Sex-selective abortions

Jump to Last Post 1-13 of 13 discussions (162 posts)
  1. habee profile image93
    habeeposted 11 years ago

    What do you think? Do you think it's okay to wait until you're far enough along in a pregnancy to see if you're carrying a male or a female? And if it's not what you want, get an abortion for that reason alone? I could never do that.

    replyreport
    1. profile image0
      JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I guess if you don't believe that it's a living human being...

      Although, I don't understand how any person could possibly think that. It's just sick. Pro-choice people should just be grateful that they weren't aborted.

      replyreport
      1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
        MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        There are pro-choice people who do believe that the baby is a living being.  But hey thanks for being massively insulting... that always helps.

        replyreport
        1. profile image0
          JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          I said that in response to the question. It's the only reason I can think of that a person could rationalize aborting for sex choice. If you think it's a living human, then it's murder.

          replyreport
          1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
            MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Then you have a very limited imagination and little experience empathizing with situations that you have never been in.  The world is bigger than your life.

            replyreport
            1. schoolgirlforreal profile image80
              schoolgirlforrealposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              roll

              replyreport
            2. profile image0
              JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              If you believe it is a living being, and you have to abort your baby girl because hubby wants a boy, then you are killing your baby girl so your hubby won't kill your baby girl later. It's wrong.

              How can you defend killing a living being?

              replyreport
              1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
                MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                Because I have seen women beaten almost to death that had absolutely no where to go without their husbands.  I have seen women who have had their children beaten in front of them who were powerless to stop it and only had their heads kicked in when they tried.

                I am glad you haven't experience it but I am also sad that you are so convinced of your moral superiority that you cant step into their shoes and see how hard the choice would be.

                replyreport
                1. profile image0
                  JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Being abused doesn't justify you murdering someone else. I know women who have been in those situations, and none of them would kill their child. My wife was in one of those situations. Killing an innocent person is murder.

                  A woman can find help, especially in the US. There are shelters, there are churches, there are individuals who would help. If a woman showed up on my doorstep with her kids, we would take them in and help them. A lot of other people would help too.

                  replyreport
                  1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
                    MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    And of course you know exactly what that would take right?  You know exactly how an immigrant with no social or financial support would feel in a culture that is completely different than what she came from?  Of course she would logically completely trust strangers who were telling her something different than everything she was told her entire life to protect her from a man who she is terrified of who has threatened to kill her.

                    Once again you are lacking empathy and the ability to understand another person's situation because you have never been in it.

                    replyreport
                2. Smireles profile image66
                  Smirelesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  It is still murder. Sorry.

                  replyreport
                  1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
                    MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    *Shrugs* Then don't have an abortion.  And pray that if someone beats you almost to death that someone with more sympathy than what I seen displayed here is there to help you.  Although karma dictates that they'll just call you names.

                    replyreport
                  2. profile image0
                    JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    Thank you. Trying to justify murder is such a dangerous slope to even approach. Should we put people who are chronically ill out of their misery? It's more humane to just put them under and kill them than to let them suffer for years. Maybe they will be cured or go into remission, but we don't know that. Let's do them a favor by killing them.

                    replyreport
                  3. Ron Montgomery profile image61
                    Ron Montgomeryposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    Your lengthy argument with all of it's supporting facts and precedents has not caused me to agree with you.

                    Sorry

                    replyreport
        2. profile image0
          JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          And I'm not sorry if I insult someone who believes that A) the baby is a living human and B) it's ok to kill that living human because you wanted a boy/girl.

          replyreport
          1. schoolgirlforreal profile image80
            schoolgirlforrealposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            totally

            replyreport
          2. MelissaBarrett profile image58
            MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            And you automatically assume that you are describing me there?  Because I am pro-choice?  Wow.

            replyreport
            1. profile image0
              JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              Did I say I was describing you?

              I'm talking about people who would abort because of the sex of their baby.

              For a person who makes that choice, they either think the baby is a living human being or not.

              If they don't think it's a living being, then according to their own conscience they aren't killing the baby.

