Almost.

They have to defend "a woman's right to choose" on the back of the House of Representatives defeating a measure (thanks to those "pro-choice" Democrats) that would prohibit sex-selective abortions.

You see, Planned Parenthood has been caught red-handed in aiding and abetting sex-selective abortions (sometimes appropriately called "Gendercide").

And by "sex-selective" we mean: "If it's a girl, I'd like to kill it."

So feminists are caught in a bind. They have to support that "it's a woman's body" crap because they must support the sisterhood and the party line.

But if a member of the sisterhood wants to abort her child because the child is female, what then?

Oops. Well if they maintain their pro-choice position, then they're not exactly standing by the sisterhood are they? They are, in fact, promoting the worst form of discrimination one can imagine: destroying a child because she is a girl.

But then if they oppose Gendercide, what then?

Then — GASP! — we are on the slippery slope to overturing their beloved Roe v. Wade!

And they can't have that.

So where do the feminists stand?

With Roe, of course.

You can see MSNBC's Alex Wagner basically say as much at the link above.

And you can also check out Erin Gloria Ryan's column over at Jezebel for some ultra-parsing in favor Gendercide.

One of her main complaints: Husbands can interfere if a woman tries to abort a child because it's a girl.

Yeah, we can't have that, can we? No father should have a say in allowing his daughter to live simply because she is a daughter and not a son.

Liberals once again find themselves at odds with common sense.

We've seen this Act before. And we'll see it again.