by Kelvey Vander Hart
While the 2020 Democratic presidential hopefuls are each rushing to be the most pro-abortion candidate in the running for their party’s nomination, former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro has taken it a step further, calling for “reproductive justice” in the first televised debate.
This ideology was stressed in his answer to a question asked by debate moderator Lester Holt:
Holt: Secretary Castro, this one is for you. All of you on stage support a woman’s right to an abortion. You all support some version of a government health-care option. Would your plan cover abortion, Mr. Secretary?
Castro: Yes, it would. I don’t believe only in reproductive freedom. I believe in reproductive justice. And, you know, what that means is that just because a woman — or let’s also not forget someone in the trans community, a trans female, is poor, doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have the right to exercise that right to choose. And so I absolutely would cover the right to have an abortion.
Castro’s answer is so illogical that it begs analysis.
First of all, what does “reproductive justice” mean? If I were to hazard a guess, I think Castro would probably consider New York City’s taxpayer-funded abortions to be a great first step toward this “justice.” If that is the case, we should certainly view it as a great tragedy that spending money on services dedicated to ending the life of a human instead of improving it is now viewed as “justice.”
Secondly, in what world does it make sense to advocate for the “right to choose” for a transgender woman? Let’s not be confused about the point Castro is making here: he is advocating for abortion access for someone who is biologically male yet identifies as a female. Castro wants access to low-cost abortions for someone who will never carry a child.
In the rush to become the most radically pro-abortion candidate in the field, Castro is pushing a radically unscientific platform. I would like to believe that most people, even on the left, realize that abortion access for biological males is a ridiculous policy agenda to push. In reality, it likely won’t be long before every 2020 Democratic candidate is echoing the same talking points.
Photo credit: Gage Skidmore