-
Generation Unwed Motherhood
June 11, 2012 | 64 comments
-
The Millennial Perspective
May 1, 2012 | 0 comments
-
The Millennial Perspective
April 26, 2012 | 83 comments
-
The Best Last Man Standing
February 15, 2012 | 226 comments
-
Carolina Girl
February 3, 2012 | 30 comments
The Public Policy
Prenatal Nondiscrimination
Pro-choicers put on the spot as never before.
As Christians prepare to celebrate the birth of the most important child in history, pro-life Americans would be wise to renew their emphasis on an element of the abortion debate that strongly favors their side: banning abortions based on the sex or race of the unborn child.
U.S. Rep. Trent Franks, a Republican from Arizona, has filed a bill that would accomplish those ends. The Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act would criminalize sex-selection abortion in the United States, subjecting physicians who perform such abortions to fines and imprisonment for up to five years. Organizations that perform sex-selection abortions would forfeit federal funding under the proposal. Women who seek the abortions would be exempt from prosecution.
The sad irony is that the same technological advances that have bolstered the pro-life cause — ultrasound images — have promulgated sex-selection abortion. Parents may now more easily determine the gender of their unborn child, and opt for an abortion accordingly.
Sex-selection abortion is more prevalent among Americans who originate from countries where the practice is legal. H.R. 3541 outlines the problem:
In a March 2008 report published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Columbia University economists Douglas Almond and Lena Edlund examined the sex ratio of United States-born children and found `evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage’. The data revealed obvious `son preference’ in the form of unnatural sex-ratio imbalances within certain segments of the United States population, primarily those segments tracing their ethnic or cultural origins to countries where sex-selection abortion is prevalent. The evidence strongly suggests that some Americans are exercising sex-selection abortion practices within the United States consistent with discriminatory practices common to their country of origin, or the country to which they trace their ancestry. While sex-selection abortions are more common outside the United States, the evidence reveals that female feticide is also occurring in the United States.
The opportunity for the pro-life cause lies in liberals’ vehement opposition to the sex-selection ban. To maintain a logically coherent argument, pro-choicers must defend sex-selection or race-based abortion. Pro-abortion ideology is rooted in the belief that parents’ wishes — specifically, the mother’s — are the preeminent factor. Equally important is the creed that a fetus isn’t an unborn child, but merely a collection of pre-human matter no more worthy of human dignity than afterbirth.
Based on those assumptions, pro-choicers must regard sex-selection abortion as both legal and morally permissible. Using their own rationale, how is deciding to terminate a pregnancy because the parents believe they have too many children different from terminating a pregnancy because the unborn child is female? If a woman’s choice is most important, and the fetus is not a human being, there is no moral distinction between the two.
That being the case, pro-abortion forces have their hands tied on this issue because an overwhelming majority of Americans oppose sex-selection abortion. A Zogby poll from 2006 put opposition at 86 percent. Just 10 percent of Americans said the practice should be legal.
Most Americans — Vice President Joe Biden being a high-profile exception — have a visceral negative reaction to China’s one-child policy. It’s rare to find a public policy matter today that has so lop-sided a divide.
Yet leftist groups, including Planned Parenthood and NARAL, have blitzed Franks’ bill, calling it an attempt to circumvent access to abortion. “This bill is a cynical and offensive attempt to evoke race and sex discrimination when actually it’s about taking women’s rights away,” said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights.
That argument carries weight with the far-left spectrum of the pro-choice cause, but it won’t fly with the general American public that decidedly supports restrictions on abortion. The logic isn’t even coherent: How is ensuring that more females are born discriminate against women? On the flipside, how does aiding the termination of unborn females help women’s liberation?
Banning sex-selection abortion is an important plank of the pro-life cause that has widespread appeal. Along with state-level laws that mandate parental consent for a minor’s abortion, or require that women be fully informed about their options prior to the procedure, a sex-selection abortion ban carries the support of a majority of Americans.
Pro-choice extremists will continue to oppose a ban — and continue to hurt their cause.
About the Author
David N. Bass is a journalist who writes from the Old North State. Follow him on Twitter.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (87) | Leave a comment
More Articles by David N. Bass
More Articles From The Public Policy
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/12/23/prenatal-nondiscrimination
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
scythe| 12.23.11 @ 6:54AM
"Sex-selection abortion is more prevalent among Americans who originate from countries where the practice is legal. "
More and more we are dealing with people who should NEVER be allowed to become American because their filthy cultures undermine ours and they are swamping the original American culture. Isn't it about time WE had a say about whom WE are forced to live with instead of a Marxist ruling elite importing every weirdo on the planet to effectuate their Global Village as a battering ram for the New World, One World Uber Alles Government?
