San Francisco bans city employees from business travel to 22 states with pro-life laws
“Shocking intolerance”
The City of San Francisco has added 22 states with pro-life laws to a blacklist that prevents city employees from traveling to those states using city funds or dealing with businesses based in them.
City Administrator Naomi Kelly issued a memo to department heads and other high-level staffers Tuesday indicating the states had been placed on the city’s blacklist.
The move followed the passage of legislation introduced by Supervisor Vallie Brown this summer that curbs city-funded travel to states that restrict abortion before the viability of the fetus to live outside the womb, which include so-called “fetal heartbeat” laws. The city will also be prohibited from inking new contracts with businesses headquartered in those states.
The 22 “deplorable” states are: Alabama Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, West Virginia and Wisconsin.
The rationale behind the move is astonishing.
“States that are having these horrific bans, I’d like to see them hurt financially,” [San Francisco City Supervisor Vallie] Brown says. “That is a universal language of economic health. If they’re going to put women in a situation that could hurt their economic health — like having children when they’re not ready — then we should hurt their economic health as a state.
The move is being condemned by politicians in Nebraska.
Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse (R) called questioned the wisdom of the blacklist.
“Progressive cancel culture is dumb,” Sasse said in a statement. “Most Nebraskans, like a whole bunch of Californians, are pro-life and want to reflect our pro-science, pro-woman, pro-baby beliefs with common-sense laws. Folks in San Francisco are free to disagree, but it’s childish to try to shut down a big cultural debate.”
…Sasse said that, unlike the San Francisco government, pro-life individuals are willing to listen to people with opposing views.
“Pro-lifers aren’t out to silence the other side — we believe in persuasion,” he said. “San Francisco progressives can throw a tantrum — Nebraskans will continue to act like grownups.”
Nebraska’s governor also essentially deemed this inane directive divisive.
Nebraska Gov. Pete Ricketts responded, “Nebraska is a proudly pro-life state, and this demonstrates shocking intolerance by coastal elites that is divisive to our nation.”
I will simply point out that, despite the feces-ridden streets teeming with discarded syringes and homeless encampments, San Francisco also enjoys a fairly healthy tourist trade. How many more travel bans will the city issue before the “deplorable states” create their own travel and trade blacklists?
Featured image: San Francisco Civic Center BART Station drug users via YouTube.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Selective-Jew… I mean, child, or wicked solution, is a quasi-religious (“ethics”): Pro-Choice, political, social, and economic imperative for progressive liberals, and tolerable by many “good” Americans who “go along to get along”.
I am sure they will be missed.
Can we ban people from California coming to Pennsylvania? Asking for a friend.
They can’t keep needles and feces off the street, or the power on, or enough water, but they can virtue signal!
That sounds like a declaration of war, economic war.
All The Other States Beg California To Add Them To Travel Ban
Notice How Liberalfonia doesn’t ban the power it gets from Ks. YES a plant outside Topeka generates power that goes to Liberlafonia. That way it’s out of sight out of mind for the libs
I guess it’s OK to keep a religious name for a city as long as the Left can turn it into a G-D hating abomination. So many “San”s in California to desecrate.
Perhaps the state should ban power being sent to California.
Great News! I hope my state is on that list!
NO state puts a woman in the position of having a baby she is not ready to have. Birth control has been available in the USA for 5 decades, even to unmarried women. Condoms can be had at any clinic and on any college or high school campus for free. The WOMAN who has unprotected sex puts her own damned self in a position to have a child she isn’t ready for.
Takes two to tangos
Uh huh.
You don’t get out much and dance do you?
I would say a woman and man not ready to have children have options. the onus isn’t only on the woman.
but using abortion for birth control is just horrifying to me.
You, and others, seem to be operating under the false premise that “dating” today is much as it was when we were dating. Sadly, all too often these days young men think that dinner out entitles them to “dessert” and too many young women go along with that. And you are assuming that having sex with someone means that you are a “couple”, when all too often these days that is far from the truth.
It does take two to tango, but much of the time young men consider birth control entirely the province of the woman. It never even crosses their mind that a child might result from their activities.
I was raised in an all-female family (except for Dad.) I have all daughters and all but one of my grandchildren are female. I repeat: ANY woman who does not take care of herself by accessing birth control AND condoms (the pill does not prevent venereal disease) has nobody to blame but herself. Most certainly the state is not to blame.
This video is quite disturbing but informative.
A former abortionist explains the process with depictions of the event at different stages.
Anyone seeking an abortion should be made to view it- along with Congress and judges.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=664&v=CFZDhM5Gwhk
Exactly, Granny. I hear women attempt to make the argument that they need abortion on demand up until the moment of birth because some guys in their hook-up culture refuse to put a raincoat on Willy.
I never thought I’d be having this discussion with someone named Granny.
And they think they’ve just made some sort of killer, impossible-to-refute, rock-solid logical point that pro-life types just won’t be able to argue against.
When in fact they’ve just outed themselves as idiots with poor impulse control who couldn’t reason their way to the bathroom of their own apartments after living there for five years.
Oh, it’s the GUYS who aren’t doing their part to prevent unintended pregnancies. Not the chick who will spread her legs for just anybody damn the consequences. I suppose alcohol and/or drugs had to be involved as when I was in college back in the ’80s the women who bought the feminist lie that women could have casual, emotional-attachment-free sex just like men knew on some level they were lying to themselves. But they were making an important point or something so they were going to make that point even if it required a certain amount of self-medication.
Not my problem. It wasn’t then and it isn’t now. It’s certainly not the child’s problem that he or she was conceived by a stupid woman with no self-control. Not that the guy isn’t blameless, but what she lets someone put inside her body is entirely up to her.
