When the sage glitterati of our intellectual elite want to show some level of annoyance while maintaining their politically correct bone fides, they claim a subject is “nuanced,” “complicated,” or “difficult.” I’m speaking here of André Picard’s article in the Globe recently about how sex selection is a “complex issue with many nuances.”
You know what? Give me Joyce Arthur over André Picard, I say. Dude claims he is unbiased and nuanced, while actually being a cheerleader for abortion. I much prefer people who have a strong opinion, aka, a pulse.
Anyway, the Post comments today in Full Pundit on this “infinite nuance.” I enjoyed that.
Or, in the words of one friend who emailed me his frustration, “sex-selection abortions are not nuanced and complicated. They are pretty damn simple. I want a boy. I carry a girl, therefore I terminate girl’s life simply because I want a boy. Wow. Uber f*&ing complicated. Soooo nuanced! How do we keep up?”
Indeed. All that nuance, keeping me up at night.by
I just read the Picard article- then threw up in my mouth a bit. Quite a bit actually. But according to Picard, Rajenda Kale’s proposal is “unethical,” while Picard offers no solution to the problem of sex-selection abortions. And its apparently ethical to turn our heads and not notice this going on- or to even look straight at it and let it happen. I’m with Kale on this that “This is discrimination at its against women at its worst.”
I was uber excited to see these recommendation (Kale’s) come out of a group that isn’t explicitly pro-life. Perhaps we will soon see similar criticisms, such as the decisions to abort based solely on a disability, and even the recognition of human rights for all humans, including those on the other side of the womb. Kale’s proposal is a step in the right direction- let’s hope his words resonate more than Picard’s.
Thanks for your tough (but as you say, super obvious) criticism of this anything but a “nuancing” issue!
Aborting a child because you don’t want it? That’s fine and dandy.
Aborting a girl because you don’t want her? Now that’s barbaric.
And… as I suspected might happen, a commentary article was published in the Globe by Roxanne Mykituik (law professor) called “Why Care Less about the Disabled Fetus?” http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/why-care-less-about-the-disabled-fetus/article2307237/
She concludes with: “In a society committed to protecting the equality rights of women and persons with disabilities, we should be just as concerned about the use of ultrasound to identify and eliminate fetuses on the basis of disability as we are about sex.”
There’s a long way to go, but I think articles/movements like this and the previous are steps in the right direction to recognizing the need to protect all life.