Republicans to push anti-abortion bill based on race/sex

I think republicans are trolling America.

House Republicans Push Bill To Ban Abortions Based On The Race Or Sex Of The Fetus

For House Republicans, this year has been the year of outlandish answers to non-existent problems. And tomorrow, they will offer the magnum opus of their 2011 campaign against a woman’s right to choose: the Susan B. Anthony and Frederick Douglass Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (PRENDA). The bill seeks to somehow protect the “civil rights” of fetuses by banning physicians from performing abortions based on the fetus’s race or sex. While the woman would be exempt from prosecution, physicians who perform the procedure can be sued for damages.

Just look at the name of the bill :

the Susan B. Anthony and Frederick Douglass Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act (PRENDA)

Really?

I bet Frederick Douglass and Susan B. Anthony are spinning in their graves right now...

There has to be more to this...It just makes no sense as it's being presented. For the fight and headache that any bill from either side which so much as mentions abortions tends to cause for all involved, why over this? The article itself says it may..MAY..even be relevant for 5% of abortions where it occurs after the gender is known anyway. I don't know where race even comes into it. If *THAT* is going to be a surprise moment in learning about the new baby, there are serious relationship issues that abortion isn't the answer to.....

I wonder if this is foundation work in legislation for a follow-on bill aimed at the selection of gender for the baby by genetics. If we aren't there already, it can't be far off from being possible with a near 100% certainty. I could see some busy bodies using the abortion side of that issue to line up for a second punch at a far more relevant and timely question we'll actually be dealing with before long. Hmmm...

Sometimes i'm ashamed to be a registered republican. You would think they have more pressing issues to work on

in many other countries, babies are often aborted due to their sex. in China for instance it is common to abort a female baby and not a male. i can also understand that is some places babies are aborted due to their ethnicity.

the bill is something though, that is not needed in this country, and a complete waste of taxpayer money, and valuable legislation time.

i see the logic behind it however i do not see the need, these things are not an issue in this country.

The text of the bill can be found here.

Sec. 2 (a)(1)(D)
A `sex-selection abortion' is an abortion undertaken for purposes of eliminating an unborn child of an undesired sex. Sex-selection abortion is barbaric, and described by scholars and civil rights advocates as an act of sex-based or gender-based violence, predicated on sex discrimination. Sex-selection abortions are typically late-term abortions performed in the 2nd or 3rd trimester of pregnancy, after the unborn child has developed sufficiently to feel pain. Substantial medical evidence proves that an unborn child can experience pain at 20 weeks after conception, and perhaps substantially earlier. By definition, sex-selection abortions do not implicate the health of the mother of the unborn, but instead are elective procedures motivated by sex or gender bias.

Sec. 2 (a)(2)(C)
A `race-selection abortion' is an abortion performed for purposes of eliminating an unborn child because the child or a parent of the child is of an undesired race. Race-selection abortion is barbaric, and described by civil rights advocates as an act of race-based violence, predicated on race discrimination. By definition, race-selection abortions do not implicate the health of mother of the unborn, but instead are elective procedures motivated by race bias.

Sec. 250. Discrimination against the unborn on the basis of race or sex
(a) In General- Whoever knowingly--
(1) performs an abortion knowing that such abortion is sought based on the sex, gender, color or race of the child, or the race of a parent of that child;
(2) uses force or the threat of force to intentionally injure or intimidate any person for the purpose of coercing a sex-selection or race-selection abortion;
(3) solicits or accepts funds for the performance of a sex-selection abortion or a race-selection abortion; or
(4) transports a woman into the United States or across a State line for the purpose of obtaining a sex-selection abortion or race-selection abortion; or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.

It's intended to prevent women from basing their abortion decision on the gender or race of the baby. I'm pro-choice, but honestly I can kinda see their point. Having an abortion solely because your pregnant with a girl when you wanted a boy (or vice versa) or because your baby is the wrong race is disturbing. However, I don't really think it's such a huge problem that we need a specific law against it. Looks like an attempt to later be able to say that those who vote against it don't have a problem with women aborting due to race and/or gender more than anything else.

