Project Reason is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The foundation draws on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines to encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.
Most on this forum would probably agree that abortion isn’t wrong; or, at least, that abortion is the lesser of two evils when compared to forcing a woman to carry her baby full term even if the pregnancy was unwanted. Most would also probably agree that terminating a pregnancy because the fetus has been found to have some defect, like Down syndrome, is likewise not wrong. But what about aborting the baby because the parents don’t like the gender? Is that wrong? The Canadian Medical Association Journal thinks so:
Calling Canada a “haven” for sex-selective abortions, a noted medical journal is calling for regulations to stop doctors from disclosing the sex of a fetus until after an abortion is possible.
Female feticide - terminating a pregnancy because it’s a girl - has become a common practice in many Asian countries, and it’s finding root in Canada with new immigrants, says an editorial published Monday by the Canadian Medical Association Journal.
While the CMAJ said the practice is not widespread here, the Journal’s editors are calling for regulation to prohibit doctors from revealing the gender of a fetus before 30 weeks into the pregnancy, when an “unquestioned abortion” is all but impossible.
The Journal argues that the gender of the fetus is “medically irrelevant” information that doesn’t generally affect the care and treatment of the patient except in specific cases.
The 2004 Canadian Assisted Human Reproduction Act prohibits any action that “identifies the sex of an in-vitro embryo except to prevent, diagnose or treat a sex-linked disorder or disease,” the article said.
Delaying the results of ultrasounds that reveal the sex of the baby may be a “reasonable ethical compromise,” the CMAJ said.
“Postponing the transmission of such information is a small price to pay to save thousands of girls in Canada.”
Should a woman’s freedom of choice extend to her preference for a certain gender? And if so, is it wrong to conceal a fetus’s gender in order to prevent a woman from making that choice?
It’s probably not something I’d ever choose to do, nor is it something I approve of. But regardless, it seems a little hypocritical to support a woman’s “right to choose” and then put restrictions on that choice. So I’d have to say I disagree with the Journal. Parents should be told the gender of their baby so they can choose to abort it if it turns out not to be their preferred gender.
If you’re serious, change the title to “because of its gender”. In some cultures they abort girls because they would rather have boys. In ours, I suspect that the opposite trend is developing. Even though females still haven’t really achieved anything after all this time.
It is something that is done regularly among families who have inherited hereditary Sex-linked diseases.
So the action is similar even if the reasoning differs.
If you’re serious, change the title to “because of its gender”. In some cultures they abort girls because they would rather have boys. In ours, I suspect that the opposite trend is developing. Even though females still haven’t really achieved anything after all this time.
Do you have any evidence to support your suspicion that in our culture, the trend is to abort fetuses simply because they’re male? And what do you mean by, “Even though females still haven’t really achieved anything after all this time?” On the face of it, you sound a little misogynistic. Or maybe paranoid of some consipiracy by females in our society to tip the balance of power in their favor by aborting male fetuses.
If you’re serious, change the title to “because of its gender”. In some cultures they abort girls because they would rather have boys. In ours, I suspect that the opposite trend is developing. .
Well, perhaps future moms who are interested in appearing on “Toddlers and Tiaras” would have that viewpoint. Other than that, I suspect that you’re probably wrong. Gosh, it sure is easy to suspect, isn’t it?
It is something that is done regularly among families who have inherited hereditary Sex-linked diseases.
So the action is similar even if the reasoning differs.
I don’t think that’s the same thing. The decision to abort a baby because it’s at risk of a sex-linked disease is based on the risk of sex-linked disease. That’s different from deciding to abort it because of a personal or cultural preference for one gender over another. “Strictly because it’s a girl” is the key point.
Motive only comes into meaningful play when the action is determined to be unethical from the start. If we defend the right to abort on principle there is no point to evaluating intention.
It is something that is done regularly among families who have inherited hereditary Sex-linked diseases.
So the action is similar even if the reasoning differs.
I don’t think that’s the same thing. The decision to abort a baby because it’s at risk of a sex-linked disease is based on the risk of sex-linked disease. That’s different from deciding to abort it because of a personal or cultural preference for one gender over another. “Strictly because it’s a girl” is the key point.
Yes I agree, that’s where the whole moral argument would begin for some I expect, not in the action but in the reasoning for the action.
