Why Are Billion-Dollar Companies Hysterical Over the Texas Pro-Life Law?

COMMENTARY: Businesses are making a lot of money, directly and indirectly, from the availability of the abortion license.

Salesforce logo displayed on a laptop computer
Salesforce logo displayed on a laptop computer (photo: monticello / Shutterstock)

Several high-tech firms strongly oppose Texas’ new pro-life heartbeat law. The Match Group, which owns apps including Match.com and Tinder, announced that it will offer travel assistance to their Texas-based employees who “need to seek care outside Texas.” 

Salesforce, a billion-dollar company, announced that it would assist with relocation for any of its 2,000 Texas-based employees who choose to leave the Lone Star State. I think these companies are driven by more than ideologically driven posturing. I think we are seeing something deeper at work. U.S. society, including the economy, has reorganized itself around the ready availability of abortion. Businesses are making money, directly and indirectly, from the availability of the abortion license. 

Match Group CEO Shar Dubey revealed more than she knew when she stated, “The company generally does not take political stands unless it is relevant to our business.” Of course, abortion is relevant to their business. The Match Group owns both Match.com and Tinder, as well as several others. Match.com presents itself as a tool for finding a lifelong soulmate, whereas Tinder is an unapologetic casual sex app. 

The Sexual Revolutionary ideology teaches that casual sex is a private recreational activity, with no social consequences worth thinking about. Without the ideology of the Sexual Revolution that sex is an entitlement, there would literally be no demand at all for the casual sex apps. Without abortion as a backup plan for contraceptive failure, the demand for sex apps would go down. Simple cause and effect thinking. 

The businesses that are making money from the Sexual Revolution have always been counting on the Sexual State to create the social climate that allows them to thrive. They are upset because the state is no longer protecting them and their profits. 

A defender of the Match Group might claim that these dating apps could make money just on the “marriage market” side of their business. Possibly but not likely. The Sexual Revolution’s toxic ideology has completely disrupted the courtship process. Dating apps have come into existence in part to fill the void that the Sexual Revolution itself created. Let’s be clear: The Match Group is not promoting “love.” It is promoting its own profit. 

Meanwhile, Salesforce,  the billion-dollar sales-management software company with 56,000 employees worldwide, also spoke out against the Texas law. Salesforce announced that it would assist with moving expenses if any of its  Texas-based employees chose to relocate. Commentators have expressed concern that “it’s going to be a real recruitment challenge to get people to move to Texas ... this certainly is a signal, especially to women in leadership, that this might not be the state for them.”

Like Match Group CEO’s Shar Dubey, Salesforce, which recently acquired communications management portal Slack, has revealed more than they probably realized. Some people, men and women alike, may indeed make their job location decisions based on the availability of abortion in case they think they need one. People generally think they need an abortion because they had sex when they were not prepared to deal with one natural consequence of sex, namely a baby. 

When you stop and think about it, this is a very odd thought process. If you don’t want the baby, don’t have sex. Pretty simple cause and effect thinking. If you bang your head against the wall, you get a bruise. You don’t blame the wall, or demand padding on every wall in sight. An intelligent person refrains from banging their head against the wall. Engaging in sexual activity is not a medical necessity for anyone at any time. No one has ever died from not having sex. 

So why don’t people just refrain from having sex if they don’t want the life-creating and life-changing consequences of the sexual act? 

I will give you two reasons. First, we have all been subjected to a staggering amount of “messaging” to convince us that sex without a baby is the norm, while sex with a baby is somehow exceptional. But no amount of propaganda can change the fact that sex frequently does make babies. Every known society has made provision for this connection, by placing various social, cultural, and legal restraints on sexual activity. Our era is the only society in human history that has ever attempted to completely sever this connection between sex and babies. 

The second reason people find it so hard to “just say No” to sex is that sexual activity is addictive. Most adults are aware of this fact, once they think about it. Part of the addictive experience is that we think we’re going to die without the drug or experience that produces the “rush.” But that is our brain tricking us. You won’t actually die. People can live without sex. They do it all the time. 

Thinking you might die without sex is a big red flag for addiction. Organizing your life around being able to get that rush is also a big red flag. 

The Match Group makes money helping its potential customers find that next sexual “high.” Salesforce takes for granted its potential employees want that next sexual “high.” It goes without saying that an unwanted baby messes up that “high.” Without abortion as a backup plan, these companies would have to seriously revise their business plans. Sell something else to someone else. Find someone else to hire. 

And that is why these companies are so upset about the Texas abortion law.