Obama and 168 House Members Defend Sex-Selection Abortion (Bill defeated; who are the 168?)

May 31, 2012

Obama and 168 House Members Defend Sex-Selection Abortion

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Thursday, May 31, 2012, 2:30 PM EDT

For further information: NRLC Media Relations, 202-626-8825, mediarelations@nrlc.org or NRLC Federal Legislation, 202-626-8820, federallegislation@nrlc.org

Strong U.S. House majority votes to ban sex-selection abortion

NRLC says Obama and 168 U.S. House members “complied with the political demands of pro-abortion pressure groups, rather than defend the coerced women, and their unborn daughters, who are victimized by sex-selection abortions”

WASHINGTON – The U.S. House of Representatives today conducted a roll call vote on the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (H.R. 3541), a bill to make it unlawful to perform or coerce a sex-selection abortion. The vote was 246-168 in favor of the bill – a strong majority, although short of the two-thirds vote required under the fast-track procedure utilized today. In a statement obtained exclusively by ABC News late May 30, the White House acknowledged that President Obama opposes the bill. The National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the federation of state right-to-life organizations, issued the following statement after the roll call:

“We are heartened that a strong majority of House members voted to ban performing or coercing abortions for the purpose of eliminating unborn babies of an undesired sex – usually, girls,” said NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson. “Shamefully, President Obama, and a minority of 168 House members, complied with the political demands of pro-abortion pressure groups, rather than defend the coerced women, and their unborn daughters, who are victimized by sex-selection abortions.”

Among the organizations that warned House members not to vote for the bill was the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA), the nation’s major abortion provider. PPFA sent an email memo to House members on May 29 warning of its “intent to score” a vote for the bill as a vote against “women’s health.” Also on May 29, the Huffington Post reported that “no Planned Parenthood clinic will deny a woman an abortion based on her reasons for wanting one, except in those states that explicitly prohibit sex-selective abortions (Arizona, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Illinois).” So, for PPFA, abortion for sex selection is just another menu option, except where it is illegal – and PPFA vehemently opposes making it illegal.

“We commend the House Republican leadership for bringing this bill to the floor today under the fast-track procedure,” Johnson said. “Today’s groundbreaking majority vote was a stepping stone to this bill ultimately becoming law – perhaps after the replacement of some of the lawmakers who today were unwilling to protect victimized women and their unborn daughters from sex-selection abortions, because they were more concerned with maintaining favor with the abortion industry, pro-abortion advocacy groups, and Hollywood donors.”

NRLC’s letter to House members in support of the bill, and links to academic studies demonstrating the prevalence of sex-selection abortions (often coerced) within certain immigrant communities in the United States are posted on this page: http://www.nrlc.org/Sex-SelectionAbortion/index.html

Founded in 1968, the National Right to Life Committee (NRLC), the federation of 50 state right-to-life affiliates and more than 3,000 local chapters, is the nation’s oldest and largest grassroots pro-life organization.

Well the unannounced problem is if congress can outlaw a particular kind of abortion(murder) then they not only implacably inlaw all other forms they could one day inlaw that form as well.

I don’t find that power anywhere mentioned in the Federal Constitution except for Federal districts & territories where they have state like powers.

Abortion like murder are State issues, each state has to decided theses matters for themselves and by themselves.

The only thing congress has any kind of authority to do is to control the state borders as to insure that people don’t simply cross the State lines to gain that which is prohibited by their own people in their own state. This is no different than controlling the international borders.

Many southern States already have retrocipical laws setup to respect their neighbors in this way.

I am 100 percent pro-life believe me, but I don’t see how passing this bill either saves lives or ultimately fights abortion in general.

First, once you have already established by law, and apparently in our country in the national consciousness, that murder is perfectly OK, legally and morally, what difference does the REASON make?

By adding “stipulations” or “yes/no” scenarios to individual abortions, you simply reinforce that abortion overall is acceptable and permanent as part of our society.

Second, this is impossible to enforce and will lead to all sorts of government (taxpayer) expense. Hate to be crude, but let’s face that.

Here’s the reality of what will happen (simplified):

Woman is 5 months pregnant with a boy. Decides to abort and try again with husband for a girl. Goes to Planned Parenthood and says, “I want an abortion.” PP says, “OK, but first you have to sign this form from the Federal Govt declaring that you are not having this abortion for reasons related to the sex of the child.” Woman says, Sure, signs form, sex-selection abortion is performed.

There will be Fed and State forms, reports, audits, compliance inspections...were easily talking in the millions. If it saved one life, it would be worth it. But considering the mentality of a woman who has already decided it’s OK to murder her baby, I don’t see that this law would save lives. We cannot and should not presume to read anyone’s mind.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.