Even though I'm pro-life, I wouldn't favor this bill.
(1) In this country, a woman can have an abortion for any reason she wants (or for no reason at all). I absolutely don't approve of that, but who says "I don't want a boy"/"I don't want a girl" is any different from "I don't want a baby" (regardless of gender)? Other than life-of-mother, all of the "reasons" for abortion are equally unacceptable to me, and I don't want to send a message that (a) reason X is "better" than reason Y or (b) "it's OK as long as you don't abort a little girl!"
(2) It's not like a woman seeking an abortion actually has to provide a reason to the abortionist (although one could argue that that ought to be changed). If someone is aborting her child because of the child's sex, they aren't going to mention it anyway.
(3) I don't like the rhetoric (on both sides used here). Those individuals who favor a woman's right to abort also condemn countries like China, where girls are being aborted. (Note Mr. Franks' remark about little girls being aborted, as opposed to the fact that sex-selective abortion is happening at all.) Although the reverse situation is rare, something tells me fewer people would care if the situation were indeed reversed.
It won't cause any de facto change in the legality of abortion (again, women can always make up, or for that matter not reveal, a reason).
Sure I agree with everything you just posted, but if you're pro-life, shouldn't you support pretty much any abortion restriction you can come up with? Sure this might only stop like one or two women a year but isn't that better than nothing?
Poll
