The End of Women's Rights in America?

Anyone who knows something about the radical feminist movement of the '60s and '70s will be gripped by déjà vu when looking at photos of the recent "War on Women" rally in Los Angeles. 

Once again, leftist women were toting placards with slogans like "Get Out of My Womb" and "Get your rosaries off my ovaries," and "If I wanted the government in my womb, I'd f**k a senator." 

But something is radically changed from the '70s.

What the bra-burning, wire coat hanger-toting, pro-abortionist feminists and their offspring marching in LA and residing at NOW, NARAL, and Planned Parenthood don't seem to comprehend is that they may be looking at the complete unraveling of women's rights.

Let's look at the reasons why.

The signature achievement of radical feminists agitating during the 1960s and early '70s was 1973's Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision, which essentially legitimized abortion on demand throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy.

Since that time, leftist feminists have clung to the absolute right to abortion, tolerating no exceptions to what they consider an inviolable right.  The fact is that no argument on behalf of the unborn human being has been deemed a reason to curb abortion rights.  Any woman in the U.S. can walk into an abortion clinic and be rid of her unborn baby for any or no reason at all.   

How ironic is it, then, that absolutism concerning abortion may prove to be the Achilles heel of the entire leftist feminist movement?

That Achilles heel is sex-selective abortion, which is gaining a foothold in Canada and the United States.

According to Adam Cassandra, a Canadian author writing for Life News, a recent study reveals that third-world immigrants from the East, especially those from India and China, are bringing to the West their preference for male babies.  Women are using sex-selective abortions to get rid of female babies in order to try again for the male infants they crave.

Cassandra quotes Joseph Meany, director of international coordination for Human Life International:

The Canadian study highlighted the fact that abnormally few girls were born to mothers from India or Korea.  The correlates with the well documented fact that sex-selection is most practiced in the Far East.  China and India are at the epicenter of the crisis with tens of millions of missing girls [...] In the USA there is strong evidence to that recently found in Canada pointing to sex-selection abortion of girls with immigrant parents from China, India and South Korea.

The widespread gendercide of the East has now immigrated to the West.  Little girls in the free West, where equal rights for boys and girls, men and women have largely been achieved after centuries of struggle, are now in jeopardy because of the absolutist interpretation of abortion rights.

The tragedy of female feticide and the inevitable erosion of women's rights is amplified by the noted absence of a megaphone from those who make themselves out to be defenders of women.

As Patrick B. Craine of LifeSiteNews noted in his article entitled "Woman-killing in the name of women's rights," abortion rights activists such as Joyce Arthur of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada have come out in favor of sex-selective abortions, claiming that restrictions on sex-selective abortions would be a "dangerous road to go down" because "women have the right to decide" even if they want to get rid of a girl-baby.

So there we have it.

In the opinion of leftist feminists, it is better to stick to the ideological absolute of abortion on demand -- no matter the consequences -- than it is to rise to the defense of unborn girls in the name of women's rights.

Because of their intransigent stand concerning abortion, leftist feminists stuck in the '70s have given up any claim to be the spokeswomen for women's rights in general.  How can any woman claim to be a defender of the female sex in any respect when she advocates choices that exterminate unborn little girls?

Feminists have embraced an ideological construct which declares loudly and clearly that any woman can decide that her unborn little girl is worth less than a little boy.  They have gone along with the worst of third-world ethics, declaring female feticide a "choice" they can live with.

A glance at what is transpiring in such countries as India provides illumination as to how matters will transpire in the West if third-world immigrants are allowed to abort little girls. 

Though British rule outlawed infanticide in 1881, the combination of easy access to abortion since 1971 and the advent of ultrasound technology has enabled women to abort unwanted female fetuses.  The result has been millions of missing girls.  The accompanying demographic distortions can be described only as catastrophic for both men and women.  China is in much the same position as India because of a draconian one-child policy that has resulted in forced abortions, sterilization, and a gender imbalance that bodes ill for female-deprived Chinese males. 

An increase in the elimination of girls is what the West is in for if it does not stop its insane allegiance to a distorted multi-culturalism accommodating morally repugnant third-world views which allow the killing of unborn females.  

The still largely Christianized West is in danger of trashing the core Judeo-Christian belief undergirding women's rights movements of the past -- namely, that women are as valuable as men and therefore entitled to equal protection under the law, whether born or unborn.  If girl-babies can be thrown out with the trash, women's rights also will be discarded along with those helpless little ones.  Further, an imbalance in favor of males risks the re-establishment of one of feminists' chief gripes -- a hegemonic patriarchy.

