Gendercide in India

 

Gendercide.

Sex-selected abortion.

The “problem” is as old as misogyny, which is to say, it goes back to the day we were cast out of the garden. Baby boys are wanted all over the world, baby girls, not so much.

Christianity has always stood against killing babies. It has always opposed taking the life of any innocent person, including that most innocent of persons, the baby in the womb. There are no exceptions in Christianity which allow people to kill their baby girls, either born or unborn. Killing a baby girl is murder. Murder is a mortal sin. Unrepented and unforgiven, murdering a baby girl will send you to hell for eternity.

I am deliberately using stark language because I think we dress things up a bit too much sometimes. In our zeal to keep the peace and not offend, we weaken the message until it loses its meaning.

Gendercide is just a fancy way of saying mass murder of baby girls by means of abortion. Sex-selected abortion is just another way of saying misogyny. It is blood-soaked sin that will send everyone involved straight to eternal hell.

India is one of the places where sex-selected abortion has become a means of satisfying the demand for boys. China is another such place. Explanations focus on dowries, care for elderly parents and the religious rites that only a son can perform.

It will interesting to see what effect the persecuted, but growing, Christian population of India will have on this situation over time. Among other things, I imagine that they will be the ones who end up having enough girls to sustain their culture.

The following video discusses the murder of India’s daughters by their own parents with what must, as a practical necessity, be the  collusion of much of the rest of Indian society.

YouTube Preview Image

  • pagansister

    Apparently it hasn’t dawned on them that if you don’t have girls, eventually you won’t have boys either! There will be no females to give birth to the boys. Think China has noticed this —whether it will make any difference or not to killing the girls or (if the child is lucky) putting them into orphanages for adoption. I taught 2 little adopted Chinese children, sisters (by adoption). One had been brought to the orphanage, I guess by the bio mother, but the other had been left on a garbage heap and was found by someone who took her to the orphanage.

    • Rebecca Hamilton

      Pagansister this is the I’m-doing-what’s-best-for-me-now philosophy at work. You should recognize it. It has becoming the arbiter of how we’re making many of our decisions in this country as we veer more and more into amoral nihilism.

  • pagansister

    I do recognize what you mentioned in your first sentence. It still makes no sense in the long run, as an imbalance of genders produces fewer off spring. As to moving towards amoral nihilism? I’m a bit more optimistic——

    • Theodore Seeber

      Isn’t that entirely the plan? Family planning, thus fewer offspring?

  • pagansister

    Yes, Ted, family planning means just that—but shouldn’t be based on whether the fetus is male or female. If one doesn’t wish to have a child–fine, but terminate in a 3 month period—not after one finds out if the gender is to your liking. That isn’t planning, that is gendercide. Fewer off spring is not a problem in the long run—IMO there will always be enough humans on this earth. Killing off the future baby carriers will mean fewer simply because males need the females to have 1 or 2 children ( of more if wanted).

    • Rebecca Hamilton

      I’m going to interject here. The reason it’s gendercide is because they are killing baby girls. That’s because the “fetus” is a human person, in these cases a female human person. It’s wrong to kill people pagansister.

  • pagansister

    Rebecca, I totally know the reason it is called gendercide. Since the gender can’t be determined until around 18 weeks of gestation, I agree that that is too late to decide to not continue the pregnancy if the gender is considered not the one wanted.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X