99Percent

If abortion is not going to be wrong for whatever reason, much less its going to be wrong for a particular reason.

Loren Pechtel

Actually, I have a problem with gender-selective abortion for non-medical reasons. The areas where this has become common are suffering from big gender-imbalance problems. As such I think society has a legitimate interest in prohibiting such abortions.

tronvillain

Yes, it is morally justifiable to abort the fetus for that reason. Of course, I think it is morally justifiable to abort a fetus for any reason.

Mary and Mike

__________________________________________________ __
Originally posted by Loren Pechtel
Actually, I have a problem with gender-selective abortion for non-medical reasons. The areas where this has become common are suffering from big gender-imbalance problems. As such I think society has a legitimate interest in prohibiting such abortions.
__________________________________________________ __

I have the opposite view. Right now I have two boys, but I also had a tubal done. In the future if I want to really have another child despite my having had a tubal and I wanted to have a girl, I would first go through sex selection at a fertility doctor. But if I got pregnant using the sex selection and the baby was a boy, I would get an abortion. I didn't want another boy, and I tried through medical technology to have a girl. I would keep trying through medical technology till I got pregnant with a girl. I wouldn't want to keep having a bunch of boys before I had a girl though.

I could have the boy and give him up for adoption, but that would take a toll on my body going through the entire pregnancy. I would have the doctor do the anmenoisis testing by the ambilical cord when I was about 9 weeks along to ensure that I was having a girl.

Although I have to add that the sucess rate of having a girl the first time would be pretty high and I would probably not have to face the issue of aborting a boy, but I would do it.

Mary

Bumble Bee Tuna

Yes, Loren, but those areas are places with backwards, sexist societies. Would such a thing happen in the U.S.? If not, then it isn't immoral here.

Also, I don't think it's fair to hold someone accountable for their country's future problems. So having a male child in china by choce is wrong? But what if you did that, but moved to a different country before your child reached sexual maturity?

I just don't buy this absolutist morality. I also think that it would still be wrong to prevent such abortions, even in the interest of gender equality. If your child can't find a mate, he can move to a new country. It's not an insurmountable problem.

-B

Loren Pechtel

In the areas where it's common it *IS* a problem and as such the state has a reasonable interest in prohibiting it.
You're going to get a lot of young males who seriously lose out in the relationship department--a major prescription for trouble. The problem is effectively insurmountable--moving to a different country isn't going to solve their problems--by the time they realize there's no hope where they were, then they move and learn a new language there aren't going to be all that many available females of the right age--and how many of them will go for such individuals?
Most would never find mates. Add a rabble-rouser that blames some outside force and you've got a good source of recruits for groups like Al-Quida. (Note how many of the 9/11 guys were losers in the romance department--that was *NOT* chance!)

Mary and Mike does have a valid point, though--how about they are only prohibited if it would increase the gender imbalance in *THAT* family. If you have two boys and zero girls you can legally abort a boy but not a girl.

trientalis

A recent report from the BBC on sex-specific abortion and the social cost thereof:

"India's Lost Girls"

Frankly, I think Loren may have a point.

Bumble Bee Tuna

He may have a point, but generally on the interenet when I hear someone say society, they are either by default referring to the US or they must then be referring to every society on Earth. I think that the position that every society on Earth is only partially flawed because possibly a place like China would need a law like this, but not other places. If "society" refers to the US, though, it's entirely flawed because we do not have these problems and we will not have these problems. Society could definitely have a pressing interest if things got truly skewed (I could see rape going up greatly due to all the guys who can't get any).

I'll listen to a case for societies with backwards, sexist people and serious population problems having reason to prohibit gender abortion. Though I think that still leaves you with the problem of people just doing illegal abortions that end up being less safe...Perhaps what you really need to ban is gender testing- people can't get gender abortions if they don't know what they're going to have.

-B

brighid

If we focus on gender-specific abortion aren’t we focusing on the effect and not the cause of the gender disparity? In societies that value females, or at least don’t severely devalue them as evil, barely human beings only put her for reproduction you won’t have gender specific abortions.

I agree that the plight of women and unborn female fetuses in India (and other places in this world) is beyond abysmal I am not sure interference is in order. Should the existing women breed more females to be born into a value system such as this one? Will the near extinction of the Indian female and quite possibly the extinction of that culture perhaps force these ass-backward people to perhaps change? I am not sure I would want to bare a daughter into an environment that will degrade, enslave, abuse, oppress and simply use her to bare more male children.

This society will have taken a course, due to its misogynistic value system, that if not changed will destroy that society and perhaps the degrading attitudes right along with it.

Let it get bad enough that these men cannot find “brides” to purchase. Maybe then they will realize the inherent value of their necessary human, female counterparts. Perhaps I am being overly cynical today, but focusing on gender specific abortion in these cases seems to be accepting a stop-gap solution for a pervasive social ill that has it’s root deep in the religious and cultural attitudes of these societies. Unfortunately, it is easier to address the abortion issue then the social norms that perpetuate this cycle of violence against the female gender.

Brighid

TomboyMom

[QUOTE]Originally posted by AquaVita
[B]

Here is my question...is it morally justifiable to abort the fetus based on this information? If not, what makes this situation different then a woman who simply does not want a baby at this point in her life? Do we take away the women's right to choose?

Just want to point out that the question, "Is it morally justifiable..." is different than the question, "Should the woman have the right to choose?" You could take the position that the woman should have the right to make a choice which may not be morally justified.

That's ignoring the highly objectionable assumption that someone would be more likely to abort their fetus just because it would grow up to be gay like me.