Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is abortion for the purpose of sex selection immoral?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Choice Donate to DU
 
Pterodactyl Donating Member (415 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 08:19 PM
Original message
Is abortion for the purpose of sex selection immoral?
Interesting article on NPR:

In Asia, The Perils Of Aborting Girls And Keeping Boys
http://www.npr.org/2011/06/15/137106354/in-asia-the-per...

Asians are selecting boys over girls and it is starting to cause a huge difference in the sex ratio.

Is abortion for the purpose of sex selection immoral?
Refresh | +1 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Drale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. Every time they make the decision to give up a girl
they are moving one step closer to a major population disaster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 09:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
17. IMHO China could use some form of "major population disaster" - one that
is a bit different from the slow motion one they have been in for 100 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Pterodactyl Donating Member (415 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. Huh? Care to elaborate?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #20
22. I'm just saying that they have a huge population, and it is going to pose a HUGE
problem for them over time. It would be ideal if their population were a lot lower, but I am not advocating for any action to make it so. Mother Nature will take care of it if the humans don't show personal restraint in their reproductive habits.

Of course the entire planet has a huge population problem, lol. But the subject was China.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Pterodactyl Donating Member (415 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. OK. For a moment there, I thought you might have been hoping for the deaths of millions of people!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jul61252 Donating Member (50 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-02-11 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #1
31.  +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-30-11 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #1
50. I would think it would create more social problems rather than a population disaster
which is pretty much already extant. The one child policy is also potentially damaging, if you imagine an entire generation without siblings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
sakabatou Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. In my mind, I think it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
24. Is it immoral to attempt to conceive a particular sex?
Using acid/base, timing, depth, etc, people have tried to up the odds on conceiving a particular sex. Is this immoral also?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-30-11 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #24
52. No more immoral than wishing, hoping or praying for one or the other.
Personally, I don't understand why anyone would have a preference, especially in today's world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
CaliforniaPeggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 08:24 PM
Response to Original message
3. I don't know...
I could not do it, back when I had an opportunity.

As for morality, who knows?

I would not want to make that judgment.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ohio Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 08:25 PM
Response to Original message
4. Abortion is between a woman and her doctor
Her reasons are no one else's business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jul61252 Donating Member (50 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-02-11 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #4
32. +1000
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #32
59. say buh bye to jul61252!
Edited on Sun Aug-21-11 03:23 AM by iverglas

Two months of stealth posting of blank messages, all in order to be able to send me this a few minutes ago:

hello
From: jul61252
Date: Aug-21-11 03:05 AM

I'd love to carve your stomach and watch your entrails spill out onto the ground below.

I wish you a truly slow, agonizing, and pain-filled demise.





I have to say that's my first. Should I be insulted at it taking 10 years? ;)



Why do I always misspell something in my subject lines?!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #59
60. Wow. that is something.
Glad it went away and I wish it the same it wishes for us.

did you know this poster otherwise? Not sure of your 10 yr reference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-21-11 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #60
61. nah, seems to have been random
I put a post in GD just in case of others getting it, who might have felt more vulnerable if that landed in their inbox at 3 a.m. Turns out it's a repeat troll, this is just the latest in a series of similar apparently random attacks. (I only recognized one name among those who have received the same in different instances.) I just meant that I've been here 10 years and never been favoured with such charming attentions before. ;)

Nobody here or elsewhere on the net has any idea who, what or where I am (although you can read some fascinating theories at a few ugly right wing gun militant sites!), so even if that sort of thing did seem to arise out of personal animus, I'd just snort and click alert. I know that other people haven't grown as impervious a hide, or donned such an impermeable shell, on the net, so I was concerned for anyone like that.

My guess was it picked people who seemed to be awake at 3 a.m. But then my insight into such minds might be limited. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-30-11 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
53. Abortion is between a woman and herself
She may seek advice from her doctor, the father or whomever, but the choice should be entirely her own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
no_hypocrisy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 08:27 PM
Response to Original message
5. I don't think the standard should be pure morality, but rather ethics.
Not good or bad, but whether the procedure for that purpose is appropriate at times, never, or always.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
6. Immoral is a slippery term.
You might define morality as the point where ethics are subjective enough that they're not universal. I consider deadly force used in defense of yourself or others against murder or grievous bodily harm to be moral. Others don't. I consider casual sex to be morally fine. Others don't.

Personally, I would say that sex selection is unwise in the extreme, and unethical on the face of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Angry Dragon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
7. Should humans engage in breeding programs??
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Brianboru Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
8. My neighbor has adopted three Chinese girls.
All had medical problems, but that are all fine now.

