Sex-selective abortion hypocrisy

The “pro-choice” community was backed into a difficult, and illogical, position last week, a consequence of their own actions. While … Continued

The “pro-choice” community was backed into a difficult, and illogical, position last week, a consequence of their own actions.

While Planned Parenthood claims to oppose gendercide, choosing to abort a baby based on the sex of the unborn child, counselors at its affiliates are actively facilitation the abhorrent practice. Live Action, a pro-life organization, caught at least two different Planned Parenthood clinics on tape promoting sex-selective abortion.

Even worse for the abortion lobby is that at the same time they were trying to spin their way out of being caught supporting the abortion of a fetus solely on the fact that it was female, they were vehemently working to stop legislation in Congress that would ban the practice.

While Planned Parenthood, NARAL Pro-Choice America, and other pro-abortion organizations were able to sway enough Democrats in Congress to defeat the bill, the logic of the pro-choice position was damaged in the process.

The Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act, or PRENDA, would have simply made it illegal to perform or force someone to obtain an abortion because of the sex of the unborn child.

Aborting an unborn baby because he or she is of the “wrong” gender is discrimination plain and simple. In any other area of American society it would be outlawed and disgraced.

But pro-choice hypocrisy abounds.

The contradiction of the pro-choice community on the issue of gendercide was best summed up by President Obama in the official White House statement opposing PRENDA, “The Administration opposes gender discrimination in all forms, but . . . [t]he government should not intrude in medical decisions or private family matters in this way.” So it’s an “acceptable” form of discrimination? Not to the pro-life community.

Writing at the XX Factor blog at Slate, pro-choice advocate Allison Benedikt demonstrated the convoluted logic of those on the pro-choice side who express discomfort with sex-selective abortion:

Benedikt is exactly right. If “these are fetuses with female genitals or male genitals—not little girls and little boys,” why would the pro-choice community condemn sex-selection abortion at all?

The answer exposes the faulty –and deeply tragic –logic of the pro-choice position.

Here is the real problem: “pro-choice” advocates are really pro-abortion. According to their worldview, anything that would restrict any abortion for any reason must be opposed.

The problem with all of this is that sex-selection is a real problem, even in the U.S., and pro-choice advocates know it.

As “pro-choice” feminist author Mara Hvistendahl details in her critically acclaimed book, “Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys Over Girls, and the Consequences of a World Full of Men”:

Hvistendahl concluded that sex-selection worldwide, through a “combination of ultrasound and abortion . . . has claimed over 160 million potential women and girls—in Asia alone.” She noted by comparison, “AIDS has claimed an estimated 25 million people worldwide—a mere fraction of the number of missing females.” Yet, sex-selection “remains mostly invisible.”

She told me when I interviewed her on my radio show that the problem with sex-selection goes far beyond the abortion of girls; the dearth of women in certain to societies can lead to other social ills, including sex trafficking.

Planned Parenthood urges “leaders” to address the “legal, economic, and political conditions” that allow sex-selection abortions to occur. Yet, they oppose a simple bill to outlaw the practice that would shut down the legal, economic, and political conditions that permit gendercide to occur.

But here is the real reason they won’t support any effort to ban the abhorrent practice: As Planned Parenthood states, such a law could lead to “curtailing access to abortion.”

Being “pro-choice” is a policy position that really means you are pro-abortion, where the right to terminate a human life is to be placed as a good above all others, even if it means allowing the intentional discrimination and destruction of women.

Jordan Sekulow is Executive Director of the American Center for Law & Justice and writes for On Faith’s blogging network at the Washington Post. Matthew Clark is an attorney for the ACLJ.

  • MAUREEN DEPENDAHL

    67MILLION LESS RIGHTS FOR WOMEN, CAUSE THEY WERE NOT PERMITTED TO BE BORN!

  • MAUREEN DEPENDAHL

    167 million less rights for women, because they were not aloud to be born!

  • dnice1

    Yes, the pro-choice position is highly inconsistent. The anti-choice position, by contrast, is highly consistent. A doctor performs abortions; a “pro-life” activist murders him. Clinics that are, correctly or not, believed to be performing abortions are torched, bombed; workers and patients are harrassed. Laws are obeyed when they are anti-choice but not otherwise. Yes, I think I understand the authors’ position.

  • trouztrouz

    What a hollow piece. I don’t believe for a second that you really believe the viewpoint that you are espousing; this is just an angle you’re playing to sway morons.