              But, if they do think it's a living being, then they are killing a living human being. That's murder.

              replyreport
              1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
                MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                You said: I said that in response to the question. It's the only reason I can think of that a person could rationalize aborting for sex choice. If you think it's a living human, then it's murder

                Obviously I can rationalize it.  So yes you pretty much said that comment about me.

                replyreport
                1. profile image0
                  JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  My comment said 'if I insult someone who...'. If you fall into that group, I'm not sorry for insulting you. If you fall into that group, then you believe that it can be ok to murder an innocent, living human being.

                  How can killing an innocent human baby not be murder?

                  replyreport
                  1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
                    MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    The same way that self-defense isn't murder.  It's amazing how your compassion exists for the baby but you have none whatsoever for the mother.

                    replyreport
    2. Melissa A Smith profile image95
      Melissa A Smithposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Sounds rather...disrespectful? I couldn't imagine the type of person who would want to, or could do that. And I'm pretty much 'pro-choice' (but not pro-responsiblity free) but I understand why the other side thinks the way they do. If this existed it would be part of the reason.

      replyreport
      1. habee profile image93
        habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Hi, Melissa. It does exist:

        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/2 … 52672.html

        Thankfully, the employee was fired.

        replyreport
        1. Melissa A Smith profile image95
          Melissa A Smithposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          But has anyone actually tried to gender select?

          replyreport
          1. Smireles profile image66
            Smirelesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            I heard on the news today that as we know it is common in China. I did not know that it is also common in India.

            replyreport
      2. TomBlalock profile image71
        TomBlalockposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        I can. I can imagine quite a few people that would. Welcome to Amurca.

        replyreport
    3. Ron Montgomery profile image61
      Ron Montgomeryposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      You could never do that.  Does any woman have the right to chose differently?

      replyreport
    4. Healthy Pursuits profile image79
      Healthy Pursuitsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I was amazed when I heard this. I know that people in some countries are determined to have boys rather than girls. Of course, they're doing it partly because boys are considered better in every way. They're also doing it because they believe that a boy will take care of them when they are old.

      However, if nothing else, don't they ever think about the idea of all those boys coming of age with not enough girls to marry? If enough parents abort their girl babies - and it seems the trend is up - they will end up with exactly that problem.

      replyreport
      1. kirstenblog profile image79
        kirstenblogposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        In countries where this has become a real problem they simply kidnap girls from other countries and force them to marry. sad

        replyreport
        1. kerryg profile image84
          kerrygposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Or force a woman to marry several brothers and bear children (sons, of course) for each of them.

          replyreport
    5. Jane Bovary profile image84
      Jane Bovaryposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      If the woman is pressured by cultural demands to choose a particular sex then yes, I think it's wrong. For one thing, as Healthy Pursuits pointed out,  it could lead to a serious imbalance in the sexes within a particular culture and it also reinforces the notion of the  'superiority' of one gender over another. Where there's no pressure, it seems like an inadequate, even frivolous reason to terminate a pregnancy, unless, as Melissa said, there was some issue with a gender related genetic problem. I wouldn't do it and would guess that most women wouldn't but even if it was banned, it would probably still occur, since there's nothing to stop a woman from lying about her reasons for wanting a termination, especially as technology improves and the baby's sex can be discovered much earlier than before.

      replyreport
    6. gmwilliams profile image85
      gmwilliamsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I totally concur with you habee on that one!

      replyreport
    7. nightwork4 profile image60
      nightwork4posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      i have no problem with abortions but to do it just because it isn't the right sex is stupid. doing it because it wasn't planned, you got raped, you can't afford a baby is one thing but just because you hope the next one is a different sex, well that's messed up.it's like in India where they still kill new-borns if it is a girl. sickening.

      replyreport
    8. Wayne Brown profile image81
      Wayne Brownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I see no moral value in it...too much like shopping for a child or tossing out what you classify as leftovers.  What happens when we can define the genes which establish the nature of the child...head-strong, low-key, or even the potential sexual perference.  What happens when couples abort their child after the doctors tells them.  I suspect that some who might favor abortion today might have to rethink where they stand the issue. Where is accountability in this issue?  Have we finally become such a "yuppie" society that we pick our children like puppies out of a litter to include hair color and disposition, or maybe even sexual orientation.  The public was aroused at immorality of cloning...for God's Sakes...where is they morality on this direction? WB

      replyreport
    9. iantoPF profile image79
      iantoPFposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I read through most of this thread and it was moving too far off point. I'd like to come back to the original.
      My brother lived in London for a while, during that time his wife got pregnant. The hospital she used had a policy of not revealing the sex of the child before birth. The reason for this was that there was a high proportion of immigrants from the Indian sub-continent in the locality. If they revealed that the baby would be a girl the family would go immediately for an abortion.
      I am very much pro-choice. The emphasis is usually been on the mother's choice to abort. It also means that the mother has the right to bear the child. Pressure should not be brought to abort against the mother's wishes.
      It seems to me that while I have respect for cultures and cultural diversity. Not all customs are worthy of universal respect. Some customs need to be opposed.

