The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.
You may have never heard of the word PRENDA. But the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee held a hearing on it on April 14.
PRENDA stands for the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act of 2016.
If enacted, the bill would subject medical professionals to up to five years imprisonment for performing an abortion on a woman who wants to abort the fetus because of its race or sex. A similar bill was defeated in the House of Representatives in 2012.
Sex-selective bans have been introduced in over half of the state legislatures in the United States and have been passed by eight of those legislatures. But in addition to banning sex-selective bans, this federal bill reaches further, banning race-selective abortions as well.
While sex-selective abortion bans have received much attention, fewer people have written about race-selective abortion bans.
American anti-abortion advocates invented race-selective abortion bans. Supporters argue they are designed to address the disproportionate rate of abortion among minority communities. They believe abortion providers target minority women for abortion.
The reality is that instead of addressing the real reasons for the disproportionate rate of abortions among some minority groups, PRENDA accuses minority women of racially discriminating against their own fetuses. This, as Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., put it in his statement, “is absurd on its face.”
Read full, original post: Here’s Why that Race-Sex Abortion Ban Bill is So Discriminatory