Indian premier calls for end to killing of unborn girls
Tue Aug 15, 1:06 PM ET


NEW DELHI (AFP) - Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called on parents in India to stop seeing girls as an economic liability and to end the practice of killing unborn female foetuses.


Singh's appeal on India's 59th Independence Day came four days after the grisly discovery of 25 female foetuses from a private clinic in northern Punjab state, which has the country's lowest sex ratio due to rampant female foeticide.

"We must end the crime of female foeticide. We must eliminate gender disparity," Singh said in an address to the nation.

"We have a dream of an India in which every woman can feel safe, secure and empowered. Where our mothers, sisters and daughters are assured a life of dignity and personal security," he added.

A study by British medical journal The Lancet said this year that India may have lost 10 million unborn girls in the past 20 years, but Indian experts say the figure is not more than five million.

Under Indian law, tests to find out the gender of an unborn baby are illegal if not done for medical reasons, but the practice continues in what activists say is a flourishing multi-million dollar business.

Premier Singh urged parents not to neglect their girl children.

"It should be ensured that every young woman is educated and skilled and capable of guiding a new generation," he said.

Punjab state has 798 girls for every 1,000 boys under the age of six while the national average is 927 -- still well below the worldwide average of 1,050 female babies.

Girls in India are often considered a liability as parents have to put away large sums of money for dowries at the time of their marriage.

Centuries of tradition also demand that couples produce at least one male child to carry on the family name.

Many grooms demand dowry well beyond the means of families of their spouse -- demands which often result in the killing of newly-married women.

According to the National Crime Records Bureau, India in 2004 posted 19 dowry-related deaths every day but women's organisations say the actual figure is 10 times higher.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060815/hl_afp/indiaidaypmhealth_060815170658

An unfortunate practice that needs its attention.

Indian premier calls for end to killing of unborn girls
Tue Aug 15, 1:06 PM ET

He can call for it all he wants. Until they change the dowry system things will remain the same. I know the first step is awareness but it will be centuries before any change is realized if they do not work on the root of the problem.

Hey, Googs, what's the difference between what they do in India and what they do in the United States. Killing the unborn is killing the unborn. It doesn't matter if you do it because the baby would have been born a girl of if you simply don't want a kid at this point in your life. The result for the unborn child is the same.

All foeticide is wrong not just that of unborn girls.

He can call for it all he wants. Until they change the dowry system things will remain the same. I know the first step is awareness but it will be centuries before any change is realized if they do not work on the root of the problem.The government can only do so much. If society chooses to continue using the dowry system there's little the government can do about it.

Jester is right. The caste system was officially done away with at the birth of India but it still exist, especially in rural areas. You have to remember that while we see teeming cities when we see films about India most of the country is still rural and conservative.

Hey, Googs, what's the difference between what they do in India and what they do in the United States. Killing the unborn is killing the unborn.

Overpopulation in India is a MASSIVE problem.

If the Indian government were sane and rational, they would be strongly encouraging ALL Indian citizens to practice birth control, and if women became pregnant when the birth control measures failed, the Indian government should be providing (and encouraging) abortions free of charge.

Failing to take necessary measures to prevent MORE children being brought into a situation where so many children are already starving to death is an act of insanity.

Fully agreed, FT.

Why not educate them on the use of condoms? What happens in India is couples keep aborting children until the unborn baby is a boy. Girls are sometimes abandoned to die even after they are born. The answer to India's problems is not to kill off girls. It is to practice more responsible sex.

The government can only do so much. If society chooses to continue using the dowry system there's little the government can do about it.

Agreed.

Why not educate them on the use of condoms? What happens in India is couples keep aborting children until the unborn baby is a boy. Girls are sometimes abandoned to die even after they are born. The answer to India's problems is not to kill off girls. It is to practice more responsible sex.

How would practicing more responsible sex ensure the birth of a male child? It's the dowry system that is the problem.

No, it would't Sal, but it would help alleviate the gross overpopulation problem that Freethinker uses as a reason to support the killings.

No, it would't Sal, but it would help alleviate the gross overpopulation problem that Freethinker uses as a reason to support the killings.

True.

India will soon be experiencing the same problem as China. Too many boys, not enough girls. Too many men, not enough women. No one to marry. Women then move up the scale in value.

