Jivin J’s Life Links 4-13-10
by JivinJ, host of the blog, JivinJehoshaphat
Many Canadians see this as wrong. The official policy of professional groups such as the Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Canada condemns sex selection…. Doctors in British Columbia already… refus[e] to reveal the sex until 20 weeks into a pregnancy….
But how does that make sense? In order to support “a woman’s right to choose,” you have to believe that a fetus is not human in the moral sense. This judgment — or lack thereof — is encoded in Canadian law, which permits abortion for any reason, or no reason at all.
If you believe a fetus is not a human life, the fetus becomes no different from any other unwanted appendage on a woman’s body. There is no moral difference to removing it than there is to removing an unwanted mole, or an unsightly wart. It’s just a bunch of flesh, with no human soul or spirit to it, so what’s the difference?
The bill requires a doctor or other health professional to screen women to determine whether they were pressured into having abortions. The screenings also would assess whether women have risk factors that could lead to mental or physical problems after an abortion.
Doctors would have to tell patients whether they had any of the risk factors but could perform abortions even if they existed. If a screening was not done, a woman could file a civil suit.
Doctors would not face criminal charges, nor would they lose their medical licenses.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I’m thinking that NE law will have zero effect. To expect abortionists to quiz women beforehand is like expecting PP to actually give women the facts they are required to by law. It ain’t happenin’. I can’t believe they expect these butchers to set themselves up for greater liability by quizzing women beforehand.
When the foxes guard the henhouse, you can’t expect the hens to actually be protected.
This has to be one of the dumbest, most pointless laws I’ve seen thus far…
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, though. I’d like to see the point of this.
you might be right, Kel, but it could be very interesting IF they actually complied. If a woman is being coerced into abortion by an abusive boyfriend or husband that says “Abort or I’ll kill you / Or I’ll leave you:” then they may be able to find that out. Of course its most likely that PP would STILL encourage the abortion.
Of course its most likely that PP would STILL encourage the abortion.
Posted by: LizFromNebraska at April 13, 2010 2:01 PM
**********************
Exactly. My point is, what good would it do?
Right now, PP is supposed to report statutory rape, and they don’t. Live Action has shown us how well that law is being enforced. This law has even less of a chance at making any difference, in my opinion.
The sex selection is happening in Canada. This study shows it amongst certain demographic groups, tilted for male preference: Nathalie Auger, Mark Daniel, & Spencer Moore. Sex ratio patterns according to Asian ethnicity in Quebec, 1981–2004. Eur J Epidemiol (2009) 24:17–24.
The actual tilt is probably more dramatic, since the correct way to evaluate this evidence is to look at birth ratio amongst families who have not yet had a male; the birth ratio in other locales has been analyzed this way, and the tilt is shown to indicate that the female is more likely to be aborted if the family already has one, or two, children, but no boys yet. In other words, a family might tolerate a first or second girl, but after that, the females will be aborted and a male will be allowed to progress to birth.
This is the cultural preference in some places. It largely depends upon dowry, etc.
In Canada, generally, the preference is for a nearly even sex distribution amongst the 2 to 4 siblings that are typical of a family. Surveys, or fertilization clinics, will ask what sex is preferred. If a family has a boy already, they will generally tend to want a girl, and vice-versa.
This cultural preference may lead to Canada, and United States, and Australian, etc., families to be more likely to abort not based on sex preference, but on sibling sex composition. This will be much more challenging to capture in demographic data.
So, we white imperialists can continue to rail against the “unwashed savages” and their “barbaric” practices, but we can carry on with our “choice.”
It’s a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion no matter what her reason is. Laws like this are backwards and wrong.
Laws that protect a woman from being coerced into an abortion she does not want are wrong??
Wow. I feel so sorry for you. How hard it must be to live a life so full of hate.
That law treats women like children who can’t make their own reproductive health care choices for themselves. If a woman wants an abortion, she should be able to get it without any strings attached. Instead, people like you want to set up every possible roadblock possible to prevent women from getting the abortions they want.
We’re just saying that women should have all the facts before making such a decision. Women are lied to on a daily basis about the facts of fetal development and pregnancy. What is infantilizing is thinking it is better to lie to women than give them the truth about the situation. The pro-abortion lobby is quite guilty on that count.
“We’re just saying that women should have all the facts before making such a decision.”
Maybe a woman doesn’t want all of what you consider to be “facts”? Maybe she doesn’t want to be forced to view an ultrasound image of a fetus she doesn’t want, followed by a mandatory 24-hour waiting period before she can finally get the abortion she drove 9 hours out-of-state to get? Maybe she doesn’t to hear the doctor read the pamphlet that sounds like something written by the National Right To Life Committee? This has nothing to do with “giving women all the facts” and everything to do with throwing every single obstruction possible into her path in order to guilt-trip her into keeping a pregnancy she doesn’t want. I really feel bad for women who live in backwards places like North Dakota or Wyoming where they would just flat-out ban abortion if that pesky Constitution thing wasn’t standing in their way, but since that’s not available, their state legislatures that are packed full of bible-thumping hicks do every single thing in their power to make abortion as difficult to get as possible.
When you have any other kind of surgery, there’s things to read and forms to fill out, exams to undergo. Only in the unregulated abortion business is it considered OK to rush to a procedure a) without fully informing the woman, or b) outright lying to her. Years ago, I was told the same lies by a clinic that was unconnected to PP. In fact, neither my doctor NOR the clinic even conducted a pregnancy test on me. They just rushed rushed rushed. When I found out the truth about fetal development, I was horrified. Women do not have a right to kill another human. Perhaps we need to go over the birds and bees again: humans make other humans by having sex, the egg is fertilized by the sperm, then the zygote begins to develop and eventually becomes a walking, talking, car-driving teenager. You may have a right to get breast implants with your body, but you do not have the right to kill a developing human being. As Abraham Lincoln said, “We do not have the right to do what is wrong.”
I’m going back to my last point. Regardless of your opinion as to whether women should be allowed to get abortions they want… you are against laws to keep them from being coerced into abortions they DON’T want???
Again. How very sad your life must be.
“I really feel bad for women who live in backwards places like North Dakota or Wyoming where they would just flat-out ban abortion if that pesky Constitution thing wasn’t standing in their way, ”
Please point to where in our constitution abortion is allowed. You can’t. It was a “right” invented by activist judges that should and will be overturned.
Also, just because you don’t want to hear the facts don’t make them any less true. Fetal development is on the side of those protecting life. You might find it an inconvienant truth, but that doesn’t change the reality of the situation.
state legislatures that are packed full of bible-thumping hicks do every single thing in their power to make abortion as difficult to get as possible.
Posted by: Anne at April 13, 2010 5:33 PM
________________________________________________
Well then, THANK GOD for Bible-thumping hicks!
Maybe a woman doesn’t want all of what you consider to be “facts”?
wow Anne! Talk about deliberately encouraging women to not take responsibility for their actions and wanting to have women stick their heads in the proverbial sand.
Would you want women to have this same attitude towards their cancer care, or any other treatment?
A woman should KNOW and SEE exactly what it is that she is aborting.
The only thing I can think of it that IF women really knew ahead of time all the risks and the stage of development of their baby, many women would not choose abortion.
Maybe abortion would then become rare.
Maybe abortion might not even be legal.
And maybe you and your evil peeps would then really have to take responsibility for your sexuality.
Maybe you’d have to learn that little word, “no” and use it once in a while. **gasp**
You disgust me.
What a sad world it is when people can decide to abort their child simply because it’s not a boy or girl….. whichever they are wanting.
Talk about lies, look through some of the links on this page. It’s a sad state of affairs when places committed to “giving women choices” lie, coerce and stalk in order to get their way.
http://cpcwatch.org/Women%27s-Stories.php
Anne,
It’s because of people like you who don’t believe in helping women who are coerced into abortion that my aunt is DEAD!!!!
About 26 years ago, her husband told her that if she didn’t have an abortion, then he would kill her. So she did. And no one helped because it was, “a woman’s right to choose.” She desperately wanted children, but no one offered her any help. She divorced her husband. She never forgave him or herself for that abortion. Over the course of 16 years she drank herself to death over it because of the guilt.
Aunt Cecilia was my favorite aunt. She was so loving, so kind. To lose her was extremely painful for me! I even took her name as my Confirmation name. I now fight the battle against the violence of abortion in her name and in the name of her unborn child.
Why wouldn’t women want these facts? Why wouldn’t women want help? I guarantee you that they do. It’s only in your selfish mind that a person would refuse the help they truly want, or the medical information that goes along with a procedure as dangerous and invasive as abortion.
Amy, may St. Cecilia intercede for you Aunt Anne!
I will remember her in my daily prayers.
Yes I agree,thank God for Bible thumping individuals. I’m so thankful that God uses the foolish things of the world to confound the wise. So my prayer is that on the abortion issue God would use the foolish things of the world to confound the wise. Amen! Lord please be gentle with those who you are about to confound but please remember their avarice and self-righteousness when destroying what you send to the earth as gifts that they’ve treated like trash to be taken out. Please reward them according to their works. Amen