Has nothing to do with India, let alone Hindus.
Australian couple, who already have 3 sons, then aborted twin boys (conceived via IVF, not that that makes a difference) just so they can have a girl to ease the Mrs' mind over a sad loss of a daughter earlier. I.e. purpose of daughter is solely to appease the mind of the wife. (Else she should have been happy with the twins she conceived.)
news.ninemsn.com.au/health/8193634/desperate-couples-bid-to-have-a-girl
No outrage? Guess that's only reserved for those cheap self-centered rich Indians who also do the same type of easy "gender-selection". (But curiously, *all* Indians get tarred with the behaviour of X numbers of people of the same nationality who the rest of the nation has little else in common with. It's always held up as a reminder or used as public set-down of Indians' - or worse, unreasonably exclusively "Hindus"' - inhumanity/base humanity. But, if argued that way, thoughtlessness is clearly not solely the predilection of modern Indians. The *same* rules apply and hence the same conclusions derived.)
I'm not booing abortion. One can allow that there are cases where it is necessary and for that reason should be legally available with provisos (so it's not applied on a whim). But selfishness should never be a motivation in what are *incredibly* weighty and non-trivial decisions. One lives (and dies) with the choices one makes and the situations they were made in.
Australian couple, who already have 3 sons, then aborted twin boys (conceived via IVF, not that that makes a difference) just so they can have a girl to ease the Mrs' mind over a sad loss of a daughter earlier. I.e. purpose of daughter is solely to appease the mind of the wife. (Else she should have been happy with the twins she conceived.)
news.ninemsn.com.au/health/8193634/desperate-couples-bid-to-have-a-girl
Quote:Desperate couple's bid to have a girl
00:06 AEST Sat Jan 8 2011
A couple that aborted twin boys conceived through IVF because they wanted a baby girl are trying to win the right to choose the sex of their next child.
The couple, who have three sons naturally but lost a baby girl shortly after birth, chose to terminate an IVF pregnancy when they learned the twins they were having were both boys, The Herald Sun reports.
They have gone to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) in an attempt to to win the right to choose the sex of their next child using IVF.
The couple said the decision to abort their twin boys was traumatic but necessary because they did not want to have numerous babies in their bid for a girl.
[color="#800080"](Oh it was traumatic. For them. Again, it's all about them: the choice to have kids and keep trying for it is about them, the choice to have a girl is about them, the choice to do away with their boys is about them. And the trauma is about them too: how they feel about their 'difficult decision'.
Some people never grow up, I guess. They still imagine the world revolves around their little aspirations and is consequently subject to this. But it's a pity that others have to be pawns in their quest for cheap thrills.
And the keenness of the experience of the couple's "trauma" concerning their decision to abort is surely lessened by their *trivial* motivations and reasoning about it all. After all, aren't the latter a measure of their capacity for the former? Am I wrong?)[/color]
They have said they are prepared to travel to the US to conceive a girl, where it is legal to select the sex of a child through IVF, if their case fails in Victoria.
The mother became obsessed with having a girl after their first girl died shortly after she was born.
She said having a girl was vital to her psychological health and although she loved her sons she would do anything to have a girl.
The man said: "After what we have been through we are due for a bit of luck. We want to be given the opportunity to have a girl."
Under Australian laws IVF clinics are only allowed to enable couples to select the sex of their children to reduce the transmission of a serious genetic condition.
An independent panel known as the Patient Review Panel recently rejected their bid to choose the sex of their next child.
VCAT, which has ruled that it has the right to review the panel's decision, will hear the case in March.
No outrage? Guess that's only reserved for those cheap self-centered rich Indians who also do the same type of easy "gender-selection". (But curiously, *all* Indians get tarred with the behaviour of X numbers of people of the same nationality who the rest of the nation has little else in common with. It's always held up as a reminder or used as public set-down of Indians' - or worse, unreasonably exclusively "Hindus"' - inhumanity/base humanity. But, if argued that way, thoughtlessness is clearly not solely the predilection of modern Indians. The *same* rules apply and hence the same conclusions derived.)
I'm not booing abortion. One can allow that there are cases where it is necessary and for that reason should be legally available with provisos (so it's not applied on a whim). But selfishness should never be a motivation in what are *incredibly* weighty and non-trivial decisions. One lives (and dies) with the choices one makes and the situations they were made in.
Death to traitors.