Killing Girls Is Bad, Killing Boys Is Okay (Hillary)

American Spectator ^ | 9/4/2009 | Doug Bandow

[IbJensen]

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is upset about abortion. Well, not abortion per se. But some abortions. Of girls. Apparently killing boys is okay.

Abortion is one issue never likely to disappear. It sets protection of life and liberty in apparent conflict and raises challenging issues such as responsibility and privacy.

But the issue can't be avoided. The bottom line of abortion is a dead baby. No amount of obfuscation and euphemism can hide the obvious. And if abortion is a legal right, beyond regulation by government, then motivation is irrelevant. If you have a right to kill all babies, you have a right to kill girl babies.

However, Secretary Clinton, a supporter of unrestricted abortion, appears disturbed by the logical outcome of her policy preferences. In commenting on her international agenda for women, she observed that in some nations "girl babies are still being put out to die." Moreover, she explained: "Obviously, there's work to be done in both India and China, because the infanticide rate of girl babies is still overwhelmingly high, and unfortunately with technology, parents are able to use sonograms to determine the sex of a baby, and to abort girl children simply because they'd rather have a boy. And those are deeply set attitudes."

Secretary Clinton's remarks received surprisingly little comment from those she should have most offended -- other advocates of abortion "rights." Pro-lifers suggested that Secretary Clinton was a traitor to the abortion cause, but Laurie Carlsson defended the secretary's "nuanced view" on an issue that is "neither simple, nor clean-cut along lines of political beliefs or moral values."

Yet Secretary Clinton challenged two fundamental precepts of the case for legalized abortion. First, she tied the "infanticide rate of girl babies" to sex selection abortions.

[GLDNGUN]

OK. Change gay to Transsexual and the same applies.

Huh? There's a "transexual" gene?

[GLDNGUN]

I can't see a loving God sending a beautiful innocent baby to earth with a homo gene and then condeming it to hell.

That's exactly the way I see it.

[GLDNGUN]

Yes, but is there a 'liberal' gene?

Yes, in fact, I'm afraid babies are 100% liberal genetically at birth. Think about it. They don't pay for anything, they cry, kick, and scream every time they want something, they make stinking messes and expect someone else to clean it up, and the one thing they can do on their own is suck on someone else's teat.

Fortunately, these "bad genes" are not necessarily permament. Proper parenting (i.e., conservatism) can make these traits go into remission for the reamainder of the babies' lives.

[Michael.SF.]

Huh? There's a "transexual" gene?

I never used the word "gene", you did. My reference was to my original post.

[IbJensen]

Too bad her parents didn't have the abortion option.

Abortion is just fine if parents can have up until about ate 15 to abort the child. At that age they should know if the kid is turning out to be worthless and can legally eliminate him.