Someone once mused that in the unlikely event an actual homosexual gene was ever discovered, abortion would be outlawed overnight.
There are two reasons for this:
- Homosexual activists have been the front-line shock troops of the abortion-on-demand movement. They comprise the vast majority of those “defending” abortuaries from the peaceful vigils of sidewalk counselors across the country. For whatever reason, they have adopted this cause as their own – even though it should have no impact on their lives as “non-breeders.”
- Homosexual activists who have championed “choice” are smart enough to understand that many prospective mothers, conditioned for 30 years to expect only a “perfect” baby, would choose to abort one that was known in advance to be disinclined to bear offspring.
With that in mind, a legislator in Maine decided not to wait for what so many homosexual activists and their acolytes predict as an inevitable development – the discovery of a “gay” gene.
State Rep. Brian Duprey, a Republican, introduced a bill to forbid a woman from ending a pregnancy based on the projected sexual orientation of a fetus. He explained that the proposed legislation looks forward to the possibility of the discovery of a “homosexual gene.”
Duprey, who admits getting the idea by listening to the Rush Limbaugh talk-radio show, may have his tongue in his cheek, yet he is sincere in his objections to abortion based on sexual orientation. I share his convictions. I’m opposed to abortion in all cases, except in the extremely rare instances in which the life of the mother is in danger. So, certainly, I would oppose abortion for such a frivolous reason as an inclination toward homosexuality. I would suggest upward of 90 percent of Americans would be with us on this.
“I have heard from women who told me that if they found out that they were carrying a child with the gay gene, then they would abort,” said Duprey. “I think this is wrong.”
Sure it is.
Such abortions are not without precedence. There are already some abortions taking place in this country, and far more in many others, for no other reason than the sex of the baby. After all, there are virtually no restrictions on abortions in this country for any reason. Even in China, where the government still forces women to have abortions against their will, Beijing has changed its laws to forbid sex-selection abortions because of a massive imbalance in the birth of boys vs. girls.
So, it goes without saying that, knowing human nature, some people would decide to abort for reasons as specious as “sexual orientation.”
But you ought to hear the uproar about this latest “gay rights” legislation!
No one knows what to do with it. It’s got everyone confused. Do homosexual-friendly legislators really want to oppose a bill to protect the birth of homosexuals?
“It will be seen as some kind of political gamesmanship,” explained Maine’s House Majority Leader Glenn Cummings.
Of course it is. But it is much more than that. It is an example of being absurd to point out the absurdity of our culture’s blind faith in the principle of abortion on demand.
The abortion fanatics will tolerate no restrictions on abortion for any reason – not even if it is used to kill unborn babies because they are girls or to kill babies because they might be homosexual. Meanwhile, their shock troops, the homosexual activists, demand every imaginable form of special privilege based on their sexual proclivities.
Here is where the interests of the femi-Nazis and the homosexual brown shirts clash. Duprey nailed it.
I like it, if for no other reason than the delight it gives those of us who still value all human life as sacred an opportunity to watch the “choice” hypocrites squirm.