Let’s see if I have this straight. If a woman wants to “terminate her pregnancy,” it’s completely her choice. It’s nobody’s business what she decides about this, because it’s her body. Period. No exceptions. That’s the dogma of the modern feminist world. Right?
But everything suddenly changes when the mother is using abortion in order to kill a baby because she wants the other sex instead. In fact, it’s illegal in many places, including Great Britain, where a newspaper claimed recently that the practice is widespread in abortion clinics after it sent undercover reporters into clinics.
Is there any way to reconcile these startling inconsistencies? We’re told that abortion isn’t killing a baby. It’s not really murder, they say. But if a woman wants a son instead of a daughter — and she makes her choice to kill the baby daughter — those same activists tell us she’s done something monstrous. Why?

Ron Paul asks 31 tough questions that our politicians won’t answer
It’s wrong to silence anybody, even a nutcase like Alex Jones
I can change my appearance, but my inner self will stay the same
Rodney Dangerfield wasn’t funny, but tenacity built career as comic
Was Columbus a hero or a special kind of evil monster? Neither one
You never know when someone needs a hug — to know you care
FRIDAY FUNNIES
If there are exceptions to free speech, it’s not really free speech, is it?
Would you have avoided mistakes if a psychic could’ve warned you?