But what to do with all of those extra males. They become expendable ... ARMY. Expand their frontier...

it would help alleviate the gross overpopulation problem that Freethinker uses as a reason to support the killings.

ROTFL.

The terrific force of the spin from the phrasing of that statement nearly took my house off it's foundation.

You are --in an extremely dishonest way--- putting the cart before the horse in this argument.

The massive ovepopulation is not **providing me a reason** to support abortions.

State funded abortions simply comprise an effective way of addressing the overpopulation problem that currently exists.

meh, India's overpopulated anyways. Let em screw over their possibilities of reproduction. After they get around a 10 to 1 ratio of guys to girls, they might start to realize that the dowry system they have is crap - especially since the girls will get to choose almost whoever they want (and the guys will be horny as hell since they aren't getting any)

True.

India will soon be experiencing the same problem as China. Too many boys, not enough girls. Too many men, not enough women. No one to marry. Women then move up the scale in value.

But what to do with all of those extra males. They become expendable ... ARMY. Expand their frontier...

hahaha, good point - massive military campaigns

If the disparity between men and women continues or gets worse in India the country will just return to the practice of polyandry. Polyandry used to be fairly widely practiced in India and is still practiced in some areas of the Malibar coast and in Himalayan India.

meh, India's overpopulated anyways. Let em screw over their possibilities of reproduction. After they get around a 10 to 1 ratio of guys to girls, they might start to realize that the dowry system they have is crap - especially since the girls will get to choose almost whoever they want (and the guys will be horny as hell since they aren't getting any)


What about the women now? Screw them too?

What about the women now? Screw them too?

What about them? They are of lesser value.

If the disparity between men and women continues or gets worse in India the country will just return to the practice of polyandry. Polyandry used to be fairly widely practiced in India and is still practiced in some areas of the Malibar coast and in Himalayan India.

Does polyandry increase, decrease or not affect the value of women?

What about the women now? Screw them too?

Are you talking about the treatment of women over there?

Well, the government has to do something about that

polyandry sucks, I want polygyny!!!

Polyandry increases the value of women, Sal. Windwip wants polygyny because he wants lots of women. When you are a twenty one year old man of course you want lots of women. Later in life you realize one is more than enough.

When you are a twenty one year old man of course you want lots of women. Later in life you realize one is more than enough.

?!?!

Only if you no longer have erections.

If you need more than one woman in your life you have a bigger problem than just erections, Freethinker.

If you need more than one woman in your life you have a bigger problem than just erections, Freethinker.

That is simply superstition and hidebound Puritanism.

Male homo sapiens are mentally predisposed to want to have sex with multiple partners. You might say --in a very subjective way- that --"no man "needs" more than one woman".

But is a simple fact of biology that a man will sexually DESIRE more than one woman.

If you are denying that to yourself, then you have been brainwashed (very likely by some repressive religious creed) into denying your own humanity.

And I have NO idea what is meant by describing it as "a problem".

Freethinker, you are mixing up lust with love. Even were multiple spouses or simply couplings with multiple people allowed or even the norm I would not have any other sex partners than my wife. There is such a thing as love and love transcends horniness. At least in my life it does. Perhaps in your life it is different.

Freethinker, you are mixing up lust with love.

Lust is real.

"Love" is an illusion, invented by the human mind.

Romantic "love" --of the type that causes a male homo sapien to convince himself in his own mind that he finds one and only one woman in all the world sexually desirable- is an extreme form of brainwashing.

....love transcends horniness.

Only after prolonged and intensive psychological conditioning. Conditioning that short-circuits the biological drive you were born with.

Who said only one woman would be sexually desireable? I said that I have no interest in having a sexual relationship with any other woman. I recognize that there are lots of beautiful and sexy women out there. I simply do not want to screw them.

You sound as if you have never been in love. If that is the case I truely feel sorry for you because you have never experienced the most wonderful of human emotions.

Overpopulation in India is a MASSIVE problem.

Overpopulation in India is not as much of a problem as it could be. The size of a population is controlled by females; with India limiting the number of females who are born and reaching sexual maturity, India is limiting the size of its population. Less females = less children being born overall.

Not that I'm saying population control is a reason for India to kill its female offspring. That's more of a Marvin Harris thing.

