GOP Lawmaker: We Need to Ban Sex-Based Abortions Because of Asian Immigrants

rdowns

macrumors Penryn
Original poster
Jul 11, 2003
27,345
12,408
What could be better than a Republican bill combining two of their most favored past times, misogyny and racism.


On Wednesday, by a vote of 60 to 10, the South Dakota House passed a bill that would ban abortions based on the sex of the fetus, or "sex-selective" abortions. Speaking in favor of the bill, Stace Nelson, a Republican state representative running for the US Senate, hearkened back to his time living in Asia as a Marine. "Many of you know I spent 18 years in Asia," Nelson said. "And sadly, I can tell you that the rest of the world does not value the lives of women as much as I value the lives of my daughters."

In a PowerPoint presentation he showed to the judiciary committee, Cody referred to studies that found Asian American families tend to have more male female than female children. He then wrote, "1.1% or approximately 9,200 South Dakotans come from ethnic backgrounds that are known to practice sex selection," and linked to US Census data estimating that in 2012, 1.1 percent of South Dakotans were of Asian descent.

Another slide read, "Ethnic backgrounds that are known to practice sex selection account for up to 3.9% of all abortions in South Dakota." It referred to South Dakota Department of Health statistics showing that 3.9 percent of abortion patients in 2011 reported their race as "other," that is, not white, black, or Native American. "It's possible that this could be affecting as many as 24 abortions a year," Cody concluded—assuming every woman who reported her race as "other" was Asian, and every one of them was seeking an abortion only because of the fetus's sex.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/02/south-dakota-stace-nelson-ban-sex-based-abortions-because-asian-immigrants#disqus_thread
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
38,936
Criminal Mexi Midget
Abortion is an ugly deal, do you guys honestly support abortion simply based on the sex of the child? should people be able to abort simply because its "another" boy or another "girl"?
 

0007776

Suspended
Jul 11, 2006
6,474
8,051
Somewhere
While the way the bill is being presented is clearly racist, what is wrong with banning abortions based just on the sex of the child?
 

rdowns

macrumors Penryn
Original poster
Jul 11, 2003
27,345
12,408
Abortion is an ugly deal, do you guys honestly support abortion simply based on the sex of the child? should people be able to abort simply because its "another" boy or another "girl"?

No, I don't support sex-selective abortions. However, abortion is legal and the woman has the right to choose. I also don't believe any women would admit to a sex-selective abortion but would give other reasons.

I also don't support racists using bull **** to try and pass unneeded legislation.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
38,936
Criminal Mexi Midget
No, I don't support sex-selective abortions. However, abortion is legal and the woman has the right to choose. I also don't believe any women would admit to a sex-selective abortion but would give other reasons.

I also don't support racists using bull **** to try and pass unneeded legislation.
the bill should apply to EVERYONE, not just Asians.

Seven states already prohibit sex-selective abortions. In five states, the bans passed after the 2010 elections that swept Republicans into a record number of statehouses. South Dakota's ban, which is now before the state Senate, would require physicians to ask women seeking abortions whether they are doing so because of the sex of the fetus. If a woman responds yes, her physician must refuse to perform the abortion, or else risk prison and fines.
I hope more states pass a bill that applies to EVERYONE.
 

zioxide

macrumors 603
Dec 11, 2006
5,725
3,711
Abortion is an ugly deal, do you guys honestly support abortion simply based on the sex of the child? should people be able to abort simply because its "another" boy or another "girl"?
Honestly, it doesn't matter what any of us "support" because it's a free country. Abortion is a personal medical decision that is legally supported by the supreme court and the only people who should be involved at all are the pregnant woman, her family, and her doctor. This is no business of any douchebag politician.


I hope more states pass a bill that applies to EVERYONE.
Man, in that other thread, you were complaining about the big bad government trying to control people. But now you're for it here? Double standard much?
 

Michael Goff

Suspended
Jul 5, 2012
13,262
7,298
Honestly, it doesn't matter what any of us "support" because it's a free country. Abortion is a personal medical decision that is legally supported by the supreme court and the only people who should be involved at all are the pregnant woman, her family, and her doctor. This is no business of any douchebag politician.




Man, in that other thread, you were complaining about the big bad government trying to control people. But now you're for it here? Double standard much?
Everybody wants big government, it's just a question of where they want the Government to be big.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
38,936
Criminal Mexi Midget
Honestly, it doesn't matter what any of us "support" because it's a free country. Abortion is a personal medical decision that is legally supported by the supreme court and the only people who should be involved at all are the pregnant woman, her family, and her doctor. This is no business of any douchebag politician.




Man, in that other thread, you were complaining about the big bad government trying to control people. But now you're for it here? Double standard much?
you ASSUME me an anarchist , I am not. different thread = different issue.
Everybody wants big government, it's just a question of where they want the Government to be big.
indeed. I support the ACA, with the exception of the MANDATE. I have no problem with the rest of it .
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
38,936
Criminal Mexi Midget
Honestly, it doesn't matter what any of us "support" because it's a free country. Abortion is a personal medical decision that is legally supported by the supreme court and the only people who should be involved at all are the pregnant woman, her family, and her doctor. This is no business of any douchebag politician.




Man, in that other thread, you were complaining about the big bad government trying to control people. But now you're for it here? Double standard much?
nothing "medical" about that sex based decision.
 

zioxide

macrumors 603
Dec 11, 2006
5,725
3,711
nothing "medical" about that sex based decision.
There's no proof that anyone is even making that decision. This is a bunch of stereotyping & bigotry from some clown lawmaker who can't prove this is actually a problem but just "thinks" it is.