      replyreport
  2. habee profile image93
    habeeposted 11 years ago

    5 months is too late to make a decision on abortion, IMO. (not including if the mother's life is at risk)

    replyreport
    1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
      MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      A lot of birth defects aren't discovered until after 20 weeks.  That's my major problem with the 20 week cut off.  That and those women who are in horrible domestic situations that they can't get out of before then. 

      As far as selective sex abortions go I wasn't aware it was a problem in the U.S. I thought it was more prevalent in countries that limited children or had major problems with females.  In those cases it's more societal pressures than anything.

      replyreport
      1. habee profile image93
        habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        I understand what you're saying, Mel, but if a woman is okay with having a boy, is it okay to terminate the pregnancy just because it's a girl?

        According to Huffpo, it doesn't happen often in the US, but it does occur, mostly in Asian-American communities.

        replyreport
        1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
          MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Personally I say no but then again personally I wouldn't choose to have an abortion if I were carrying an octopus.

          The scenario in the article was obviously faked and designed to be as callous and inflammatory as possible... under the limited conditions of that fake I would obviously be forced to say that it is wrong... and that would be the reaction that the group was obviously seeking.

          However if a women came in that was in an abusive relationship and her husband was threatening to kill her or her child if it was a girl (and that scenario is not unheard of in some cultures) then my answer might be different.  If she knew that the child would likely be killed while an infant (which is also not unheard of in some cultures) my answer would also be different.  If the possibility of carrying a gender related birth defect was significant... then again.  Since I am not the woman carrying the child then I can't tell her situation or motivations.  As such I hesitate to condemn her choice.

          replyreport
          1. fpherj48 profile image59
            fpherj48posted 11 years agoin reply to this

            In cultures where it is not unheard of for an infant to be murdered for being the non-preferred sex?  so....in other words, "Barbaric countries" where human life is no more vital than a rat or poisonous snake....whose people are ignorant, blood thirsty, religious zealots or dictators who decide the fate of all the masses?  The reality is: there is no such thing as ABORTION is these backward countries, inhabited by lunatics.
            As for Asian countries and their disdain for female infants, but reverence for a male child.....There can be no justification, nor excuse nor explanation for this, other than total ignorance, lack of respect for human life and a complete void of morality, tainted with barbarism. 
            Let's see now....what other insanity could they choose?  I know!!  Any man who fathers more than one female child.....must have his penis removed.  Now, that makes sense.  If women can be stoned to death and babies murdered.....let's even up the score!   See how simple this lunacy can be?

            replyreport
            1. silverstararrow profile image75
              silverstararrowposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              Nah, I don't think that's likely to happen. These norms and rules have all been designed by men for themselves. They wouldn't condemn one of their own for committing such a 'sin' (even though biologically, he's the one responsible for the child turning out female). They'd rather remarry again and again until they can produce a boy child. Women are just a tool to be exploited in that regard.


              I've read extensively on the subject and written a hub about female feticide too. I'm ashamed that it is still prevalent in many countries, even after we've climbed high peaks of liberalization. sad

              replyreport
    2. psycheskinner profile image83
      psycheskinnerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      You can test for sex much earlier by amnio. But either way, it's unethical except arguably in extreme cases--for example an unplanned pregnancy by a person with a horrendous sex-linked genetic disorder.

      replyreport
  3. Angela Blair profile image68
    Angela Blairposted 11 years ago

    I couldn't do that either, Habee. I agree with MelissaBarrett -- I wouldn't choose to have an abortion if I were carrying an octopus OR a litter of puppies. Of course at this age, if I became pregnant, I'd have to choose between cutting my wrists or selling my soul to Ripley's Believe It Or Not!

    replyreport
    1. habee profile image93
      habeeposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      OMG, Sis - I've said exactly the same thing! (about the cutting of the wrist thingie) lol

      replyreport
  4. mbwalz profile image86
    mbwalzposted 11 years ago

    I believe the question really is, Are baby boys worth more to society than baby girls? Once you have answered this, then you can answer the "selection" process.

