No matter what side you come down on in the debate over abortion — a post over at SD Politics is nothing short of sobering….

Pro choice proponents in the United States argue that abortion is about women’s rights — her right to control her body…and yet….this tool of “liberation” has wiped out the equivalent of all of the women in the United States in China and other gender-centric societies where women are not considered equal…..

Irony or Tragedy?

45 Replies to “Sobering….”

  1. caheidelberger

    Your feeble attempt at casting the women’s liberation movement as counterproductive ignores the fact that feminists also fight the misogynist attitudes that lead to sex-selection abortions. Abortion is not the problem: the oppression of women is. Banning abortion perpetuates the mindset that women are second-class citizens.

    In other news, you could just as easily get on your high horse and argue that the inventors of ultrasound technology are responsible for this great “irony”.

    1. PNR

      Equating an end to abortion with “second-class citizen” is quite the leap. Banning the killing of human beings whose lives might be inconvenient to us makes no one a second-class citizen. Instead, abortion renders an entire age-group of children non-citizens.

      Abortion is also inexorably tied to eugenics – essentially the desire to control what kind of people get to live. In some countries, that desire leads to skewed gender ratios. In the U.S., it’s primarily race-based (as recently released statistics concerning abortions in New York reveal). Planned Parenthood’s founder saw abortion (and other, less deadly forms of birth control) as a benefit primarily in controlling the size of poor, ethnic minority populations and that intent is still reflected in their operations. You might recall a few years ago when someone offered a sizable donation on the grounds that it be used only to abort Black babies – and Planned Parenthood was willing to accept such an ear-marked donation even after the donor’s plainly racist motivation became clear. Yes, it was a hoax/sting operation, but their willingness was still laid bare.

    2. Kristi Golden

      Abortion stops a beating heart…..if you don’t want to acknowledge that heart as human….well that’s your loss.

      1. kwn

        “It’s my loss”?

        No, it’s my CHOICE!

        When can we move on from this arguement? Must we continue to fight this in the courts and spending money that could be educating our younger generation?

  2. Erin

    Comparing Chinese women living under a totalitarian Marxist regime with American women trying to build lives in a capitalist economy that could not care less about their lives, except when it wants to repress them like they can in China, goes beyond the ridiculous.

    1. Kristi Golden

      You are seriously telling me you are totally okay with 163 million girls not being born just because they were girls?

        1. duggersd

          Actually, there is a rather large excess. From that article a quote from Eleanor Clift: “Mara Hvistendahl is the author of Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys over Girls, and the Consequences of a World Full of Men. She puts the number of missing girls in Asia at 163 million, more than the entire female population in the U.S., and reports on the tens of millions of men in Asia, “surplus males,” who without female counterparts may purchase women from poorer countries. ” This has been something that has been going on for some time. In the past, instead of aborting, girls were drowned.

  3. springer

    Erin thinksing that a capitalist economy cares nothing about women’s lives except to repress them like in China is past ridiculous. In a capitalist society such as ours women are allowed equal opportunities with men, are allowed to choose to stay home and raise their families if they prefer, are considered equal to men, and she says this is repression?!?!?

    And I recommend anyone thinking abortion is about a glob of tissue to read the book “Heaven Is for Real” by Todd Burpo. This will forever change your mind as it is the story of a 3-year-old who went to heaven during an operation; the things he experienced were things he could not have known at his age, including meeting his sister who had been miscarried early in a pregnancy and whom he knew nothing about.

  4. anon

    Until someone makes it a crime equivalent to 1st degree murder to have or assist in an abortion, this is all a bunch of poppycock. If it is murder, make it murder. If its not, its not. The problem is that 90% of american realize its not the same as planning to murder one’s spouse, they don’t like abortion, they in many instances would like to see it stopped, but it should be a misdemeanor, not Murder. What does this say, not sure, but the truth in the moral conviction of nuts like randall terry is telling. The rest are armchair pro life. Seig Heil!

