Obama's Gendercide Hypocrisy

Judie Brown
June 5, 2012
Reproduced with Permission

President Obama's positions on "social issues" have never been known as consistent or logical. This can be said about many questions including the human rights of innocent and less fortunate human beings. One current example is the contrast between how the White House handled its opposition to a ban on sex selection abortions versus its position on a toxic poison that was added to drinking water being consumed by Afghan female students in Takhar Province, Afghanistan.

Late last week the United States House of Representatives, under a special rule, voted on the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act - a proposal that would have allegedly banned efforts to abort a baby based on that child's gender. President Obama was among those who opposed the proposed law. Apparently Obama does not view sex selection abortion as discriminatory.

As the White House press office stated: "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."

Such double-talk is designed to muddy the waters. Actually, the White House is telling the public that it defends abortionists. Their deadly practices need to be protected because aborting a baby because of its gender is a "medical decision" and a "private family matter."

The White House is saying that the administration does not want the government intruding when the lives of innocent preborn boys and girls are at risk, even when little girl babies are being killed because the parents want a boy instead of a girl.

However, not all gendercide is equally to be defended by the Obama administration. Barely a month ago, when the first cases of poisoned drinking water at a girl's school in Rustaq, Afghanistan, became public, the Obama administration's Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, "said the incident was a reminder of the need to retain hard earned human rights in Afghanistan as security duties were handed over to Kabul."

These mysterious poisonings have resulted in up to 150 young girls being hospitalized because of a toxic chemical being added to their drinking water. The report suggests that this act was perpetrated by a regime that is unbelievably inhumane, barbaric, and symptomatic of some in the Afghani culture who abhor the education of women.

But the double standard that Obama and his minions have chosen to employ in these two cases is madness personified.

How can it be that young women on foreign soil who are being discriminated against and whose lives are being threatened by a cruel regime invite sympathy and expressions of outrage from the Obama administration, while female preborn children in America are summarily denied their human rights without the batting of an eye?

Such inconsistency is symptomatic of the grave problem America faces as society grows increasingly callous to the demands and propaganda of the abortion cartel. Perhaps it is because Americans are ignorant, perhaps it is because they simply do not care or, worst of all, perhaps "human rights" has become a malleable term that applies in some cases and not in others.

No matter the cause, the result is a war on the innocent with a toll so large that the nation and its economy are crumbling. Gendercide, aborticide, national suicide. You decide.