Your web-browser is very outdated, and as such, this website may not display properly. Please consider upgrading to a modern, faster and more secure browser. Click here to do so.

Pro-Choice and Pro-Voice

Posts tagged sex selection

Mar 1 '14
ncapablog:

The South Dakota House passed a bill that would ban abortions based on the sex of the fetus, also called “sex-selective” abortions, according to an article in Mother Jones.
Lawmakers claim the bill is necessary because Asian immigrants, who they say don’t value woman and girls, are coming to their state. The Asian American community grew more than 70 percent in South Dakota in the last 10 years, according to the National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum (NAPAWF).
In the Mother Jones article, Stace Nelson, a Republican state representative running for the U.S. Senate, is quoted as saying, “Many of you know I spent 18 years in Asia … And sadly, I can tell you that the rest of the world does not value the lives of women as much as I value the lives of my daughters.”
NAPAWF launched a campaign today to take action to stop the passing of the bill, HR 1162. 

"The racism and the stereotypes and the stigma is laid so bare here," said Miriam Yeung, executive director of NAPAWF, told Mother Jones. The group has long argued that that sex-selective abortion bans perpetuate negative stereotypes about Asian American women. “We’ve been saying that these bills are wolves in sheep’s clothing. But in this case, I think the wolf has left off the sheep’s clothing.”

NAPAWF asks you to sign their petition here: “Don’t let South Dakota pass a racist anti-abortion bill!”
Follow @NAPAWF on Twitter for more information and graphics like the one posted above.

Just when you think anti-choicers have reached peak absurdity, they manage to prove you wrong.

ncapablog:

The South Dakota House passed a bill that would ban abortions based on the sex of the fetus, also called “sex-selective” abortions, according to an article in Mother Jones.

Lawmakers claim the bill is necessary because Asian immigrants, who they say don’t value woman and girls, are coming to their state. The Asian American community grew more than 70 percent in South Dakota in the last 10 years, according to the National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum (NAPAWF).

In the Mother Jones article, Stace Nelson, a Republican state representative running for the U.S. Senate, is quoted as saying, “Many of you know I spent 18 years in Asia … And sadly, I can tell you that the rest of the world does not value the lives of women as much as I value the lives of my daughters.”

NAPAWF launched a campaign today to take action to stop the passing of the bill, HR 1162. 

"The racism and the stereotypes and the stigma is laid so bare here," said Miriam Yeung, executive director of NAPAWF, told Mother Jones. The group has long argued that that sex-selective abortion bans perpetuate negative stereotypes about Asian American women. “We’ve been saying that these bills are wolves in sheep’s clothing. But in this case, I think the wolf has left off the sheep’s clothing.”

NAPAWF asks you to sign their petition here: “Don’t let South Dakota pass a racist anti-abortion bill!”

Follow @NAPAWF on Twitter for more information and graphics like the one posted above.

Just when you think anti-choicers have reached peak absurdity, they manage to prove you wrong.

Jun 2 '12

Surprise! That New Planned Parenthood ‘Sting’ Video Was Deceptively Edited

laurenvauren:

Militantly anti-abortion rights group Live Action sure acted like it had exposed some big-time fuckery in its latest Planned Parenthood hidden camera sting operation. From a casual observer’s perspective, the sting captured what appears to be footage of a Planned Parenthood employee enthusiastically endorsing sex-selective abortion for a woman who claimed that she didn’t want another baby girl. But this edition, like every other undercover sting video Live Action has ever produced, was edited heavily, omitting key moments in the interaction and artificially making Planned Parenthood look artificially bad. I’m shocked!

Not that the original sting video Live Action released was that damning to begin with — a swift response statement from Planned Parenthood clarified that employees of the family planning organization are to follow a specific protocol in sensitive situations like the one presented by the Live Action actor, and that the employee featured in the video didn’t follow protocol.

Regardless, the employee did do a few things that weren’t included in Live Action’s final cut. For one thing, the employee asked the pregnant woman if they’d considered adoption instead of abortion. She also declined to give credence to tests that purport to help couples determine the sex of the fetus early in pregnancy. She also asked the woman if she was sure, 100% sure, that she wanted to terminate her pregnancy. When the Live Action actress asked the Planned Parenthood if there was a specific doctor she’d recommend to perform a sex-selective abortion, the Planned Parenthood employee said she didn’t know of any provider who specifically specialized in sex selection.

Read the informative article about the supposed “sting” operation here

Whaat? Live Action - blatantly lying? I never thought I’d see the day.

May 31 '12

Anti-abortion bill gains traction in House, but falls short of passage

stfuconservatives:

shortformblog:

  • yeah… Today, the House of Representatives voted 246-168 in favor of a bill that would make it illegal for doctors to perform abortions if the sole motivation for the abortion is dissatisfaction with the gender of the fetus.
  • but… The bill, nicknamed PRENDA (for Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act), was brought up under a suspension of House rules, thus requiring a two-thirds majority for passage. It was thirty votes shy of that, so it didn’t pass. source

» For and against: The bill’s sponsor, Trent Franks, claims that America is the only advanced country left in the world that still doesn’t restrict sex-selective abortion in any way.But Democratic Rep. Jan Schakowski voted against the bill, saying that it ”includes a provision that would allow a women’s husband or parents, by merely alleging that an abortion is because of gender, to seek injunctive relief to prevent the doctor from performing abortion procedures.“ 

Follow ShortFormBlog • Find us on Twitter & Facebook

Bolded for emphasis. It was a bill that allowed people other than the pregnant person to prevent them from getting an abortion. They just did it under the guise of “we’re protecting girl babies!!!” Sex-selective abortion happens in America, but not at a statistically significant rate. We don’t need a law to restrict it, and we certainly don’t need a law that pretends to restrict it while actually punishing pregnant people.

May 29 '12
Apr 23 '12
Aug 23 '11
Aug 22 '11
Jul 7 '11
Jun 23 '11
"For if “choice” is the moral imperative guiding abortion, then there is no way to take a stand against “gendercide.” Aborting a baby because she is a girl is no different from aborting a baby because she has Down syndrome or because the mother’s “mental health” requires it. Choice is choice. One Indian abortionist tells Ms. Hvistendahl: “I have patients who come and say ‘I want to abort because if this baby is born it will be a Gemini, but I want a Libra."

Unnatural Selection (via almonds-and-cherries)

Choices don’t happen in a vacuum. It’s very naive to think they do.

Jun 13 '11

voidstuff said: is abortion what they’re suggesting????? i think there is (really expensive) technology now that can let you choose which gender you want your baby to be…

jmepie:

No, abortion is what caused the shortage in the first place because countries like China and India don’t like girls.

The article is explaining how bad this selection has become, basically, so let’s not bring that technology to China and India. Although I suppose if they’re going to be doing it anyway, choosing the sex beforehand is better than aborting a fetus because it’s female.

Abortion is often a symptom of a problem. In the US, the problems are lack of education, lack of resources, rape, etc. In other countries, it’s because boys are valued over girls. Those are the problems we should be addressing. Starting from the tail-end will either get you nowhere, or somewhere you really don’t want to be.

You can’t really choose the sex of an embryo/fetus that is already developing, FYI. All those techniques involve IVF or strategies like timing of intercourse, diets, supplements, and positions. I don’t know if that’s what you were suggesting, but I see a lot of anti-choicers throwing out “solutions” like this without doing any research into what they actually involve.