Lee’s resolution also claims that, “Food insecure women with limited socioeconomic resources may be vulnerable to situations such as sex work, transactional sex, and early marriage that put them at risk for HIV, STIs, unplanned pregnancy, and poor reproductive health.”
The resolution goes on to urge Congress to agree on the “disparate impacts of climate change on women,” and demands that Congress use “gender-sensitive frameworks in developing policies to address climate change.”
Lee also concludes that women, who are “often underrepresented in the development and formulation of policy regarding adaptation to climate change,” are without a doubt in the best position to offer policy ideas.
Aside from the general ridiculousness of Lee's resolution, I’m not sure why she is so bothered by the notion of women engaging in “sex work,” or “transactional sex.” From a liberal worldview, what's wrong with "sex work?" In other words, if prostitution is a consensual sexual act between adults, why would a liberal protest? If Ms. Lee objects to prostitution, upon what moral code is she basing her conclusion? GASP!! You mean to tell me that she believes that there's some moral standard we're supposed to abide by when it comes to sexuality?!
The only ones prostituting themselves when it comes to climate change are today’s democrats. They and their Big Green allies have literally reaped billions as the result of their wicked climate policies.
Copyright 2015, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
No comments:
Post a Comment