    This proposed legislation against selective abortion is just the tip of the wedge that the right wing want to use to illegalize abortion altogether. Exactly how to do you prove that someone seeking an abortion is doing so becasue they don’t want a girl? And how do you prove that they are seeking an abortion for some other reason? Exactly which reasons should be illegal?

    That’s the problem with all this – we can all agree that there are immoral reasons to get abortions, but should there be illegal reasons? How can you demonstrate someone’s motivations?

    This is just the pro-life movement grasping at straws, and hoping the slope gets slippery.

  • Princess Sheilyia

    This is a scary and cold-blooded world we live in today where babies are slaughtered with out reason or thought. People have become so heartless and unfeeling that they would mutilate a child for a sense of entitlement and convenience. A “choice” is worth a person’s life? How do people turn off that part of their conscience and murder a defenseless baby? Why do we even need to argue for the rights of a child in this country or any country. Killing babies are supposed to uplift and celebrate a women’s rights? I can’t believe that this mind-screwed, barbaric, and butt-backward ritual is still accepted in society. I am astounded at what “people” are willing to do to one another in the name of anything. When will people evolve from eating their own young like wild animals? Peace for all…especially for the babies.

  • AgentFoxMulder

    Thank you for your excellent post Princess. I agree with you 100%.

  • AgentFoxMulder

    I don’t know whether ones motives become obvious at some point during their inquiry into abortion, but the fact that people do choose to abort simply because of gender (as documented by Live Action) should send chills down everyone’s spine.

  • AgentFoxMulder

    If, as you suggest, there were 1 doctor murdered for every abortion we would have run out of doctors a long time ago.

  • Rodger

    There is no right way to do a wrong thing. When abortion is legalized it is futile to try to control the reason for doing the unreasonable.

  • Rodger

    There is no right way to do a wrong thing. When abortion is legalized it is futile to try to control the reason for doing the unreasonable.

  • persiflage

    I can see now that the pro-choice crowd relies overly much on rational thought – they need more drama to make their point. Try taking your cue from the Princess.

  • persiflage

    So it goes in the entire Western World……….what next? Gay marriage??

  • tres6220

    I can see that legislation making it illegal to gender select would be difficult to prove and enforce however if such a case comes clearly apparent wouldn’t you want to stop it….perhaps say just one clinic became focused on such a practice and was sorta making it their specialty. ..wouldn’t such a law prevent that type of practice? ….wouldn’t everyone be for that? Are we just cattle to be bread.and used? Isn’t this whole thing kinda like we are putting ourselves at the same level as simple animals. Isn’t there any dignity in human life?

  • lovessam

    I have never posted before, but this prompted me, especially in light of losing my precious son Sam recently at the age of 20. I have often thought that even though he was a beautiful baby, how I could never have foreseen what a funny, adorable, good-hearted young man he would become. He was unique, as every life is unique and only God himself knows who that soul will grow into. His friends, family, and everyone who met him loved him. Life is a miracle and it starts with the thought in God’s mind. I’m thankful he thought of Sam and I had the joy of raising him and watching him grow. I agree with everything Franklin Graham said. I pray about all these things. Thank you.

  • Larry

    Ban ABORTION!!!!!!

  • Larry

    AMEN.

  • Katie

    If you are a pro-choicer who has never looked into the development of a baby from the moment of conception–Baby Center is one great resource–then you may just be totally misinformed. I cannot understand how, with all of the technology we have available to us, people can still be so unclear about what actually goes on in the womb. Don’t take your cues from your party or some politician, don’t read a pamphlet from your favorite speaker on the subject, look into it for yourself. And not just in one place, find it in many places until you understand what’s true. Many who have simply believed what supports their political position without researching it themselves may be shocked to find out fascinating details about life in the womb.

  • BarJ

    Doctors murder too, they do NOT have to perform the action.

  • Kingofkings1

    Abortin is a practice that society condones with guilt. Sex selective abortion should not be a matter of debate. It is in the same category of decisions such as trying to decide if you should have a bowl of your feces from last night for breakfast.

  • persiflage

    ‘ I can’t believe that this mind-screwed, barbaric, and butt-backward ritual is still accepted in society’

    Abortion is a medical procedure – religious behavior is more likely the ritual you’re referring to.

  • Sandra19

    Actually, it’s the prolife movement that’s backed themselves into a corner. By feigning horror over this supposed epidemic of sex selection abortions in the US (doesn’t exist), they’ve essentially redefined their position. Instead of abortion being wrong, some abortions are more wrong than others. They themselves have created a sliding scale of wrongness when it comes to reasons to abort.