Rich Birkett | 12.23.11 @ 12:56PM
What "original American culture"? Pre-European indigenous culture, or, European culture? And "Isn't it about time WE had a say about whom WE are forced to live with..."? I'm sure Native Americans ask that question every day.
Al Adab| 12.23.11 @ 2:07PM
See, the Spanish were illegal from the moment they set foot on San Salvador. Si?
facetious font included.
daddio| 12.24.11 @ 10:59PM
There are no native Americans. Even they came from somewhere else.
Rich Birkett | 12.25.11 @ 1:10PM
True. They came from Asia. But they were here first by 10,000 years.
Dai Alanye | 12.26.11 @ 11:22AM
Who came first is a pointless argument, especially since there is good reason to believe a Polynesian type of people landed in North American prior to the Northern Asian types whom we refer to as Indians.
There is no significant part of the world that hasn't seen waves of colonization by different peoples, often with the late-comers ending up dominant.
Should Have Impeached| 12.26.11 @ 6:51PM
Despite what many think, there IS an identifiable "American culture". It began with the founding of this nation. Neither pre-European indigenous, nor strictly European. It's something no one else ever constructed. It begins here:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--"
Alan Brooks| 12.25.11 @ 2:32AM
"As Christians prepare to celebrate the birth of the most important child in history"
Isaac Newton.
Nemo| 12.23.11 @ 7:25AM
1) Facts please: which are the cocountries which practice sec-selected abortion?
2) A horrible thought: Are parents who murder their children because they are of inconvenient sex people we want breeding here anyway?
Darin| 12.23.11 @ 7:35AM
China is the main culprit. The one-child policy has led to the killing of unborn girls.
cowgirl| 12.23.11 @ 8:11AM
Although China and India are the main culprits in sex-selection abortions, the United States has helped finance sex-selection abortions world wide since the inception of Roe v Wade in 1973. The ugly statistic is this - 173 million unborn girl babies have been murdered in the past 4 decades. A little over half of the present-day population of the United States. The havoc that this has reeked on societies in India and China are horrific. Besides the fact that a huge percentage of men in this countries will never be able to marry and have children (there are not enough women) there is another horrific outcome from this barbric practice that is endorsed and loved by the left in this country. Slavery world wide is at about 27 million people. Millions more than were ever enslaved during the Trans Atlantic Slave trade or any other time during the history of mankind. The bulk of this number consists of young girls and young women who are being sold and kidnapped to be used as sex slaves because of the lack of eligibile women for men to marry.
The biggest question I have though is where is Jane Fonda, Gloria Steinem, and Medina Benjamin and the rest of the feminists in this country outrage of this horrific abuse of women.
The answer - they helped caused it and they know that.... Liberialism and feminism is a mental illness and abortion is a barbaric crime.
Al Adab| 12.23.11 @ 12:00PM
Thank you Cowgirl:
Merry Christmas to you and yours.
Tony in Central PA| 12.23.11 @ 3:13PM
One consequence of the Chinese " One Child " policy is the fact that there are tens of millions of unmarriagable males in China, the " bare branches " as they are called. This has a destabilizing effect on a society. The obvious governmental solution to something like this would be to enlarge the military to accomodate most of these males. Some have argued this was the intention all along.
TrueBlue| 12.23.11 @ 4:33PM
Exactly, and what reason could China have for wanting a larger military? The same reason they (and many other societies) have historically used a large overwhelming force for, conquest.
merlin| 12.24.11 @ 9:09AM
A modest proposal:
Mothers on welfare could be taught Chinese and then given (voluntarily at first) to a man or men in China on the condition that he or they would support her well, take care of her children, etc. And in return our debt to China is reduced. While there may be some down side to this plan, it would clearly be a win-win.
1. Men in China will be happier an therefore less bent on world domination.
2. We reduce the number of people on welfare.
3. The children of welfare mothers will be raised in a culture that has a strong work ethic.
I am sure reader of AS can see other advantages.
KyMouse| 12.23.11 @ 12:27PM
Nemo, children whose parents don't want them or can't care for them should be given the opportunity to be adopted by others. Is there any child who doesn't deserve that chance?
