“Mexico City policy” reversed
Today, President Obama reversed what is known as the “Mexico City policy,” which prohibits U.S. money from funding international family-planning clinics that promote abortion. President Reagan had originally put the policy into place, only to have it reversed by President Clinton, then restored by President Bush, and now again reversed by President Obama. I understand that these decisions were made based on where these presidents stood on the abortion issue, but have we forgotten the other aspect of it?
Whether you are pro-life or pro-choice, this is U.S. taxpayer money, so don’t you think that we should spend that for doing good in our own nation instead of funding abortions internationally? We are currently in trillions of dollars of debt and this only allows for more U.S. money to go abroad for a cause that isn’t nearly as important for the United States government as is solving the nation’s domestic problems. I understand that by revoking this policy, the U.S. won’t necessarily spend more money on international clinics, but it does mean that some of the current money going over can now be used for abortions. It is not like there will be an epidemic or something else horrible if someone can’t get an abortion, so is it really necessary to spend even part of the money on that? It is not the job of the United States government to fund abortions internationally. This is U.S. taxpayer money. Then why is it being sent abroad for a procedure that isn’t really necessary for America or its people and one which doesn’t even help solve any major health problems?
2 Comments »
Jan 29 2009 at 9:29 pm
The U.S. Government is not “funding abortions” abroad. It is contributing to family planning clinics in other countries as part of an overall humanitarian aid of health and welfare.
Clinton and Obama do not feel that America’s ongoing battle to have religion dictate law, as in the case of abortions, affect aid to other countries.
If conservatives feel that the funding is unjustified, then they would probably have better luck with anti abortion rhetoric in a heavily Catholic nation like Mexico, and should go there and take up the fight, after all, if that is a belief that you feel strongly about, it doesn’t matter where the battle ground is right ?
Jan 30 2009 at 2:37 pm
I never said that I was pro-life (or pro-choice for that matter,) I am simply saying that we should not be funding this. This policy does allow the money to go to clinics that can use it for abortions, so you really are funding abortions with it. As for the philanthropic aspect, it is great and all, but in reality it is not good for this nation right now as we have our own problems and our own people to take care of.