Combating ‘Gendercide?’ House to Vote on Sex-Selection Abortion Ban
- Posted on May 31, 2012 at 6:48am by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
WASHINGTON (The Blaze/AP) — Legislation coming up for a House vote would make it a federal crime to carry out an abortion based on the gender of the fetus. The measure takes aim at the aborting of female fetuses, a practice more common to countries such India and China, where there is a strong preference for sons, but which is also thought to take place in this country.
On Tuesday, The Blaze brought you an undercover video that was created by Live Action, a pro-life group based in San Jose, California. In it, a Planned Parenthood counselor at an Austin, Texas, branch can be seen allegedly being complicit in helping a woman facilitate a sex-selective abortion.
The mainly Republican supporters of the federal bill characterized the vote as a sex-discrimination issue at a time when Democrats are accusing Republicans of waging a war on women. Abortion rights advocates argued that the bill exploits the problem of selective abortion to further limit a woman’s right to choose.
(Related: Planned Parenthood Responds to Gendercide Expose, Refuses to Ban Sex-Selective Abortion)
The House Republican leadership brought the bill to the floor under a procedure requiring a two-thirds majority for passage, and the outcome was uncertain. To help assure passage, the authors removed a contentious provision of the bill that would have also banned abortions based on the race of the fetus.
Even if it passes the House, the measure faces a dim future in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz. (AP)
The legislation, sponsored by anti-abortion activist Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., would make it a federal offense, subject to up to five years in prison, to perform, solicit funds to perform or coerce a woman into a sex-selection abortion. Bringing a woman into the country to obtain such an abortion would also be punishable by up to five years in prison.
“We are the only advanced country left in the world that still doesn’t restrict sex-selection abortion in any way,” said Franks, who has also collided with pro-choice groups recently over a bill he is pushing to ban abortions in the District of Columbia after 20 weeks of pregnancy. “This evil practice has now allowed thousands of little girls in America and millions of little girls across the world to be brutally dismembered.”
Franks and others say there is evidence of sex-selection abortions in the United States among certain ethnic groups from countries where there is a traditional preference for sons. The bill notes that while the United States has no law against such abortions, countries such as India and China, where the practice has contributed to lopsided boy-girl ratios, have enacted bans on the practice.
Lawmakers “who recently have embraced contrived political rhetoric asserting that they are resisting a `war on women’ must reflect on whether they now wish to be recorded as being defenders of the escalating war on baby girls,” said National Right to Life Committee legislative director Douglas Johnson.
His group, in a letter to lawmakers, said there are credible estimates that 160 million women and girls are missing from the world due to sex selection.
But the Guttmacher Institute, an organization that favors abortion rights, said evidence of sex selection in the United States is limited and inconclusive. It said that while there is census data showing some evidence of son preference among Chinese-, Indian- and Korean-American families when older children are daughters, the overall U.S. sex ratio at birth in 2005 was 105 boys to 100 girls, “squarely within biologically normal parameters.”
NARAL Pro-Choice America president Nancy Keenan said that while her group has long opposed “reproductive coercion,“ ”the Franks bill exploits the very real problem of sex discrimination and gender inequity while failing to offer any genuine solutions that would eliminate disparities in health care access and information.”
Marcia Greenberger, co-president of the National Women’s Law Center, said the bill fosters discrimination by “subjecting women from certain racial and ethnic backgrounds to additional scrutiny about their decision to terminate a pregnancy.”
“Doctors would be forced to police their patients, read their minds and conceal information from them,” said Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y.
With the focus on the economy, abortion and other social issues have not been in the spotlight this year. Still, Franks’ D.C. bill and other bills on parental notification and eliminating funds for international family planning groups are working their way through the House, and last year the GOP-led House passed bills to deny funds to Planned Parenthood, effectively ban abortion coverage in state health-insurance exchanges and bar funds from being used by teaching health centers for training in abortion care. Those efforts died in the Senate.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 676 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 527 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 398 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 371 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 328 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 265 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 275 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 146 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 265 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (112)
phillyfanatic
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 12:39pmBarb Lee of course, like all the socialist Dems spoke in the Well and said, of course, Pubs were hurting females. Yikes. Nothing ever said by Dems about the kids. Never unless it is for welfare so they become dependent voters for them . Lord, at my advanced age I am actually starting to despise these Dems.