Drudge Ette Obama| 12.24.11 @ 8:44AM
Latest Dinner Letter from Obama-Moveon.org-DNC
"Friend --
You may know me as the tall guy who followed Barack everywhere he went.
As the President's body man for the last four years, it's been my privilege to help him with whatever he needs: making sure he's on time, finding some food when we're on the road, or playing a quick game of basketball (he won, mostly).
Of course, this also means I've also eaten many, many meals with him.
So first of all, I just want to say thanks for supporting the Obamas and being part of this campaign. It means a lot, not only to the President, but to all of us who've worked by his side.
Two: I kind of love this "Dinner with Barack and Michelle" contest. You all have to do this.
Get on that here.
You should know this practically never happens.
While Barack wants to do these dinners throughout his campaign, I know that dinner with Barack and Michelle is something that usually only happens with the girls, and no one else.
The fact that this dinner is with the two of them should tell you how much it matters to them to know that you have their backs out there.
I wouldn't let this one get away.
Donate $3 or whatever you can today to automatically be entered to win a spot at dinner for you and a guest:
https://donate.barackobama.com/Barack-and-Michelle
Thanks,
Reggie
Rich Birkett | 12.24.11 @ 4:01PM
Another horrible thought: Are parents, who murder their children because one parent rapes, or is a blood relative of, the other parent, people we want breeding here anyway?
coal carrier| 12.26.11 @ 9:11AM
How many of the 50,000,000 babies that have been butchered since Roe v Wade were the products of incest and rape?
POST American| 12.23.11 @ 7:27AM
"Understand folks, 'Free Trade' , Globalism,
USURY, TREASON and EUGENICS are
always intertwined. ALWAYS."
--It bears constant repitition.
As for this invidious, no doubt Tavistock
and Rockefeller conceived term 'PRO-Choice'---
WHY is there NO 'PRO-Choice' clamor over
the matter of ever more enforced injections
with these outrageously weaponized
vaccines? --one and all manufactured in
RED China ---many cultured in the flesh
of the aborted unborn! (TRUE)
And as for the predicament of pregnancy
---legislate male support liability. This
can be easily established and would take
a whole lot of recklessness off the streets.
Also the Rockefeller-Carnegie-Ford Foundation
funded, Stanford Research and Tavistock
engineered degradation op 'POP' culture
should be exposed and dismantled-----NOW.
And for those who want to live the lifestyle
of the CON-Sumerian media witches who
model this abomination ---they can choose
to have themselves sterilized.
Everyone's happy!
----MATTER SOLVED----
Just a little REALITY CHECK amidst the
verbal throw pillows Luciferian EUGENICS.
Tenn Slim| 12.23.11 @ 8:35AM
"Also the Rockefeller-Carnegie-Ford Foundation
funded, Stanford Research and Tavistock
engineered degradation op 'POP' culture
should be exposed and dismantled-----NOW."
bt
A bit of history research will open the eyes of the US Electorate. Circa 1890 thru 1950, and into the wars of the 60s should take up the rest of the winter.
Folks. The abyss yawns.
Semper Fi
With God all things r possible| 12.28.11 @ 11:30AM
Honestly, your comments are rather like those from a one-year-old child with a four-word vocabulary. Completely unaware of the world around you, you keep using your four words, hoping they'll matter to someone "out there" in the air swirling around your crib. Really.
Surely your dad & mom taught you to carry on a conversation, you know, you listen and respond to what someone else actually says. Why don't you try it? You are capable, I think, of more.
Darin| 12.23.11 @ 7:38AM
A similiar question can be asked with regards to handicapped children. How many unborn children with Downs Syndrome are aborted for that very reason? Sarah Palin was (and still is) viciously attacked because she chose to have Trig knowing he had Downs Syndrome. The left still hasn't gotten over this. When you can justify dehumanizing any unborn child, you can justify dehumanizing them all. The same argument was made to support slavery - "they're not really people."
KyMouse| 12.23.11 @ 12:35PM
As many as nine out of ten babies who are even just suspected of having Down Syndrome are aborted, although many "Down babies" grow up to have productive lives and typically are very loving people.
The March of Dimes established genetic testing centers years ago, and popularized the amniocentesis test that is usually performed in the mid-trimester of pregnancy. It became a search-and-destroy mission for unborn babies found to have some disability.
Tony in Central PA| 12.23.11 @ 3:14PM
I'm a dentist, and some of the happiest patients that I see in my daily work happen to have Downs Syndrome. Seeing them also makes me happy.
