Support First Things by turning your adblocker off or by making a  donation. Thanks!

Shameful deeds are almost always accompanied by shameless lies. Some members of Congress who shamefully voted against the prohibition of sex-selective abortions are shamelessly claiming (or permitting their spokesmen or surrogates to claim) that the proposed legislation was unnecessary because sex-selective abortions don’t occur in the United States or are so rare as to make legislation unnecessary. The National Right to Life Committee has helpfully provided a link to the most up-to-date (2011) research paper on the question .

This research was available prior to last week’s vote on the Penatal Non-discrimination Act (PRENDA).  Everybody on Capitol Hill knew about it.  It is true that sex-selective abortions are nowhere near as common in the U.S. as they are in places like China, India, and Korea. But they occur, and they are not so rare as to be insignificant.  Those who claim otherwise are simply lying to cover their atrocious vote to permit the killing of children  in utero  because (let’s face the truth about what is actually going on in most sex-selective abortions) they happen to be female.

In my view, voting to protect a practice as vile as sex-selective abortions is disqualifying.  Pro-life Democrats can say what they think should happen to the 161 Democrats who did that. In my view, the seven Republicans who joined them (one of whom was presidential aspirant Ron Paul) should be challenged in Republican primaries and driven from office. (Bravo, by the way, to the 20 Democrats who voted with 226 Republicans in support of the proposed legislation.)

Sadly and embarrassingly, many of those who voted to protect sex-selective abortions are self-identified Catholics.

Comments are visible to subscribers only. Log in or subscribe to join the conversation.



Filter First Thoughts Posts

Related Articles