Executive (Dis)Orders: Pro-life Policies Set to be Jettisoned

Obama’s transition team is busily preparing a thick sheaf of Executive Orders for the President-elect to sign the day he takes office.  And — in a reprise of what happened when Bill Clinton took power 16 years ago — the pro-life policies of the Bush Administration will apparently be the first to go.

Obama appears set to reverse existing Executive Orders that protect taxpayers from having to fund abortions at home and abroad.  Moreover, Bush’s prohibition against the vivisection of tiny humans (aka embryonic stem cell research), will almost certainly go by the wayside.

Another pro-life policy on the ideological chopping block involves the U.N. Population Fund (UNFPA), which unabashedly supports China’s inhumane one-child policy.

We know.  It was the Population Research Institute whose investigation in China led the Bush administration to cut off funding to the UNFPA for the past seven years.  We have continued to monitor the situation in China, and we stand by our assertion that the UNFPA was — and is — involved in coercive abortions in China.

PRI’s original report, entitled “UNFPA, China, and Coercive Family Planning,” is based on an investigation conducted by PRI researchers in China’s Sihui County.  Relying on interviews with over two dozen victims and witnesses, the 2001 investigation found that coercive abortion and sterilization practices were taking place in that county where the UNFPA had supposedly instituted a “client-centered and voluntary family planning program.”  In fact, PRI’s investigation revealed that the UNFPA shared an office with the very Chinese family planning officials who were locking up women and carrying out forced abortions. 

Prompted by this investigation, then-Secretary of State Colin Powell sent his own research team to China, which independently verified the facts that PRI had gathered.  As a result, Powell himself urged that the U.S. government stop funding the UNFPA.  Said Powell in a 2002 letter to Congress: “UNFPA’s support of, and involvement in, China’s population-planning activities allows the Chinese government to implement more effectively its program of coercive abortion.”

President-elect Obama and his supporters blame pro-lifers in the Bush administration for this decision, but it was Colin Powell, who is no friend of social conservatives and who recently endorsed Obama for President, who made this call.

It would be a shame if Obama abandons both the women of China and one of his most high-profile backers in the name of the failed ideology of population control.  Americans don’t want their money going to an organization — the UNFPA — which works hand-in-glove with China’s population control police as they drag women off for forced abortions and forced sterilizations.  In protecting American taxpayers from having to fund such atrocities, President Bush made the right call.

Compare Bush’s judicious actions to those of his predecessor.  Bill Clinton chose the 20th anniversary of Roe v. Wade to sign, in a televised Oval Office ceremony, a series of executive orders undoing the pro-life policies of the Reagan-Bush era.  The orders he signed on that day — only his fourth in office — undid the Mexico City policy, allowing tax dollars to flow to abortion outfits, encouraged federally-funded clinics to refer for abortions, forced the U.S. military to provide abortion services, and permitted human embryo vivisection.  His oft-stated claim that he wanted abortion to be “safe, legal and rare” was revealed as a sham at that moment.

Bush weighed the evidence before acting, while Clinton overreached.  What will Obama do? 

Whatever he does, it will cast in sharp relief who Barack Obama really is.  Is he the reasonable-sounding moderate who appeared on the televised debates and in those carefully crafted (and ubiquitous) TV commercials?  Or is he the radical who associates with race-baiting pastors, unrepentant terrorists, and makes far-reaching promises to Planned Parenthood? 

By signing a series of pro-abortion Executive Orders, President Obama will be perceived as governing from the Left.  The die will be cast, and pro-lifers will rally against him from that moment.  They will start looking towards 2010 to restore some checks and balances on this man they will rightly perceive as a pro-abortion zealot.            

Clinton’s pollster argued strongly against acting on abortion policy as one of the new administration’s first pieces of business, but he went ahead regardless.  The debacle of the 1994 House elections for the Democrats began at that moment.

Let us see if Barack makes the same mistake.

Steven W. Mosher

By

Steven W. Mosher is the President of Population Research Institute and an internationally recognized authority on China and population issues, as well as an acclaimed author, speaker. He has worked tirelessly since 1979 to fight coercive population control programs and has helped hundreds of thousands of women and families worldwide over the years.

Subscribe to CE
(It's free)

Go to Catholic Exchange homepage

  • Pingback: Executive (Dis)Orders: Pro-life Policies Set to be Jettisoned | Pelican Project Pro-Life()

  • yblegen

    Please keep us informed. I plan on sending this to my devout Catholic friends and relatives who voted for Obama but who are very pro-life.

  • Paul

    I am puzzled, that even from a secular point of view, how funding UNFPA advances Americas foreign policy.
    I can only think that the secular logic would go something like, in the long run, fewer people, less funding to support them and with regard to China, fewer Chinese less competition.

    Dado

  • Cooky642

    How sad that so many little people–potential presidents and Congress-persons among them!–will be murdered just to make a point.

    Yes, Mr.Obama wants to “reduce” populations, presumably so that those of us already alive can have “more”! More what?!

    It occurs to me that, in praying for the salvation of such a monster, one ends up calling down greater fire on his head in eternity if he refuses to heed God’s call. That puts me in a quandry: to pray, or not to pray? I think I’ll pray and let God sort it out.

  • Pingback: Will the US go back to funding China’s one child policy? « Being Fed()

MENU