    Not to mention that this entire non-issue is being led by “Lila Rose” and her “Live Action” group. She’s been playing fast and loose with statistics dealing with China and India by insinuating that those statistics refer to the US. According to her sly manipulations, hundreds of millions of female girls have been aborted in the US because of sex selection abortions.

    This is a flat–out lie, and yet she continues to play rhetorical and statistical games in order to make her mindless, ignorant followers believe her.

    When pressed for any kind of evidence for her insinuations, she remains silent (because there is none, and she knows it).

    When people have to rely on dishonesty and deceit in order to push an agenda, there’s a problem. PP relies on dishonesty and deceit, and the prolife movement rely on dishonesty and deceit.

    Women deserve honesty, and it is dishonest to even hint that hundreds of millions of baby girls are missing due to sex selection abortions in the US.

    I can’t take her or her organization seriously because they lie. They’re not to be trusted. They’re incapable of a thoughtful, scholarly look at the abortion industry (because they’re shallow and selfish and attention-seeking before they’re anything else), so they lie and get people ginned up over non-issues.

    But at least we know one true thing about Lila Rose: she believes that some abortions are less wrong than others. Good to know who she really is.

  • Sandra19

    And adoption is not the answer to abortion, yet prolifers always throw adoption up as if it solves the problem of an unwanted pregnancy.

    Prolifers have been in bed with the adoption industry for so long, and there have been too many revelations of how Christian and Catholic CPCs are working as feeder organizations to the adoption industry, that young women reject adoption in lieu of abortion.

    Prolifers should be first and foremost about mothers and children, and not just procuring live babies to feed their adoption agencies.

  • Sandra19

    There are four states that have laws banning sex selection abortion. The women who live in these states are aware of this and obviously could easily circumvent the law.

    That said, statistics do not bear out the notion that sex selection abortion is a common choice in this country. China and India, among other eastern countries, have high rates of sex selection abortions because of their family policies and because of cultural conventions. But creating useless laws in the US won’t impact that one bit.

  • Sandra19

    Why does it matter whether a woman’s reasons are for sex selection, eye color, timing, preserving her bikini bod, or whatever?

    By playing into this hysteria over something that isn’t an issue in the US, you’ve essentially said that abortion is okay for some reasons and not okay for others.

  • Sandra19

    Yes, but those female children were aborted in other countries, and they didn’t have much in the way of rights in those countries to begin with.

    This particular fight needs to be fought in the countries where this is happening, not here. Feigning outrage over this on the internet from the comfort of your American home does not help a single unborn female child in China or India. Not one. Might make you feel important and righteous, but it’s pretty pointless and helps no one in a real way.

  • cricket44

    Asinine post of the day. Actually, physical autonomy for women ought not to be a matter of debate.

  • cricket44

    Why would you assume that pro-choicers are not informed? On the contrary, we seem to have a better grasp of biology than the anti-choice “eggs are people” groups.

    I have been happily pregnant and delivered a child and researched from step one. So, what’s your point? That knowing about fetal development ought to somehow make it okay to take personhood away from women? Okay to force continued gestation and childbirth, with all the risks of both, on the unwilling?

    I don’t think so.

  • cricket44

    Compulsory celibacy for all anti-choice males!

  • cricket44

    My condolences on your loss. Your love of your son does not have bearing on whether others feel they are able to continue their pregnancies, however.

  • cricket44

    “Are we just cattle to be bread.and used?” It is the anti-choice cultists that feel women ought to be bred against their will.

    Either we have physical autonomy or we don’t. If we do not, then we are once again chattel.

  • cricket44

    There are no “babies” killed in an abortion. Please educate yourself better and step away from the hyperbole. Facts make a much better argument.

  • cricket44

    LiveAction demonstrated nothing. You ought to find out the truth behind those so-called expose videos. These groups lie and contort and obfuscate as a matter of course.

  • cricket44

    There is no murder in abortion, barj. You need some facts.

    Brilliant illustration of how the anti-choice cult attracts unbalanced minds, Agent.

  • Sandra19

    If the pro-life stance is that all elective abortion is murder, why are you not fighting to prosecute the murderous women who abort their babies? Why does the pro-life movement practically wet themselves gushing over any post-abortive woman who agrees to express the I-regret-my-abortion message (yet still villify those who won’t)?

    If abortion is murder, then women who’ve aborted are murderers and you should be spreading that message. You can’t have a murder without a perpetrator.

