We Have a New Home! Please Click Below to Go to the New Freedom’s Lighthouse!

freedomslighthouse.net

Blog Archive

Friday, January 23, 2009

Pro-Life Ad Uses Obama As Example of Who is Being Aborted - Video 1/23/09



The video above is produced by Catholic Vote.org, and it is a powerful reminder of the tremendous loss our nation experiences as a result of abortion. It should be a sobering reminder to President Obama that he is exactly the type of child that is too often being aborted - a person of color, abandoned by his father, with a single mother. Yet, one day after the 36th anniversary of the heinous Roe vs. Wade decison, President Barack Obama is set to issue an Executive Order today lifting all restrictions on Federal Funding for abortion services overseas:

President Obama on Friday is expected to lift a ban on federal funding for international groups that promote or perform abortions, reversing a policy of his predecessor, George W. Bush.

Obama will sign the executive order one day after the 36th anniversary of the landmark Roe v. Wade Supreme Court ruling that legalized abortion in all 50 states.

Liberal groups welcomed the decision while abortion rights foes criticized the president, who was long expected to make this move during his first week in office.

The so-called Mexico City policy requires any non-governmental organization to agree before receiving U.S. funds that they will "neither perform nor actively promote abortion as a method of family planning in other nations."

It is also known as the "global gag rule," because it prohibits taxpayer funding for groups that even talk about abortion if there is an unplanned pregnancy.

The policy was first instituted by President Ronald Reagan in 1984 and continued by President George H.W. Bush. The policy was reversed by President Bill Clinton in 1993, and re-instated by President George W. Bush in 2001.

Both Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who will oversee foreign aid, had promised to do away with the gag rule during the presidential campaign. Clinton is to visit the U.S. Agency for International Development, through which much U.S. foreign aid is disbursed, later on Friday. . . . . MORE

UPDATE: An anonymous reader has clarified my post. I am going to post below the comment of the reader, and then my response:

Anonymous Reader
"President Barack Obama is set to issue an Executive Order today lifting all restrictions on Federal Funding for abortion services overseas"

This is inaccurate. US funds are NEVER authorized for abortions. Lifting the ban simply means that foreign organizations may use their own NON-US funds for abortion-related services (such as saving lives of women who received backstreet abortions in unsanitary conditions) without risking US funding for other NON-ABORTION services, including HIV care.
Response
Anonymous,
Thank you for the clarification. I accept your statement, although the reality is that indirectly, it amounts to the same thing. Federal Funds wind up going to organizations that perform abortions. They may find a way to make it look on paper like no U.S. funds are paying for actual abortions, but by supporting the entity, we are in effect indirectly paying for the abortions. That is the practical reality.

BrianinMO

2 comments:

Anonymous,  January 23, 2009 6:43 PM  

"President Barack Obama is set to issue an Executive Order today lifting all restrictions on Federal Funding for abortion services overseas"

This is inaccurate. US funds are NEVER authorized for abortions. Lifting the ban simply means that foreign organizations may use their own NON-US funds for abortion-related services (such as saving lives of women who received backstreet abortions in unsanitary conditions) without risking US funding for other NON-ABORTION services, including HIV care.

BrianinMO January 23, 2009 9:28 PM  

Anonymous,
Thank you for the clarification. I accept your statement, although the reality is that indirectly, it amounts to the same thing. Federal Funds wind up going to organizations that perform abortions. They may find a way to make it look on paper like no U.S. funds are paying for actual abortions, but by supporting the entity, we are in effect indirectly paying for the abortions. That is the practical reality.

  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP