Abstinence Ed Rejected, Abortion Protected Under House Bill
- Jun 19, 2007 - 2 -
The U.S. House is set to consider a bill that appears to support abortion on demand and undercut abstinence education. The appropriations bill includes provisions that would slash funding for abstinence-until-marriage programs, while open funding for organizations that promote or provide abortions. Yet several pro-life congressmen will seek to amend these provisions when the House takes up the legislation as early as this week.
The State and Foreign Operations Appropriations bill, as passed last week by the House Appropriations Committee, would drop a requirement that 33 percent of funding for the ABC model (abstinence, be faithful, and condom, when necessary) for HIV/AIDS prevention be directed toward “A” (abstinence) and “B” (be faithful) programs under the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR).
While some news reports and certain congressmen allege otherwise, evidence suggests that abstinence-until-marriage programs are working. In seven of the 15 PEPFAR Focus Countries, the number of HIV/AIDS cases and number of sexual partners among individuals are declining, while abstinence rates are growing among unmarried 15- to 24-year-olds, according to the Demographic and Health Survey.
Rep. Joe Pitts (R-PA) will likely offer an amendment to strike the language that would cut the spending requirement for “A” and “B” programs when the bill is brought to the House floor.
Also included in the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations bill is a provision to overturn the Mexico City Policy, a longstanding pro-life policy that prohibits distributing funds internationally to groups that promote or provide abortions. Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY) led efforts in the House Appropriations Committee to pass the bill with a provision that would allow U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund international family planning services as long as they direct an undetermined amount to promote contraception, though most funds could be used to promote or perform abortions.
The Mexico City Policy was instated in 1984 by President Reagan but later struck down by President Clinton before President Bush reinstated it by executive order in 2001.
Reps. Chris Smith (R-NJ) and Bart Stupak (D-MI), with the support of other pro-life congressmen, will try to strike the pro-abortion language.
If you agree that a successful funding program for international abstinence-until-marriage programs should continue and that taxpayers should not be forced to fund international organizations that encourage or provide abortions, please tell your congressman to support the Pitts Amendment to maintain funding for abstinence education and the Smith-Stupak Amendment to prevent funding abortion-advocating organizations when Congress votes on the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations bill.
Further Learning
Learn more about: Family, Sexual Purity, Abstinence, Life, Abortion, Citizenship, Legislation,
{comment_total} comments (post your own) feed
1 On Jun 23rd, 2007, at 1:47pm, Janet Hoy wrote:
The A-B-C model doesn’t apply if you’re viewed as property and forced into a marriage with an HIV positive man. Re: abortions, most sub-saharan African villages don’t have access to BASIC medical care, let alone the advent of abortion clinics. The rights of unborn children ARE at grave risk here, but NOT from abortion, but from HIV. Please advocate for CULTURALLY RELEVANT policies - local HIV prevention workers in Kenya have told me that President Bush’s order imposing such restrictions resulted in serious cultural barriers in until-then successful HIV prevention - in turn causing unnecessary HIV transmission, and deaths. Please consider the children when you’re advocating for restricting their chances to be born HIV-negative. I, having looked into the eyes of too many HIV-positive newborns, prayerfully thank you for your consideration of, if not agreement with, my ideas.
2 On Jun 24th, 2007, at 2:35am, Janet Hoy wrote:
Re: my comment above, the order I was referring to was President Bush’s executive order, reinstating the abstinence restrictions placed on HIV relief in Africa that were revoked by President Clinton. My conversations with local HIV prevention workers were in March of 2007, while I was in Kenya. The proposed PATHWAY bill, which would lift the abstinence restrictions, would also build in requirements for strategies that address the special needs of vulnerabilities of women and girls at particular risk due to being trafficked as forced wives. Here is a brand new article - which came out after my first post - that further expounds on the plight of the newly born children - please, please don’t make this issue about abortion, these kids need your support of the PATHWAY act, and your opposition of the Pitts and Smith amendments which would restrict these kids’ chances!!!! Thank you.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070623/ap_on_re_af/africa_s_child_aids