    When you come up with a clear message and when you stop glorifying abortion in the eyes of young girls (who hear that abortion is bad, but you can have one and as long as you say you’re sorry afterwards, no big deal, not even with the people who say it’s so wrong — in other words, they get to eat their cake and have it too) then get back to the rest of us, but right now the message is so all-over-the-map and mixed and actions are speaking far louder than words.

  • Sandra19

    Yes, and if abortion is murder, women who’ve aborted should be charged with the crime of murder and sent to jail (or given a lethal injection).

    Murders don’t happen without murderers. In this situation, you have the original perp. and the hitman (abortion clinic) they hired.

  • Sandra19

    Then insist women who’ve murdered their children by aborting them go to jail for life or get the death sentence, just like we do to other murderers. Murder is murder.

    Fight for that legislation, and I’ll take your “abortion is murder” rhetoric seriously.

  • Sandra19

    Right, Scott, and any murderous woman who’s aborted (murdered) her child should be prosecuted and sentenced accordingly, just like we do with all other murderers.

    Don’t use the word murder unless you’re willing to follow through, okay? Otherwise you’re just a bag of hot air using threatening rhetoric to push your agenda.

  • Sandra19

    Agreed, Scott.

    Abortion is not murder because it’s not against the law.

    And that is why the continued use of the word “murder” in reference to abortion falls on deaf ears.

    Abortion is no more murder than killing innocent civilians during the course of a war is murder.

    If women who abort are murderers, then so are soldiers, police officers and judges and juries and executioners.

    Murder has legal meaning in this country, and, in this country, abortion is not murder.

  • Sandra19

    Okay — so if I blow my neighbor’s head off, and then I repent, I’m not guilty? The law will let me go free — I shouldn’t be prosecuted?

    Logic is obviously not your strong suit.

    If abortion is murder, and women who’ve aborted are murderers, then regardless of how sorry they feel afterwards, they should be arrested, charged, tried and sentenced just as any guy with a gun who blows the head off a 7/11 clerk is.

    Because murder is murder and “I’m sorry” doesn’t get you off the hook.

    Also, Scott — I’m prolife ,and I’m not a feminist.

    I just loathe certain sorts of prolifers — the ones like you who do more harm than good.

  • Sandra19

    Also, if you really believe they are murderers, then you should treat them as such. You wouldn’t allow a man who murders children to baby sit your kids, would you? Then why allow a woman who’s murdered her children to associate with you and your family?

    You can’t blame one woman’s choice (no matter how much she regrets it later) on “feminists”.

    She had the choice, she chose, and she murdered her child. Why wouldn’t she murder yours, too?

    Take your word all the way, Scott — you want to use it to threaten, then show people you mean it, otherwise your words are nothing.

  • Sandra19

    If abortion is cold-blooded murder then all women who’ve had abortions should be treated like the cold-blooded murderers they are.

    You say abortion is cold-blooded murder, done for selfish reasons. Okay. I’m with you.

    I will now refer to all post-abortive women, regardless of how sorry they are afterwards, as cold-blooded killers and treat them as such.

  • Sandra19

    Where did I defend abortion on demand?

    Logic is NOT your strong suit, lol! Nor is honesty, or integrity.

    Oh, wait — so now there’s this “coercion” — what about a murderer who was “coerced” into it by his gangbanger friends? He gets to walk free, too? And the kid raised in organized crime who knew no other way of life — it’s those mobsters and their deceiving lies and influences, right, that made him a cold-blooded hitman?

    Seems like you want to use violent, threatening rhetoric when you’re trying to push an agenda, but you don’t have the backbone or integrity to follow through.

  • Sandra19

    Oh, but wait, Scott…

    Maybe she’s just being “coerced” into the abortion, or maybe she’s just being deceived by those evil “feminists”, therefore we have an extenuating circumstance…

    The problem with prolifers like you is that you talk tough, you like to use threatening rhetoric on the internet, but you don’t really believe in anything at all.

    Start being a decent human being and maybe you’ll make some sense. Stop with the usual LiveAction deceptions and manipulations, and then maybe the prolife point of view would stand a chance.

  • Sandra19

    No, it’s not advocating that abortion should be legal. It’s me advocating for not using counterproductive rhetoric.

    And that’s the problem. You can’t even make a logical argument for using it — you’ve tripped yourself up. Now you have to pretend that there are all these coercive circumstances — how exactly do you prove that in a court of law?