    If boys are deemed more valuable by a society or religion, then there is no question that that society or religion finds it acceptable to select (by whatever means: abortion, abandonment, abuse, starvation)the baby based on its sex. It's been done for thousands of years.

    However, gender selection - whether you think its OK or not - eventually creates an imbalance. Many countries where gender selection is accepted are now finding it impossible to find partners for their sons. This, in tern, has created a new market for brides - often illegally presented for marriage.

    When a society values both girls and boys, men and women, then the need for gender selection is gone.

    So to me, it's less of a pro-choice or pro-life issue, and more of a human rights and human equality issue.

    Sex education, birth control responsibility, and a economic and sex equality eliminate the vast majority of abortions in the world.

    We are a long way away from any of that. So the question of "when does life start" or passing laws against abortion does little to help the underlying problem.

    replyreport
  5. Teddletonmr profile image69
    Teddletonmrposted 11 years ago

    It just seems to me.
    Many folks in this world are only concerned with their own pleasure, pain and denial of accountability, go figure.
    I guess in the eyes of the believers, two wrongs actually make right.

    replyreport
    1. Smireles profile image66
      Smirelesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with you. I think it is just a game they are playing trying to pretend that it is a woman's right to choose. This is not about women's health or anything else other than a woman's right to do as she pleases with her body and if a child gets in the way, get rid of it. Sorry, I did not mean to get carried away. Usually I stay out of these discussions because there is no way both sides can come to an agreement.

      replyreport
  6. freecampingaussie profile image60
    freecampingaussieposted 11 years ago

    Murder is a terrible thing that people have to live with the rest of their life & to kill their son or daughter because they prefer to choose what they have is very sad , If they waited till their child was born they would go to jail .
    So many regret killing their baby later in life . I lost 2 babies so I hate hearing how many murder their babies out of choice .

    replyreport
  7. Cagsil profile image71
    Cagsilposted 11 years ago

    This entire topic is getting a bit ridiculous people.

    Sex-selective abortions are utterly absurd. End of story.

    Any moron who uses this as an excuse should have their head examined.

    If a woman is pregnant and that fetus/child/baby or whatever you want to call it has reached viability(meaning it could live outside the womb, but with assistance of medical people), then the abortion should NEVER take place.

    The sex of a child is never going to be a legitimate justification for abortion.

    replyreport
    1. lovemychris profile image77
      lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Deleted

      1. Cagsil profile image71
        Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Your post is completely irrelevant to my post. roll

        replyreport
      2. profile image0
        JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        If you couldn't detect the sex of the baby until birth, would you still support the practice?

        replyreport
        1. Cagsil profile image71
          Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Ridiculous question and not one any person should have to answer. Why? Because in today's day and age, not knowing is by choice. Technology can tell them.

          replyreport
          1. profile image0
            JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            It is relevant. If we no longer had the technology, would that make it ok to wait until birth to see if it were the right sex?

            Technology doesn't change the morality of the action. You say if a baby is viable it shouldn't be aborted. Does that mean that a 30-week old baby has more rights now than it did 100 years ago?

            It's not the technology that matters, it's the baby.

            replyreport
            1. Cagsil profile image71
              Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              It's irrelevant.
              I've seen a lot of pathetic statements and the above is one of the most absurd. The technology is HERE and it's not going anywhere. To make up a "what if" is foolish.

              replyreport
              1. profile image0
                JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                No, it demonstrates that technology doesn't determine morality.

                You say that it depends on viability. So if we can save babies at 15 weeks in 20 years, does that mean those babies have inherently more rights than 15 week old babies today? No, they are still the same.

                replyreport
                1. Cagsil profile image71
                  Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Which is irrelevant.
                  Want to bet on that. The Law will change when the technology changes to do what you've said here. Just as it has change throughout the centuries.

                  replyreport
                  1. profile image0
                    JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    I'm talking about morality. Just because the technology changes, does that mean it goes from being ok to kill it to not-ok?

                    It's still the same being, the law doesn't change that.

