Sex-Selection Abortion: Bad News for Pro-Choicers

She is arguing on the wrong side of the issue, but the point is clear.

Allison Benedikt:

Strategically, it makes no sense to give in to this idea that there’s somehow something a little queasier about having an abortion for gender than, say, for money. These are equally legitimate reasons (or, if you are on the other side, equally illegitimate). One might make you uncomfortable in your gut, but it can’t make the movement hesitate. Because that hesitation—that pause of, well, yes this one is complicated, or, as Amanda says, this one is "unpleasant to contemplate"—makes it that much easier for so many of those other reasons (money, timing, work) to seem a little not-OK too.

Also, let’s just remember that we are talking about fetuses. No matter how many ultrasound pics get posted to Facebook, these are fetuses with female genitals or male genitals—not little girls and little boys. If pro-choicers object to aborting because of the sex of the fetus, aren’t we then saying that abortion is “murdering” girls? Aren’t we basically arguing that a fetus is not a blank slate but a future possibility? That is not the case to make if your goal is to protect abortion rights. Gulp for a second if you must, then get over it.

Side note:  She brings up the word "anti-choice" quite a bit in her article.  Just remember that when you get called "anti-choice" it helps to bring up:

1.  We are all about choice, just not the right for a mother to killer her toddler.  "Who said we are talking about toddlers?" will be the response.  Right.  Now explain to me the difference between a toddler and a baby in utero.  

2.  We are not "anti-choice".  We are all about choice!  And would love to allow the smallest member of the human family in the uterus to have the opportunity to be able to make choices for herself. 

(HT: Amy Hall)