Why not educate them on the use of condoms? What happens in India is couples keep aborting children until the unborn baby is a boy. Girls are sometimes abandoned to die even after they are born. The answer to India's problems is not to kill off girls. It is to practice more responsible sex.

This is laughable. We can't even get people in the United States educated about condom use. India is a much more traditional country compared to the United States and many parts of India are rural, out of the way locations. Educating people on condom use would be extremeley difficult, I think.

Does polyandry increase, decrease or not affect the value of women?

Polyandry tends to occur when resources are scarce. It's ideal for more than one man (usually brothers) to marry/mate/bond with one woman in order to ensure survival and the reproduction of their own children.

In these instances, I would say that the "value" of women (read: need for) is increased. Without women, men would not have partners nor children.

"Love" is an illusion, invented by the human mind.

Romantic "love" --of the type that causes a male homo sapien to convince himself in his own mind that he finds one and only one woman in all the world sexually desirable- is an extreme form of brainwashing.



Only after prolonged and intensive psychological conditioning. Conditioning that short-circuits the biological drive you were born with.

You too may want to view the movie "What the Bleep Do We Know"...quantum physics, quantum mechanics":p

frogger, why is it that you can only love one person and only lust after one person? If love is such a great feeling also (I already know that lust is :thumbs:), why do you need to commit yourself to only one person.

The only reason I can think of is that your partner would get jealous, and since you 'love' them, you would not want to make them feel like that.

"Love" is an illusion, invented by the human mind.
The term "love" may be invented by the human mind, but the feeling of love is a very real care, as well as attraction, directed towards one or more people.

While all males may be biologically inclined to "go after" other women, in the modern age society has changed and we are mastering our bestial qualities. Frogger is happy with one person, and you aren't, just let it be.

See, evakian, it's posts like that that make me consider you one of the more mature posters here despite your young chronological age.

While all males may be biologically inclined to "go after" other women, in the modern age society has changed and we are mastering our bestial qualities.

mastering our "bestial" qualities = being brainwashed to subvert and deny the biological drive born in us

Frogger is happy with one person, and you aren't, just let it be.

I hear and obey!, oh mighty Warrior Poet!

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

mastering our "bestial" qualities = being brainwashed to subvert and deny the biological drive born in us
No. Its being a responsible and caring human being. If you want to screw lots of women fine but if you have a girlfriend that means she gets the same freedoms. The problem is guys who sneak around behind their womans back to get outside lovin'. They deserve to be dumped and alone for hiding what they really wanted.

mastering our "bestial" qualities = being brainwashed to subvert and deny the biological drive born in us
You've made two things apparent in this conversation:
1. Love (an inherent emotion that we experience) is an illusion created by the mind.
2. That society represses our sexuality (because we are animals that should not be restricting our impulses), and we should be more free and permissive about that.

Sounds like you're quite the sex fiend. :D
I hear and obey!, oh mighty Warrior Poet!
The label is for V, as you can see in my avatar, not me.

When a young man loves a young woman, she will get pregnant and it will be the duty of the young man to put all his rescources into the life he has created also if the man runs around he runs a good chance of bring home some sexual transmitted diease to his wife.

I would not date a woman who was running around all over town mainly because I don't want any disease and also it is my nature to have nothing sexually to do with a woman who has sex with other people.

Sexual partners should belong only to each other but I am sure there are circumstances that would make casual sex ok. It should be understood by both parties.

However, only in my mind, I have sex with more than half the women I see.

However, only in my mind, I have sex with more than half the women I see.
That's pretty scary, Old reb. Half the women I see make me wanna throw up.

That's pretty scary, Old reb. Half the women I see make me wanna throw up.

Maybe you are looking at the wrong half. I have sex with them in my mind but if offered sex, I would have to back off. I can barely take care of one woman and she left her last husband because he thought he could have extra-marital sex.

How about legalizing polygamy?

How about legalizing polygamy?

The Mormans and Muslims have that but it is not to make life better but to have more children to grow the religion.

How about legalizing polygamy?

Actually, I don't see the big deal about polygamy and why it has to be against the law. I couldn't care less if some guy wants to wed and bed multiple women as long as there is equality, respect and mutual consent.

Actually, I don't see the big deal about polygamy and why it has to be against the law. I couldn't care less if some guy wants to wed and bed multiple women as long as there is equality, respect and mutual consent.