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 1:17pmIf MALES reject ENSLAVING the FEMALES… then, No Law should dictate what a Woman (re. Declaration Of Indepenence: Created Equal) does with her own Body.
If MALES want to ENSLAVE the FEMALES… then, convert to ISLAM!
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 2:01pmDid the woman just fall down and get pregnant on accident?
Do we claim that a murderer is just “exercising his choice, with his body” when he goes out and starts shooting people?
Just curious.
Abortion, especially Planned Parenthood, is deliberate and planned genocide. Look up the history of the organization, especially Margaret Sanger. Look at the comments of Judge Ginsberg about Roe v. Wade. It’s not about choice, it’s about eliminating “undesirable inner city types” aka black people. Don’t take my word on it, research it. Also, while you’re researching, go look for the “free clinics” and abortion clinics. See any around the lilly white Suburbs/rural areas? Or are most all of them in inner cities.
Genocide. Straight out.
Report Post »jerimiah41
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 2:04pmI sure hope that Christian women are at least having a discussion not only with husband and family but also with their Pastor. I am not a Pastor but the scriptures are very clear about anyone that would harm a little one has very little chance entering the Kingdom of God. I pray for any woman having to make a decision like this that they are at least shown some picture of the baby they are going to take the life of. For any woman that might agree with creation this would have to come back and haunt them. Think of what this baby could really have turned out. I usually do not like to take positions but is anyone thinking of the potential Grandmother or Grandfathers in these cases especially something this late. I remember when my oldest son was dating the eventual mother of my first grandchild came to his mother and said “Hey, how does it feel you are going to be a Grandmother”. She was so excited even though they were not married and neither of us thought this relationship would ever last. What if the mother said after a few months decided on aborting that baby when an ultrasound would show the baby’s form , etc. At what point should there be a concern about things like this. You deprived somone of being and Aunt or Uncle, Brother or Sister, etc. Especially if someone close in the family would love a child but unable to do so. From what I have seen, it is just discussed with the client as if it is nothing to it , they can just take care of the problem. I pray.
Report Post »JRook
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 3:33pmHow many pieces of stupid legislation are going to be put up as attempts to overturn Roe v. Wade. In the 1st. trimester a woman’s reproductive choice has the priority. The rationale she might use to terminate HER pregnancy is of no relevance. It could be as stupid as hair color or as complex as severe congenital defects. Frankly, the woman shouldn’t have to give any reason other than this is the CHOICE I have made. Transparent and stupid piece of legislation in that women will just give another reason. Why should the government be able to even ask the woman what her reason is. Don’t the folks in Washington have some real work to do.
Report Post »old white guy
Posted on June 1, 2012 at 6:21ami wonder who these sex selection people think will have the next generation of boys?
Report Post »Common Sense Sally
Posted on June 1, 2012 at 6:20pmJROOK, women “made the choice” to have sex and take the risk of becoming pregnant. If our society hadn’t made sex so casual and alluring, we might not have to have this discussion. If a woman doesn’t want to ever have to face the EFFECT of her choice, getting pregnant, then she should refrain from the CAUSE, having sex.
And why doesn’t anyone think of the baby growing inside, who may be a girl. She doesn‘t get a choice to decide what’s going to happen with HER body. How’s THAT fair???
Report Post »APPAULED
Posted on July 12, 2012 at 10:09pmPhilly – Please don’t judge all Democrats. We don’t all feel the same about abortion and especially aborting due to the sex of a child. I think this is horrendous and I don’t understand how someone could do such a horrible thing.
Report Post »sfcpete
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 12:39pmHow are these idiots, that can’t even put a budget together, think they can prove that a woman is getting an abortion based on the gender of the child inside her?
Report Post »Not Quite
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 1:01pmI have to agree. This is impossible to effectively enforce. You just don’t say you are getting an abortion based on sex, race, or whatever. I’m against abortion but this seems like a waste of tax payer dollars.
