Home  |  About  |  Contact  |  Site map

« Mrs. Laura Bush Shows Grace, Class | Main | Kerry's Ongoing Faith-Based Contradiction »

Life Issues: October 21, 2004

Pro-Lifers Divided over Bush's Record and Claims of Abortion Increase

There is significant controversy regarding the pro-life record of President Bush. Recently, Rose, among others, suggested that Bush is not pro-life. Countering this are other pro-life blogs and organizations who have endorsed the president (see also Pro-Lifers Favor Bush).

Now we have a controversy over whether or not abortions have increased under the Bush administration:

While this latest controversy may be decided on the basis of established facts, it illustrates the ongoing conflict between incrementalists and purists. The true purist, seeking an immediate ban on abortion, will not accept a candidate that in any way compromises the life of the unborn or legislation that in some way legitimizes the practice of abortion. The incrementalist tends to support the candidate that is the "most" pro-life and finds the incremental reduction of abortions through legislation acceptable while working toward a complete elimination of abortion.

Purists will find Bush's inconsistency on pro-life issues damming while incrementalists will pragmatically consider the implications of electing Kerry and reject a third party candidate who is unlikely to be elected.

What I find interesting is the way Bush is presented by both pro-life groups. Contrary to the representation by some, Bush has taken strong stands on behalf of the pre-born. Contrary to the representation of others, Bush does not take a pro-life position on all issues and is far from the ideal pro-life president. If you are a purist, Bush is not going to satisfy your expectations. If you are an incrementalist, he might.

Update:

For those in the mainstream (thanks for the comment, Steven), here is an example of a purist who believes that the ban on partial birth abortion "codified" abortion into law while banning one particular "procedure".

Posted by tim at October 21, 2004 12:20 PM




Articles Related to Life Issues:

Comments

I am not so certain that the writers you site are sufficiently mainstream (in terms of Conservative and/or pro-life circles) for this to constitute a "significant controvery".

Posted by: Steven Taylor at October 21, 2004 1:34 PM

You are right that this is not a significant controversy in mainstream circles but is only significant to a sub-set of pro-life individuals. BTW - blogicus has only one writer ... Thanks for the comment.

Posted by: tim at October 21, 2004 4:16 PM

and I just noticed that should be "cite" ;)

and I meant off-site writers.

Posted by: Steven Taylor at October 21, 2004 8:28 PM

Makes more sense... thanks.

Posted by: tim at October 21, 2004 10:16 PM

Bush's policies CAUSED an estimated
800,000 abortions in China

Bush STILL claims his actions are because "the (UNFPA) fund indirectly supports Chinese government programs that force women to have abortions." Fact is, in the 32 Chinese counties where they operated, the UNFPA programs "emphasized education, improved reproductive health services, (enhanced) economic development, and they eliminated the target and quota systems for limiting births,"[4], i.e, the policies forcing women to have abortions.

The success of the UNFPA's effort prompted 800 other Chinese counties to remove "the target and quota system and...[attempt] to replicate the UNFPA project by emphasizing quality of care and informed choice of birth control methods." For the third consecutive year the Bush administration has decided not to release $34 million appropriated by Congress to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). The administration still claims that the funds are being withheld because "the fund indirectly supports Chinese government programs that force women to have abortions,"[1] despite findings to the contrary. What findings?

In 2002, Bush's own Secretary of State Colin Powell dispatched a team to China to investigate whether the UNFPA was assisting the Chinese government's coercive practices. The investigators reported that there was "no evidence that the UNFPA has knowingly supported or participated in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization."[2] The investigative team recommended "that funds allocated by Congress be released to UNFPA."[3]

The 2003 State Department Report on Human Rights Practices found that, in the 32 Chinese counties where they operated, the UNFPA "emphasized education, improved reproductive health services, and economic development, and they eliminated the target and quota systems for limiting births."[4] The success of the UNFPA's effort prompted 800 other Chinese counties to remove "the target and quota system and...[attempt] to replicate the UNFPA project by emphasizing quality of care and informed choice of birth control methods." According to U.N. estimates, the $34 million in funds being withheld by Bush this year could have helped prevent as many as 2 million unwanted pregnancies, 800,000 abortions, 4,700 maternal deaths and over 77,000 infant and child deaths.[5]

Poor, uneducated, impoverished people in China and throughout Asia are eager to work for meager wages and tolerate pollution of their homeland, reducing overall manufacturing costs for the Conglomerate Corporations who make products overseas instead of at home. Some anti-republican forces have suggested this is the REAL reason Bush continues to withhold the funds, pleasing his large base of wealthy corporate political supporters whose sole concern is their "bottom line". That seems awfully harsh.

