Freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) used the Bible to make the case for her legislation to cap interest rates Thursday, while also accusing the “religious right” of punishing women and “queer people” and attempting to “outlaw sex.”
What are the details?
Ocasio-Cortez has teamed up with fellow democratic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in proposing the Stop Loan Sharks Act, which would cap credit card interest rates and virtually eliminate payday lending.
To promote the bill, she retweeted a
Vox article outlining the plan with a message that “Usury — aka high interest — happens to be explicitly denounced in the Bible (& many other religions).”
She then mocked Christian legislators, adding, “Looking forward to having the religious right uphold their principles + sign my bill” with a smiling emoji donning a halo.
“Unless of course, they’re only invoking religion to punish women + queer people,” the representative from New York added in a political dig.
Responding to a comment that Sen. Sanders has pushed the legislation for a long time, Ocasio-Cortez wrote with a wink, “Yep! I’m just carrying it in the House and whipping votes there but if Mitch McConnell wants to actually use religious principles for good + reinstate usury laws, he’s more than welcome.”
Ocasio-Cortez also accused “U.S. religious fundamentalists” of trying to
criminalize sexuality they don’t agree with, tweeting Thursday, “Abortion bans aren’t just about controlling women’s bodies. They’re about controlling women’s sexuality. Owning women. From limiting birth control to banning comprehensive sex ed, US religious fundamentalists are working hard to outlaw sex that falls outside their theology.”
Joy Villa accused Ocasio-Cortez of religious bullying with her comments, responding, “Stop your nitpicking and attacks on people’s personal religious beliefs. It’s immature and uneducated. Can you make a point without putting others down?”
It is unclear as to whether or not Rep. Ocasio-Cortez actually read the Vox article regarding her bill, which stated that “Economics 101…would argue that these kinds of regulations will have perverse effects” that would “fatally reduce” the supply of credit.