Report Post »Cuba_Libre
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 4:07pmTotally agree. I mean they can’t even enforce the border… What they need to do is firmly stand up to the issue itself and draw a line in the sand! Email them here: http://www.oneclickpolitics.com
Report Post »3monkeysmomma
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 11:23pmAgreed. This is a stupid law and it wouldn’t have saved a singled life.
Report Post »azitdad
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 12:12pmHmm, let’s see… Back in the day the Pagans sacrificed virgins to their gods so rain would fall on their crops and the world would keep turning. They also made war on their neighbors, most of whom they did not consider to be human.
Today, Liberals murder children (Abortion: especially girls) worship the earth (Green Movement/Global Warming) and want to punish anyone of differing or opposing opinion (tolerance).
Report Post »CaliforniaGold
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 6:38pmWell said.
Report Post »Tigress1
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 10:45amProgressives are such KIND, CARING people! The stand for CULLING people! First it was “death panels” in Obamacare, where panels will decide if you are “worth” investing money in order to save your life. You might be deemed “too old”, or “too far gone” or “can’t contribute enough to society”, etc. Then also since Obamacare was passed, suddenly certain tests which have saved lives through early detection (such as mammograms for women under a certain age) are suddenly determined to be “unnecessary”. Now we have gendercide, where women can cull their own babies for particular characteristics! Progressives are warped, disgusting, nasty, mean, CREEPY, people!
Report Post »AmazingGrace8
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 10:28amSign of the times when government is going to ban “bigger-size“ drinks gets more of ”a big gulp” (can no longer have a 20 oz. drink) than this “selection” (20 weeks) at a drive-up abortion clinic.
Report Post »Lloyd Drako
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 10:27amIt’s not difficult to see what this is: an attempt to make a measure further limiting actual women’s freedom of choice into a measure prohibiting discrimination against potential women. Nicely played!
Report Post »DamocleAurelius
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 10:43amYou’re a fool. Women’s choice? If a woman was raped, or if carrying pregnancy to term would kill her, let’s talk about “choice”. Otherwise you are just trying justify women CHOOSING to have sex and then trying to avoid the natural consequence of that choice. Which would be tolerable if and only if we weren’t talking the termination of human life.
Women are just as accountable for their choices as anybody else. You want CHOOSE to have sex, you can live with the consequences, just like everybody else.
Report Post »Lloyd Drako
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 11:06amIf a woman chooses to have sex, and then chooses to abort the natural consequence of that choice, that is her business. Perhaps she was using birth control–but it failed. Perhaps her partner was using a condom–but it failed. Let me be clear: abortion is a dreadful thing even to think about. It does indeed involve a human life–two lives to be precise. We should do everything in our power to keep the number of abortions to a minimum, but when all is said and done, if a woman wants one, for whatever reason, she should have it.
Report Post »johnjamison
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 11:29amAnd what role does a the father in whether a child he helped create is born. NONE. If women want total control over the unborn child they need to be held total responsible for the child after birth. If a primiscuous woman has sex with multiple partners and then get pregnant she has total control over the unborn. She chose her action and as a responsibile adult she need to account for them. Women want total control they need to assume total responsibility.
Report Post »tljjjjcline
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 11:32amYou are a mental midget, You and your womens rights bunch. How about a little responsibility or is this something you never learned. Your moral compass is non existent. I suggest you seek the Lord while he may be found because you are in gross deception
Report Post »G-WHIZ
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 11:38amNow you see what the [govt-in your life] is causing. Abortion has been cheepenned by “free” at P.P. ! If they actually had to pay for their own abortions, they would NOT use them just for every reason-needed. The progressives immediately latch-on to “free” and bend it to their own designs, and hidden agenda….the necessary elimination of “undesireables” in the cultue of their choice…not [our] choice!
