General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHouse debates abortion ban for sex of fetus
Source: BBC
By Alan Silverleib, CNN Congressional Producer
May 30, 2012 -- Updated 2336 GMT (0736 HKT)
Washington (CNN) -- One of the most divisive issues in politics is set to take center stage in Congress on Thursday as the House of Representatives votes on a measure banning abortions based on the sex of a fetus.
Supporters characterize the proposal as a necessary defense of the civil rights of unborn children; opponents consider it part of a broader so-called "war on women" and an ongoing assault on legalized abortion.
The Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act would impose possible fines and prison sentences up to five years on doctors who knowingly perform abortions chosen on grounds based on sex.
Abortion providers could also be subject to civil penalties -- including punitive monetary damages -- under certain circumstances.
[font size=1]-snip-[/font]
Read more: http://edition.cnn.com/2012/05/30/politics/house-abortion-gender/index.html
SoutherDem
(2,307 posts)Also, it is nauseating to hear anyone talk of "Civil Rights" for the unborn when they don't give a flip for the living.
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)w8liftinglady
(23,278 posts)Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act.
What a load of deceptive bullshit.
spanone
(135,877 posts)reThugs won't be happy until they control all women's reproductive activities
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)Of abortions over the sex of the baby? This is another way of BIG government reach around. I bet that number is small. But it should still be an option for a family if they want a different sex.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)and cravenly trying to give themselves the "pro-woman" brand.
Naturally they want a quick 2/3 votes, to dare the Dems to vote against it.
I wonder how often this sort of thing happens? I'm not too crazy about the idea of getting an abortion only because it's an unpreferred gender, but is it an issue here? Doesn't it take a while to even know the gender, and can't someone just say it's not the reason? Will it just be assumed that any abortion taking place after gender is "knowable" is taking place because of that knowledge? Or maybe they want to force doctors to announce the gender even if the woman doesn't ask?
Strange people, these kooky conservatives.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)BattyDem
(11,075 posts)this is about passing a law that requires you to prove something that is not provable.
Think about it ... unless a woman specifically mentions it, there's no way to know if the decision to abort is based on gender. So they'll use some kind of twisted logic to make that determination: "It's healthy, it's not the result of rape and there's no threat to the woman's life - so the only possible reason she could have for getting an abortion is because she isn't happy with the gender. Therefore, she can't have an abortion!"
There's also no way for the abortion provider to know or prove what a woman's reason is, but they could face five years in jail if someone accuses them of knowingly performing a gender-based abortion! How many doctors would be willing to take that kind of risk?
I'm glad the repigs are working so hard on creating jobs!