Over the past two decades, up to 10 million unborn female babies may have been aborted in India because of parent’s desires for a male child.
Dipankar Gupta, a sociologist, blamed the government for their inability to enforce laws against fetal sex determination and abortion on the basis of gender, which have been illegal since 1994. "Ultimately, it boils down to building public opinion and social consciousness that there is no difference between a man and a woman and protecting women’s rights," said Gupta.
The modern feminists have placed themselves in a difficult position – arguing for abortion as a "woman’s right," while arguing against aborting female babies as an issue of "women’s rights."
If an unborn baby is simply a fetus, not a human being, then how is preventing gender selection an issue of women’s rights? How can you argue both for and against abortion depending on whose being aborted?
I do think this is a tragedy. The resulting impact on the Indian society will be tremendous. Other countries, particularly Asian nations, will face the same situations in the future – not enough women to go around, which will ultimately lead to the decline of the nation.
But this is a tragedy that will not find it’s solution in framing it as a debate on women’s rights. The majority of women have bought the line that abortion is simply another medical procedure. They are only removing some excess tissue from their bodies.
The only way to combat this evil is to argue for life – to re-explain that the unborn child is a person. They are not tissue or a disposable fetus. The baby is a living person that should be protected as all other persons. To frame the debate any other way, particularly in terms of women’s rights, is to doom your efforts and possibly even worsen the problem.