Report Post »ChristianPatriotTX
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 1:15pmLoyd- you are truly r one messed up individual- u see when people terminate a life (thats right, a life given by GOD) all because you just don’t loke the sex, that makes YOU try to be God.. They have a name for it when you willfully take a life…it is called MURDER so, your endorsement can only be seen as making YOU an accomplice to murder… Only really with since you support this barbaric procedure that YOUR parents had decided on that for YOU…
Report Post »Lloyd Drako
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 1:16pmResponsibility–absolutely. If a woman chooses to have an abortion, she is assuming responsibility for the consequences of sex, whether free or forced, promiscuous or not. If she chooses to bear a child instead, she should also be responsible for it, unless marriage has created a legal obligation on the part of the father.
G-Whiz: The question of who should pay is debatable. Procedures such as lasik are often cheaper because they are not commonly covered by health insurance or Medicaid. Perhaps abortion should be treated similarly.. But what is an “undesirable” pregnancy is up to the woman to determine, on whatever basis she chooses.
Report Post »Tigress1
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 10:24amAbortion is disgusting, but gendercide is disgusting beyond words. Can you imagine how a little boy would feel if he learned that the only reason he is alive is because his sister before him was CULLED and then brutally murdered?
Report Post »wvernon1981
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 3:03pmAnd a little boy is going to learn this news how?
Report Post »Arc
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 10:09amAs we crumble under the weight of our collective stupidity, I will continue to look for a glimpse of humanity and soul in the throngs of pro-abortion advocates. It is an uphill climb since I am already educationally challenged but I will struggle on utilizing my GOD given right to seek the sanity in this world that HE gave me. I fully realize that some in this world are more concerned with themselves and are unable to embrace anything outside their buffer of personal space therefore I will pray for them also.
Report Post »The Gooch
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 10:08amI am not an abortion proponent. I find this “right” repugnant & the manner in which abortion was legalized shameless activism dependent upon mental gymnastics.
Report Post »Having said that, this proposed legislation is just stupid. It’s even crazier than the forced ultrasound in VA. How in the hell will this be enforced? Who will be the final arbiter on this matter? The thought police… the intent investigators?
As much as many of us do not support abortion, it is legal. So we, as a nation, are taking a bizarre stance that only unborn males can or should be aborted? Wacky.
This is a way to make leftist ideologues squirm & puts a cute twist on the so-called war on women. This is partisan gamesmanship, not a serious stand against abortion.
If abortion is legal & allegedly a right, it’s not my businsess or the govt.’s business as to why someone chooses to end an unborn human being. If the aborter is following the letter of the law, I’m assuming they can have an abortion to make a point, see how it feels or get back at their mother. It sucks… but it’s legal. Then again, if you‘re so shallow as to want a ’designer’ family, why not just model many a celebrity & adopt? You can even choose color. I hear China & India have an excess of males.
I suppose the intent here is to give abortionists one more reason to sweat. Hey. How about we just create a new govt. agency that trains agents on observing doctor-client relationships?
Ugly, ugly, ugly….
DamocleAurelius
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 10:38amThank you for demonstrating why abortion should be illegal except for cases of rape/incest, or if the pregnancy threatens to kill the mother.
Do we really want to be a society that terminates human life for any other reason?
Report Post »CheckeredFlag
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 12:33pmAmen! We must not criminalize thought – only behavior. Not only is is unenforceable, it reinforces a very dangerous precedent judging thoughts and not actions alone. It’s a slippery slope — at what point do we punish thought alone in the name of preventing crime like in “Minority Report”?
If I happen to become so angry that clench my fist and perhaps even draw back, yet restrain myself from throwing a punch, could I be arrested by police of having the mere thought or intent of violence?
What about convicted child sex offender being arrested for his fantasies? A man was arrested several years ago when police discovered his personal diary these private thoughts.
Same reason why I despise “hate crime” legislation. Why is the rape and murder of an innocent child any less egregious and receive a lesser sentence merely because it wasn’t racially motivated?
At what point do our thoughts and/or intents become a crime? Scary.
Report Post »toto
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 1:27pmUnderstand your frustration with the compliance aspects of legislation. However unenforceable, you do not make things legal just because you can’t control what people actually do. It is a first good step and at least sets a standard. The next steps that have to be taken by all those that find abortion abhorrent is to treat it like they have tobacco. It is not good for you (your soul), it is definitely not good for the baby. It needs to be put on the front burner in people’s minds for the murder that it is. Needs to be tried and convicted in the court of public opinion. Pictures of the aborted should be seen by everyone who contemplates an abortion, even though legal, it should have a most unsavory taint.