They would be dead if the adoption hadn't been arranged from birth.

I'm afraid the male imbalabce will lead China to war. Somewhwere. To correct the male imbalance.

No good outcomes from that program. So no, not a morally good thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Pterodactyl Donating Member (415 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Your neighbor is AWESOME!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Brianboru Donating Member (226 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. They are great kids - and two other families also adopted girls.
They are fortunate in that they have the resources to arrange the adoptions. It was about $15,000 each before the medical expenses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 08:32 PM
Response to Original message
9. Depends on what you use as your moral compass.
Most of us just seem to use our feelings, which changes throughout the day.

Morality is a tool, and it requires a goal to make any sense.

For example: If the ultimate goal of morality is to ensure individual autonomy over one's own body, then the sex-selecting abortions are moral. If the ultimate goal is to have a healthy society, then the sex-selecting abortions are immoral.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Pterodactyl Donating Member (415 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. It seems here the goal is to only give birth to boys at the expense of girls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #14
21. That is goal of the abortions, I was referring to the goal of one's morality.
Morality needs to have an ultimate goal in order to be useful; e.g., world peace, entrance into heaven, happiness, military honor, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Pterodactyl Donating Member (415 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #21
26. Yeah, that's what I was saying. Their goal is boys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. The boys are more likely to be a means to an ultimate goal. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
snagglepuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 08:34 PM
Response to Original message
10. What's immoral is the favoring of males that engenders this sort of behavior.
Nothing good can come out of a mindset that diminishes women.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
left coaster Donating Member (938 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. + 1,000! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #10
19. Exactly. But by the same token, no good can come of forced childbearing.
Women who are taught that females are inferior may well just drown their girl babies. They have done so in the past.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 08:45 PM
Response to Original message
12. Not when it's done because the parents carry a sex-specific genetic disease marker. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
16. Abortion is a private decision. If a woman feels that she cannot love and
properly care for a child FOR WHATEVER REASON, then an outside party really has no business forcing her to bear said child.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
saras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-11 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
18. Either sex selection is moral or it is immoral - abortion is largely irrelevant
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. Is attempting to conceive one sex immoral?
There are ways to attempt to make it more likely you will conceive a boy or a girl, are these immoral? If they were able to figure out if a fertilized egg were m/f and implant what the parent chose, would this be immoral? What about choosing a sperm donor, even partially, based on hair color?


Indeed the question is is it immoral to base selection on sex or hair color or whatever vs anything about abortion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
libguy_6731 Donating Member (50 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-06-11 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #23
58. Great Post
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Pterodactyl Donating Member (415 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-21-11 09:22 PM
Response to Original message
27. The answer is yes. Yes, it is.
Edited on Tue Jun-21-11 09:22 PM by Pterodactyl
It's an affront to the dignity of the human lives that get "deselected" for not being good enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-02-11 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #27
33. Using that logic, do you feel all abortions are immoral? Since they get "deselected" for not being
good enough in some way?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Pterodactyl Donating Member (415 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-06-11 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. Yes, nearly all would be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-11 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #35
37. In what case is an abortion not "immoral"? When, if ever, should they be legal?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Pterodactyl Donating Member (415 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-11 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. In cases of self defense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-11 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. self defense how? Thank you. Not sure what you mean, if you could clarify
perhaps an example or some such. thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Pterodactyl Donating Member (415 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 09:17 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. When the mother's life is endangered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-11 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #41
48. You do not think early abortions are moral, only late term ones if the mother's life is endangered.
Got it. Do you think abortions should be legal, with what restrictions?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
musette_sf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-10-11 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #35
40. So disheartening
to come to this group and have to read this kind of crap.

Women's reproductive health care rights, including abortion rights, are part of the Democratic platform. Get with it or get lost.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Pterodactyl Donating Member (415 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-13-11 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. That does not mean it is a good thing. America can do better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
musette_sf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-14-11 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #42
43. Autonomy for women IS a good thing.
There are SO many reasons why a woman wants and/or needs to terminate a pregnancy, that it really is none of ANYONE'S business except the woman herself.

I have no compunctions about stating flat out that availability of safe and legal abortion IS A GOOD THING.

I came of age when abortion was first being legalized in the more progressive states, and my reaction to this was JOY, RELIEF, and STRENGTH.

Sorry, but I, and millions of other women, are just not going to wring our hands and play Ain't It Awful over legalized abortion rights. America DID do better when US female citizens finally realized bodily autonomy. We don't need or want your morose puling over your personal emotions regarding the human, civil and Constitutional rights of US female citizens.