    1. feasant

      Anon just because some clowns in black robes say it is okay to kill innocent childen, doesn’t make it right. Slaves were legal too, didn’t make it right. Abortion kills an innocent human being. You can spin it any way you want, but you know the truth.

      Springer: I read “Heaven is for Real” in one evening. Very good book.

      1. Name

        Slaves, what? My point is try and pass a law, win our hearts and minds, that abortion is a capitol offense otherwise it’s not murder” it’s a misdemeanor.

        1. PNR

          Whether it is a felony or a misdemeanor is really beside the point. Given that so many have been seriously misled, even lied to concerning abortion by a great many people, we might rightly choose to be merciful to those who, in what can often be distressing and confusing circumstances, believe the lies and choose to have their babies killed. Just because it is murder doesn’t mean we have to execute those who do it.

          As for breaking through the lies and winning hearts and minds, it is being done. Significant majorities favor major restrictions on abortion and more of them are following the logic to recognize that, while unborn, these are still human children. Sadly, the black-robed tyrants who gave us this monstrous affront to decency and morals have not yet changed their minds and, as things stand at present, they have been permitted to trump the democratic process.

  5. Anne

    Erin’s point is that both regimes control women’s choices, only with different emphasis. As for women having equal opportunity in America, I don’t know of any women who have had that experience, even the little cutie pies who so endear themselves to the male world.
    Women have earned their places in the world only through a strong and persistent fight against forces that try to keep them subjugated. Now the Supreme Court has just passed a decision to make that fight a lot more difficult.

    And now let me get this straight: the evidence being cited against abortion is a book by a 3-year-old baby who went to heaven, met a miscarried sister, then came back and wrote this book about it? If I read that in The Onion, I might at least get a giggle or two out of that story,

    1. SDMIke

      So Anna-bell – why do the feminists demonize Sarah Palin for making a choice to have a downs syndrom baby?? The tag line pro choice is totally off base when in fact they are PROABORTION!!! Looking at the bright side – I suspect a large precentage of those that are having an abortion are from the heavily government subsidized side of our society and thus that part of society is happy to eliminate themselves from the shallow end of the gene pool.

  6. dissident

    Ms. Golden, you seem to have missed the point of Dr. Blanchard’s post. He is saying that the resulting sex trade and exploitation of women are due to choices made outside the jurisdiction of the US Constitution he sees as causal. His argument is one of the clearest out there for offering Statehood, first to Mexico, then to other nations where jurisprudence is offered as a commodity rather than as a civil right.

    The War on Drugs is an extra-constitutional affront to the sovereignty of Mexico. If she was a State, with two senators and a requisite number of House members, she would be a strong voice for conservative, christian values that might prompt a more equitable discussion of your mythos surrouding a fetus as having any civil rights before the second trimester.

    1. Kristi Golden

      I’d respectfully disagree that I’m the one who missed the point….

      Not to mention….I made my own point independent of Dr. Blanchard’s.

        1. Kristi Golden

          Geez….I’ll have to check my computer keyboard because I thought I was pretty clear. I think this is horrifying….the short-term and long-term consequences of this are mind boggling. I think this is about as anti-woman as it gets and I think they are the victims.

          1. Bill Fleming

            I agree. But it seems you are arguing against women’s rights here in the US in the same breath. Can you clarify your position? I’m not sure at all what you mean by “her right to control her body” and “tool of liberation.”

            If you read the story, you surely noticed that the government has restricted families choices to that of having ONE child. Only one. If such were the law here, and you could decide what sex that child would have, male, or female, which would it be (knowing full well that being female in those countries means being a second class citizen.)

            What would YOU choose, Kristi?

            1. Kristi Golden

              Bill — as I see it — I’m arguing for the babies rights. In the U.S., pro-choice argues that a woman should control her own body — and that abortion is one of those controls. I don’t accept that….but for the sake of argument — and the fact that it is a legal procedure….for those who do think it’s an important part of women’s liberation — isn’t it sad that the same marker of this self determination for women (abortion) is used in other countries to suppress even the existence of women? That’s my point about the irony — and the tragedy. I guess I thought both sides could agree that losing that whole segment of our world’s population was loss for us all.

