Abortion Ban for Gender & Disability. What about the Rest?

Celebrating a new abortion ban means forgetting about all the other abortions that are taking place.

According to Lifenews.com:

“The Indiana Senate Health Committee today passed a pro-life bill to make it the next state to ban abortions on babies simply because they are diagnosed with Down syndrome. Senate Bill (SB) 334, abortion prohibition based on gender or disability, passed the Indiana Senate Health and Provider Services Committee. This bill will bar a person from doing an abortion if he or she knows the pregnant woman wants an abortion because of the baby’s gender or a diagnosis or potential diagnosis of Down syndrome or another disability.”

Mike Fichter, president and CEO of Indiana Right to Life said the following:

“Senate Bill 334 sends a clear message that Indiana does not tolerate discrimination.”

Well guys, we’ve reached the summit. We’ve made it! We’ve stopped women from being able to slaughter their children should they decide to let their doctor know the contents of their thoughts, and the reasoning behind their decision to get an abortion.

If this bill passes the Indiana Senate, women in Indiana will no longer be able to discriminate…on gender or disability. Of course, the doctor must first be told that. So, the next logical step will be to create a mind-reading machine, because that’s all that’s left to accomplish! Oh wait—what about other abortions? Women can still discriminate based on pretty much everything else, such as…that it’s a baby…and she doesn’t want it…so yeah.

Let me see if I understand this victory celebration. A woman can walk into any abortion mill, and request that her pregnancy be terminated (which is just fancy talk for “Let’s rip that little bugger’s limbs off, and crush its skull with metal clamps, then suck it out of your uterus, and toss it in a trash bag!”), but if a doctor somehow senses that this woman is requesting an abortion for “discriminatory” purposes, he is then prohibited from performing the procedure?

First, for this bill to have any effect at all, the woman has to be a moron, telling her doctor that the reason she wants the carcass of her child sucked out of her body rather than carrying it to full term is because of its gender or disability. So, unless we get that mind-reading machine up, and working, I doubt this bill will be all that effectual. In any case, the Supreme Court would probably rule that the mind-reading machine violates a woman’s right to choose.

Second, this bill fails to address the absolute idiocy of the notion that aborting a child based on gender, or disability is somehow bad, while aborting it for any other reason is totally fine. What?! I’m all for saving as many children as we can, but this is ludicrous. We are celebrating a hollow victory.

How have we reached the point in our society in which we can—without our brains bursting due to sheer idiocy—fully condone aborting a child because one just doesn’t want it, while condemning someone for aborting a child because of its gender or disability?

The most vile part of this whole bit of news is that many people who are “personally against abortion, but don’t want to tell someone else what to do with their body” will agree with this bill. They will celebrate with us, as they celebrate with equal enthusiasm the intentional slaughter of thousands of children every year. It’s a ridiculous compartmentalization, and an intellectually bankrupt sickness to think that some abortions are acceptable, while others are not acceptable. It’s like celebrating an anti-slavery bill, while claiming that you cannot tell a slave owner what to do with his own property. It’s contradictory!

The people whose mental atrophy has led them to this conclusion will celebrate such a bill as the one in Indiana. But why? What does it matter? Regardless of the inherent dissonance of this philosophy, this incoherent trash-thought runs rampant in our intellectually stunted society.

For a member of Right to Life, especially one in such a prominent position as Mike Fichter, to proudly proclaim that this bill “sends a clear message that Indiana does not tolerate discrimination” is kind of sickening. Americans United for Life president Charmaine Yoest celebrating a similar bill in North Dakota, saying “Gov. Jack Dalrymple, Rep. Bette Grande and the legislators in North Dakota have shown courageous humanity in passing this legislation,” is like a punch in the gut.

Courageous humanity? What about the rest of them? What about their humanity? This is a sickness not only on the left, but on the right as well. We compartmentalize the murder of human beings, celebrating small victories, while ignoring the elephant in the room.

We need a politician who will say stand up, and say “While this bill sends a clear message that we will not tolerate discrimination, we cannot overlook the rest of the slaughter. We cannot condone some abortions, while condemning others. The logic isn’t sound, and here’s why.”

That would be real courage. That would be real humanity. But until then, I guess we can continue to compartmentalize atrocity, and genocide. We’re pretty good at it.