Thread: Obama reverses abortion-funding policy

My personal opinion: Abortion is not a political issue, it's a moral issue and politics should completely stay out of it. That being said, my problem with this is that I don't want my money -- by way of taxation -- going towards foreign abortions. Private funds can continue to pay for it.

Obama reverses abortion-funding policy

NEW: Order shows that reducing abortions not a priority of Obama's, Republican says

"Mexico City policy" prohibits U.S. funding of some foreign family-planning groups

It was begun by Reagan, canceled by Clinton, reinstated by Bush

Order comes one day after Roe v. Wade anniversary


By Suzanne Malveaux
CNN White House Correspondent

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Obama signed an executive order Friday striking down a rule that prohibits U.S. money from funding international family-planning clinics that promote abortion or provide counseling or referrals about abortion services.

President Obama has decided to overturn a Republican-favored abortion funding policy.

The order comes the day after the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion in the United States.

It reverses the "Mexico City policy," initiated by President Reagan in 1984, canceled by President Clinton and reinstated by President George W. Bush in 2001.

The policy, referred to by critics as "the global gag rule," was initially announced at a population conference in Mexico City.

The policy says that any organization receiving U.S. family planning funds from the U.S. Agency for International Development cannot offer abortions or abortion counseling.

Reversing the previous administrations' stance on the policy was one of Clinton's first acts as president in January 1993 and the very first executive order issued by Bush on January 22, 2001, the 28th anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

Critics, including Planned Parenthood, called Bush's move a "legislative ambush."

He defended his action, saying, "It is my conviction that taxpayer funds should not be used to pay for abortion or actively promote abortion."

The group Population Action International praised Obama's move, saying in a statement that it will "save women's lives around the world."

"Family planning should not be a political issue; it's about basic health care and well-being for women and children," the group said.

"Women's health has been severely impacted by the cutoff of assistance. President Obama's actions will help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies, abortions and women dying from high-risk pregnancies because they don't have access to family planning."

Republican lawmakers were critical of the new president's action.

"Not even waiting a week, the new administration has acted to funnel U.S. tax dollars to abortion providers overseas," Rep. Tom Price, R-Georgia, said in a written statement.

"This is a stunning reversal of course from the president's campaign statements that he hoped to reduce the number of abortions. Just a day after thousands of Americans came to Washington to celebrate the principle of life, President Obama has made it clear that reducing abortions is not one of his priorities."

Obama has always said he supports a woman's right to choose but has advocated better education and wider availability of contraception to reduce the number of abortions through decreasing the number of unwanted pregnancies.

I agree Dixie. I am oppose to my taxdollars funding this in foreign countries.

He's doing this, because the abortion industry is a billion dollar business. They contributed to his campaign.

I personally feel sickened at being force to fund this culture of death industry.


Reagan stopped it for 8 years, Clinton allowed it for 8 years, Bush stopped it again for 8 years and now Obama is allowing it again.

Here's a petition to stop FOCA in this country. This act would remove all the restrictions of the last 30 years that Americans have fought for against abortion. He's also fighting the Freedom of Conscious Act ,that presently protects health care workers from being forced to perform abortions. The below is the petition and information about Obama's agenda on this issue.

http://www.fightfoca.com

I agree Dixie. I have no idea why we are funding anything anywhere in the world when we are broke with our own expenditures for pork and mollycoddling people who should not be here in the first place.
Governmental concern should end at the point of making sure the folks giving out medical advice are qualified. But these days some of these folks have been continually slanting their medical opinions by religious beliefs or looking for the big payment from the insurance company for a procedure that is not needed for the patient, but needed for their next payment on the Rolls Royce.
An abortion is a private family decision, especially if it is a teen or preteen that has become pregnant through rape, as happens. Now imagine the horror a young woman could face walking through a phalanx of anti-abortion activists to get to her appointment with her doctor. These people do not know her story, nor do they care. They are more interested in this woman producing a child, which will probably end up in a foster home or given up for adoption, or living with the mother in poverty as she was not able to be educated to get a good-paying job.
And for the rabid pro-lifers, I have one question: How many of these kids have you adopted?

Well, look at Obama. This Youtube video speaks volumes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2CaBR3z85c

I understand your point on rape which accounts for 1% of abortions and health of the mother. I think these would be the only moral consideration for a society to allow it in these situation with heartfelt consideration.IMHO

Adoption is still an option and I don't see the condemning of it. My sister is considering adopting right now. Why take it anger out on the unborn.