              As for your “Sophie’s Choice” question, I can’t even pretend to understand the mindset of a Chinese peasant….so I can’t really give a truly honest answer because I can’t really put myself in their place or circumstances. From my personal experiences and my gut reaction to your question….I’d give up my life to protect my girls.

          2. Bill Fleming

            Thanks for the clarification, Kristi. Yes, we seem to agree that what is going on in China is terrible, even as both of us admit that we no real idea what it’s like to be a member of that society. In the same way, I confess that I have no idea what it would be like to be female and face to face with the reality of an unwanted and/or life-threatening pregnancy. I could only imagine, and wouldn’t presume to judge.

  7. Stace Nelson

    Got some reeeaaaaal ugly anonymous phone messages & emails for my little parts in helping get HB 1217 passed, not to mention a little fan club mention 😀

    Click on the little eagle on the right side and listen to the testimony presented to the House Judiciary Committee on 14Feb11 and read the bill. If this was about women’s rights, why were they not equally for a women’s right to be free from being coerced into having an abortion…

    A leading liberal pointed out that Roe v. Wade was not about women’s rights but about them limiting the “growth in populations that we don?t want to have too many of. ”

    Please also note the comments about SCOTUS saying a waiting period for an abortion is NOT considered an undue burden or unconstitutional. Regardless, “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..”

  8. springer

    Anne stated, “And now let me get this straight: the evidence being cited against abortion is a book by a 3-year-old baby who went to heaven, met a miscarried sister, then came back and wrote this book about it? If I read that in The Onion, I might at least get a giggle or two out of that story,” Typical lib and pro-abort reasoning to my post.

    Before you giggle your heart out and make more foolish statements, maybe you should read the book. Believe it or don’t believe it, but there are points in the experiences of this 3 1/2 year old that will give you pause either way. And it wasn’t written by him BTW, as I think any person would know, but I digress.

  9. Lee Schoenbeck

    Flemdog – I think you may be missing the point about why they kill female babies in China. Most of China is agrigarian. If you have a son and he marries, somebodies’ daughter now lives with you and you have two people — and then their child – to help work the farm. If you have a daughter, and you only get one child, you loose your worker and you may have to also pay a dowry. SO it is economically bad to have a daughter, and in the battle for survival – daughters die. Also, when they don’t get it done pre-birth, this can also happen post-birth (infantcide). A week studying in Bejing was eye-opening.
    If you believe abortion is just a medical procedure, no moral dimension to the choice, then the reason for the medical procedure HAS TO BE ok with you – becuase you would see it as nobody else’s business. Sex selection (as evil as we see it) belies another reality for those who take a moment to ponder. Even is it wasn’t because of a government policy in the decision mix — abortion is NOT just another amoral medical procedure. But, if my friend Corey accepts that premise, he starts down a murky road to enlightment — one accepted for generations. It is not that women should be second class citizens – it is that life is special gift and the ability to bring that life into the world is a unique ability of the classiest of citizens

  10. Bill Fleming

    Lee, it seems to me that in the Chinese case, abortion is is a non-issue. If a family can have only ONE child, abortion of all other pregnancies is basically a government mandate. The point of Blanchard’s post, as I see it, is that any government who can legislate what women can (and cannot) do with their reproductive system can just as well demand that they HAVE abortions as that they CANNOT. In China’s case, that means government intervention gone horribly and unnaturally wrong.

