Bush bows to pressure from anti-abortion groups
   President George W. Bush is not intimidated by the Taliban or any measly terrorists. But, a blood-curdling group of pro-life conservatives, now that’s a different story.
Last week the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion, brought celebration to pro-choice groups and mourning to pro-life groups across the nation. As those on both sides of the abortion issue debated as usual, women in developing countries, many of whom have no choice on the issue, were considered by the Bush administration unworthy of our help.
Bush put a hold on $34 million dollars recently allotted by Congress for the world’s largest international source for women’s reproductive health and population assistance, the United Nations Population Fund.
The UN Population Fund, known as UNFPA, assists third world countries in ensuring the well-being and equality of women, providing family planning services and fighting against AIDS.
However, pro-life groups have pressured Bush to withhold the money because the UNFPA is involved with China, a country with strict population control methods including forced abortions and sterilizations.
What these groups are failing to recognize is that not only does UNFPA work with Chinese authorities to help move them toward voluntary contraception practices, but also contributions from the Unites States are not even used in China.
As one of his first actions in office, Bush reinstated former President Reagan’s “Mexico City” policy declaring that no overseas agency that provides or promotes abortion in any way could receive U.S. population assistance. Therefore, UNFPA has cooperated by assuring that not one penny from U.S. contributions is used in China.
Yet most importantly, without U.S. funding, which accounts for 12 to 13 percent of UNFPA’s budget, the agency fears its ability to prevent 800,000 abortions and the deaths of 4,700 mothers and 77,000 children under the age of five will be seriously hindered.
How can either the Bush administration or pro-life activists justify cutting funding to the UNFPA when the result is so detrimental to human life?
In light of the Roe v. Wade anniversary, Bush declared Jan. 20 “National Sanctity of Life Day” and stated, “We should peacefully commit ourselves to seeking a society that values life — from its very beginning to its natural end.”
(Impressive words from someone who so strongly supports the death penalty.)
Bush’s opposition to abortion is his personal choice, and the right to have that choice is one of the freedoms which our country is so grateful to have.
However, denying women in developing countries access to health services because of contradictory beliefs is only turning our back on those who need our help the most.
According to a UN press release in December, five million people were infected with HIV last year and 350 million couples worldwide lack access to a range of contraceptive methods, causing millions of unwanted pregnancies, unsafe abortions and thousands of maternal deaths.
UNFPA is the largest agency dedicated to resolving these issues. If Bush permits cutting funds to this organization, we can only pray he has something better up his sleeve.
Monique Roche