I agree. Especially since people can essentially do that now, except without the legal protection marriage brings.

The Mormans and Muslims have that but it is not to make life better but to have more children to grow the religion.


Mormons don't do that anymore. And Muslims only do it under certain circumstance and the first wife has the option to divorce if the husband wants to remarry.

and the first wife has the option to divorce if the husband wants to remarry.
I take it the other ones are plumb fucked, ay?

How about legalizing polygamy?


I don't think that'd go over too well in my neck of the woods.

IOW, some would live and some would die.

frogger, why is it that you can only love one person and only lust after one person? If love is such a great feeling also (I already know that lust is :thumbs:), why do you need to commit yourself to only one person.

The only reason I can think of is that your partner would get jealous, and since you 'love' them, you would not want to make them feel like that.


Windwip,
I can love more than one person. In fact, I love many people. Thre are different kinds of love though.

When I was younger the most important type love was eros. I looked at all women as potential sex objects. I think that is typical of young people, guys especially. That is the type love that usually first attracts a couple to each other. It is the, can't wait to see her, oh I get all fluttery when she is around type love.

Once you have been a couple for a period of time, usually years, your love matures to eros mixed with philos. You still have the sexual attraction for the person but it is mixed with a deeper love. You don't have to be constantly touching each other. You can sit quietly together and not always be trying to impress each other. The eros is still there but something additional has been added.

The final type love a couple comes to, and not all couple come to this type love, is agape. That is the love that transcends everything else. Eros is still there, philos is still there but something has been added. You now love your partner unconditionally. You don't even always realize how much you love them but your love is the most important thing in your life. You cannot conceive of not being together. You have melded into one with your partner. This is the love you sought when you took your marriage vows, the love in sickness and in health, in richer or poorer, for better or worse, till death do you part. What was two has now become one. The eros is still there. You still thrill when she walks in the room. You still desire her. She still makes your heart beat a little more rapidly. The philos is still there also. She is still your best friend, the one person you know you can always depend on and who can always depend on you. There is something else though. Something hard to define. Your love transcends everything else. That is agape.

Your post leads me to feel you haven't experienced agape. I feel a bit sorry for you because until you do you don't really know just how wonderful love can be. Agape is why I would never cheat on my wife, have no desire to cheat on my wife and cannot even conceive of cheating on my wife.

That's one of the nicest things you've ever written, Frogger. Beautiful and true.

The final type love a couple comes to, and not all couple come to this type love, is agape.

Not only do "not all couples come to this type of love" I would venture to say "many if not most" people are not capable of it. And when I say capable I mean, the desire must first be there. That means that first the awareness that such a state can and does exist must first be known.

And the process of getting there is definitely on the "the road less taken".

Mormons don't do that anymore. And Muslims only do it under certain circumstance and the first wife has the option to divorce if the husband wants to remarry.

Do not confuse Mormons with Latter Day Saints their philosophy and belief system is extremely different. Technically, Mormons have abolished polygamy. In reality there are small compounds all over Utah that have a very bastardized form that subjugates women and forces young males to leave the compounds at very young ages 14 or so. This ensures all the young girls go to all the old and powerful men. The law can not seem to stop it.

If it were legal things would have to change.

I don't think that'd go over too well in my neck of the woods.

IOW, some would live and some would die.


It was just a hypothetical question. I think one wife is a enough. Why would you want to muliply the nagging. :thumbs:

Windwip,
I can love more than one person. In fact, I love many people. Thre are different kinds of love though.

When I was younger the most important type love was eros. I looked at all women as potential sex objects. I think that is typical of young people, guys especially. That is the type love that usually first attracts a couple to each other. It is the, can't wait to see her, oh I get all fluttery when she is around type love.

Once you have been a couple for a period of time, usually years, your love matures to eros mixed with philos. You still have the sexual attraction for the person but it is mixed with a deeper love. You don't have to be constantly touching each other. You can sit quietly together and not always be trying to impress each other. The eros is still there but something additional has been added.

