But the embrace of “choice” presented a quandary, which was not all that clear at the time. “Choice” as a value meant that all choices were equal in terms of morality: not only the choice to give life or take it, but all the reasons for which the choice of abortion were made.

Reasons of hardship or health or convenience were accepted as equal, and all were defended. All women’s choices were regarded as wise, since women had made them. Objecting to this was out of the question, as it gave an opening to all of those evil and retrograde social conservatives. It was also, of course, “insulting to women”….

Then came the news that women were using this wisdom in order to end female lives….

In the course of events, every second abortion produces a dead female fetus (which the sisters accept as collateral damage) but this new statistic means something different: the culling of females, because they are female, for no other discernible cause.

… Murder is one thing, but an attack on a group is beyond human decency. Is this a crime against which they will rally? Well, no.

Why not? It’s a “choice” – and choices, of course, must never be questioned, no matter to what ends they lead. Late-term abortion? Terrific. Infant dismemberment? Hardly a problem. Sequential abortion? No problem there.

Abortion as a tool to dispose of unwanted girl children? Now, this is a problem, but liberals have surrendered the right and the standing to make moral judgments. They have found now a choice they despise, and they can’t rail against it. Who would listen to them holding forth on this issue? What in the world would they say?

Ready to fight over a word, wink or whistle, they have no words at all for all those dead females. They are strangled and silenced by “choice.”

~ Noemie Emery, Washington Examiner, July 12

[Photo via orderofcompassion.com]