Concern over the slaughter of baby girls may become fashionable...

Error message

China alone stands to have as many unmarried young

men—“bare branches”, as they are known—as the entire population of young

men in America. -"The War on Baby Girls," in The Economist, March 4, 2010.

(Tim, w/thanks to Ross C.) The two big social justice causes Emergelical hipsters are concerned about just now are sex trafficking and earth-keeping--female circumcision had a short half-life. Like articles in refereed journals, clothing, and liturgy, the choice of social justice issues is merely a giggling excitement over fashion.

There are more trees in the Eastern third of these United States than there were when this continent was first settled by Europeans; landfills are filled with the chattering class's newspapers--not fast food packaging and diapers; and people who claim to be Green don't recycle any more than the uneducated slobs who make no claim at all. Which is not to say recycling or using cloth diapers or laying pine flooring from Log's End aren't good things.

But religious things? Biblical things? Christian things? No, sorry...

These are the small laws men use to escape the big laws they hate, and watching Christians join the conspiracy is pathetic. Laissez-faire capitalism, earth-keeping, and democracy are about equally salvific--which is to say, not at all. I don't get stars in my eyes when I hear someone talking about the new agrarianism; my higher purpose isn't sustainability; I think meat is good for you; my nose twitches when I hear the word 'holistic'; chiropractors give me the creeps (sadly, my family loves them); and even if I were Roman Catholic, 2x6 exterior framing filled with an inch of closed-cell foam and five inches of cellulose plus geothermal with Puron would not qualify as works of supererogation.

So, now that I've softened you up to the prevalence of hypocrisy in the causes we claim, note this article from The Economist on Asian's wholesale slaughter of little girls. This is no news to those who hate abortion, but no one else has given a rat's brain about it until now. So why have our cultural superiors decided its day has come?

Not out of concern over the bloodshed of innocents. Not the hundreds of millions of deaths in the womb--with alacrity The Economist clarifies this is not its concern:

For those who oppose abortion, this is mass murder. For those such as

this newspaper, who think abortion should be “safe, legal and rare” (to

use Bill Clinton’s phrase), a lot depends on the circumstances...

Regardless of their reasons, it's a very good thing they are concerned, and we rejoice. 

What is the extent of this holocaust?

In some Chinese provinces the ratio is an unprecedented 130 to 100.

The destruction is worst in China but has spread far beyond. Other East

Asian countries, including Taiwan and Singapore, former communist states

in the western Balkans and the Caucasus, and even sections of America’s

population (Chinese- and Japanese-Americans, for example): all these

have distorted sex ratios. (Gendercide) affects rich and poor; educated and illiterate; Hindu, Muslim,

Confucian and Christian alike.

Wealth does not stop it. Taiwan and Singapore have open, rich

economies. Within China and India the areas with the worst sex ratios

are the richest, best-educated ones.

Sadly, The Economist's solution is the massive implementation of Feminist ideology. Which should remind us that some ninety-five percent of micro-finance loans go to women...