The thing is: they abort children because they're female. Had it been a male, they wouldn't have done it, but now it's a female, so they do it. Just because they don't whant to pay for her wedding. This is clearly social. Shure, females in west abort their children because of economic reasons, but there is no difference between males and females here. That is because families doesn't have to pay for their daughter's wedding here. They have to there. And not just that, they have to pay a guy to marry her (sounds like bribery, don't you think?). And about abortion in general: If the mother doesn't whant the child, if she's not fit as a mother or if she can't afford it (giving birth to a child, and then have it live in poority isn't a very wise choice for either the mother or the child), she shouldn't have to go through nine months of pregnancy followed by a really painfull surgery. Shure, she could give the child away, but 1) If she really whant the child, but can't take care of it going through those nine months and that surgery just get's more painfull, since she will have to give the child away. And 2) giveing away nine months of her life for a child she doesn't whant doesn't feel fair. It's not just the child's life we're talking about, it's the mother's life too. And she DOES have the right to decide over that.
