Gendercide is not a "War on Women," but banning it is

Sometimes there are subjects you don't want to write about. They are slightly disturbing and you don't know how anyone can find them acceptable or even a human right. And then Shelia Jackson Lee opens up her big fat mouth and the stupid that pours forth just astounds you and you have to call it out.

Abortion is a horrible thing and it is used as contraception out of convenience. This week gave rise to the issue of gendercide via abortion when the Republicans introduced a bill to stop it. The bill was put up to a vote under a suspension of House Rules which meant that it needed a two thirds majority instead of a simple majority to pass.

This was obviously done to embarrass Democrats on their abortion policy. However, at the same time it shows that if the Republicans were serious about this issue they would have let it go through the normal process and it probably would have passed. Instead they played politics and gendercide wins the day.

Good job Republicans. Do you feel proud of yourselves? It is like you are joining Democrats in killing unborn females. *** clap clap clappity clap ***

Planned Parenthood's PR campaign claims that they are against gendercide. But we have videos that show that this government funded project and beacon of human rights for women but not babies supported by the Democrats is just paying lip service to the public_[1][2][3].

Aside from the gendercide issue of the said bill, it also would outlaw abortion based on the race of the unborn baby_[1][2]. Basically, no racist abortions.

And then the stupidity train comes to town.

Shelia Jackson Lee, what say you about stopping gendercide and racist abortions?

Was that hard to listen to and follow? Here is a transcript:

Thomas: Congress woman, it is good to have you here this morning. Groups that track this sort of thing say evidence of abortions based on the predicted se... predicted sex of the fetus, they're limited, they're also inconclusive. So, why do you think Republicans are bringing this bill up now?

Shelia: Well Thomas, I think that the next act will be dragging women out of uh patient rooms into the streets uh and screaming over their uh bodies as they uh dragged out of getting access to women's health care. Uh, that is what I feel like uh is occurring today uh with the uh legislation that is on the floor.

Thomas, first of all, uh, there is bipartisan ehe unilateral unanimous that we should not have agenda based abortions for the sake of getting one gender over another. Uh, that is a human and humane humanitarian issue that none of us quarrel with.

PRENDA of course starting out by being the Susan B. Anthony and Frederick Douglas already provocative in trying to racially profile ... this bill uh is a direct intrusion into the relationship between patient and physician. We realize that uh there is a suggestion that cultures around the world do this. But in order to change those cultures, this legislation will not work. What you really need is an affirmation of the value of women. And today PRENDA is an affirmation of the devaluing of women, because what it does is it demonizes the physician and the women, particularly here in the United States, and it suggests, uh it puts on them, the idear that they're going in to have an abortion for a dastardly reason other than the choice, uh and the uh personal needs uh and the uh the faith conversation and medicacal needs of that particular patient.

This is a Draconian drastic initiative and frankly it should go down today.

Thomas: Congresswoman, this bill comes as though a time where Planned Parenthood is fighting back against a hidden camera sting campaign that attempted to show Planned Parenthood accepted sex selection abortions. They went to clinics in your home state where Planned Parenthood right now the funding is in limbo. Eh is this all about the ongoing battle to defund Planned Parenthood which this week launched that ad campaign in several states that's targeting Mitt Romney o' or is or is this something else or is this strictly about trying to strip away the funding that goes to Planned Parenthood?

Shelia: Well you know, the women in Texas are particularly victims. I would answer this Thomas and say it's the world. It's the holistic approach of coming after women.

Uh, the uh, the decision u'by the court uh in uh Texas and the federal court has as you well know enjoined the state its ridiculous approach of denying uh the funding to unaffiliated clinics for Planned Parenthood.

Planned Parenthood is of course fighting for its life, uh but it is an institution that has served women for years. So I think it is a combination of the whole global approach in the United States by the Republicans to go after women and to bring up this heinous bill which, as I said, no one, I have been an advocate against in opposing forced abortions in China. So obviously, I believe in a different approach.

But I can not, at in any way, find in this bill, any legitimacy, by a criminalizing incarcerating doctors. We're going back to the days of oh uh coat hangers. That's what they want to do. They want to criminalize doctors because what that says is how do you know that a doctor is engaged in helping a woman abort because of the particular gender of the fetus?

And so, the only way you do that is you get into the minds of those, so I would imply say, simply say to you, the bill should go down. We need to reinforce the value of women. Educate people about the value of girls and boys. And join in with the human family and stop condemning, a women's right to choose.

Stop having this war on women.

Thomas: Congress woman Shelia Jackson Lee. Thank you for this time this morning. I appreciate it.

Shelia: Thank you for having me.

Thomas: Absolutely.

There is soooooooooo much to make fun of here. However, I want to make this simple.

Shelia agrees that gender based abortions are wrong. However, a law to oppose them is "draconian."

Yes. Shelia Jackson Lee said that opposing killing a fetus because it is a girl is "draconian."

How many more "draconian" measures can you find?

1 2 1 2