The recent, disturbing news uncovered by Western Standard magazine that sex selection abortions are taking place in Canada is quite simply the inevitable result of the abortion-on-demand ideology that has taken hold in this country, thanks in large part to the agitation of feminist zealots in co-operation with certain other influential and powerful elements that have a grip on key power points here. It also points out that once the Pandora’s Box of killing some human beings is opened, there is no closing it and no end to the evils which may be generated by it.
As Joanne McGarry of the Catholic Civil Rights League so correctly points out, it is ironic the very feminists who served in the vaguard of the effort to secure unrestricted abortion in this country are finding that their sisters in humanity are being slaughtered under the very banner that they gathered under for so long: choice. Indeed, if the principle of choice is elevated as the prime consideration in deciding whether one lives or one dies, what possible moral standing can there be for all of a sudden claiming that choice has to be circumscribed when it comes to the matter of the sex of the preborn human being?
Surely, the right to life must triumph over the personal predilections and choices of other human beings already born. Except, in our current bankrupt moral climate, it does not. Instead, “pro-choice” advocates have to engage in complicated philosophical gymnastics to somehow justify choice in the matter of life or death, while denying it in the case of sex selection. A pretty tough balancing act, to be sure.
Not that there is any shortage of pro-choicers trying, however. Joyce Arthur, one of Canada’s foremost pro-abortion zealots, has been known assert that, “Being pro-choice means supporting a woman’s right to decide whether or not to continue a pregnancy for whatever reason, even if one personally does not agree with her reason.”
Right.
But for the most part, the Canadian “pro-choice” lobby has been deafeningly silent on the matter of sex selection abortions. Perhaps it knows that it is a futile question to attempt to tackle. Or perhaps it really does not care about women, as it claims to do. Either way, those who believe in the sanctity of life can take some measure of satisfaction in the knowledge that this is another nail in the coffin of abortion in Canada.
Whether it is sex selection abortion, the evidence of abortion’s deleterious effects on women, the increasing willingness of women to come forth and tell about how their abortions have hurt them or even the devastating social effects abortion has had on Canada as a whole (via our collapsing birthrate and subsequent coming destruction of our social safety net, for example), it is clear that it is only a matter of time before the monolith of unrestricted abortion in Canada comes to an end. Lies and deceptions do indeed eventually catch up to the liars and deceivers.
