Social Media
National Center Presents
Category Archives

The official blog of the National Center for Public Policy Research, covering news, current events and public policy from a conservative, free-market and pro-Constitution perspective.

501 Capitol Court, NE
Washington, D.C. 20002
(202) 543-4110
Fax (202) 543-5975

Search
Monthly Archives
Twitter feeds
« Food Fight Breaks Out on Left | Main | Project 21's Arps on New Vote Fraud Conviction and Sanity of Voter ID »
Monday
Jun032013

Stopping Race, Sex-Based Abortions is "Discriminatory" to the Left

In Arizona, a local NAACP chapter and the National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum (NAPAWF) — with the legal representation of the ACLU — are suing in a federal court to overturn a law that criminalizes abortions that are performed because of the race or the sex of the unborn baby.

You can’t make this stuff up!

It’s being alleged that seeking to prevent abortions motivated by a bias against a particular race or gender are, in the words of ACLU of Arizona legal director Daniel Pochoda, “motivated by racist and discriminatory beliefs.”

The law, passed in 2011, makes it a crime for an abortionist to end an unborn baby’s life “knowing that the abortion is sought based on the sex or race of the child or the race of the parent of that child.”  A woman seeking an abortion in Arizona must sign an affidavit stating she does not seek the abortion “out of racial or gender animus towards her own fetus.”

This is being called profiling that unfairly singles out blacks and Asians.  Abortions among blacks are disproportionate to the overall population.  Sex-selection abortions are known to occur in the United States, particularly in Asian communities.  This is important to know, but it is also anecdotal in this instance.  The Arizona law applies to all who seek abortions — not just blacks or Asians.

The lawsuit nonetheless throws down the race card, saying blacks and Asian-Pacific Islanders “are members of a protected class” that are apparently deserving of unfettered access to abortions — even if those abortions may, in fact, be discriminatory in their intent.  ACLU attorney Alexa Kolbi-Molinas said black and Asian women need to be allowed to make unrestricted decisions about abortion “without being cast as villains or as women who the state must monitor because they cannot be trusted to make this decision on their own.”

Once again, it’s important to note that the Arizona law does not single out black and Asian women.  The ACLU, NAACP and NAPAWF do.  For good measure, Miriam Yeung of the NAPAWF told Mother Jones magazine that the Arizona law also “contributes to anti-immigrant perceptions” and that “sex-selection is really a symptom of gender inequality.”

It would seem there is ample profiling being done with regard to the Arizona law, but it’s being done by the plaintiffs and not the defendant in this case.

Derryck Green, a member of the National Center’s Project 21 black leadership network, sees this NAACP/NAPAWF/ACLU lawsuit as a miscarriage of justice and an overt attempt to find discrimination on the part of those who actually want to see an end to that very discrimination they now stand accused of:

Only in the absurd, upside-down world of progressive leftism do so-called civil rights groups sue to effectively preserve a “right” to kill babies based on race and sex.

The NAACP, in conjunction with National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum (NAPAWF), and represented by the ACLU, is suing the state of Arizona.  Ironically, they are claiming that a state law in Arizona criminalizing abortions based on race and sex is “discriminatory.”  They claim the law violates women’s rights under the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by “stigmatizing their decision” to kill their babies.

Just to be clear, as I see it, the NAACP, NAPAWF and ACLU lawsuit — if successful — will ensure that more Asian baby girls in particular and black babies in general are easier to kill by the parents who don’t want them.  But it’s so much more than that.  This law was not written to single our Asians or blacks — but to save all precious babies that may be at risk because a couple wants a girl instead of a boy or for when family pressures are exerted upon an expectant mother to abort her mixed-race baby for vanity’s sake.

So quickly after the gruesome trial of late-term abortion doctor and infanticide practitioner Kermit Gosnell — who preyed on poor black and Asian women and of whom the NAACP appeared all too silent — the NAACP is now actively suing a state for seeking to prevent race and sex-based abortions.  The NAACP is effectively encouraging more abortions among blacks — a genocide which already claims more than 1,400 babies per day. 

Clearly, the Arizona law is meant to save lives.  The NAACP and the NAPAWF are essentially trying to end them by seeking to have the law declared unconstitutional.  It is these groups that are trying to inject the stigma of alleged discrimination into the debate.

What more does the NAACP have to do to prove that they’ve completely sullied their heritage when it comes to the true protection of the civil rights of black Americans?  They appear to have forfeited their moral credibility when it comes to most everything else, and I believe they no longer represent the best interests of black Americans.

For the NAACP, civil rights protections these days seem to only extend to blacks outside the womb.  For this reason, among many more, they’ve proved themselves to have become nothing more than a progressive political organization desperately attempting to maintain relevance.

By pushing a lawsuit that can only encourage more abortions based on race and sex aren’t the NAACP and the NAPAWF the racist and sexist groups in this case?

top photo credit: iStockphoto

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend