An editorial in the New York Times last week:
On his third day in office, President Obama issued an executive order lifting the odious “global gag rule” that denied federal money for family planning work abroad to any group that performed abortions or counseled about the procedure, even with its own money. But he left standing another policy that imposes similar speech restrictions and bans using foreign aid money for abortions — even to save a woman’s life or in cases of rape in war zones like Congo, Sudan and Burma.
The policy is not mandated by any law. Rather, it is an overly restrictive interpretation of the Helms amendment, which was originally enacted in 1973 and bars using foreign aid money to “pay for the performance of abortion as a method of family planning or to motivate or coerce any person to practice abortions.”
Providing abortions for women and girls who have been subjected to the use of rape as a weapon in armed conflict is clearly not “a method of family planning.” And informing rape victims and governments about the right to proper medical treatment, which would include abortion, under the laws of war does not amount to lobbying or coercion. Yet the misinterpretation of the Helms amendment was formalized in a policy directive in 2008 by the United States Agency for International Development and continues to be enforced by other aid programs as well.
Why am I not surprised that Jesse Helms’ name is associated with this? It was Helms who when discussing the planned construction of the North Carolina Zoo in Asheboro, NC, had asked “Why build a zoo when we can just put up a fence around Chapel Hill?,” referring to how liberal the town is. This just goes to show what a big deal it was that a majority of the state voted in favor of Barack Obama in 2008.
Humanitarian Aid for Rape Victims
An editorial in the New York Times last week:
On his third day in office, President Obama issued an executive order lifting the odious “global gag rule” that denied federal money for family planning work abroad to any group that performed abortions or counseled about the procedure, even with its own money. But he left standing another policy that imposes similar speech restrictions and bans using foreign aid money for abortions — even to save a woman’s life or in cases of rape in war zones like Congo, Sudan and Burma.
The policy is not mandated by any law. Rather, it is an overly restrictive interpretation of the Helms amendment, which was originally enacted in 1973 and bars using foreign aid money to “pay for the performance of abortion as a method of family planning or to motivate or coerce any person to practice abortions.”
Providing abortions for women and girls who have been subjected to the use of rape as a weapon in armed conflict is clearly not “a method of family planning.” And informing rape victims and governments about the right to proper medical treatment, which would include abortion, under the laws of war does not amount to lobbying or coercion. Yet the misinterpretation of the Helms amendment was formalized in a policy directive in 2008 by the United States Agency for International Development and continues to be enforced by other aid programs as well.
Why am I not surprised that Jesse Helms’ name is associated with this? It was Helms who when discussing the planned construction of the North Carolina Zoo in Asheboro, NC, had asked “Why build a zoo when we can just put up a fence around Chapel Hill?,” referring to how liberal the town is. This just goes to show what a big deal it was that a majority of the state voted in favor of Barack Obama in 2008.
Share this:
Published in Commentary, Development, Miscellaneous, Policy and Politics