Thoughts on sex-selective abortions. It really does seem like the objective goal of the “pro-choicers” is to maximize the number of terminated pregnancies, not offer women real choices.
12 thoughts on “When A Choice Isn’t A Choice”
Comments are closed.
Rhetorical: Why are feminists not speaking up for these unborn women?
That piece is about the US. It doesn’t even mention the elephant. Add that to the “arab spring” movements to go back to sharia law related polygamy and you have a true recipe for disaster. Too many single young men. This will not end well.
the objective goal of the “pro-choicers” is to maximize the number of terminated pregnancies
Right now the “pro-choicers” — i.e. Obama and Congressional Democrats — are trying to require that health insurers cover contraception. That is a serious attempt at reducing the number of terminated pregnancies, and naturally it’s opposed by the Catholic church and pro-life Republicans.
They’re also trying to force health insurers to cover aromatherapy, fish pedicures and gender reassignment surgery. Why would they skip contraceptives?
Do you have a reference for these claims?
You didn’t reference your claims.
When Medicare drops a quarter-billion on penis pumps, I figure (re)tracking down the market-destroying vagaries of obamacare is a waste of time.
It’s too bad that lack of contraceptive access is not the issue.
It’s not even an issue.
Abortion is considered a contraceptive to Obama.
Almost certainly a very uncommon reason for sex-selective abortions; but what about such abortions for medical reasons? An example might be selective abortion of male foetuses in cases where either the woman is a carrier for haemophilia or the father is a sufferer from it. I’m sure there are other such cases.
Don’t forget male pattern baldness….