Rich Birkett | 12.24.11 @ 4:08PM
Same can be said of the rape and incest exceptions. So, why are so many pro-life candidates, like Gingrich, Romney, Perry, Bachmann and Huntsman, support these exceptions?
coal carrier| 12.26.11 @ 9:12AM
How many of the 50,000,000 babies that have been butchered since Roe v Wade were the products of incest and rape?
Maddox| 12.23.11 @ 8:01AM
What difference does sex make if the aborted "fetus" is not considered a life? These people want it both ways. To argue for choice because life begins at birth but condemn making a choice over sex before birth is absurd. Only in liberal minds can this attempt to control the outcome be justified.
Wayne| 12.23.11 @ 10:49AM
Agreed, it makes no sense. Welcome to the legal system.
POST American| 12.23.11 @ 8:02AM
"Understand folks, even among the
elitist Brahamans, the ultimate duty of
the mature, the aged Brahmin is to
----the UNBORN."
As we write, yes even now, it's a bitterly
cold night across Tibet, Manchuria, North
Korea.
Surely, surely there are wretched,
outcast young women, seeking shelter,
seeking asylum, from the EUGENICS police
of the Globalist created, US taxpayer
underwritten, RED Chinese 'miracle'.
-------------------------SURELY---------------------------
George S| 12.23.11 @ 8:29AM
A large number of Americans oppose same sex marriage but a large number of judges do not. Who ultimately wins?
Rich Birkett | 12.24.11 @ 4:12PM
The problem started when the Supreme Court ruled marriage is a "fundamental right". What were they thinking?
Mac Jehoff| 12.24.11 @ 7:49PM
Hypothetical: Two homosexual men get married in a "same sex" authorised state and indulge in the buggery that seems so natural to them. What would you call their offspring? Arse hole babies?
Tenn Slim| 12.23.11 @ 8:31AM
Eugenics, the forbidden word, is explicit here.
Once the pandoras box of Pre Birth disposal is opened, with all its ramifications, the slippery slope to the early days of Purity Breeding are next.
Folks. This Pro, or Not choice debate, holds a plethora of evils. We, the US Electorate, beseiged with economic failures, and now, the Pro vs Not debated of life itself, need to stop the cycle.
History WILL REPEAT.
Semper Fi
end
Redstateboy| 12.23.11 @ 8:44AM
Interesting... feminist groups supporting the "right" of a woman to terminate the lives of would be women.
and people debate weather Liberalism is a mental disorder?
Controse| 12.23.11 @ 11:14AM
Amen. What a crystal clear example of the Liberalism as mental disorder argument. Of course that old Liberal saw ---those that volunteer to defend our freedom work to destroy our freedom by bleeding our treasury dry leaving little for the unfortunate among us --- is the manifestation of mental illness that threatens us all with destruction not just the unborn fairer sex.
Rich Birkett | 12.24.11 @ 4:16PM
What about conservatives who support the "right" of a woman to terminate in cases of rape and incest. Would that mean Conservatism is a mental disorder, too?
coal carrier| 12.26.11 @ 9:13AM
How many of the 50,000,000 babies that have been butchered since Roe v Wade were the products of incest and rape?
Should Have Impeached| 12.26.11 @ 7:10PM
I just consider them inconsistent. They pick and choose what "circumstance" warrants killing the pre-born. Everyone has their line in the sand, rape and incest is theirs. I guess they don't want to traumatize the mother. The person is rare who says "Everyone has the right to live, no matter how they got here." That's a hard stance to take--especially for a politician.
POST American| 12.23.11 @ 8:47AM
"I pity you without family for what's
coming. The EUGENISTS have it all
planned out. I pity you. In the name
of God, I pity you-----"
And now consider
----the 50 MILLION, and counting, who
are NOT here this Christmas and won't be
there ----when- - - -
Take in, this Christmas, the sobering reality
of the invisible ----and behold the 'HOLLOW COST'
of our Globalist franchise slum 'lifestyle'.
Instead of spoiling one another further with
gadgets and RED China slave wampum
---we might visit the local state retirement
'fac---ILL--'IT'--he' and then the maternity
wards of the unwanted.
Take a quality glance upwards as you leave.
How many aluminum/cadmium
/barium oxide CHEM-trails are
clotting the air----mixing with the FUKISHIMA fallout.