Sounds like “political revenge” -wasn’t that what Newsom was crying about a few weeks ago, when Trump’s EPA cited ‘Frisco with multiple violations of the Clean Water Act….
Lefties, thy name is HYPOCRISY!
San Fran is avoiding Las Vegas? Or does Sin City not really count as part of Nevada?
Ban all travel outside of San Francisco. Build a wall to keep natives home until they start fixing things.
Based on public health issues alone, those states should quarantine San Fran as a destination.
Actually a lot of companies and trade organizations that would like nothing more than to remain apolitical are doing exactly that. Would you want to go to a city where you need to download an app to avoid the feces? Then there are the intertwined problems of drug use (when you’re not avoiding the feces you’re trying not to step on the syringes), and aggressive panhandlers who will turn violent in a heartbeat.
Speaking of the mentally ill, current SF mayor London Breed and her city council apparently have a pathological hatred for the city’s taxpayers, of which there are ever fewer and fewer, and a sick emotional attachment to the maniacs who are driving the city in the gutter. Where they happen to sleep.
If you go to TripAdvisor.com and look up SF hotels the most common theme is “Stay away!.” The hotel itself might be nice inside, but it’s located on skid row. Pretty much the entire city is skid row; after all the street people may be looney tunes but they’re not entirely stupid. They go where the money is, and the tourists have the money.
You can’t even really blame the street people for destroying the city because the insane leftards have invited them to do so. The homeless go into restaurants or cafes and just take over the place. They know the police aren’t going to do anything even after they assault the owners who try to kick them out by themselves when the cops don’t show up.
No sane person would allow entire sectors vital to a city’s economy that they theoretically are in charge of to go down the toilet. But that’s a west coast kali leftist for you. These limousine liberals don’t live with the problems they saddle other people with, which is why the “other people” can’t wait to leave.
I of course am not apolitical and I refuse to spend dime one in SF or for that matter Oakland and a number of other cities in the Bay Area when I visit family. Recall that former mayor Jean Quan allowed violent Occupy Oakland types to vandalize restaurants downtown. This is insane; not only did the business owners have to spend money cleaning up graffiti, cleaning broken glass, and human excrement the rioters would deposit in the doorway areas, people just stopped going downtown for recreational purposes because, would you knowing that the mayor had told the police to stand down and let the rabid dogs run loose? It turned out her husband and daughter were among the occupiers. They were photographed as part of the mob that blockaded the port of Oakland. One of the major sources of revenue for the city, and Quan just let it be shut down, slitting her own throat.
Last year, either the American Medical Association or the American College of Surgeons [both Chicago-based institutions] cancelled their national annual meeting in SF – that’s LOST REVENUE from over 15,000 attendees totaling over $40 million. SF isn’t naming the group – except to say Chicago-based.
So … is this the first of many? Maybe SF likes the homeless and poop in the streets and needles in the streets, but clearly national conventions don’t.
Maybe when Bubonic Plague, typhoid, or typhus breaks out in San Francisco, we can quarantine the whole city so San Franciscans can’t visit anywhere. Also, maybe SF voters will then come to their senses and vote these politicians out of office.
>
(PS n.n’s comments above take a gratuitous slap at Jews, and IMHO should be removed from this comment section.)
Headlines we won’t be reading:
San Francisco bans city employees from business travel on public and private aircraft.
San Francisco bans city employees from using plastic water containers.
San Francisco bans lawns and non-native flora on private and public property.
The next time the “big one” hits the Bay area and SF is begging the nation for help, I hope those 22-states [and I PROUDLY live in one of them] tell SF to go pound sand.
Des Moines will not lose many conventioneers from this. But I know several people who have gone to SF. Seems to me SF has more to lose if these states retailiate and conventions start booking elsewhere.
Certainly seems like an unreasonable restriction on interstate commerce to me. Seems the proper response is for the Federal government to forbid any federal conferences held in states with this type of restriction, and for other state organizations to do likewise.
Darn, North Carolina needs to get going and be banned by mental cases in California.
Leave. California is a lost state to liberalism.
Won’t get better until it gets much worse. So much worse that the idiot liberals finally either vote to change or leave the state.
We really need to build a big brick wall around the state, then fill it with water.
Please! Keep them in SF. We don’t need them here in TX! Keep them!
Someone needs to tell those San Franciscans the secret to conceiving babies. Seems a couple has to do very specific things in order, and conditions have to be right in order for a pregnancy to occur.
There are means, effective to 100%, of preventing conception. All of which are preferable to killing unborn babies.
Great, keep these weirdos out of Mass, we have plenty already.
APPARENTLY SAN FRANCISCO DOESN’T BELIEVE IN STATES RIGHTS OR THE RIGHTS OF THE PEOPLE TO DECIDE THEIR LAWS.
you do realize that as far a I know none of the states on the ban list have sued to try and get the policy overturned, wonder why?
Great! We don’t want them here anyway! Might catch the dumba** disease from them. If killing unborn babies is a prerequisite to be a Kalipornian then good riddance! Maybe the state will fall into the Pacific soon and rid the world of their cancer to humanity. And don’t point your finger at me and say what a terrible thing to say! 60 million babies have died for the liberals ideology! SIXTY MILLION!!! I don’t feel a bit bad about wishing the same on the left.
Just give them another couple of years and they will be required to stay in their own cesspool, I mean state.
The deplorable states must go to national organizations ( e.g. AMA) and, in effect, say they will not support conferences anywhere in CA. This will have the effect of getting other cities in California, like LA, to put pressure on San Francisco.
AGAIN: persecution of “acts of intolerance” with a formal ACT OF INTOLERANCE…
Everyone in the 22 states ought to pay commiefornia back big time by boycotting that state!