EDIT: Have to agree with the OP. The author and cosponsors of this bill are trolling a bit with this one. They've essentially created a solution to a problem we don't have and I can guarantee that if it actually made it through the committee and to an actual vote, any one who votes against it will have it tossed in their face at the earliest opportunity. Doesn't Congress have anything better to do?

I'm sure it's for job creation and nothing more.

GOP is all about jobs, don't ya know?

It appears to be similar to an anti-eugenics law, which every human should support. Murdering babies solely because they're the wrong sex or wrong color is beyond disgusting.

/TOA

No big deal, let us think about what Hillary Clinton said shall we? I mean she is a PROGRESSIVE right? She LOVES Margaret Sanger. Who was Margaret Sanger by the way?

OH YEAH, she wanted to use abortion to limit the population growth of blacks. Hmmmm, tell me author of the thread, what is the percentage of abortions in the black neighborhoods compared to the white or other nationalities/ethnic groups. Do you have any idea or are you just a purveyor of propaganda that you hear? I mean, you did RESEARCH the information you are spreading here right? You just did not spew something you read somewhere else? Right?

It is utterly despicable that they would use them as vehicles for their vile activities. But oh well, who in their right mind thinks that leftists are actually normal?

Anyway, there is a method to the madness of this bill. At NO TIME, will the race or sex of a baby be allowed to determine the choice to abort. If you do not realize the ramifications of the meaning, you seem to be devoid of intelligence. Leftists will NOT be allowed to abort children to get a certain outcome based on sex or race.

Do you not get it? If you do not, I feel very sorry for you.

reply to post by LIGHTvsDARK


Sorry OP, this subject is very personal to me. I did not mean to assume that you approved the subject of the OP. My apologies. Very emotional subject.

reply to post by Jenna


You are pro choice, what do you mean you can see what they mean?

Since you are pro choice, you are NOT ALLOWED to make a judgement. You have decided that anyone can kill their child for any excuse they want.

Sorry, been reading here for a long time. I will not allow those with hypocrite positions to make a judgment call on this. If you are a pro choice individual, you agree that abortions can be made by decisions of race and sex. So go and discuss something where you have relevance.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by LIGHTvsDARK
reply to post by Jenna

 

You are pro choice, what do you mean you can see what they mean?

Since you are pro choice, you are NOT ALLOWED to make a judgement. You have decided that anyone can kill their child for any excuse they want.

Actually, I know many Pro-Choice people who find abortion as birth control distasteful, only to be used as last resort... I am one of them.

That being said, Pro-Choice means you can have whatever OPINION you want, but you don't believe in big government getting into our pants.

Existing Thread

This is a waste of time and a political ploy to gain support from the anti-freedom crowd. It will never pass because it violates Roe V Wade.

This would be EXACTLY the same as hate crime legislation (which I disagree with). The REASON someone does something is irrelevant, especially when that ACTION is lawful. Who wants the government in our heads, punishing us for our REASONS??? It's insane!

reply to post by LIGHTvsDARK


It's not hypocritical in the least. Being pro-choice means that I accept it's not my decision whether someone else has an abortion and that I recognize their choice to have one or not. Personally, I could never do it. However, it's not my place or the government's place to dictate who can and cannot have one or under what circumstances they may be allowed to do so.

And I can see their point because the purpose of the bill, preventing abortion based on race or gender of the baby, is disturbing. The thought that someone would use that as their reason to have an abortion is disturbing to me. That doesn't mean I think the government needs to step in and start dictating terms and conditions when it comes to the matter however. To claim that being pro-choice means I've "decided" that people can just have abortions willy-nilly is as ludicrous as it is incorrect. It means I recognize the fact that it's really none of my business and I have no right dictating what someone else does.

Originally posted by rogerstigers

Actually, I know many Pro-Choice people who find abortion as birth control distasteful, only to be used as last resort... I am one of them.

That being said, Pro-Choice means you can have whatever OPINION you want, but you don't believe in big government getting into our pants.

Exactly.