                    If the law said we could kill babies up to 1 year, would that make it 'ok'?

                    replyreport
                2. MelissaBarrett profile image58
                  MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Well at right this moment my doctors would do nothing to save the baby I am carrying if I went into preterm labor.  In three days they would.  So if a doctor thinks that three days makes a difference who are you to argue?

                  replyreport
                  1. profile image0
                    JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    Appeal to authority with no logical connection.

                    Are you saying that now the baby isn't a living being with rights, and in 3 days it is?

                    Babies have rights, and I'm going to stand up for them.

                    replyreport
    2. MelissaBarrett profile image58
      MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I agree... but once again not my business to force my opinion on others.  If the choice is based purely on gender preference with no other factors then it's a really crappy reason to have an abortion.  However... once again... not my choice.

      It should be noted that sex can usually be determined at 20-23 weeks and viability generally doesn't come before 25 weeks except by a very very few world record breaking 'miracle babies' that have been kept alive by extreme medical intervention.

      replyreport
      1. Cagsil profile image71
        Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Melissa, you're not forcing your opinions on anyone. You are simply expressing them. There's a difference I am sure you're aware of, so please do try to remember it. tongue
        No, but you should be answering the question as if it was a choice for you to make. And in the above you have.
        I understand that. wink

        replyreport
        1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
          MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          The biggest problem I had with the argument is the whole attitude that there is no reason whatsoever why any women who thought of a fetus as a child to ever do this.  I can think of a reason and stated it.  Then again there are very few things people do in life that I can't think of some reason that it could be understandable.  I guess I live in a gray world like that.

          replyreport
          1. Cagsil profile image71
            Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Gray to my understanding is just an illusion. wink

            replyreport
      2. profile image0
        JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        If people were killing babies after birth in America because of the gender, would you still hold the stance that it's their choice?

        It's not a bad thing to stand up for someone else's rights.

        replyreport
        1. lovemychris profile image77
          lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          Unless you're standing up for the woman. You know...the one who's already here.

          She doesn't count.

          replyreport
          1. Cagsil profile image71
            Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            LMC, his post said after birth which means the child is born. Please read more carefully, instead of just reacting.

            replyreport
            1. profile image0
              JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              I'm used to it... LMC never directly engages in discussion with me.

              replyreport
              1. lovemychris profile image77
                lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                Oh please...I talk--you post articles. You don't like my talk...I post articles. You say my articles are crap...what's the use?

                replyreport
                1. profile image0
                  JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  I post primary sources. You don't. That's the difference.

                  replyreport
            2. lovemychris profile image77
              lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              Please stop pestering me!  Geezus...everyone's a critic!

              replyreport
              1. Cagsil profile image71
                Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                Pestering you? Get real.

                replyreport
          2. profile image0
            JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            The woman has rights, but that doesn't extend to killing. Should a woman be able to abort a baby at 8 months because she changes her mind?

            Once the baby becomes a living being(that's the real debate), then its right to life must be protected.

            replyreport
            1. lovemychris profile image77
              lovemychrisposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              Really?

              Then why do we have the right to own guns? It's to kill if we have to, is it not?

              Same rights---like it or not.

              replyreport
              1. profile image0
                JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                Not the same thing at all.

                If someone breaks into my house and tries to stab my wife, that person is giving up their rights. I'm justified in defending myself or my family. That person isn't justified in killing us for no reason.

                A baby isn't a criminal.

                replyreport
            2. Hollie Thomas profile image60
              Hollie Thomasposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              Should a woman be able to abort a baby at 8 months because she changes her mind?

              Is she having an abortion because she has changed her mind, or because he doesn't want a girl? You consistently avoid the real issues.

              replyreport
              1. profile image0
                JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                Either way, do you think it's ok to kill a baby at that point? For either reason?

                replyreport
                1. Hollie Thomas profile image60
                  Hollie Thomasposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  I think if you focus on the men, as opposed to the abused women who are pressured into abortions because of the gender of the baby, then you stand a chance of eliminating sex selective abortions to a large extent. It is not the victim of abuse that deserves ridicule and judgement, but  the abuser. Your focus on powerless women perpetuates this kind of abuse and sex selective abortions. If you really want to protect the rights of the unborn, channel your energy into protecting the rights of females, pre and post birth.

                  replyreport
        2. Hollie Thomas profile image60
          Hollie Thomasposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          I agree, so instead of berating women for "murder" why don't you start a thread discussing misogyny and the need to educate men? if women from some Asian cultures feel pressured into having abortions because their husbands "expect" male children, then your focus on abused women and abortion is a huge deflection from the real issues.

          replyreport
          1. kerryg profile image84
            kerrygposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            +1

            replyreport
  8. Hollie Thomas profile image60
    Hollie Thomasposted 11 years ago

    @ MeliisaB.

