THE INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER is to be congratulated on
their exposure of sex selected abortions among Asian communities. This is a
practice that most of us knew was happening, a priori, but the Independent has found sound empirical
evidence from studying the 2011 census, which suggests that 4,700 female embryo/foetus have been aborted within such communities;
because within such cultures a dowry has to be paid by the family when a
daughter marries.
The
government had denied that any such evidence existed when, last June, Earl
Howe, a minister at the Department of Health (DoH) insisted that; ‘on sex selection, we have no evidence
at all of gender-related abortion in the UK. Concerns were expressed about this
in the Press, but analysis has been done that shows the UK birth ratio is
within normal limits’. The
DoH never had the evidence because they did not want to find it. Ministers and
civil servants knew of such practices, but preferred not to investigate them
for fear of offending the Asian communities that practiced such gender related
abortions.
The
DoH has turned a blind eye, in the same way the police and social services in
Rochdale and Oxford did, when young white girls were harvested from the streets
by Asian gangs to be abused and raped; and they did it for the same reason.
Socially
liberal Britain is seeing a few chickens coming home to roost. Ever since the 1967 Abortion Act was steered through by
the then pre-knighted and peeraged David Steel, the debate about the status of
the embryo/foetus has raged - are they
human or just clumps of tissue without any human genus?
In
order to pay homage to the rising tide of feminism; it was decided to strip
the embryo/foetus of all human identity,
and it continues to be the case today. No wonder our feminists have, along with
other contentious practices adopted by our other minority cultures, ignored
what should have been a cause-celebre for feminism.
If,
on the other hand, some senior Canadian police officer says that women who
dress provocatively cannot complain if men are overcome with lust; then the
feminists take to the streets en-mass all over the Western world.
At
least the feminists are consistent in that they care little about the
embryo/foetus whether male or female.
But one would have thought that by selecting the female embryo/foetus for
termination on grounds of gender,
they would have protested at the attitude held toward women by the Asian
communities.
But,
also like the DoH, as well as the social workers and constabularies in Rochdale
and Oxford; the feminists have also decided to turn a blind eye regarding the
Asian communities chauvinistic attitude to women. Compared to the way women are
treated in other cultures, particularly, but not exclusively Muslim ones, our white
Western feminists are living in an Amazonian paradise regarding the advancement
of their sisterhood.
They
are hypocrites all, and their feminist manifestoes, articles, and books, are
filled with so much false piety. They
care little about the sufferings of
their gender, if such suffering is confined to ethnic minorities.
BUT BACK TO the issue of abortion. There is another
statistic, referred to by Dominic Lawson writing in today's Daily Mail. This concerns the laxity of
the 1967 Abortion Act. At the time we were told there would be all sorts of
safe guards written into the legislation that put strict limits on the
procedure. One being that two doctors must be consulted before an abortion is
allowed. But those doctors who opposed, for ethical reasons, any termination,
removed themselves, rightly, for reasons of conscience from any practice
resulting in abortion.
This
meant however, that the embryo/foetus had lost many an ambassador for their
cause. Now, of the 200,000 abortions carried out each year, some 50% have been
terminated without the need (presented in the 1967 Act as being in its spirit)
of any intervention from two doctors. The term used in the Act was, two doctors
acting "in good faith" by judging in part the mental condition of the
mother. Much it seems was left to faith by a liberal constituency which was, on
the whole, secular in its outlook.
David
Steel is now about to experience the
world beyond the thin end of the wedge talked of in 1967 and ever since. Many
other liberals, from within all the main parties who regard abortion as in some
way "progressive", are finally tainted by this inhuman procedure.
The
1967 Abortion Act was neither 'progressive', or in any way to be considered to
be a humane response to the back street abortionists that preceded it. Consider
just how many writers, musicians, artists, and scientists have been denied the
possibility of advancing our civilisation through the application of this foul
act. Selfish and self-centred women have, over the decades since 1967
terminated their pregnancies; but for no other reason than using the procedure
as another form of contraception.
We
were once told that no women chooses lightly to abort her pregnancy. This was,
at the time, in 1967, the feminist response to those on the Right who opposed
Steel's abortion act - thus came into being this new addition to the various
other methods of contraception. Abortion today has become as familiar as the seasons to those
wishing to rid themselves of an unwanted problem.
There
should be in theory, none, or very few abortions taking place. Women have the
pill as well as the morning after pill, along with more traditional methods of
contraception. Men either have the Catholic method of withdrawal, or the
condom. And in extremis being neutered.
We
have all these methods of prevention, yet still every year 200,000 abortions
take place. If abortion has not become another form of contraception, then let
our liberal politicians from all the main parties who supported Steel's
abortion act explain to us where we have lost their liberal plot.
Abortion
involves the killing of a human embryo/foetus; not a dog's or cat's. The only
way the liberal elite would understand this, is if we were to describe the
Leonardo Cartoon as the mere embryo/foetus
to the finished master piece; and therefore without significance and
could be readily put to the flame. Imagine the outrage at such an abortion of a
work of art.
Well
I feel the same way about the human embryo/foetus. I am an atheist, but not a
secularist. Between 1968 and 2003, six million legal abortions were performed
in the UK[1]-
while five hundred abortions are being performed each day.
With
this rampant nightmare in progress, what the liberal's are concerned with, if
at all, is gender selection; not the cruelty and denial of opportunity to either
sex brought about by such killings. I say killings because the parameters of
the term murder are set by the state, and, the 1967 Abortion Act made abortion
legal. So the destruction of human life, under circumstances allowed by the
state; is perfectly legal.
It
is a good job that in the 17th and 19th centuries, abortion was never rubber stamped
by the state. For we may have been left without Shakespeare and Dickens, along
with a flurry of artists, authors, engineers, and scientists over the coming
centuries that lifted this country up on the world stage - how stupid can our
people be?
The
wretched Steel has a lot to answer if he believes in a maker. If not, he will
have done future mankind a disservice including his own future ancestors by the
so-called 'progressive' path he, in his political immaturity, took.
Abortion
has limited the cultural blood of the nation. Many great minds in all spheres
of human cultural activity have been put to the abortionists knife. Lives which
will now never prosper mankind.
No comments:
Post a Comment