Rest assured: where female feticide and infanticide gain a foothold and become a permissible social practice, women's rights in general will be increasingly threatened, inevitably reduced, and perhaps even revoked as male dominance, long and often insufferably deplored by leftist feminists, ascends due to the increase of men.

It has been clear for a long time that countries such as China, which winks at the killing of female infants, are among those in which human rights for both sexes are held in contempt.  Human rights activists have long noted the brutality of the Chinese regime devoted to enforcement of its one-child policy.  As early as 1983, Stephen Mosher documented the horrors of forced abortions, sterilizations, and infanticide in China.  His revelations have been corroborated by others, most recently by dissident Chen Guangcheng, who has exposed China's systematic use of forced abortion and sterilizations.  

Having blown up the foundational principle for equal rights for men and women -- the fundamental human right to live -- feminists of the left really have nothing left to say.

Some are reduced to absurd and trivial argumentations over minutiae, as the outrage ginned up by the Brooklyn-based SPARK Movement against LEGO toys for little girls attests.  According to the group, the female version of little LEGO people is "hyper sexualized."  The organization's executive director, Dana Edell, also objects to what she sees as stereotyping of little girls' toys such as a beauty parlor and hot tub.  Edell huffs, "Girls aren't building space shuttles.  They're getting their nails done."

How long will women endure being subjected to the faux outrage ginned up by so-called women's rights groups over nonsensical non-issues?  When will true feminists see that what little girls can and can't play with doesn't much matter if they are not even allowed to see the light of day?

For genuine moral outrage lies not in protesting LEGO's manufacture of tubs and beauty parlors for little girls.

It lies in protesting and forbidding the most egregious assault on women's rights in the recent history of the West.  Anyone who believes in the equality of men and women will, when contemplating the enormous moral distortion of women who cold-heartedly sanction the assassination of their own sex while still in the womb, rise up in righteous indignation to proclaim:

"Unborn girls will not be killed in my country.  Not in any country."

You won't have seen the words above written on any placard toted by enraged feminists at the Los Angeles' "War on Women" march.

But they would make a good slogan for the next pro-life march.

Fay Voshell holds a M.Div. from Princeton Theological Seminary.  She has been active in the pro-life movemen.  She may be reached at fvoshell@yahoo.com. 

Anyone who knows something about the radical feminist movement of the '60s and '70s will be gripped by déjà vu when looking at photos of the recent "War on Women" rally in Los Angeles. 

Once again, leftist women were toting placards with slogans like "Get Out of My Womb" and "Get your rosaries off my ovaries," and "If I wanted the government in my womb, I'd f**k a senator." 

But something is radically changed from the '70s.

What the bra-burning, wire coat hanger-toting, pro-abortionist feminists and their offspring marching in LA and residing at NOW, NARAL, and Planned Parenthood don't seem to comprehend is that they may be looking at the complete unraveling of women's rights.

Let's look at the reasons why.

The signature achievement of radical feminists agitating during the 1960s and early '70s was 1973's Roe vs. Wade Supreme Court decision, which essentially legitimized abortion on demand throughout the entire nine months of pregnancy.

Since that time, leftist feminists have clung to the absolute right to abortion, tolerating no exceptions to what they consider an inviolable right.  The fact is that no argument on behalf of the unborn human being has been deemed a reason to curb abortion rights.  Any woman in the U.S. can walk into an abortion clinic and be rid of her unborn baby for any or no reason at all.   

How ironic is it, then, that absolutism concerning abortion may prove to be the Achilles heel of the entire leftist feminist movement?

That Achilles heel is sex-selective abortion, which is gaining a foothold in Canada and the United States.

According to Adam Cassandra, a Canadian author writing for Life News, a recent study reveals that third-world immigrants from the East, especially those from India and China, are bringing to the West their preference for male babies.  Women are using sex-selective abortions to get rid of female babies in order to try again for the male infants they crave.

Cassandra quotes Joseph Meany, director of international coordination for Human Life International:

The Canadian study highlighted the fact that abnormally few girls were born to mothers from India or Korea.  The correlates with the well documented fact that sex-selection is most practiced in the Far East.  China and India are at the epicenter of the crisis with tens of millions of missing girls [...] In the USA there is strong evidence to that recently found in Canada pointing to sex-selection abortion of girls with immigrant parents from China, India and South Korea.

The widespread gendercide of the East has now immigrated to the West.  Little girls in the free West, where equal rights for boys and girls, men and women have largely been achieved after centuries of struggle, are now in jeopardy because of the absolutist interpretation of abortion rights.