Remembering, CHEM-trials and FUKISHIMA
don't matter -----hardly exist.
------BEHOLD ------BEHOLD
--------the COST of X--speediency
---------the PRICE of 'CON---V---knee---ants'
---------------------BEHOLD!
----------------HUAC/ Nuremberg 2012---------------
------------------------BEHOLD!--------------------------
Purp| 12.23.11 @ 8:51AM
The Tea Party Caved on the Payroll Tax Cut Extension ... hahaha - Wow - how incompetent can the Republicants be? The 2 month extension is paid for - saying otherwise is a Republicant lie. Fees to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae housing underwriting pay for the 2 month extension. That's why it is only 2 months - the Republicants would not agree to tax the millionaires and billionaires to pay for it. Social Security Insurance is not short changed - that's a bald faced Rush Loudmouth lie.
Wayne| 12.23.11 @ 10:47AM
You realize that is was Obama who caved right. He wanted a year extension. You need to get your facts straight.
Purp| 12.23.11 @ 11:45AM
Hahaha - OMG, how wrong you could be - the House Republicans didn't want the extension AT ALL as recent as 2 weeks ago. Wha' happened? The Tea Party could't stand the heat in the kitchen and caved. john boner really pulled it this time.
Wayne| 12.23.11 @ 1:10PM
The house voted for a 12 month extension. The Senate went with 2 months. You not only don't get your facts straight, but like your fearless leader, you sound like a child.
Purp| 12.23.11 @ 1:37PM
The Senate Republicants would only allow for 2 months, remember without their support there is the filibuster, Chuckles, so if you don't like what happened, "Blame Yo'self", you voted for them. The president introduced the year long extension first in September and every Republicant said no and the House was saying no as recent as 2 weeks ago. So THEY caved into the Presidents demands and accepted the extension, 2 months for now, but they'll extend it again in February, 'cause they have no principles, are weaklings that stand for nothing - and the Republicants stand for no tax increase, ever. Ha!
So when you want to discuss facts, try using some, not political spin.
Teaghan| 12.23.11 @ 4:17PM
Sounds like Purp is ODing on MSNBC.
Nick| 12.23.11 @ 1:53PM
Purp-jackass,
Thanks to President Downgrade, the U.S. National Debt just surpassed our G.D.P. (That's Gross National Product, for those of you in Rio Linda.)
How proud you must be!
Bleeding heart liberals, like yourself, are doing everything they can to accelerate this great country's destruction.
Rich Birkett | 12.24.11 @ 4:23PM
I find it odd that Dems think the payroll tax cut is their winning issue. Payroll taxes pay for Social Security, and Social Security is going broke. Would Dems pay for the tax cut by cutting Social Security benefits? Hell no. Repubs have nothing to worry about. Its the Dems who are being irresponsible by adding to the deficit and "kicking the can down the road."
Gene| 12.23.11 @ 10:40AM
Ninety Percent of abortions worldwide are because the fetus is female. It has never ceased to astonish me that many feminists support this as "Choice" when they should be marching in the streets.
Stephen Barlow| 12.25.11 @ 9:11AM
Where do you get your statistics? Of do you just spout ANYTHING someone shouts in your ear?
Wayne| 12.23.11 @ 10:45AM
Wait a minute, if they are not human how can they have sex. Its all very confusing to me.
Should Have Impeached| 12.26.11 @ 7:14PM
Point.
Nina| 12.23.11 @ 11:14AM
Got a chill reading that. I can not imagine deciding the fate of my child's life based on the sex of said child. I understand that the people of China are only allowed one child per family and to carry on the name of the family, help provide when old enough for the family, etc a male is preferrable but that's because the GOVERNMENT has interferred in personal rights. Not that I approve of it in any way.
And that person...Northrup...the name should be
Murder Inc, not REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS!
Again, in the lefties convoluted way of thinking that this impinges on a women's rights to procreate or not....maybe we should get rid of the routine ultrasound exams unless there is a problem that needs to be evaluated....not to determine the sex of the child which is the norm these days.
...where is the wonder and surprise of delivering a healthy baby? So you can get the room prepared in blue or pink?
DaveD| 12.23.11 @ 11:30AM
How do you determine whether the abortion is being done because the child is the "wrong" sex, or because the mother changed her mind about carrying the baby to full term? Since the latter is perfectly legal, only a complete moron would admit to terminating a pregnancy because of sex or race should such a decision become illegal. And isn't making such a decision illegal establishing a "thought crime?"
