Conflicting logic about babies

Color me confused. Britain is going to outlaw choosing the sex of one's baby...

Sex selection of babies for non-medical reasons is set to be outlawed in the UK under Government plans for a shake-up of embryology regulation.

Health Minister Caroline Flint told MPs she was minded to introduce a "clear and specific ban" on the use of new techniques to choose one gender of baby.

Allowing parents to pick sex for reasons such as "balancing" the make-up of their family could be the start of a "slippery slope" to designer babies, she warned.

...but will shorten the period that abortions are permitted...

Giving evidence to the Commons science and technology committee, Ms Flint also rejected calls for a review of the abortion time limit. Professional bodies had presented no scientific evidence to back demands for an inquiry into whether the present 24-week limit should be shortened.

Why? I mean a slippery slope towards designer babies is immoral in what manner? That certain babies will not be allowed to be born. Yeah, that could lead to an island of Brits with straight teeth...but what is the truly objectionable part of that?

Or, what is the objectionable part that justifies preventing designer babies but also justifies allowing fetal-fatale?

The lines of argumentation seem terribly conflicted.