I distinguish between moral issues and legal issues. It’s legal and constitutional in the US and I guess in Canada for a woman to abort within the prescribed parameters, and I would not seek to impose my moral standards on anyone else. I personally feel that it is wrong to abort a healthy fetus except when the mother’s life is at risk or in cases of rape. So, to answer the OP, yes, I think it’s wrong to abort a fetus simply because it is a girl. Life, once begun, should not be snuffed out without a compelling reason. But again, that’s just my opinion, and I’m not calling for changes in the law.
Well, perhaps future moms who are interested in appearing on “Toddlers and Tiaras” would have that viewpoint. Other than that, I suspect that you’re probably wrong. Gosh, it sure is easy to suspect, isn’t it?
Doesn’t matter. The point is that you’re a nincompoop. The feminists have been known to hallucinate sexism from an awful lot less than aborting girls specifically because they’re girls. Surely it isn’t such a great stretch to imagine that the word “girl” might bring unnecessary emotional and political baggage into this topic? Why not got for a more neutral topic title, like “Is It Wrong to Abort Your Baby Strictly Because of its Gender?”
Like Bruce, I do not consider the ending of a human life to be a capricious nor casual decision, and if that decision could be considered isolation of anything else, I’d oppose it. However the reality is that there are other equally significant issues always involved, including: the power or right of a state to interfere with the biological processes of a woman against her wishes; the lifelong issues associated with bearing and raising a child that are borne mostly by the parents, not the state; and the medical, social, psychological and financial circumstances of the mother. Although it is obvious that agreement will never be completely had on these issues, the law as currently drafted and the reported consensus of polled adults is that abortion prior to the first trimester is legal, and as long as we have a representative democracy, and not a theocracy, then abortion is a legal decision primarily borne by the mother, and that I support.
If and as effective means of contraception and known and freely available, then this becomes a much less likely issue. I note that many of the same people who passionately oppose any abortion also oppose the free use of contraception, which is arguably a quite different issue than abortion, since by no reasonable definition is a sperm and cell uncombined a human life. Many of these same people promote capital punishment of adults, as though somehow human life is not as sanctified as an adult. This is not just to me some abstract issue: my first wife elected to abort her pregnancy from a sexual relationship with another man; she then changed her mind and carried the child to full term. I supported both decisions.
Well, perhaps future moms who are interested in appearing on “Toddlers and Tiaras” would have that viewpoint. Other than that, I suspect that you’re probably wrong. Gosh, it sure is easy to suspect, isn’t it?
Doesn’t matter. The point is that you’re a nincompoop. The feminists have been known to hallucinate sexism from an awful lot less than aborting girls specifically because they’re girls. Surely it isn’t such a great stretch to imagine that the word “girl” might bring unnecessary emotional and political baggage into this topic? Why not got for a more neutral topic title, like “Is It Wrong to Abort Your Baby Strictly Because of its Gender?”
I actually agree with the last sentence if you wish to extrapolate to North American culture, although the original OP was based quite correctly on cultures which prefer baby boys and would only normally abort girls. The real point is that you’re a tool.
Hmmm, I don’t feel that much better after that little juvenile outburst. Oh well, I tried to be like you but I can’t quite bring myself down to that level.
Well, perhaps future moms who are interested in appearing on “Toddlers and Tiaras” would have that viewpoint. Other than that, I suspect that you’re probably wrong. Gosh, it sure is easy to suspect, isn’t it?
Doesn’t matter. The point is that you’re a nincompoop. The feminists have been known to hallucinate sexism from an awful lot less than aborting girls specifically because they’re girls. Surely it isn’t such a great stretch to imagine that the word “girl” might bring unnecessary emotional and political baggage into this topic? Why not got for a more neutral topic title, like “Is It Wrong to Abort Your Baby Strictly Because of its Gender?”
I actually agree with the last sentence if you wish to extrapolate to North American culture, although the original OP was based quite correctly on cultures which prefer baby boys and would only normally abort girls. The real point is that you’re a tool.
Hmmm, I don’t feel that much better after that little juvenile outburst. Oh well, I tried to be like you but I can’t quite bring myself down to that level.
CR,
Suggest it is an ignoble effort to seek to try to be like JayD. Apart from poorly written sarcastic comments that seek to derive some audience from sniping at other posts, this poster has had nothing to offer anyone with an IQ more than room temperature.
Oh, I know Dennis, but thanks nonetheless. Thus far I have avoided putting in my two cents after he posts his unnecessarily offensive ramblings, but I couldn’t help myself this time. I should have continued pretending he didn’t exist. I read a lot more posts on this forum than I actually participate in, so I’m familiar with his “work”.