Far better to prevent ALL abortions than to try to pick away at the problem in this manner.
cicero| 12.23.11 @ 11:56AM
As I have said before, our court system has done more damage tothe fabric of our culture than all other branches of government and political and cultural movements combined. Maybe Newt's "zany" ideas are not so outlandish after all. Once we gave the courts the idea that they were the final arbiters of our laws and culture, the slide began.
Maybe if we could have called the 9 toads on the Supreme Coiurt bench before congress in 1973 to explain what a penumbra had to do with the clear wording of the Constitution, and explain where they found these "rights" that they mystically discovered, we could have spared the lives of a generation.
I am a practicing attorney, and have been for nigh on to 43 years, and I have seen it from the inside. We must continue the fight for America, despite setbacks. We havve history and logic on our side. They have the progressive party, the educational system, and a dumbed down electorate. Heaven help us.
Wayne| 12.23.11 @ 1:11PM
Crazy hearing the pundits defend the court system just to attack Newt.
Rich Birkett | 12.24.11 @ 3:55PM
One of Newt's "zany" ideas is his support of government funding of abortions in cases of rape and incest. Once pro-lifers accept abortion in cases of rape and incest, "the slide" begins.
Stephen Barlow| 12.25.11 @ 9:09AM
The dumbed down electorate is courtesy of post birth abortion agenda's of the RED party that include perpetual war and unfunded education mandates like "no child given a chance"
Rich Birkett | 12.23.11 @ 12:47PM
The pro-life movement has its own selective abortion issues: pro-life candidates and activists who would selectively allow abortion when one parent rapes, or is a blood relative of, the other parent. The exceptions for rape and incest are advocated by top Republican pro-life candidates: Gingrich, Romney, Bachmann, Perry and Huntsman. Gingrich actually favors government funding of abortion in cases of rape and incest. Only Ron Paul and Rick Santorum oppose the exceptions.
Wayne| 12.23.11 @ 1:13PM
Those exceptions are wrong-headed. Its not the child's fault it was conceived during rape or incest. It should not be killed either.
Teaghan| 12.23.11 @ 4:19PM
Absolutely~
Should Have Impeached| 12.26.11 @ 7:19PM
Hear hear!
cicero| 12.23.11 @ 1:13PM
You are either pro-life or you are not. The child is never at fault. To make exceptions is to deny the principle. The candidates make the mistake of trying to appeal to the mythical "undecideds", and the so-called "middle". If we learned nothing else from Reagan, we should have learned to stand on princple. All of his failings came when he tried to "move to the middle". That only works for the Left. If the conservatives candidates stick with principle, the "middles" and "undecideds" will have only two choices. They can vote consservative, and sane goverment, or they can vote progressive, and persnoal polital destruction. Given such a clear choice, even the American public will make the right choice.
Rich Birkett | 12.24.11 @ 4:31PM
By your logic, conservative pro-lifers who make exceptions for rape and incest aren't conservative nor pro-life. Glad to know that Gingrich, Romney, Perry, Bachmann and Huntsman aren't real conservatives nor really pro-life.
Stephen Barlow| 12.25.11 @ 9:07AM
WOW, you are so sure. THe public only does what the advertising tells it to. Haven't you learned ANYTHING from Karl Rove. America DID the right thing and Bush's brother stopped the vote, and Bush's fathers court confirmed him.
The RIGHT thing to do in a compromised election would have been for Florida to vote all over again with fresh ballots.
Brubaker| 12.23.11 @ 1:26PM
If Franks' bill becomes law and sex-selection abortion in the United States is criminalized, how will it be enforced? How, exactly, will doctors or law enforcement know WHY a woman chose to have an abortion? Will abortion of any female fetus be taken as prima facia evidence of sex-selection abortion?
Teaghan| 12.23.11 @ 4:20PM
You can't. So get back in front of the Supremes and reverse this wicked law.
POST American| 12.23.11 @ 9:50PM
---------------------FINAL WORD-----------------------
And even as we write, learning of the
UN's 2009 iNcident in Peru where
400,000 young women were sterilized
'accidentally' via injections.
Look deeper, and discover Peru is
being cultivated and colonized by the
INTER-nationalists as RED China's
beachhead to standardize ---and sterilize
South America.
Set this against the backdrop here
of CHEM-trails, weaponized food,
watr and meds and a fertility rate
that's dwindled to about 10% functional.
