War on Women? I do believe we have found the culprits...

If you follow politics south of our border (the good Old USA) you have almost certainly heard the phrase "War on Women" used by candidates, elected officials, political pundits, and the news media. Trust me, it is not exclusive to one side, Liberal or Conservative, Democrat or Republican, both sides to some degree accuse the other of participating in some form of gender bias. Having said that, the accusations appear to come from the Left far more often than the Right. In fact the the term is used frequently by the more Left leaning, who carry it like a shield against the Right.

The heat on this issue has recently been turned up a few notches because several major events are taking place concurrently, how so?

First, you have the The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) which is generally known to most of us as Obamacare before the Supreme Court to determine it constitutionality. The act contains a  “contraceptive mandate” requiring all insurance providers to cover the full range of FDA-approved drugs and devices, including but not limited to drugs that work after conception to destroy life rather than prevent it. Now for some this is a good thing, for others say like the Catholic Church it is a very hard pill to swallow considering it directly violates one of their religious doctrines. As well many Conservatives who tend to be "Pro-Life" for the most part also have a problem with this issue. Now when this particular part of the act is spoken about by the Left it is generally framed as a "women's health issue" (for some reason the Left never uses words like birth control, abortion, recreational sex, etc. Go figure), so naturally if you don't agree with this part of the act you are obviously against "women's health" (there is something seriously wrong with that logic, where is Mr Spock when I need him?). So, this effectively paints the Right with a very easy target for those on the Left to take potshots at.

Secondly, America is in a Presidential election year. The incumbent, President Obummer knows full well he can not run on his record over the last 3+ years (even most honest Democrats view it as a disaster). His spin doctors are in full damage control looking for ways to refocus the voters attention and what could be easier than accusing your opponent and his party of  "waging a war" against approximately half the population? Yes it's dirty, but it comes from Barrack Obummer, a man that has spent his entire political career lying to achieve power. Well to be fair, he has been honest about the fact that he was a major pothead in high school, used cocaine, and wildly experimented with other illegal recreational narcotics. I must be naive as I didn't realize that the use of illegal drugs was a sign of good character or a prerequisite for holding the Oval Office.

So, recently we have seen an issue arise that seems to be a conundrum for the those on the Left. The issue I refer to is Sex Selective Abortions. For those of you not familiar with the term, it is a practice that is often used in third world countries where a pregnant women will through an ultrasound examination to have the sex of her unborn child determined as the basis to have it aborted. In most of these cultures the reasoning is that boys are the preferred gender, where as females are often considered a burden on the family (this bias would be a good example of why these nations are referred to as "third world countries"). Now for many of us this concept sounds horrific, and we are thankful we live in a society that would never allow such a thing to take place. Well folks I have news for you, it takes place every day in America (and Canada as well). While we are not as blatant about it as they are in India (where abortion clinics literally advertise it on signage) it is certainly ongoing. What is even more ironic is that the very groups (both special interest and political) that you would on first glance expect to be outraged over this, in fact support it.

Lets start with a group that is familiar to most, Angie Murie, executive director of Planned Parenthood Waterloo Region in Canada, was asked recently about sex-selection abortions. She said:
“I wrestle with gender-based abortion more than any other reason [for having an abortion]...From a macro perspective, I don’t think it is a good idea for us to be eliminating women. But if you look at it at the individual level, which is what we do, I don’t have any right to say that one person’s reason is better or worse than anothers.”

Wow,! So from "a macro perspective" Angie doesn't think it is a good idea to eliminate women?
While I can only imagine that women in general are pleased that Angie feels they have a right to exist, her attitude doesn't speak very highly for Planned Parenthood's support of women. Maybe their reasoning is simply that Planned Parenthood will support any woman that was lucky enough to avoid being aborted as a fetus and in turn survived to see the light of day. However, prior to emerging from the birth canal, it's every man (or in this case woman) for themselves as far as Planned Parenthood is concerned. Now I can see that Planned Parenthood (I don't agree with it, but I can see the reasoning) would show hesitancy to support any opinion that might lead to restraints on abortion. After all when you boil it down that's why the organization exists to a large degree, to promote birth control and easy access to abortions, to them it is simply a "service", probably akin to getting an oil change. What I can't understand though is any woman buying into Sex Selective Abortions, after all in most cases it is the female gender being targeted for elimination (another word for abortion). What's equally as disturbing is that this group is heavily funded through tax dollars. An interesting side note about Planned Parenthood is that they just made a donation of $1.5 Million to Obamas re-election campaign, think this one through very carefully....

How is a group that draws a large percentage of its operating revenue from federal government coffers allowed to make a million dollar plus donation to a particular political candidate in a presidential election?

Here is an undercover video of a young lady requesting a Sex Selective Abortion right in the offices of Planned Parenthood.

Lets move to another group and one particular individual, that often champions themselves (and the individual in particular) as defenders of woman.....  the American Democratic party and the President of the United States himself.

A bill put before the House to outlaw abortion based upon gender (generally targeted at females) has been defeated, based on Democratic opposition it failed to muster the necessary two thirds of the vote to pass. An amazing situation considering sex-selection abortion is considered so repugnant that it’s officially illegal even in China, yet it it's par for the course in America?  Many leading feminists, and others such as Hillary Clinton have condemned sex-selection abortion as well. But apparently House Democrats have a different moral outlook, as does does President Obama. Funny attitude, attitude for the "defenders of women" to take?

A statement put out by his press secretary, made clear the President's stand on the matter
“The Administration opposes gender discrimination in all forms, but the end result of this legislation would be to subject doctors to criminal prosecution if they fail to determine the motivations behind a very personal and private decision.  The government should not intrude in medical decisions or private family matters in this way.” A very strange stance on this issue from a man with two daughters. I suspect both of his girls are very grateful that Sex Selective Abortion was not the norm when they were conceived.

Now, for a moment lets imagine a different scenario.... one where the decision to abort was being made based on a fetuses race, or potential sexual preference (yes, I am aware there is no test for sexual preference, but bear with me). Do any of us imagine that the administration, Democrats, and the Left in general would not screaming for an immediate stop to the practice of "race or sexual preference based genocide". You bet they would, yet they apparently have no issues with Sex Selective Abortions.

So, I would suggest that if there truly is a "war on woman" it is being waged by some on the Left and the Democratic administration itself. However it appears that this group prefers to show their disdain for the female gender prior to birth, by simply providing an individual with no protection from having her life extinguished. Think of this the next time you hear someone on the Left accusing the Right of waging a "war on women".