Be a Democrat, or be gone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-14-11 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #43
44. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Pterodactyl Donating Member (415 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-11 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #43
45. What if someday women didn't even feel they had to do it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Lars39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-11 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #45
46. Not every woman wants to or can be pregnant and raise a child, or risk her life
with a pregnancy and labor and delivery. Forced pregnancy = slavery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
musette_sf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-11 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #45
47. because the alternatives would be, um, what?
"Gee, I don't need to terminate this pregnancy even though my birth control failed and I am in no way wanting to be pregnant or to be a parent at this time!"

Explain how you think this is any kind of realistic scenario.

Answer MAY NOT INCLUDE:

1. "I'm going to give up almost a year of my life, and take on a highly risky health condition that may permanently disable me if not kill me outright, because I WANT to sacrifice myself and my life to have some adoption mill steal the result of my labor and sell it to the highest bidder."

2. "I haven't got a pot to piss in, and it's likely I won't even be able to keep my job past the 7th month, but through magical thinking in a Sky Daddy and maybe some unicorns too, I'm going to bring a child into my life that I can ill afford, because I WANT to sacrifice myself and my life to struggle against a system against which I will never be able to win and make something of myself, like I had originally planned before my birth control failed."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Pterodactyl Donating Member (415 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-31-11 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #47
62. How about adoption by a responsible family?
There are thousands of worthy Americans hoping to adopt. I have a relative who adopted after a long wait; there was no "stealing" and no "mill" involved.

Your response MAY NOT INCLUDE "adoption mills".
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Scout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 09:32 AM
Response to Reply #62
63. if i don't want to be pregnant, no kind of adoption is acceptable
besides, i'm not obligated to breed just because someone else wants a baby, for fuck's sake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-16-11 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #45
49. Had to do what? Bear a child if they didn't want to? Or feel they "had" to have an abortion?
Do you think all women who have abortions feel they "had to do it"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
zorahopkins Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-01-11 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
29. Is A Facelift For The Purpose of Looking Better Immoral?
Abortion is a medical procedure.

Is is ALWAYS a decision that a woman makes carefully.

It can NEVER be immoral.

The question "is abortion for the purpose of sex selection immoral" makes about as much sense as "is a facelift for the purpose of looking better immoral?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jul61252 Donating Member (50 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-02-11 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
30. no
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
peace17 Donating Member (10 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-04-11 01:43 AM
Response to Original message
34. how do you define immoral?
and if you think abortion is not " immoral " , regardless of your intention to get an abortion , the act remains " moral ".
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Pterodactyl Donating Member (415 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-06-11 08:16 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. So what do YOU think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-30-11 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
51. I am 100% pro-choice but using abortion as a form of birth/population control is immoral
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-30-11 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #51
54. I don't understand. You are pro-choice yet using abortion for birth control is immoral?
How are you pro-choice if you believe abortion is immoral? Serious question. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-30-11 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #54
55. Sorry, meant to say as a primary method of birth control.
Reminds me of a couple of female acquaintances who underwent several abortions over a couple of years, using no other form of birth control. These were both successful, educated women who IMO acted irresponsibly and abusively towards themselves and towards society as a whole.
Hope that clarifies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-30-11 05:58 PM
Response to Reply #55
56. Thank you. Sounds like you view abortion as immoral but ok in some cases
I know it is often not an "always ok" or "always not ok" issue. I'be had to come to terms with why is it ok as a secondary, but not primary contraception. If it is morally ok if primary contraception fails, why not simply AS primary? Because the woman tried to prevent pregnancy yet it happened? And why does this make it ok when it isn't if she didn't use another method?

Irregardless, we need to keep the choice of a safe, hygienic abortion legal for the masses, not just for those with enough money or power to pay for a private one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starboard Tack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-30-11 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #56
57. I would call it immoral if used for gender selection or population control
If used as a primary form of birth control (only form) I call it stupid and irresponsible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Scout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-01-11 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
64. no, it's not. wise in the long run, on a societal level? no. but no more immoral than any abortion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NOMOREDRUGWAR Donating Member (319 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-02-11 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
65. No, not immoral, but probably unwise
given the demographics. It is the woman's choice whether to terminate or not, and all abortions that women choose to have should be financed by the government. It really isn't that expensive, and abortion can have many societal benefits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
vets74 Donating Member (714 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-08-11 09:58 AM
Response to Original message
66. LIVE topic -- 163,000,000 Missing Women in Asia
Mara Hvistendahl's book, "Unnatural Selection," presents a staggering view of on-going attacks on the very lives of baby girls. In China, India and South Korea, there are many more men than women.