Grant you, NONE of this is EVER
presented as an issue worth getting
upset about.
"---NOW is the time to be calling for
the exposure, prosecution, defunding,
expulsion and END of the illegitimate,
undemocratic, PRIVATE EUGENICS
front U.N.."
------SO IT IS-----
-----------------MERRY CHRISTMAS-----------------
Richard Baker| 12.23.11 @ 10:41PM
The abortion murder folks have such a shriveled sense of our uniqueness as human beings that they find anything but "kill them babies" as an imposition on their sick disposition to murder at will. Pray for the shriveled souls of these people. Sex-selection is just a furtherance of this twisted thinking. There will come a day when the Lord will ask them "What were you thinking?"
Rich Birkett | 12.24.11 @ 4:35PM
Are rape and incest exceptions also "a furtherance of this twisted thinking"? Will the Lord ask Gingrich, Romney, Perry, Bachmann and Huntsman "What were you thinking?"
Fredx| 12.24.11 @ 11:11AM
Saying that life begins at conception assumes that the sperm and egg are lifeless, which they are not. Saying that life begins at birth is capricious, because a baby cannot be an amorphous cluster of cells one minute, and a squirming baby the next. As far as selective abortion is concerned, we need to stop discriminating by gender or race, and start relieving the population of liberal democrats.
David| 12.24.11 @ 1:09PM
I do not use the terms "pro-life" and "pro-choice". The issue for everyone should be: Am I "anti-legal abortion" or "pro-legal abortion"?
As always, the leftists play with words and their meanings to win folks to their causes by muddling whatever is at issue.
With regard to abortion, the anti-abortion folks screwed up about 30 years ago. They decided to play the leftists game with words and chose to call themselves "pro-life" because they did not like the being called "ANTI-abortion". Our side did not like the negative connotation of being "ANTI", so we chose to call ourselves "pro-life". In response the left chose to stop calling themselves "pro-abortion" and chose to use the utterly meaningless term "pro-choice" to describe their position. We should have left well enough alone because as it is now, the word "ABORTION" is not used to describe either side.
And, I will puke if anyone one of our candidates starts up the "I will support a constitutional amendment to ban abortion" and challenges every candidate to to the same. Not one candidate ever has done ONE SINGLE THING to get us moving toward such a constitutional amendment in the works. Not even Reagan did anything.
There is one person who I believe may actually work toward it, and that person is Rick Santorum.
Rich Birkett | 12.24.11 @ 4:42PM
How could Gingrich, Romney, Perry, Bachmann and Huntsman support a federal constitutional ban when they support legal abortion in cases of rape and incest?
Stephen Barlow| 12.25.11 @ 9:02AM
pro life means I respect life. If it doesn't breath, it's dead. I don't name My scabs and I wouldn't name a child until it breathes.
Prochoice means I respect your decision. YOU have the right to sin if you choose, and you have the right to the consequences of your actions. But in America, YOU have NO right to limit other's rights to choose.
Wade vs Roe was a compromise decision. CARTOONS have humanoid feature, and they often have more soul than living beings. But erasing them is not a crime. Most American enjoy chicken abortions with their bacon and toast EVERY morning.
I think that the youngest viable date @ which a fetus can survive birth without artificial means should be the 1 week after the termination deadline. Many women don't even know they are pregnant until they have less than a month of the first trimester to make their chioces. And constantly be pummeled by prolifer assaults of guilt and intimidation in this limited time is not fair to either mother or embryo.
I propose a 135 day termination limit. No premmie at this date is viable. it can not live on it's own and has NO right to life.
Foghorn Leghorn| 12.26.11 @ 9:26AM
No, Stephen, most Americans don't eat *fertilized* eggs for breakfast. Regardless, the comparison is false. We do eat fried chicken; it does not then follow that we may eat fried people.
Estella| 12.27.11 @ 8:53PM
I agree, however, the terms should be pro-life, or pro-death...
An unborn child is still a child - and no one has any idea what God's plan for that child is (or would have been).
Interesting - this article greatly downplays the injection of race into this debate. In fact,the author decidedly left out the title of the bill: the Susan B. Anthony and Frederick Douglass Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act. Please consider both perspectives. In any case, abortion stops a beating heart.
http://motherjones.com/politic.....ent-franks
RichTex| 12.24.11 @ 1:40PM
Wait until they discover the gene for homosexuality. After all, we’ve been told for years that homosexuality is innate, so there must be a gene which causes it. Then, we’ll see how many “pre-humans” with the homosexuality gene get aborted. You can be sure that one faction of the leftist coalition will strongly support a ban on abortion in that circumstance, while another faction will just as strongly oppose it.