Perhaps Colin Powell just forgot to tell President Bush about the facts. Or maybe President Bush is just more concerned with appearing consistent (after going to such great lengths to label his democratic opponent a "flip-flopper"), than he is with the gruesome reality of needless, preventable abortions. We'll probably never know: he's just not saying. He just sticks to the bogus story he isn't giving your tax dollars to help the repressive Chinese government to force people to have abortions, and the uninformed masses cheer his moral leadership. Luckily for Bush, the facts just take too long to explain in 30-second "sound bites."

Charity is a Christian value, and when done correctly, works miracles. Like the work the UNFPA has done in China to eliminate coerced abortions, no thanks to our president. What do YOU think is the Christian thing for our country to do? Why do you think President Bush is so opposed to doing it?

Sources:
1. "Citing Chinese Abortions, U.S. Refuses to Fund U.N. Program," Los Angeles Times, 7/17/04,
2. "US again denies money to population fund," Boston Globe, 7/17/04,
3. "UNFPA Regrets U. S. Administration's Decision Not to Restore Funding,"UNFPA, 7/16/04,
4. 2003 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, State Department, 2/25/04,
5. "UNFPA Regrets U. S. Administration's Decision Not to Restore Funding," UNFPA, 7/16/04,

Posted by: DT at October 22, 2004 8:03 AM

Unfortunately you failed to interact with my message and posted this same text on several other of my messages. However, the main problem with your message is that it contradicts numerous reports of UNFPA involvement and support of abortion worldwide. And yes, the Chinese government says they’ve ended forced abortions and has represented this to the U.S. government. The problem with this is that the Chinese government and UNFPA are not credible sources of information. Send this information to the Chinese women who have experienced the horror of Chinese coercived abortion and are fleeing their country due to forced abortions and ask them whether what UNFPA says is true.

Posted by: tim at October 22, 2004 10:58 AM

"Not credible sources of information" ... I guess that includes Bush's own Secretary of State who went to China and did an independent investigation?? Bush said he blocked the funds because they were used for coerced abortions in China. It's simply not true.

Come on. Birth control and education DO work to eliminate forced abortions in China WHERE IMPLEMENTED - no thanks to our president, WHO BLOCKED THE FUNDS CAUSING THE ABORTIONS YOU DEPLORE in areas that DIDN'T get funds because of underfunding of the UNFPA.

Sure, there are still areas of forced abortions in China - simply because the Chinese haven't funded UNFPA-like programs all over China yet for finacial reasons. Although they have funded additional ones because the UNFPA programs eliminated the need for forced abortions.

Nice of our president to help them cut down on abortions women don't want to have, eh?
DT

Posted by: DT at October 26, 2004 9:47 PM

Let's see, Bush is to blame for forced abortions in China because he refused to fund an abortion promoting international organization that recently claims it stopped participating in forced abortions.

Powell issued a letter on July 21, 2002, which concludes that UNFPA does support forced abortion in China and is therefore ineligible for U.S. funding.

Washington, DC -- Yesterday, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell presented the annual report, "The Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2002," on conditions in 196 countries. Powell said the report reflects "the steadfast commitment of the United States to advance internationally agreed human rights principles worldwide."

The report notes that "The People's Republic of China (PRC) is an authoritarian state in which the Chinese Communist Party (CCP or Party) is the paramount source of power." The Chinese government refused permission for independent nongovernmental organizations to monitor human rights conditions and lists as problems, "violence against women" which includes "imposition of a birth limitation policy coercive in nature that resulted in instances of forced abortion and forced sterilization."

The report says moreover that the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) worked "closely" with population control officials in China in 32 counties which employed coercive methods of population control. Despite the repeated denials of UNFPA the U.S. report states that these counties that worked with UNFPA employed "birth limitation policy, including the requirement that couples employ effective birth control methods, and enforced it through other means, such as social compensation fees." Cooperation with such coercive population control programs resulted in the denial of U.S. funds to UNFPA.

The report also reveals a grim picture in North Korea where the report says, "Female prisoners underwent forced abortions, and in other cases babies reportedly were killed upon birth in prisons." [more]

Here is more:

"We located the family planning offices, and in that family planning office, we located the UNFPA office, and we confirmed from family planning officials there that there is no distinction between what the UNFPA does and what the Chinese Family Planning Office does," said Scott Weinberg, spokesman for PRI.

Weinberg went on to say that PRI investigators have video and audio proof of women flocking up to their investigators telling them stories of very recent forced abortions and sterilizations imposed at the hands of Chinese officials, in the same office where UNFPA works. [more]

Posted by: tim at October 26, 2004 11:32 PM






Categories


Recent Entries

Most Popular



Subscribe

Add to Yahoo
Subscribe to MyMSN
Add to Newsgator
add to pluck
Subscribe in AOL
Add to Rojo
Subscribe in Bloglines
Subscribe to Feedster
Subscribe with Netvibes
Subscribe with Fusion
subscribe
Subscribe to NewsIsFree


Archives


Helpful Sites