  11. duggersd

    Very few people in this world would advocate the taking of a newborn infant, stabbing a scissors into the back of its skull and dismembering it and vacuuming it up in a vacuum cleaner. Most would call that murder. There are some people, including our President, who believe that if a baby survives an abortion, then the newborn should be allowed to die. Others consider that infanticide. There are a few more people who believe pulling a baby partially out of a vagina and stabbing a scissors into its skull and dismembering it and vacuuming it from the woman up to the day before it would be born is OK. Most people, including most who believe abortion is a right, believe ripping apart a baby piece by piece after the third month is immoral and should not be legal outside of some very special circumstances.
    Each person has to ask himself/herself just when life begins. If you believe, as I do, that life begins at conception, then the killing of that life is the killing of an innocent human being. The bottom line is whenever you believe life begins, then advocating abortion for any time after that in your own mind is the killing of an innocent human being.

  12. Bill Fleming

    “…should not be legal outside of some very special circumstances.”

    And it isn’t, is it, DuggerSD?

    From Wikipedia:
    “The Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 (Pub.L. 108-105, 117 Stat. 1201, enacted November 5, 2003, 18 U.S.C. § 1531,[1] PBA Ban) is a United States law prohibiting a form of late-term abortion that the Act calls “partial-birth abortion”, often referred to in medical literature as intact dilation and extraction.[2] Under this law, “Any physician who, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.” The law was enacted in 2003, and in 2007 its constitutionality was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart.”

      1. Bill Fleming

        On the thread Kristi mentions, one poster discusses a new in vitro technology whereby sperm can be screened to select candidates for fertilization that re exclusively of one specific gender. For those not up on their biology, it is the sperm that determines the gender of the offspring. Males pass on both male and female chromosomes under normal circumstances. The female gamete (egg) contains female chromosomes exclusively. Apparently, in our culture those having the ability to chose their child’s gender in this manner are choosing to have females over males in surprising proportions.

        As our technology advances, there will be more and more issues like this we must, as a society, address. Or not.

  13. CaveMan

    The most interesting part of any moral debate is consideration of the 10 Commandments which put no order of severity in the purveyance of any sin. Therefore while most despise murder of any kind including that of an unborn baby or old senile bedridden octogenarian our failure in following God’s commandments fall equally to the thief or the abortion doctor.

  14. Anne

    Among the literate, a person who transmits an experience to another to do the actual writing is considered one of the authors. It stretches credulity to say that a 3-year-old was able to transmit an account of any kind of experience, let alone a trip to heaven. The world is caught up in an epidemic of absurdity., so be it. No, I’ll take the accounts of this book as enough to tell me not to waste time reading it.

  15. CaveMan

    Rep. Stace Nelson I had not known they were so worried about your strict moral code of ethics that they felt the need to call you a “Tea Bagging Barbarian”.

    Personally I would consider it a badge of honor big boy!! 🙂

  16. dissident

    While human rights likely begin at conception, civil rights do not exist until the beginning of the third trimester. If you’re serious about showing your disgust with the nations cited in Dr. Blanchard’s piece boycott those countries’ products, introduce legislation that prohibits WalMart from buying from them and boycott corporations that do business with these countries.

  17. yoyoyoyoyo

    pro choice are going to make any argument for abortion. Pro life are going to make any argument against abortion.

    Saying that abortion is a huge atrocity to women because of the 163 million or whatever deaths in china, isnt really placeing the blame where blame lies. The author of that article mentioned they would have been drowend if they had been born, so abortiona may have made it easier, but hasnt changed the outcome. Kind of just hte fault, or result, of their patriarchal societies. Blame society haha, my favorite cop out.

    I’d liken it to someone who shot and killed someone else…do we blame the gun? Or do we blame the person? If there were no guns, he could of just stabbed him, or beat him with a baseball bat.

    Id say this argument has no bearing in the states, where i doubt the gender of the baby comes into play very often in deciding whether or not to abort.

  18. Lee Schoenbeck

    Bill –

    You are a sly one. Instead of addressing the question I posed – that proabortion folks see abortion as just another medical procedure with no greater moral dimesnsion to it, so why are they offended by it being used for sex selection — you just slide right away from that little problem and talked about government imposed abortions in China. In debate they call that a “shift”, and it is an excellent tactic to use when you can’t effectively respond to the matter before you. You are one sly dog, friend. I appreciate you subtly conceding that abortion is in fact the taking of a human life. Now, we should talk about how to stop it.