    Stop pushing the murder angle — if it’s murder, it’s murder, and then every woman at a prolife rally with an “I regret my abortion” sign should be treated as the murderous vermin they are.

    If it’s not, it’s not.

  • Katie

    @ Cricket, I’m sorry if you misunderstood me. I did try not to lump anyone together, certainly tried to speak only to those who really are uninformed–obviously not to you. Please don’t try lumping me in with anyone either. But you succeeded in shocking me with your reply.

    @Sandra, good point, perhaps we shall.

    Which reminds me of a woman in Texas who recently mauled her 3 week old son with a sword or something and ate parts of him. Should she be tried and held accountable for her actions? Maybe not everyone thinks she was wrong after some of what I am reading here. Knifed to pieces from within her body or knifed to pieces after he comes out…both are equally as horrible and tragic to me.

  • Sandra19

    So you would then prosecute, try and convict even the women who claim publicly that they regret the murders they committed, right?

    According to you, abortion is murder and women who’ve aborted are murderers. If, after you’ve made abortion a crime, they can prove in a court of law that they were somehow forced or coerced into murdering their children, their sentences may be lighter than cold-blooded women who are ambivalent about the murders they committed.

    Repentance is God’s — they repent and receive forgiveness from God, much like any other murderer who truly regrets his or her violent crimes, but that has no bearing on the criminal charges against them.

    I totally get the concept.

    Seems to me like you don’t get your own, ah, “concept”.

    You want it both ways. You want to snarl “murder”! at people, but you don’t have the stones to call a prolife post-abortive woman a murderer to her face, and to tell her that if you had your way, she’d be tried and convicted as the murderer she is.

  • Sandra19

    Yes, dear.

    Take your “repeating yourself ad infinitum” advice and apply it to yourself.

    Where have I protected my “religion of convenience and the child sacrifices it demands”?

    You’ve been asked several times to substantiate your repeated lies about whether or not I’m prolife, and you haven’t been able to do it.

    Once more: quote me where I’ve advocated for abortion.

    Also, show me where I do not get this concept you speak of…when I pointed out that saying “I’m sorry” doesn’t get you off the hook for murder, you agreed and said that the “I’m sorry” part is about repentance, but that the action is still murder and if abortion was illegal those women should be tried as murderers. Your words, dearie, and they’re still there for anyone to see.

    You’ve lied and backpaddled so many times now, I’m getting dizzy.

    The only thing that’s a certainty here is that you’re a liar and you haven’t the courage to stand by your own words. So you’re a liar and a coward. So typical –you’re a big man on the internet, but a lily-livered loser in real life.

  • Sandra19

    Hmm. Except I don’t advocate for that at all, so you’re lying once again.

  • twmatthews

    Come on Maureen. How many spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) occurred in the same time frame? Or don’t you buy the Christian right’s argument that god controls the development and birth of all children?

  • cricket44

    No such thing, scott. Still haven’t bought that biology book or does it just take too much thinking?

  • cricket44

    “Maybe not everyone thinks she was wrong after some of what I am reading here.”

    Would you care to back up that claim? If you really feel that a less than 12-16 week zygote/embryo/fetus is the same as an actual child, then YOU, personally, ought to never abort. that is the developmental stage of the vast majority of abortions.

    I wasn’t looking to shock you, but it’s nonsensical to try to legalize that a woman *stops* being a person with rights simply because of a fertilized egg or that people who understand that, must not know about fetal development. As I said, quite the other way around.

    Scott, you are blathering, as usual. Your *opinion* of what is “convenience” is irrelevant. Only the woman knows the circumstances of her decision and it is a private one. You have made it quite clear that you are happiest when women are treated as things to be bred, but they aren’t. Personhood is NOT bestowed in the womb, what dreck. If you believe that, don’t ever abort or have sex…so you won’t put a woman in danger of having to abort. Otherwise you are just another mouthy hypocrite.

  • cricket44

    “Otherwise you’re just a bag of hot air using threatening rhetoric to push your agenda.”

    Yes, that’s Scott.

  • cricket44

    “Once you agree to engage in risky behavior, you have abrogated your autonomy and consented to bear the consequences of your actions, up to and including caring for the innocent life your irresponsibility has produced. ”

    Nope. But if you want to lecture men about *their* irresponsibility that leads to women needing to make this choice, please do.

  • cricket44

    Reading with your eyes closed again , Scott.

  • Kingofkings1

    Abortion is murder.
    No matter how much sugar coating you put on a poison, its core is still unhealthy