Gender based abortions now legal in Sweden.

Seriously, did you not think this was possible (and legal) in the U.S. for the last 25 years?

As much as I disagree with this practice, it is not a slippery slope.

Steve Petersen said:

For those who dismiss 'slippery slope' arguments here is one more reason to think twice.

Click to expand...

Is this your way of making an anti-abortion argument?
Because it's not abortion that's the issue here but gender preference/discrimination.
It's also possible to insert an fertilized egg knowing it will be a boy or girl. That basically has the same outcome but just saves you the hassle of getting an abortion. Whether this is or isn't moral is a completely different issue.

The 'gender based preference' clause is the thing that might be considered appalling in the article. Not the abortion itself. The 'gender based preference' effect can be reached through other methods.

- Ectezus

Steve Petersen said:

China has been aborting females for decades.

Haven't heard any righteous indignation from the feminists on this.

Click to expand...

Nevermind abortion, the killing of female infants (post birth) was acceptable in some cultures going waaaaaaaaay back.

Can someone explain to me how anyone could ever know why someone had an abortion?

is there a form you fill out that says "Check this box if you're only aborting this kid cause it's female" ?

Nevermind abortion, the killing of female infants (post birth) was acceptable in some cultures going waaaaaaaaay back.

Click to expand...

so was beating slaves to death and watching people fight to death for entertainment.

EDIT: it's not anything against you, i'm just amazed at how individuals' thoughts can be swayed by social norms.

Can someone explain to me how anyone could ever know why someone had an abortion?

is there a form you fill out that says "Check this box if you're only aborting this kid cause it's female" ?

Click to expand...

exactly!

lol... idk how that would work.

i'm generally against abortion though.

Ectezus said:

"The 'gender based preference' clause is the thing that might be considered appalling in the article. Not the abortion itself. The 'gender based preference' effect can be reached through other methods."


- Ectezus

Click to expand...

Why is the gender preference thing a problem if it is not really a full human life? If it is not a human being with human personhood then why should it matter that it is being aborted for its sex? You do believe it is the woman's choice, right?

daniel777 said:

EDIT: it's not anything against you, i'm just amazed at how individuals' thoughts can be swayed by social norms.

Click to expand...

I am amazed as well. In my opinion, this fact significantly dislodges arguments I've seen Christians make about how all people share certain common moral values and recognize an underlying moral objectiveness.

Joachim said:

Why is the gender preference thing a problem if it is not really a full human life? If it is not a human being with human personhood then why should it matter that it is being aborted for its sex?

Click to expand...

I agree with this view but expand it to include both sides.

If I were against abortion, I'd argue that since you're already killing the human life anyway, what difference does it really matter if you know the gender before you do it? Adding sexism to a charge of murder is hardly important and in no way "slippery slope".

If I were for the right to have an abortion, I'd argue that since the little thing you're terminating isn't even a person yet, that what early-stage genitalia it has is rather insignificant, and it is still in no way "slippery slope".

So I really don't see how it's an issue either way.

R3quiem said:

If I were for the right to have an abortion, I'd argue that since the little thing you're terminating isn't even a person yet, that what early-stage genitalia it has is rather insignificant.

Click to expand...

it's not a person but that doesn't mean it's future sex is insignificant... if it had different "early stage genitalia" they wouldn't be aborting it. Aborting a fetus because it's the wrong sex is sexist.

IMO that's a pretty terrible reason to have an abortion but as I stated before, there's no way to enforce a ban.

This is sickening. It is wrong in any case, and now they are doing it to get rid of an unwanted sex?!
The devil walks to and fro...

China has been aborting females for decades.

Haven't heard any righteous indignation from the feminists on this.

Click to expand...

And I'm sure your reading of feminist literature of the decades you are referring to is extensive and well researched right?

Why is the gender preference thing a problem if it is not really a full human life? If it is not a human being with human personhood then why should it matter that it is being aborted for its sex? You do believe it is the woman's choice, right?

Click to expand...

Oh I believe in a "woman's choice". She had choice, have sex, or don't. A fetus feels pain after just 9 weeks og gestation, so do you believe in a women's choice?
Women need to chose to not have sex if they do not want a child. And in a rape instince, adoption is a great option.

Oh I believe in a "woman's choice". She had choice, have sex, or don't. A fetus feels pain after just 9 weeks og gestation, so do you believe in a women's choice?

Click to expand...

Does a woman have a choice to allow the food she eats to pass on to her fetus or to simply bypass the fetus?

Steve Petersen said:

For those who dismiss 'slippery slope' arguments here is one more reason to think twice.

Click to expand...

In order to find out whether you are making a slippery slope argument and whether I can simply dismiss it I would have to know for or against what you are presenting this as an argument.

This sort of thing is usually more common in Asia where the deep rooted ideas of gender discrimination are still present.

It is regrettable to abort and it only succeeds in becoming more disgusting when the reasons are as arbitrary as gender.

The question here shouldn't be so much "should we allow a woman like this to abort her children", but more "should we allow a woman like this to get pregnant in the first place"

If you abort your child twice for gender-reasons, you're a pretty messed up person imo. And would probably be a pretty messed up parent. (imagine what would happen if child #3 were of the intended gender, and if it then started exhibiting some behaviors more often associated with the other gender...)

For the sake of the kids, some people should just never get pregnant. But enforcing something like that is going to make you like like the Nazis -_-

Joachim said:

Why is the gender preference thing a problem if it is not really a full human life? If it is not a human being with human personhood then why should it matter that it is being aborted for its sex? You do believe it is the woman's choice, right?

Click to expand...

Yes I believe it's the women's choice to decide to keep a baby or not. If she for whatever reason decides she can't care for it, doesn't have the money for a good upbringing or more important doesn't WANT it (not wanting a child won't make a good mother) then it's her choice to abort it.
Why anyone want to force another person to have a baby against her will is beyond me.

The reason why the gender preference abortion might be considered as a problem is because it messes up the normal ~50-50 ratio of man/women. Whether this is a bad or accaptable thing is not for me to judge. My feeling says it's unnatural but I do think gender on demand (through in-vitro fertilization) will be common in the future. Personally I want to have 2 kids, one of both gender so I wouldn't mind to see that possibility.

I do think it's bad to abort for example only females because you only want males for discrimination reasons and such. However in the article the women already had 2 girls and they don't say anything about the gender of the aborted fetus. Wanting the experience to raise a boy sounds like a good thing to me and I know plenty of people who have 2 or 3 kids more than they planned/wanted because they tried to get one of the other sex. (And now still have 4-5 boys or girls and gave up on it)

- Ectezus

If one of the parents has a family history of some sex-specific disease, making an abortion decision based upon sex is quite justifiable.

If they want to do it just to ensure their firstborn is a son, I would not find that acceptable. But a woman's reasons for an abortion are hers alone (with some input from the father, hopefully), and none of my, or anyone else's, business.

I am amazed as well. In my opinion, this fact significantly dislodges arguments I've seen Christians make about how all people share certain common moral values and recognize an underlying moral objectiveness.

Click to expand...

yes it does. but those kinds of arguments usually involve a variety of distinguished cultures each having their own social norm. . . . i still don't think it's a strong argument that really "proves" anything, but i think it allows for the possibility of real morals.