"It referred to South Dakota Department of Health statistics showing that 3.9 percent of abortion patients in 2011 reported their race as "other," that is, not white, black, or Native American. "It's possible that this could be affecting as many as 24 abortions a year," Cody concluded—assuming every woman who reported her race as "other" was Asian, and every one of them was seeking an abortion only because of the fetus's sex."


That's a lot of assuming and maybes.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
38,936
Criminal Mexi Midget
There's no proof that anyone is even making that decision. This is a bunch of stereotyping & bigotry from some clown lawmaker who can't prove this is actually a problem but just "thinks" it is.


"It referred to South Dakota Department of Health statistics showing that 3.9 percent of abortion patients in 2011 reported their race as "other," that is, not white, black, or Native American. "It's possible that this could be affecting as many as 24 abortions a year," Cody concluded—assuming every woman who reported her race as "other" was Asian, and every one of them was seeking an abortion only because of the fetus's sex."


That's a lot of assuming and maybes.
the women who are having the abortion provide the proof. all the DR does is ASK them. read the article.

EDIT.

Seven states already prohibit sex-selective abortions. In five states, the bans passed after the 2010 elections that swept Republicans into a record number of statehouses. South Dakota's ban, which is now before the state Senate, would require physicians to ask women seeking abortions whether they are doing so because of the sex of the fetus. If a woman responds yes, her physician must refuse to perform the abortion, or else risk prison and fines.
 

Zombie Acorn

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2009
1,301
9,062
Toronto, Ontario
1) are you saying that Asian countries do not have a selective abortion problem (China especially)? How is it racist to point out that Chinese people will abort a girl to have a boy?

2) Do you think people should be able to have an abortion based on the sex of their child? I don't.
 

zioxide

macrumors 603
Dec 11, 2006
5,725
3,711
nothing "medical" about that sex based decision.
Abortion is a medical procedure therefore it's always a medical decision.

the women who are having the abortion provide the proof. all the DR does is ASK them. read the article.
Why should they have to provide proof? It's a free country and abortion is legal as long as it's early enough in the pregnancy. If a woman wants to get an abortion, provided it's before ~20 weeks (or whatever it is in the specific state), she can. She doesn't have to give a reason at all.


EDIT- Just saw your edit. What's the point then? If a woman doesn't want the baby because of the baby's sex, she's just going to lie to the doctor and tell them it's for a different reason. She could give them ANY other reason and there's no problems because abortion is legal. This legislation is just a waste of time if that's how it's going to work.


2) Do you think people should be able to have an abortion based on the sex of their child? I don't.
Like I said above, it doesn't matter what any one of us thinks. It's a "free" country and abortion is legal. There are many people in this country that "think" all abortions should be illegal, but that's their personal beliefs. In a "free" country, who gives them the right to force that belief on others?
 

nebo1ss

macrumors 68030
Jun 2, 2010
2,734
1,242
No, I don't support sex-selective abortions. However, abortion is legal and the woman has the right to choose. I also don't believe any women would admit to a sex-selective abortion but would give other reasons.

I also don't support racists using bull **** to try and pass unneeded legislation.
I was under the impression that Sex selective abortions was practiced in China because of the restrictions of one child per family. Is there any evidence that it is being practiced by the Asian community in America.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
38,936
Criminal Mexi Midget
Abortion is a medical procedure therefore it's always a medical decision.



Why should they have to provide proof? It's a free country and abortion is legal as long as it's early enough in the pregnancy. If a woman wants to get an abortion, provided it's before ~20 weeks (or whatever it is in the specific state), she can. She doesn't have to give a reason at all.


EDIT- Just saw your edit. What's the point then? If a woman doesn't want the baby because of the baby's sex, she's just going to lie to the doctor and tell them it's for a different reason. She could give them ANY other reason and there's no problems because abortion is legal. This legislation is just a waste of time if that's how it's going to work.




Like I said above, it doesn't matter what any one of us thinks. It's a "free" country and abortion is legal. There are many people in this country that "think" all abortions should be illegal, but that's their personal beliefs. In a "free" country, who gives them the right to force that belief on others?
then you have no problem with the legislation as presented because of it, right?
 

lannister80

macrumors 6502
Apr 7, 2009
476
17
Chicagoland
then you have no problem with the legislation as presented because of it, right?
No, because it won't solve the "problem" (which may or may not even exist) that it's intended to solve. What the hell is the point of putting it on the books, if that's the case?
 

roadbloc

macrumors G3
Aug 24, 2009
8,779
211
UK
I know nothing about American politics, but that has to be the most stupid thing I've read. I hope this person has no power.
 

zioxide

macrumors 603
Dec 11, 2006
5,725
3,711
then you have no problem with the legislation as presented because of it, right?
Two problems with it:

It's a slippery slope. You start putting crap like this through, and what's next?

But the biggest problem this is just a huge waste of resources. Imagine if we had politicians that actually worked to help better the economy, create jobs, and improve the infrastructure instead of passing religious-rooted feel good legislation that tries to infringe on rights but is so stupid that it won't even do anything.
 

jkcerda

macrumors 6502a
Jun 10, 2013
682
38,936
Criminal Mexi Midget
Two problems with it:

It's a slippery slope. You start putting crap like this through, and what's next?

But the biggest problem this is just a huge waste of resources. Imagine if we had politicians that actually worked to help better the economy, create jobs, and improve the infrastructure instead of passing religious-rooted feel good legislation that tries to infringe on rights but is so stupid that it won't even do anything.
completely agree with you there.