In nature, roughly 102 to 105 boys are born for every 100 girls. Hvistendahl reports that in Northeast India there are 112 boys born for every 100 girls. In China, the number is 121 though some Chinese towns are over the 150-to-100 ratio. This perversion is not only seen in Asia. Azerbaijan stands at 115, Georgia at 118 and Armenia at 120.

This is technology run amok. Cheap ultrasound tests are used to tell them that the mother is carrying a girl. Over the last three decades the resulting abortions are reflected in demographic distortion -- 163 million girls are missing from the world.

Call these "fetuses" or "unborn children" or "girls." The result is the same. Millions of very, very young females are being killed. The results to those societies include heightened male violence and drops to male IQ and general social health. Personality disorders are the big winners.

A Surplus of Men, A Deficit of Peace: Security and Sex Ratios in Asia's Largest States

Journal Article, International Security, article in the Spring 2002 edition. Andrea Den Boer, Valerie M. Hudson.

Abstract ::: This issue begins with an article by Valerie Hudson of Brigham Young University and Andrea Den Boer of the University of Kent. Hudson and Den Boer trace the rise in offspring sex selection in China and India that has resulted in a "surplus" of young men. They argue that such surpluses of men increase the potential for internal and external violence, while diminishing the prospects for democracy. This phenomenon could destabilize the two countries, the region, and beyond.

A 163,000,000-man army can ruin anybody's afternoon. Think of the UK football hooligans, multiplied by 1,000. China has hired 2,000,000 into police jobs which cannot be taken seriously as a long-term solution to this problem.

Mara Hvistendahl and internal memoranda in WHO are strongly encouraging outlawing use of ultrasound for sex identification for fetuses. That would have to be enforced with prison sentences and 'sting" operations on the ultrasound shops. Dire problem, tough response.

This disaster has no connection to American abortion law. Nothing whatsoever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
iverglas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #66
67. if I'm reading this correctly ...
The text above the link in your post is your own. Your expanded version:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/06/19/986695/-Unnatu...

In view of your point about language and the appeal to the right brain in your other thread, I find this statement curious:

"Cheap ultrasound tests are used to tell them that the mother is carrying a girl."

"The mother"?

Strikes me that this is the kind of language used by the anti-choice brigade, and designed expressly to appeal to the right brain in order to evoke the desired emotional response, i.e. a negative response to the idea of abortion and the freedom to choose abortion.

A slip? ;) Dunno ...

"Call these 'fetuses' or 'unborn children' or 'girls.' The result is the same. Millions of very, very young females are being killed."

That's also a very odd statement. It very much does matter what one calls "these". The actual fact is that millions of births of female human beings are being prevented. No "children" or "girls" are being killed, and equating the "killing" of a fetus with the killing of a human being is not exactly respectful of women or helpful to women's cause, no matter who does it.

I do agree that sex-selection abortions are a social problem. It's a problem of the chicken-and-egg variety.

Pregnancies are terminated when the fetus is female because women are both devalued in ethical terms and, in practical terms, genuinely of lower value to families. To solve the problem, the approach has to be two-pronged (with many offshoots). In China, for instance, it's time for a universal old-age pension scheme; this would go some distance toward eliminating a couple's need for a son, or for children period. In other societies, it means working a lot harder to achieve economic equality for women, which involves enhancing the value the society places on women as human beings with equal dignity and worth as such, so that a daughter can then be seen to be as "valuable" in economic terms as a son.

The adoption of family planning practices is a somewhat parallel example. Couples in developing societies do not begin to limit family size until they have the degree of economic prosperity that frees them to some extent from dependence on children for their economic well-being. Limiting family size in turn enhances their economic prosperity, but most people won't adopt that practice until the evidence of their ability to survive if they do that is present.

So to deter sex-selection abortion that favours male births, couples need to have evidence that a daughter will be as valuable to them as a son, and that means enhancing women's economic and social status to the point where that is true. And of course the women in the couples need to have the personal and social and economic power to make their own choices to overcome residual social and familial preference for sons if they wish to do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #67
68. In conjunction with that poster's other topic that words, terms, matter, it is oddd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tgal Donating Member (96 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-11 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
69. Abortion is a medical procedure
that keeps women safe and healthy and is none of your fucking business.

Period.

Flame bait right wing talking point crap.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 02nd 2014, 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Choice Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC