Since 1973, federal law has prohibited the use of U.S. international family planning funds to perform or promote abortion. And since 1981, any international lobbying on abortion has been banned. With this agreement, the anti-abortion Republicans in Congress intend to extend these prohibitions one step further.
The agreement would deny assistance to overseas organizations that provide abortion services, engage in advocacy related to abortion or even educate about the dangers of unsafe abortions. Such a policy would be illegal in the United States.
It is short-sighted to link something as important as paying our UN dues to family planning policy. Clinton would be wrong to sign this agreement because the two issues should be kept separate. UN dues have no affect on our funding of family planning organizations abroad.
Throughout his administration, Clinton has been strongly committed to protecting abortion rights. He should not reverse his policies and give in to the anti-abortion forces in Congress-regardless of the United States' UN debts.
Clinton should reject this agreement and negotiate a way to pay our debts that doesn't compromise our commitment to women's health and reproductive rights across the world.
Since, however, the compromise is likely to be signed by Clinton and to take effect soon but will expire in a year, we urge next year's House and Senate Democrats to fight against the agreement's offending conditions.
Read more in Opinion
Reducing EmissionsRecommended Articles
-
UN Official Pleads for US Support, DuesThe United Nations needs and deserves both America's support and its unpaid dues, a senior UN official told an audience
-
Mandela to Tour North AmericaSouth African President Nelson Mandela's visit to Harvard to receive a rare non-Commencement honorary degree is just one of a
-
Fatal InactionH ow far will President Clinton bend his knee to the murderous thugs who lead Serbian aggression in Bosnia? How
-
The Road Down from Mexico CityOn January 23, President Barack Obama reversed the Mexico City Policy, which stipulated that the United States would not provide
-
A Federation of the Whole WorldThere are many possible ways for the UN council to reconfigure its membership to make its decisions more legitimate.
-
United Queer Nations?The UN’s new focus on LGBT rights should be used to offer support to local activists and governments, not to perpetuate economic and social inequalities.