    Exactly, if she bows to pressure just because her murderous husband wants a boy then she deserves everything she gets. Can't possibly blame hubby. Geez.

    replyreport
    1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
      MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      God yes... after all it is so easy to just leave your ABUSIVE husband.  We all know how reasonable abusive husbands are about their wives leaving them.  China is great about it!  They didn't even issue restraining orders until 2008... but in those 3.5 years every Chinese woman now knows all about them...

      And those restraining orders are great aren't they!  Who knew a piece of paper could protect you from a fist.  After all everyone knows that those completely reasonable and rational ABUSIVE husbands are most certainly going to listen to that piece of paper. 

      But you know that all the woman needs to do if her hubby comes after her is call the police... who will surely be sitting close enough to her house to stop him immediately but even if they aren't... really what can a pissed off violent man do to a women with just 5-10 minutes?  It's not like he could kill her or maim her in that amount of time.

      replyreport
      1. profile image0
        JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Haha, I saw you argue in that other thread about guns in churches that people shouldn't have guns to stop criminals because they can just call the police if something happens.

        replyreport
        1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
          MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          So you are okay with killing the husband then.  Ok... gotcha.  Makes perfect sense.  Killing is wrong except when you say it isn't.

          replyreport
          1. profile image0
            JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Maybe, maybe not. I'm saying that it's ironic that in the case of abortion, you think the mother should be able to kill her child to protect it from the evil hubby, but only because the police can't get there fast enough.

            In the case of guns, you think she should wait for the police, and somehow they will get there fast enough?

            And killing someone who is trying to murder you is justified. Killing someone who is trying to murder your child is justified. If you would rather let someone murder your child than take that persons' life then you don't understand the responsibility of being a parent.

            replyreport
          2. libby1970 profile image68
            libby1970posted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Killing is wrong either way! However, killing an inncent baby who has no voice is immoral in my eyes. An abusive husband, even though its' wrong, has a voice and can defend himself if needed--that baby can't!

            replyreport
            1. profile image0
              JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              If an abusive husband is attacking his wife and children and the wife pulls out a gun, the husband can stop. The husband can leave. He's a big boy, and doesn't have to try and impose himself on anyone. If he doesn't stop attacking, there is no reason to condemn a woman for protecting herself and her children.

              Much better to protect your children than to kill them.

              replyreport
              1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
                MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                Once again... killing is fine with you as long as it's someone who you think deserves it?  Gotcha.  No hypocritical logic there.

                Just like it's fine to starve a kid so you can have an easy ride to earn money to feed him a week later.

                replyreport
            2. MelissaBarrett profile image58
              MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

              Oy again with the exclamation marks. 

              Honestly I have nothing more to respond with because I see your argument as trite rhetoric.  Nothing personal but I've heard it a million times.

              replyreport
              1. profile image0
                JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                Oy again with the pointless criticizing of someone else's writing style instead of discussing the actual subject matter.

                replyreport
                1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
                  MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  I did discuss her response.  I said I thought her response was trite rhetoric that I had heard a million times.  The exclamation marks were new.  If she says something that isn't rehashed rhetoric I will reply.

                  replyreport
                  1. libby1970 profile image68
                    libby1970posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    You seriously think a woman shouldn't protect her children with a gun if necessary? I know you can't be serious.

                    If someone, husband, brother, uncle--whoever, If someone comes into my home or at me or my children I would shoot them and not think twice about it. I wouldn't, however, kill an unborn child for any reason whatsoever. There's a difference between innocent and guilty. A man who is beating someone is guilty and should expect someone to defend themself!

                    I do not see your reasoning at all. It seems to me you are defending your cause by grasping at straws.

                    replyreport
    2. profile image0
      JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      No, you can blame hubby too.