But Obama want to reverse, Freedom of Conscience law, forcing doctor's who want nothing to do with killing the unborn to lose their job. It will also close all Catholic hospitals down in the country. They will immediately get out of the healthcare business if forced to perform abortions to stay open. I don't call that freedom, I call it dictatorship.

I think FOCA puts more risk of injury to women.

FOCA: Freedom of Choice Act

Would Wipe Away Every Restriction on Abortion Nationwide
This would eradicate state and federal laws that the majority of Americans support, such as:

Bans on Partial Birth Abortion
Requirements that women be given information about the risks of getting an abortion
Only licensed physicians can perform abortions
Parents must be informed and give consent to their minor daughter's abortion
FOCA would erase these laws and prevent states from enacting similar protective measures in the future.

I have had 9 friends in the last 20 years who have had abortions, and all of them have come to me to express pain and remorse of having an abortion. I have also had friends who have been adopted and love their adoptive families. I guess I'm speaking from my own life experience.

I just have a different perspective. I'm not out their shouting at women going to planned parenthood, but I would like to make sure their all well informed about other options and and potential risks of having an abortion.


Another article:


Planned Parenthood: Force doctors to do abortions
Law firms gear up to defend right of conscience-

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 23, 2009
12:25 am Eastern

© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Experts for the Alliance Defense Fund and Christian Legal Society are gearing up to defend three laws that allow medical professionals to follow their conscience and not participate in abortions.

"Medical professionals should not be forced to perform abortions against their conscience," said Casey Mattox, litigation counsel with the CLS's Center for Law & Religious Freedom.

"Planned Parenthood, the ACLU and their pro-abortion allies are seeking to punish pro-life medical professionals for their beliefs," Mattox said. "Far from arguing for 'choice,' these lawsuits seek to compel health care workers to perform abortions or face dire consequences."

The public-interest legal groups have filed motions to intervene in three separate lawsuits that seek to invalidate a federal law protecting medical professionals from discrimination because they refuse to participate in abortions.

(Story continues below)




Three pro-life medical associations are seeking to defend the law against challenges by some state officials, Planned Parenthood, and the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union.

The actions came as the 2009 March for Life was taking place in Washington, when several hundred thousand people gathered to seek protections for the unborn, including the overturning of the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court opinion in Roe vs. Wade that struck down abortion limits in states.

"For over three decades, federal law has prohibited recipients of federal grants from forcing medical professionals to participate in abortions," said ADF Legal Counsel Matt Bowman. "The arguments in the lawsuits themselves demonstrate lack of compliance with these laws and the necessity of the regulation they are challenging."

Attorney Andrew Knott is assisting as local counsel in the latest dispute in Connecticut.

The Christian Medical Association, Catholic Medical Association, and American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, represented by CLS and ADF attorneys, are asking to be allowed to defend the law, 45 CFR Part 88, enacted in December by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Noting a pattern of grant recipients unaware of or flouting existing laws protecting medical professionals' rights of conscience, HHS enacted the new law to require grantees to certify compliance in order to receive funds. The three long-standing statutes are the Church Amendment, the Coats-Snowe Amendment and the Weldon Amendment.

The three pro-life medical groups point out that denying rights of conscience could harm access to healthcare for all by forcing medical professionals who refuse to perform abortions to either relocate from jurisdictions that force them to do so or leave the profession altogether.

Today President Obama, who as a state lawmaker in Illinois objected to requiring doctors to provide medical care for infants who survive abortions, affirmed his support for virtually unlimited abortion on demand.

Obama was issued a challenge by March for Life officials, who had invited him to address their annual march and rally.

The organization challenged Obama to "watch the evil deed of a surgical abortion to know what it looks like to pull off the head, arms and legs of a preborn human."

The organization noted, "There is a commercial killing site within a few blocks of the White House."




http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php? ... geId=86859

According to Catholic Heath Care of the United States, as of January 2008, 614 Catholic hospitals were operating in the United States.


Faith-Based Hospitals Could Close If Obama Signs Freedom of Choice Act

Monday, December 01, 2008
By Penny Starr, Senior Staff Writer




Cardinal Francis George, president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (Courtesy of Archdiocese of Chicago Web Site)(CNSNews.com) – Now that Barack Obama has been elected president, pro-life and pro-abortion groups are waiting to see if he will keep his campaign promise to sign the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA) into law and if faith-based hospitals and health care facilities will be forced to perform abortions or risk losing federal funding – a loss that could result in some health care providers closing their doors.

“Well, the first thing I’d do as president is sign the Freedom of Choice Act,â€