Posted on 01/05/2009 4:50:34 PM PST by wagglebee
NEW YORK, NY, January 5, 2009 (C-FAM) - According to a new article (see: http://www.ipas.org/Library/News/News_Items/Finding_the_root...) circulated by the abortion advocacy organization Ipas, widespread access to “safe abortion” trumps concerns over the gender imbalance stemming from “sex selective” abortion.
As sex-selective abortion overwhelmingly targets unborn girls, the article by Ipas senior research and policy advisor Bela Ganatra acknowledges that the issue divides the “reproductive rights community.” Abortion advocates are “often torn between their desire to allow women to choose when and if to have children, and their own personal disagreement with the basis for that choice.” Ipas, however, comes down on the side of widespread access to abortion, even if this means a female “birth dearth.”
Sex-selected abortion, or “gendercide,” as some feminist critics call it, is a practice whereby parents choose to terminate a pregnancy because the unborn child is not of the desired sex. It is generally carried out against baby girls. The practice has led to unnatural gender imbalances in some countries, mostly in Asia, where in some areas of China, for instance, as many as 150 boys are born for every 100 girls, creating a dramatic demographic crisis.
In response, some governments have banned sex-detection tests and outlawed sex-selected abortion. Ipas claims that as a result of these policies, “tremendous pressure emerges to control and restrict all second-trimester abortions,” the time when most sex-selected abortions occur. Ipas argues that “providers, afraid of being accused of providing sex-selective abortions, may limit their services to the first trimester, even when second-trimester services are legal.”
In “Maintaining Access to Safe Abortion and Reducing Sex Ratio Imbalances in Asia,” published in the latest issue of Reproductive Health Matters, Ganatra prioritizes access to abortion and argues that it is necessary to address “son preference” as the root cause, rather than on policies which place restrictions on abortion. Ganatra fears that outlawing sex-selected abortion is “starting to have adverse effects on the already limited access to safe and legal second trimester abortion for reasons other than sex selection” and that the issue is being used “as a front to promote anti-choice messages.”
Ganatra criticizes media campaigns like those in India that discourage sex-selected abortions for using “loaded words” that “personify the fetus,” claiming that these foster an “anti-abortion climate” which threatens “the gains made in making abortion safe.” Ganatra also criticizes the United Nations (UN) and some of its agencies for supporting efforts which use terminology that condemn sex-selective abortion as murder. She blasts the UN for using terms like ‘feticide’ and opposing sex selection in favor of the right of unborn girls to be born,” arguing that human rights only “begin at birth.”
Ipas and Ganatra conclude that the use of prenatal technology and selective abortions is a “pathway through which son preference results in an imbalanced sex ratio” but dismiss efforts to combat the problem with policies that hinder access to abortion.
Demographers project that there are as many as 100 million missing baby girls because of sex-selected abortion. A 2007 initiative to tackle sex-selected abortion head-on at the UN was derailed by abortion-rights NGOs and the European Union because some European states opposed condemning abortion for any reason.
(This article reprinted with permission from http://www.c-fam.org)
Pro-Life Ping
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Well that is a great question.
I was just going to post to say, it must be a b@tch being a feminist these days. Pun intended.
As the mother of two, soon to be three, Chinese girls, I’m glad their mom’s chose life!
Pardon my grammar: moms not mom’s.
Proof that those who choose to side with the demoniac will always see evil and think it is good. Unbelievable. Reminds me of the bumpber sticker I’ve seen in the past:
****I’m For The Rights of Unborn Women!
Yes, this exposes the hypocrisy of their entire position.
They have always said it’s not a person, or baby.
How can it be for sex selection if it’s not a person, or baby?
And since when would they deny their sacrosanct ‘right to choose abortion’ if the woman does it for a reason THEY don’t like?
They aren’t any better than the people they hate, religuious folks who want to deny ‘the right to choose’ for biblical reasons they despise.
We are seeing the feeling-based foundation of the left crumble on every issue. they are worse than the enemies they claim to be fighting. They are exactly like them, but on top of it, they are hypocrites because they don’t see that they are.
Actually, I agree with them. Not that I support abortion under any circumstances. But if it’s given that a woman has a “right to choose”, doesn’t she have the right to choose on any basis that suits her? Just asking.
**Targeting Unborn Girls**
Lord, have mercy.
I did a double take on the source of the message — NY. Maybe it is the new China?
The byline is NY, but I think they are talking about China, India and other countries that target girls for extinction. However, gender selection abortion is being practiced in the United States.
What a wonderful world we have now
Murder as social planning
Details, details.....
Since Satan is determined to eliminate the human race, it makes sense that he would have abortion target females.
Women can only produce so many babies in a life time. Many men and few women are an effective way to reduce a population within a couple generations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.