China’s one child policy
November 10, 2010
tags: abortion, Aktion T4, al-Jazeera, Barack Hussein Obama, China, Chinese, Exclusive, forced, health care, Hitler, Infanticide, Melissa Chan, one child policy, T-4, T4, Woman
China’s one child policy
In this exclusive report by Al Jazeera’s Melissa Chan, we look at a Chinese woman ordeal. As she was forced to abort her eight month baby, because she violated China’s one child policy.
I really can’t say I’d be surprised if infanticide becomes much more common if Obama’s Aktion T4 health care plan goes through. I doubt very much that it would ever be this extreme, but still.
Anyone who thinks we need to be more like China deserves a fist in the face.
Advertisement
Like this:
Be the first to like this post.
from → Uncategorized
9 Comments
leave one →
It strikes me that comparing the availability of abortions to a eusthanasia program run by the Nazis or China’s opressive one-child policy is not only highly offensive, but deliriously misinformed. The availbility of abortions serves to heighten the individual’s freedom, whereas both of the policies you compare it to are restrictive and intended to prevent individuals doing as they please.
And don’t hedge your opinion with ‘I very much doubt’ if you’re going to bring Nazis and other authoritarian states into your argument – either outright say it or not. Sensationalism is just backwards.
What strikes you a certain way doesn’t necessarily make it true for everyone.
The availability of abortions serves to heighten a person’s freedom, perhaps, unless you happen to be the child in the womb facing an abortion while you remain defenseless and have no say. Freedom, huh? Here’s a thought: You’re free to keep your legs closed and you’re free to keep your dong in your pants.
Outright say what? I’ve been pretty open with how I feel.
Thanks for stopping by!
Obviously there is a difference, though, between an unsentient blob at 24 weeks and an eight month pregnancy as you’ve used in your example. To deny abortions is simply to extend patriarchal control over women, pervert their sexuality (‘keep your legs closed’) and deny them any sort of sensible say over their own lives. Let me disabuse you of any ideas you might have that criminalising abortion makes it any less likely to happen; 20 million backstreet abortions take place every year in countries where abortion is outlawed, causing 80, 000 deaths every year. Those that do use backstreet methods aren’t just in the hands of quack doctors – any number of damaging pills and potions are available on the internet, which cause anything from massive uteral damage to death.
Simply requesting that people don’t have sex isn’t really a fair or sensible option, either, because people, by and large, tend to be human, and pretty faulty as a result of that. Not everyone can be straight edge, and with a culture of alcohol consumption and promiscuity (or rather, of women as sexual objects) promoted by the consumer-capitalist advertising industry, bad choices tend to be made. That said, abortions aren’t happy-sunshine things (though we do need some open discourse about them that doesn’t have all the female members of the family in a grey room crying), and prevention is the best option here – contraceptives and sex education need to be more aggressively promoted, something that doubtlessly would save the burden on the health care system anyway.
Your entire comment became void when you said: “Obviously there is a difference, though, between an unsentient blob at 24 weeks and an eight month pregnancy…”, which unfortunately for you, was at the very beginning of your comment.
http://www.whattoexpect.com/baby-pictures/PhotoDetails.aspx?photo=c2d252b8-becf-4621-8e12-997f76c3ed78
http://community.parents.com/content/november_2010/scrapbook/13610905/My-little-Sweet-Pea-at-24-weeks-2-days
http://organic-mama.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/24.jpg
How unfortunate for you. But keep trying.
Those children look ripe for abortion!
Seriously. If a woman doesn’t want that in her body, let her get rid of it.
Well, at least you acknowledged them as children. One step in the right direction.
Something can quite easily look like a rock and be an old man’s head. And just because some women leap into motherhood pre-emptively doesn’t make it a fact that there is a sentient child in there. Of course, now we’re down to the science of it so that’s not going to go anywhere.
“The availbility of abortions serves to heighten the individual’s freedom”
Whose individual freedom does abortion heighten? Certainly not the child who has no voice.
How does access to an abortion serve to heighten individual freedom? Seems to me that it is just the opposite. The individual (the mother) (in most cases) made her choice when she exercised her “freedom” to have sex and not use some sort of contraceptive (same could be said of men). Now mind you I am speaking here in terms of women who were not raped or a victim of incest, but a consenting adult in full charge of her mental/emotional/physical capacity.
In this life when people are allowed to “just throw things” away because they behaved in an irresponsible manner; it makes for a society unable take responsibility for their actions. Abortion is just one more tool used to undermind the case for morality, responsibile behavior, and the exercise of good judgement/decision making. Which is the only truly “individual freedom” that any of us have. Whether to be a moral person who exercises good judgement/make good decisions or to be someone who behaves badly/irresponsibily and lets someone else pay the price of our bad decision/bad judgement, namely a child who had no choice as to whether or not it was concieved, let alone to live.
Ending a life no matter who made the decision to do so whether it be the state or the individual will never make abortion more palatable. It is what is…murder.