    1. Bill Fleming

      Lee, I “shifted” because I think there are serious moral dimensions to the argument that no one is considering. And yes, we have to talk about them. But first we have agree about what life is and what it is not, what a person is and what it is not, what a good choice is and what it is not, etc. I have never argued that there is no moral dimension to abortion, only that we seem not to appreciate or understand very well what one another’s moral position is.

  19. Elais

    I am firmly pro-choice, yet many assume that means I force women to have abortions against their will. Women should have CHOICES not CHAINS. No woman should be viewed as simply an incubator or slave to the womb.

    It is a lie perpetuated by pro-lifers that Planned Parenthood is committing genocide. No one points a gun at any woman’s head in a American and tells her she must have an abortion or else. Claims of genocide are ridiculous, stupid and incredibly patronizing to African-American women. Planned Parenthood saves the lives of millions of women, both black and with with their other services, which everyone in this blog seems to conveniently forget in their witch hunt against PP.

    No woman should be belittled or censured or patted on the head like a naughty child for making the right decision for her. Simply believe and accept that women are capable of knowing what is the right thing for her.

    Sex selection in other countries like China and India is pretty horrible. Can you expect otherwise in countries, however, where males are more valued and have vastly more power both in law and in society over women? How many of men in that country tacitly accept and perpetuate this situation, despite the government themselves acknowledging the problem?

    The true wealth and happiness of a country I think lies in how they treat their women. The lower the status of women, the lower quality of life. I fear American is heading in a downwards spiral with these relentless right-wing assaults on women’s rights, and attempting to shut down organizations that help them. Soon,. we may be little better than repressive countries in our treatment and continued subjugation of women.

  20. Fletch

    It’s interesting to note that the evidence of god is a story supposedly told by a 3 year old about information, he “couldn’t possibly” have had. This is the best evidence in today’s society where everything is recorded.

    The Israelites were led out of Egypt after a series of plagues that were sent by god to entice Pharoah to “Let my people Go!” then they had the miracle of the parting Red Sea which then crashed down upon Pharoah’s army and destroyed them.

    These people who were very superstitious and had a fervent belief in their god had just witnessed a series of amazing hand of god interventions to free them from slavery. And they lasted 40 days before falling into sin worshipping golden calf. 40 days! That’s probably a little callus even by today’s standards.

    Then the infallible, all-knowing, all-seeing god decides that he made a mistake and called for a cosmic “Do Over” by sending his son. Who was ultimately killed according to his plan. Didn’t god also ask Job to kill his son too? It seems to me that there’s quite a lot of killing directly laid at the hand of god, and I’m not even mentioning the killing done by man at god’s will.

    The interesting thing to me about the whole abortion debate is that people of faith don’t even seem to acknowledge that few on the other side make statements that the practice is good or that they should change their belief system to allow it. Yet the believers want to FORCE their beliefs down everyone else’s throats.

    You want to make rules for your church that says you can’t have an abortion? Fine, do it. Live long and prosper. Make all the rules you want, no meat on friday, sit shiva, or announce your jihad. Just don’t be overly surprised when people who don’t share your beliefs to fight you when you forcibly impose it on them.

    The United States was founded primarily by families looking for religious freedom. The government was designed by men of faith who felt that religions should not control the government. While Christianity is overall a pretty decent religion, it too has aspects of control especially at the organizational level. Individually taken pretty decent folk who are very tolerant. As an organization, in many respects evil. I mean that for all the mainstream religions currently operating. Evil. Except Buddists, they seem like a pretty peaceful get-along sort.

    I do not expect, nor would I want, to change what you believe. I would only ask that you have the honesty to say, “I am forcing my beliefs on others for my own reasons.” when you start these types of debates. No one is forcing Christians in the US to get abortions. The question is are you arrogant and superior enough to say that you know what is right for me?

    Let the flames begin….



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.