The Senate has taken the unlikely step of passing a bill that would allow US foreign aid to be used to perform and advocate abortion.
(CNSNews.com) - In a blow to pro-life Americans, the U.S. Senate voted 52-46 on Tuesday to repeal a Reagan-era policy that blocks U.S. aid from flowing to foreign groups that perform or advocate abortion.The amendment that passed on Tuesday was attached to a State Department funding bill. It was sponsored by Democrat Barbara Boxer of California and Republican Olympia Snowe of Maine.
Snowe said the policy "infringes on a woman's right to personal, private medical care. This is a question of making sensible medical care available to women."
This is a perfect example of why we still need to elect more Republicans to the Senate. The handful of lefty Republican senators continue to gnaw at important planks of the Republican platform, not to mention their obstruction on judicial nominations. Nevertheless, the article overreaches a bit -- this amendment is almost certain to be knocked down by the House in the conference committee and is very unlikely to ever become law.
Even those who advocate abortion should be opposed to our foreign aid being used in this way; once we write the check it's impossible to control how the money is used. Under President Clinton, some US money went to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) which funded forced abortions in China. The UN and many recipients of our foreign aid are just plain evil.
I think you're totally wrong on this one. Currently, foreign aid is refused to family planning organizations which provide abortion services or advocate abortion in any way. So all this would do is repeal that ridiculous rule.
The president has actually gone further, refusing foreign aid to family planning organizations that encourage safe sex and don't use an abstinance-only education plan. How can you say things like "once we write the check it's impossible to control how the money is used.", when the government has been trying to control what people do with it by refusing to grant it if they don't play by their rules.
Again, to recap, this is REPEALING a rule by the Bush administration saying "you can't have our money unless you don't do things that are legal here". How is this ok, and how is trying to repeal this rule wrong?
Mike,
Have you had an abortion?
It's so selfish of us to give our taxpayer money to people with any restrictions on it. It's a woman's right to use our money to have an abortion.
Excuse me? Abortion may be legal in this country but don't ask me to pay for it. We can control the way tax revenue is spent in our own country but we cannot control how it is spent when we give it to someone else. I could give money to any charity but that gives me no control over how they use it. If they fund activities I do not support, then I would not donate my money. That's why I don't contribute to the Communist Party. President Bush is correct that "taxpayer funds should not be used to pay for abortions or advocate or actively promote abortion, either here or abroad." The selfish ones are those who would prefer to close a clinic than accept conditional aid, sacrificing the health of their patients on the altar of abortion. And, frankly, gender is irrelevant. A man may not be physically carrying a child but, if he is the father, his stake in that child is equally as valid as that of the mother.