Rich Birkett | 12.24.11 @ 4:45PM
There is no gay gene. How do we know this? Studies of identical twins show that most gays' identical twin are not gay.
Fearless Bear| 12.24.11 @ 3:00PM
What business is it of Congress to legislate on abortion, one way or another? The privacy guaranteed Americans by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments should not allow such national legislation to be valid. People who consider themselves conservative and then turn around and use the federal law to make decisions for individuals need to reexamine their notion of federalism. I might think this praiseworthy legislation, but I would not push it as federal law. What you can do to others, others can do to you.
LarryInIowa| 12.24.11 @ 3:11PM
Just imagine the fun if a prenatal test for homosexuality is introduced.
Rich Birkett | 12.24.11 @ 4:50PM
Since there is no gay gene, I don't believe a prenatal test for gayness is possible.
POST American| 12.24.11 @ 10:37PM
"I knew a Rockefeller, Nick Rockefeller.
Smart guy. I liked him. One time he said
to me --'Hey, what do ya' think 'Women's
Lib' was all about? --WE created ---WE funded
ALLLL that to get the women into the work
force --cheap labor ---double the tax base
---and DESTROY the family'"
-AARON RUSSO
(Aaron Russo interview online)
"Do you realize, have you ANY consciousness
that they've trained, NOW generations of
women ---to TURN on their offspring.
Have you ANY idea what that's doing ---what
that's DONE ---what that WILL DO to your
culture ---your society ---YOUR SOUL?"
-------------BEYOND NUREMBERG 2012------------
John Kettlewell| 12.24.11 @ 11:20PM
What you posit actually feeds into the Feminist ideals. It will show the need for more egalitarianism, more specifically gender-neutrality, as in elimination of societal roles based on genitalia. I use genitalia because trans-sexuals are considered whichever they choose to become by virtue of 'redecorating' while using hormones.
Therefore, you will not be convincing the true feminists. The ones which reside in academia, think tanks, and specific interest groups. Howevere, it could convince the silent majority that coast thru life, while remaining gullible. This debate goes for many subjects beyong abortion as well. Just posit hypotheticals, there will always be something that people would be willing to disallow, then they just proved that limits or restrictions are appropriate and it undermines their premise.
IT'S SOOOO MUCH FUN TO DO!!
Stephen Barlow| 12.25.11 @ 8:48AM
The failure of this bill is that you must PROVE sex discrimination in the termination decision, and you CAN'T. you would have to get a warrant from a judge to violate Doctor patient privilege, make arrests and conduct a trail... using WHAT for evidence?
POST American| 12.25.11 @ 10:44PM
"---Our propaganda and indoctrination
MUST always target the women. The women
are easily programmed. They follow
who promises and delivers the food and
creature comforts. The children follow
them. --The men too, eventually, follow.
WE MUST TARGET THE WOMEN."
-Adolf Hitler
1933
An old, old technique. bonfires and wampum
to draw, and 'fasten-ate' the women.
--Old, old, old technique.
And, further, as we consider the hordes
of unattached, non-filial women largely
created by the witches, and we DO mean
WITCHES, of daytime media---
"Understand, the woman alone,
on her own,the woman without children,
family ---is a natural DESTROYER.
She can't even help it."
D H Lawrence
(essays)
1922
And an FT review of a recent STALIN
biography exclaimed:
"In reading about the murderous intrigues
within the 1930's Kremlin, one comes
away aghast to find the women were
even more ruthless, and bloodthirsty
than the men."
AS we've been saying ---hurl the TVs.
------------------ANY QUESTIONS?-------------------
WM| 12.26.11 @ 8:30PM
Another loser idea from the coalition that brought us the failed personhood amendments. It's simply unworkable, and it would erode other conservative concepts.
On what grounds do you intend to oppose hate crime laws when you are for gender selection abortion laws, Bass? What distinguishing principle do you think you can possibly bring forth? Oh, I can't wait to hear it.
But then, when it comes right down to it, the anti-abortion crazies are ready and willing to throw away any conservative cause if it conflicts with their own, even if it means acknowledging the right of the state to impose thought and speech controls. Indeed, that is what the anti-abortion movement comes down to: Forcing people to be moral by means of the state. Right, Bass?