The final type love a couple comes to, and not all couple come to this type love, is agape. That is the love that transcends everything else. Eros is still there, philos is still there but something has been added. You now love your partner unconditionally. You don't even always realize how much you love them but your love is the most important thing in your life. You cannot conceive of not being together. You have melded into one with your partner. This is the love you sought when you took your marriage vows, the love in sickness and in health, in richer or poorer, for better or worse, till death do you part. What was two has now become one. The eros is still there. You still thrill when she walks in the room. You still desire her. She still makes your heart beat a little more rapidly. The philos is still there also. She is still your best friend, the one person you know you can always depend on and who can always depend on you. There is something else though. Something hard to define. Your love transcends everything else. That is agape.

Your post leads me to feel you haven't experienced agape. I feel a bit sorry for you because until you do you don't really know just how wonderful love can be. Agape is why I would never cheat on my wife, have no desire to cheat on my wife and cannot even conceive of cheating on my wife.

That is a very insightful post, thank you Frogger. I have experienced parts of those, though I never considered myself to be in 'love' with anyone, except for the love for my family and friends, though I would consider that to be more appreciation, loyalty, duty and respect.

I date a fair amount, though beforehand I know what I am looking for. I'm not looking for love when I go out. I'm looking for physical attraction and a good personality that I could get along with. I have my flings and my week-long girlfriends, though eventually I will want to settle down more and look for someone like you have found. The problem at the moment is that I want to explore. I want to see what there is, and mostly I want to find out what I like the most, so that I can eventually know exactly what kind of person I want to be with.

Actually, I don't see the big deal about polygamy and why it has to be against the law. I couldn't care less if some guy wants to wed and bed multiple women as long as there is equality, respect and mutual consent.

Yes....but every instance of polygamy that I am aware of in THIS country is deeply grounded in religious belief.

And the Xtian religion stands for --as it concerns women-- pretty much the antithesis of equality, respect and mutual consent.

In the eyes of the Xtian religion, women are strictly second class human beings.

Yes....but every instance of polygamy that I am aware of in THIS country is deeply grounded in religious belief.

And the Xtian religion stands for --as it concerns women-- pretty much the antithesis of equality, respect and mutual consent.

In the eyes of the Xtian religion, women are strictly second class human beings.
Yes that is likely true that polygamy in the States is mostly grounded in religous belief...maybe everywhere. However if there is mutual respect, equality and mutual concent I don't care about their spiritual belief system.

As for the Christian religion concerning women, that would be a separate issue for me as I would not consider Mormons to be Christian. The Latter Day Saint split off may be Christian but I am uncertain if their belief in Christ still follows the Mormon tradition or if they altered that also.

Mormons don't do that anymore. And Muslims only do it under certain circumstance and the first wife has the option to divorce if the husband wants to remarry.


Sure she does, googs. She has the option to divorce her husband. Of course her family will not take her back, she cannot get a job, and she will be scorned and spurned. But, hey, she has the right to divorce him.

She also doesn't have to stay in Utah & put up with all that crap.

Sure she does, googs. She has the option to divorce her husband. Of course her family will not take her back, she cannot get a job, and she will be scorned and spurned. But, hey, she has the right to divorce him.

If you truly understood Islam, you wouldn't post such things. But there is nothing I can do but tell and show you that what you say is incorrect.

I pulled this from one of my posts awhile back.

"Islam has changed the status of women, and changed the outlook that men have towards women. Islam revolutionized the world 1400 years ago when it gave women full access to their rights. To illustrate that point, one needs to only remember the West acknowledged women as beings who possessed a soul just less then 100 years ago. Islam recognized this fact 1400 years ago.

As for social rights, Islam has always recognized the substantial role women play in society. The right of inheritance and the right of individual independent ownership unhampered by father, husband, brother, son or anyone else for that matter, has also been granted. They are given the freedom to pursue any profession including political stations. In both the past and present day, women in Islamic societies have reached political heights unparalleled within the most "advanced" western nations.

Then why is Islam often portrayed as being oppressive towards women? A part is certainly due to the stereotyped image of Muslim women in the media. However, some of it is due to Muslims themselves. This surely is not caused by our religious ideology but rather by our own negligence in understanding our religion

Some of the practices in Muslim countries have deviated from or are totally unrelated to the origins of Islam. Instead, they are based on cultural customs, which date from pre-Islamic tribal traditions. Pre-Islamic traditions still remain imprinted in the hearts of some Muslims. The status of women in Islam is one of equality and honor."

But I'm not surprised you don't know this.