Strengthening Constitutional Self-Government

No Left Turns

Bioethics

Siblingcide

Michael New writes at NRO:

pro-lifers were given a lot to think about by last Sunday's New York Times Magazine article about women who, after simultaneously conceiving multiple children, chose to have all but one of their children aborted.

Will Saletan's Slate article on the same subject tackles the

puzzling unease among abortion-rights supporters [who are] uncomfortable with the notion that in a single pregnancy, one twin is wanted and another with an identical genome can be discarded.

New suspects a more self-interested and pragmatic rationale.

Supporters of legal abortion typically do not argue that they want abortion to be common or widespread. They make the case that it should be a legal option for women facing unique or difficult circumstances.

Child-reduction abortions would not be good for the PR campaign. 

Consider a related issue. "Humane" methods of administering the death penalty were a bittersweet victory for those who oppose capital punishment, since more acceptable methods have the effect of softening public opposition to the act itself. Inversely, the more barbaric forms of abortion, such as partial-birth and sibling-reduction, tend to aid the pro-life movement's greater goal by souring public opinion toward abortion in general. One hopes that examples of abortion's moral pollution have the effect of further awakening public sentiment to this peculiar institution - that good can ultimately come from evil. 

Categories > Bioethics

Discussions - 8 Comments

sex-selection abortions should be among the leading civil rights issues of the day

Please provide empirical data on the frequency of 'sex-selection' abortions in the US for the past 10 years.

I don't have any empirical data on the frequency of masturbation in this country but I have a pretty good hunch that it's happening.

If it happens once, that's too many.

You and I are of a single mind, Ken. I've written on the issue of global gender-cide before, noting the conspicuous silence of the feminist movement on the trend. Abortion advocacy apparently ranks higher in priority among feminists than the prevention of female-targeted homicide. I can think of no higher indictment of the modern feminist movement.

I made this same argument about Gonzales v. Carhart, that is the procedure that was banned as a method of partial birth abortion, was less gruesome than the one that was left available as an option.

That is: "the more barbaric forms of abortion, such as partial-birth and sibling-reduction, tend to aid the pro-life movement's greater goal by souring public opinion toward abortion in general." Exactly.

Anonymous is right to point out that selective abortion is uncommon. But even if it were to become more common, I am not sure it is a winner.

I mean that a side effect of fertility medicine is to increase the likelyhood of twins. So this abortion is just a remmedy for the side effect.

In some sense this is the type of abortion we want, that is abortion that is the result of responsible action undertaken to achieve a specific result.

So it is the Planned Parenthood abortion, that is most about planning parenthood, and the least about the reprehensible image of being an irresponsible welfare hooker, abortion mill.

Abortion is a pure autonomy/privacy play, and it is about a woman's control over her body.

If in a normal pregnancy you have one kid, and in this abortion pregnancy they have one kid, the result is the same.

In fact it is highly possible that you killed more sperm having your one kid than they did having one kid. So relative efficiency is a toss up.

In terms of murder in some sense the couple that has 3 kids and aborts three kids, has commited less infanticide than the couple that has 2 kids, and wastes sperm and ovum.

That is life technically doesn't begin at conception, because if the sperm or ovum aren't alive there is no child or fetus possible. By not having children you are killing children.

If two independent proffesionals remain childless they have killed more children, than the couple with 3 children and three abortions.

So the question of abortion ultimately comes down to autonomy in planning pregnancy.

Life begins before conception. NOw, that's a new one! Poor logic and basic biology. It seems that two pro-choice can never make the same argument in favor or abortion. You're right though in admitting that it is the radical automony of the human person in the post-modern world that permits murder of a human life.

Please provide empirical data that sex-selection abortions are not being done in the US. Over the past 30 years over 163 million baby giirls hsve been abortted via sex- selection abortions throughtout the world Democratic presidents and democratic congresses have gladly handed over the funds to help pay for those abortions. You obviously support abortion. Congratulations. You have helped in the slaughter of unborn baby girls for the purpose of sex-selection

Leave a Comment

* denotes a required field
 

No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://nlt.ashbrook.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/16992