A classic case of conflicting principles exists in the case of sex-selective abortions. One horn of the dilemma has the "women's movement" enshrining the right to abortion as fundamental. The other horn is the indisputable fact that this "right" is consistently used against women. Women are victimized in many ways because of our societal, cultural and legal treatment of abortion, but most notably in the case of sex-selective abortion. These are abortions in which the fetus is destroyed solely because it is a little boy or a little girl. Females are affected disproportionately worldwide because of sex-selective abortions.
Sex-selective abortions should be outlawed in the United States of America by vote of Congress. A process which rests entirely on discrimination has no place in the United States. If the law is challenged in court, let it be challenged. For the issue of sex-selective abortion, as for many other human rights issues, the largest hurdle to overcome is ignorance. A public debate over sex-selective abortion will produce much-needed dialogue and reach the majority of Americans who feel that abortion is wrong but should not be outlawed in all cases.
Abortion for sex-selection is wrong. But, it follows from the philosophy which underlies abortion in the United States. Our country, according to Harvard Law Professor Mary Ann Glendon, has the most permissive abortion laws of any Western country.
Many consider the untrammeled exercise of the right to abortion as of paramount importance in maintaining gender equity and "reproductive freedom." In fact, the opposite is true. Without restrictions on "choice," gender equity is among the first victims.
Sunday's New York Times Magazine contained a large section devoted to China. A small paragraph on page 27 read, "There are now 40 million more males than females in China, and that surplus is not expected to diminish substantially. Male babies continue to be more desired, and an estimated 12 percent of females never enter the population because of sex-selective abortion and infanticide." Read it again -- males are desired more; females are aborted more.
Where is the chorus of human rights voices? Silent. Where are prominent feminists objecting to this blinding injustice? Silent. Perhaps they are scared of limiting "choice." Perhaps they consider that aborting females solely because of their gender is a lesser evil than restricting the "right" which they have elevated and promoted. Perhaps they do not see anything wrong with it at all. We will never know what they think, because they remain in a state of denial.
But, you say, that's China. Sex-selective abortions may happen over there, but not here. In the United States, we are better than that. We would never allow such blatant discrimination. We know better. We would speak out against this clear evil if it existed in our more enlightened country.
Try again. A worldwide trend of sex-selective abortion coupled with discrimination against female infants wipes out thousands upon thousands of females each year.
The United States is guilty. In our progressive, rational, liberal-minded country, roughly 42 percent of all baby girls are aborted, whereas only 25 percent of all baby boys are aborted. In other words, if you are a female in the fetal stage, you have little more than half a chance of making it out of the womb. Welcome to America.
We can and we should outlaw sex-selective abortion in the United States. We must open our eyes -- ignorance is not bliss. Babies are aborted because they are not boys every day in the United States. Each day that passes without legislation against sex-selective abortion is another day in which females continue to disappear from the world's population.
The thought is revolting. Worse, the silence is deafening.