      Just because she is being abused doesn't justify killing. Would it also justify her killing a newborn?

      replyreport
      1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
        MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Broken record much?

        replyreport
        1. profile image0
          JaxsonRaineposted 11 years agoin reply to this

          I was talking to somebody else. Just because one person can't understand the relevance doesn't mean another won't.

          replyreport
      2. libby1970 profile image68
        libby1970posted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Why not? Same difference IMO. Killing is killing. And surely it can't be claimed it's self defense-it's an innocent baby. How could it possibly hurt you?

        replyreport
      3. Hollie Thomas profile image60
        Hollie Thomasposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Do you believe that women would choose gender selective abortions if their (abusive) partners were willing to raise a female? Don't forget, there are many women who choose abortion in this situation because they fear for their own life. And until you have been in a situation like that, where your own life is in danger, you cannot possibly say how you'd react. They may also have other children who need to be protected and nurtured. That's pretty difficult to do when you're six foot under. Challenge the men who put their partners in this situation by controlling their wives using threats of violence, when you have done that, you are confronting the problem properly.

        replyreport
  9. Ron Montgomery profile image61
    Ron Montgomeryposted 11 years ago

    Melissa, I don't know where you get your patience.

    replyreport
    1. MelissaBarrett profile image58
      MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Because I only have 5 of the 10 kids I have been pregnant with.  I murder every other one because really... 10 kids?  Sheez I would have no patience.

      replyreport
      1. Ron Montgomery profile image61
        Ron Montgomeryposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        Once you finally come to the common sense conclusion that abortion is murder, you will realize that by extension any act you commit to stop an abortion is really a life-saving action sanctioned by God.  Lock 'n load.  Let's get religious...

        replyreport
  10. iefox5 profile image58
    iefox5posted 11 years ago

    Sex-selective abortion is a common problem in many developing countries.

    replyreport
  11. ElderlyAnarchist profile image58
    ElderlyAnarchistposted 11 years ago

    Habee!  personally, I condone abortion ONLY IF, there is danger to the mother, or in case of an unwilling assault.  I abhor use of "abortion" as a birth control by any means.

    replyreport
  12. jacharless profile image74
    jacharlessposted 11 years ago

    Goodness, this planet is really getting out of control.
    Next, humans will be deciding generational legacy/lineage, or the ability to control family trees/populous, with a pill and a little gene "chic". And, no doubt, they'll find a way exclude females from procreation altogether. Science is getting scarier by the minute and way too powerful.

    But, I do not see how nature is going to respond to this, as a positive addition to its already fragile system. There are always repercussions during changes to the natural state of things. Humans -especially females who's anatomy is hugely complex and amazing to begin with- are no exception {physically, mentally, emotionally, genetically, socially}.

    Just My Thoughts.
    James.

    replyreport
  13. prettydarkhorse profile image62
    prettydarkhorseposted 11 years ago

    Demographers are fascinated with the result of one child policy in China. Faced with a choice of only a child to have, couples opt for a son for so many reasons - economic, age old dependency, status etc. The result is an imbalance of sex ratio in favor of boys. The problem is who will replace the population if there are lesser women. A population that is sustainable is 2 per woman granting she can have one daughter to replace her for her traditional role of bearing children.

    I was part of a research in a developing country where abortion is clandestine and illegal, the maternal mortality rate due to risks related to abortion is one of the highest in the world. If it is legal then it is expected to be low. The number of abortion is almost 400, 000 a year, almost ten years ago. The reasons are varied from economic, too many children, health of mother, father is unknown, pregnancies due to rape, incest etc

    Most of developing and agricultural countries are cultures where there is son preference for added help in the farms.

    I think that the problem of abortion is complicated. It is not one dimensional, problem of moral etc.

    I think here in the US, women are more empowered to decide for themselves, but not in some developing countries. To look at the context and examine it more deeply, we can understand why women do it!

    Of course when I speak for myself, I don't think I will just abort a baby just because I prefer a boy or a girl. But in other places or culture women empowerment and husband to wife statuses are different which affect their decisions to abort or not to abort based on sex of the baby.

    replyreport
    1. silverstararrow profile image75
      silverstararrowposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      +1 smile

      replyreport
      1. prettydarkhorse profile image62
        prettydarkhorseposted 11 years agoin reply to this

        smile

        replyreport
jump to first post
 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

 Necessary
 Features
 Marketing
 Statistics

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)