The tragedy of female feticide and the inevitable erosion of women's rights is amplified by the noted absence of a megaphone from those who make themselves out to be defenders of women.

As Patrick B. Craine of LifeSiteNews noted in his article entitled "Woman-killing in the name of women's rights," abortion rights activists such as Joyce Arthur of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada have come out in favor of sex-selective abortions, claiming that restrictions on sex-selective abortions would be a "dangerous road to go down" because "women have the right to decide" even if they want to get rid of a girl-baby.

So there we have it.

In the opinion of leftist feminists, it is better to stick to the ideological absolute of abortion on demand -- no matter the consequences -- than it is to rise to the defense of unborn girls in the name of women's rights.

Because of their intransigent stand concerning abortion, leftist feminists stuck in the '70s have given up any claim to be the spokeswomen for women's rights in general.  How can any woman claim to be a defender of the female sex in any respect when she advocates choices that exterminate unborn little girls?

Feminists have embraced an ideological construct which declares loudly and clearly that any woman can decide that her unborn little girl is worth less than a little boy.  They have gone along with the worst of third-world ethics, declaring female feticide a "choice" they can live with.

A glance at what is transpiring in such countries as India provides illumination as to how matters will transpire in the West if third-world immigrants are allowed to abort little girls. 

Though British rule outlawed infanticide in 1881, the combination of easy access to abortion since 1971 and the advent of ultrasound technology has enabled women to abort unwanted female fetuses.  The result has been millions of missing girls.  The accompanying demographic distortions can be described only as catastrophic for both men and women.  China is in much the same position as India because of a draconian one-child policy that has resulted in forced abortions, sterilization, and a gender imbalance that bodes ill for female-deprived Chinese males. 

An increase in the elimination of girls is what the West is in for if it does not stop its insane allegiance to a distorted multi-culturalism accommodating morally repugnant third-world views which allow the killing of unborn females.  

The still largely Christianized West is in danger of trashing the core Judeo-Christian belief undergirding women's rights movements of the past -- namely, that women are as valuable as men and therefore entitled to equal protection under the law, whether born or unborn.  If girl-babies can be thrown out with the trash, women's rights also will be discarded along with those helpless little ones.  Further, an imbalance in favor of males risks the re-establishment of one of feminists' chief gripes -- a hegemonic patriarchy.

Rest assured: where female feticide and infanticide gain a foothold and become a permissible social practice, women's rights in general will be increasingly threatened, inevitably reduced, and perhaps even revoked as male dominance, long and often insufferably deplored by leftist feminists, ascends due to the increase of men.

It has been clear for a long time that countries such as China, which winks at the killing of female infants, are among those in which human rights for both sexes are held in contempt.  Human rights activists have long noted the brutality of the Chinese regime devoted to enforcement of its one-child policy.  As early as 1983, Stephen Mosher documented the horrors of forced abortions, sterilizations, and infanticide in China.  His revelations have been corroborated by others, most recently by dissident Chen Guangcheng, who has exposed China's systematic use of forced abortion and sterilizations.  

Having blown up the foundational principle for equal rights for men and women -- the fundamental human right to live -- feminists of the left really have nothing left to say.

Some are reduced to absurd and trivial argumentations over minutiae, as the outrage ginned up by the Brooklyn-based SPARK Movement against LEGO toys for little girls attests.  According to the group, the female version of little LEGO people is "hyper sexualized."  The organization's executive director, Dana Edell, also objects to what she sees as stereotyping of little girls' toys such as a beauty parlor and hot tub.  Edell huffs, "Girls aren't building space shuttles.  They're getting their nails done."

How long will women endure being subjected to the faux outrage ginned up by so-called women's rights groups over nonsensical non-issues?  When will true feminists see that what little girls can and can't play with doesn't much matter if they are not even allowed to see the light of day?

For genuine moral outrage lies not in protesting LEGO's manufacture of tubs and beauty parlors for little girls.

It lies in protesting and forbidding the most egregious assault on women's rights in the recent history of the West.  Anyone who believes in the equality of men and women will, when contemplating the enormous moral distortion of women who cold-heartedly sanction the assassination of their own sex while still in the womb, rise up in righteous indignation to proclaim:

"Unborn girls will not be killed in my country.  Not in any country."

You won't have seen the words above written on any placard toted by enraged feminists at the Los Angeles' "War on Women" march.

But they would make a good slogan for the next pro-life march.

Fay Voshell holds a M.Div. from Princeton Theological Seminary.  She has been active in the pro-life movemen.  She may be reached at fvoshell@yahoo.com.