Report Post »SouthernDancer
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 2:06pmThis is not a measure to only allow male fetuses to be aborted but to keep gender out of the equation altogether. It is NOT a woman’s right to choose to murder her baby, only God has that right. Yes, abortion is legal, but it is not moral.
Report Post »CABERNETQHS
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 9:46amAdd your comments
Report Post »CABERNETQHS
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 11:17am“Heaven is for real”…read the book. Hope these “Moms” are ready to meet all of their aborted children. It’s actually a beautiful thought if you have asked for forgiveness and get to meet these beings who were meant to be here on earth just as much as you or me.
Report Post »RodT82721
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 9:41amAh yes, as we slip down that slippery slope, we find it’s okay to rip a male unborn limbs off, but not if it’s a female. That would be a “war on woman”. The “war on males” is just fine with all those elitist. So now ‘gender selective’ abortions are not to be allowed, unless the selected gender is the right one.
I wonder if anyone else notices why the removal of morales from our education system is getting really ugly?
These are people that think if enough like minded will protest for free stuff then it’s their “right”! I got news for you free loaders, if someone else has to pay for it, it’s not “free” or your “right”.
Report Post »tljjjjcline
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 9:14amWe are now approaching fourty years since row v wade became law. We have murdered over 55 million children. You think God will let this go unanswered, Think again america we are in serious trouble with God. We are under and shall continue to be under his judgement. Why do you think america is falling so rapidly on every level. Politics will not save us, Obama is our judgement and there shall be more to come if america does not repent of it’s willful wickedness. Mock if you will but the truth still stands!
Report Post »Bluebonnet
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 10:35amThis whole thing is so sick. What’s wrong with these women? How can they live with knowing they allowed their child to be murdered because it’s not convenient right now?
I’ve read about women, who in later years yearn for that baby they killed. As they get older, remorse sets in and the memory is too painful for them. hmmm? How about teaching once again, virtue, morality and personal responsibility! Some of these people are like animals breeding, but it seems the animals care more about their offspring than human animals. just saying!
Report Post »momrules
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 9:12amAbortion on demand was the greatest sin ever passed into law. There is no way to clean up this sin by passing laws about gender selection.
Whether a child is murdered for convenience or it’s gender is a moot point.
You cannot pretty up abortion.
Report Post »Carol1955
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 8:51amI hope the law does pass and at least it will force lawmakers to show how they stand and that is information that can be useful. Even though abortion lovers will wiggle around it, it does make a statement that abortion for gender selection is wrong. In a society that is as fallen as ours, we need every opportunity to stand up and proclaim when something is wrong. A small step but it moves in the right direction.
Report Post »EqualJustice
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 8:45amThe part I hate about this is the woman has to wait so long to find out the sex using ultrasound. HOW COULD ANY mother look at that moving living baby inside her and say.. kill it, it’s a girl? What have we become? How sad, really.
Report Post »teddrunk
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 8:27amPerhaps attach funds to attack breast cancer. Remember that a guy can die of a disease and no one will fund research to combat it, but God help the disease that a woman or a gay guy gets. It’s money and attention by the bucket loads.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 8:26amAlthough I am for the intent of the legislation, I don’t see how passing another law will prevent it. As long as abortion on demand is legal, the abortions based on sex will continue.
Report Post »loriann12
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 8:32amYep, they‘ll just lie and say they didn’t make the decision based on sex of the child. Why don’t we just claim the little girls will grow up to be trans gen dered? That should satisfy them, because they won’t be girls anymore if you raise them being called by boy names and treated like a boy, right? It’s another attempt to ruin the family unit.
Report Post »objectivetruth
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 11:41amWrong gonzo.Abortion on demand is almost always limited to the first trimester.The only reason the second trimester is allowed is that certain medical problems can throw a womens cycle off.Third trimester abortions better known as partial birth abortions aren’t legal in may states.Many doctors won’t perform them anyway unless the life of the mother in in grave danger or the baby will be stillborn or die very shortly after birth.Third trimester abortion for convience isn’t done as often as people think.
Report Post »Its one of the reason they couldn’t find enough stastics from the usa.Most women here who have abortions have them in the first trimester.
To answer a question you might want to ask
I’m prochoice in first trimester abortions.Second Trimester abortions I’m not really happy about.Third trimester abortions without medical reasons I’m totally prolife.I find it truly disgusting that a women would do that.Its abhorrent to me.If it weren‘t for the medical aspect of possible necessity in the third trimester I’d vote for outlawing them.I can‘t though as prolife crowd doesn’t even want a medical exemption.They are a all or nothing approach just like the liberals.Simply the flip side of the coin.I don‘t live my life that way and don’t want to be bullied into that type of decision by either side.
TWO BITS
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 8:22amIt is plausible that gender selection could join convenience and even financial reasons to justify abortion. If Planned Parenthood and pro-choice advocates pause to reflect on their actions, they are supporting the ultimate sex discrimination.
Report Post »oohisis
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 8:02amI cannot see how it would be enforced. People are evil…I am Pro-Life, but I am not a fan of the Governments ability to get involved. It is a moral and ethical issue. The only way to stop such horrific behavior is to change our culture to one that allows God to be openly worshipped and preached. To stop watching the crap coming from Hollywood and the TV. To stop listening to the degrading music on the radio. In our court of law, we are to place our hand on the Bible and swear to God. If one is found innocent due to lack of evidence, tampering, ext..our founder’s believed, as do I that they would be judged by God, thus the use of the bible. We as a nation have to take solice in that a limited Gov’t means fewer federal laws. Even in such deplorable actions. The pro choice folks use the extremely small % of rape, incest, endangerment as a defense for all abortions to be legal..YET the same % in abortions due to gender selection is too small a number to really count. Who the H**L makes these rules up? How can they justifiy that science can start life in a dish then insert it into a woman yet its NOT life? How can scientist find a one cell organism on Mar’s and declare it has LIFE but a “glob” of cells in a womb is NOT…We need to heal the soul’s of women to stop this. Our founder’s did not want to control character thru the constitution, our character is the constitution. As ben said “A republic if you can keep it”..we won’t if we lose our character.
Report Post »CABERNETQHS
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 9:45amWell put, unfortunately I don’t think most of our society is going to have this epiphany on their own. I guess we can just become like China, and eventually the population will drop with mostly all males. I would rather the government step in to prevent the murder of an innocent than restrict the size of soda we can buy. I also want to know why a man is charged with murder when his actions results in a fetal demise, but a woman can CHOOSE to kill her child. It’s a sick twisted excuse for liberals to live like whores, avoid responsibility and move their evil agenda forward
Report Post »Baddoggy
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 7:42amALL abortion is MURDER. Why not ban it all? Including ALL rape and incest pregnancies. Murder is murder. If you believe differently, please look at the blood on your hands.You too believe in killing babies….
Report Post »Yes GLENN BECK and PAT GRAY want to kill babies in the case of rape and incest. It’s still murder Glenn and Pat….Deal with it.
Leadthemtothelight
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 7:55amAmazing how quickly these people can get something done when they want to. I seriously doubt the uber liberals in the senate will pass this. On a side note perhaps they might also attach a budget as an ear mark and push for immediate passage they could tell Pelosi that they must pass the bill to really see what’s in it.
Report Post »GoodCook
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 7:24amSo who is really waging a war on women? In China more girl babies are aborted then boys. Own up Democrats you know it’s you!
Report Post »Chet Hempstead
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 7:04amThe current state of the law is that abortion is a right. A right shouldn’t be contingent on the government’s approval or disapproval of your reason for exercising it. In fact, you shouldn’t even have to give a reason. A woman should be free to say, “it’s none of your business why I want it, just do it.”
Report Post »Baddoggy
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 7:45amSo you believe that since the Government sanctioned MURDER it’s OK? I truly hope they send a drone to your houise to kill you. That is legal too now thanks to NDAA, the Patriot act and the Government kill list…How you feel now??? Wake up stupid. You believe in murder!
Report Post »teddrunk
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 7:56amAt one time, the government sanctioned slavery. By your logic, you would have approved.
Report Post »dataweaver
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 8:43amMany rights that are blatantly spelled out in the Constitution (such as the right to free speech or the right to bear arms) have been curtailed in various ways; some good, some bad. I see no reason why the right to an abortion should be _more_ sacrosanct than these other rights, and I see some very good reasons why it should be less so.
Report Post »CABERNETQHS
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 10:12amAgain…why is it ok for a woman to choose to commit murder, but if a man assaults his pregnant wife, he can be charged with murder. I once thought like you, it‘s a woman’s body, she has the right to do whatever she wants with it. WRONG… she made a choice to be sexually active. There are the very few sad incidents of rape and incest, which need addressed seperately for obvious reasons. Adoption should always be a CHOICE. Most abortions are a form of birthcontrol for the irresponsible or morally lost. Most good people come to this realization sooner or later. Some self centered narcisists never see the light. This is not a war on women, it’s been a 40 year war on babies.
Report Post »Chet Hempstead
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 3:52pmIt isn’t murder because a fetus isn’t a person. It doesn’t have free will, and it doesn’t have a human mind.
Report Post »Chet Hempstead
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 3:54pmCABERNETQHS
Most abortions are a form of birthcontrol for the irresponsible or morally lost.
What’s so bad about that? The irresponsible and morally lost are exactly the people I want to see not having children.
Report Post »Chet Hempstead
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 4:02pmdataweaver
Report Post »The only legitimate restrictions on your rights are those that prevent you from depriving other people of theirs – laws against slander, threats, weapons like machine guns and artillery that could be used for mass murder of people who would have no chance to fight back, those are all okay. Since I don’t consider you to be a person until you’re born, the only legitimate restriction on abortion is the ban on performing one on a woman who doesn’t want it.
Chet Hempstead
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 4:07pmteddrunk
Report Post »I would not have approved of slavery, but as long as it was legal, I would have opposed it by trying to change the law to make it illegal, not by chiseling away at it with laws about what kind of work you can use your slaves for and other pointless regulations.
cassandra
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 7:03amthe only war on women I see is the democrates that don‘t seem to care that a BABY is a girl go ahead and get your abortion because they wouldn’t want anybody burdened with the wrong sex of their baby I say GET RID of Planned Parent hood this org, has NOTHING to do with the health of the mother but making money off of murdered babies
Report Post »loriann12
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 8:35amJust look at Cass Sustein…he doesn’t value life before school or after retirement. Before the school system has invested in you, you’re not valuable. After retirement and you can’t do anything for the community, you’re not of value. I wonder how the government handout people feel about this? What if the government decides all they do is take, and not contribute, and refuse them health care?
Report Post »Lloyd Drako
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 10:25amCassandra: Planned Parenthood is a non-profit organization. It does not make money off abortions or anything else.
Report Post »toto
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 1:17pmDrako, So it is a non profit, where do they get 1.4 million to donate to the Obama campaign? Do you see NO problem with the government giving millions to fund Planned Parenthood, then giving money to the Obama campaign? Can you say INCESTUOUS immoral relationship? As far as I’m concerned, any entity that takes government money in the form of grants should be prohibited from making campaign contributions, but this one is particularly egregious, forcing taxpayers to not only fund abortions, but contribute to Obama himself. There must be some decent ethical Democrats that see this, where are they?
Report Post »NickDeringer
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 7:00amAnother unenforceable law. How can they prove that the woman had the abortion because of the gender to the baby?
Report Post »jens63
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 6:53amThis is another useless bill. Who is to say what the reason is one chooses and abortion, if abortion is legal they can say anything. Worthless, make it look like they are doing something, bill….
Report Post »EqualJustice
Posted on May 31, 2012 at 8:52amIf they really wanted to DO something, they would shut down Planned Parenthood or at the very LEAST, STOP FUNDING IT with OUR tax dollars. I don’t want to pay for even ONE abortion!
Report Post »