For liberals, some womens' choices more equal than others

By Noemie Emery
Examiner Columnist
  07/12/11

Excerpt:
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" -- than which no more damaging charge can be made.

Then came the news that women were using this wisdom in order to end female lives. Scientists believe that, world-over, around 160 million women are "missing," dispatched (that is, aborted) by their parents, who prefer male children and don't want superfluous females to clutter their lives...

...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." the rest

Choosing Boys Over Girls and the Consequences of a World Full of Men


In a “Choice Revolution” There Are No “Ethical Boundaries”
I first heard the euphemistic term “selective reduction,” at a bioethics conference at which I was speaking in Banff, Alberta. I don’t remember the year, probably about a decade ago. I was speaking on assisted suicide, and as I awaited my turn, the speaker before me extolled the virtue of “reducing triplets into twins,” after IVF resulted in too many embryos implanting.

I hate euphemisms, particularly regarding crucial ethical issues, and the guy really had me seeing red. So, when my turn came, I went off script. “Selective reduction doesn’t turn triplets into ‘twins,’” I said. “It kills one of the three siblings. The remaining two are still triplets, only one is dead. And if they ever find out, they will know that but for the luck of where the abortionist chose to put his tools, they might never have been born.”...