deception.

So, why the above differences between America’s two major political parties?

If the Democrat Party actually told its supporters the truth, if Democrats ran on facts, they not only would never win the White House again; they’d have a difficult time winning Senate seats in the majority of states, and would likely only win House seats in the most radical of congressional districts.

Now, the issue at hand: on-demand abortion, the U.S. Constitution, the Supreme Court, the overturn of Roe v. Wade, and the left’s predictable histrionic meltdown in the aftermath of the Roe overturn.

Speaking of histrionic meltdowns in the aftermath of Roe, New York Times editorial board member Mara Gay in a Saturday editorial declared, completely devoid of reality:

Republicans want to punish women for having sex.

Who knew? The last time I checked, lefties like Rosie O’Donnell have announced that they are going on a sex strike against men who refuse to get a vasectomy until Roe is overturned — and Rosie is a lesbian.


Back to terribly misguided and woefully misinformed Mara Gay.

In her editorial, titled “The Republican War on Sex,” Gay wrote that while she wants to one day become a mother, she now has sex “just for fun” because she likes it. “Sex is fun,” she declared; all of which is a universal view held by most people. Predictably, Gay uses her “Sex is fun” declaration as a platform from which to dive into dot-connecting absurdity.

“For the puritanical tyrants seeking to control our bodies, that’s a problem,” Gay wrote. Really? While I am a constitutional conservative, I am not only not a puritanical tyrant; I really enjoy— oh, never mind, you get the point. And on Gay spewed:

This radical minority, including the right-wing faction on the Supreme Court, probably won’t stop at banning abortion. If we take Justice Clarence Thomas at his word — and there’s no reason not to — the right to contraception could be the next to fall.

Why? Because many in this movement are animated by an insatiable desire to punish women who have sex on our own terms and enjoy it.

How do I say this tactfully? What a complete crock of crap. Zero basis in fact; instead laden with irrational emotional dot-connecting that could not be further from the truth. I know oodles of conservatives, many of them on a personal basis, Ms. Gay, and I am unaware of even one of them with an “insatiable desire to punish women who have sex on [our] own terms and enjoy it.”


However, the strong majority of those conservatives — men and women alike — are opposed to on-demand abortion used as birth control, now including abortion [murder] up until the moment of birth.

Ray ridiculously continued making up crap as she went. (Emphasis mine):

A radical minority of Americans wants to make an example of women who have sex outside marriage, women who compete with men in the workplace, women who are independent and who cannot be controlled.

That’s part of why birth control is likely their next target. That’s why the same movement that claims to care about babies is so uninterested in the health and lives of the people who bring them into this world, and so hostile to the policies that would support those children and their families after they are born.

Let’s see: No, no, no, and no. We radical Americans do care about babies — including unborn babies who are murdered — and we do care about the health and lives of “people who bring them into this world,” (Is she avoiding the dreaded “W” word? Probably not a biologist) and we do support all children and their families, regardless of when any child is born.

Gay repeatedly boasted about how she practices safe sex, as if the universally responsible practice somehow qualifies her to spew made-up nonsense and connect dots that are simply not connectible.

One reason I practice safe sex is thanks to that comprehensive, humane sex education. Another is the basic self-respect that comes from growing up in an America that, while imperfect, has come to view women as equal citizens and human beings.

It’s clear that a radical minority in the United States — from the right-wing zealots on the Supreme Court to a group of sexually illiterate politicians who clearly weren’t paying attention in health class — sees us differently.


Those right-wing zealots, Gay failed to say — because she is incapable of understanding it — Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett corrected the Court’s incorrect 1973 majority opinion that abortion, even as so-called women’s health care, is (was) a constitutional right. It was never intended to be protected by the Constitution.

With the overturn of Roe, health care issues, including abortion, have been properly returned to the states, where state officials, elected by the residents of each state, are vested with the authority to make such decisions. Leftists like Mara Gay refuse to accept reality because they are willfully uninformed, based solely on their selfish desire to abort (kill) “inconvenient” babies at will. Heady stuff, but true.

Just for grins, here’s a bit more of Mara Gay’s rambling nonsense:

This movement has relegated the women of this country to second-class citizenship, stripped us of autonomy over our own bodies and denied us essential health care.

Now the people behind it are betting that our sense of hopelessness will paralyze us, allowing them to carry out their repressed vision of America without resistance.

But there are more of us than there are of them. That’s especially true if American men recognize that their way of life is also under attack. Men also have sex for pleasure. This is not just a women’s issue.

Ironically, Gay’s last sentence — “This is not just a women’s issue” — could not be more true.


The bottom line:

The sanctity of life is a moral issue. Moral issues are not the sole property of women. What could be more immoral than murdering a healthy, full-term little boy or girl, minutes before he or she would morally enter the world and all that his or her emergence entails? On that point, moral men and women agree.

Sex for pleasure is universal, Ms. Gay; gender is irrelevant.

The on-demand killing of the most helpless among us is not.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos