THE HIDDEN AGENDA
If we are to hold ourselves accountable, in any sense, to the potential that any life has be it African, Latino, Asian, European, or American can we really afford to legitimize the use of abortion as a method of birth control? It doesn't really matter that it is "legal" in the United States. It matters that the Mexico City Policy banned the use of Federal funds for family planning services that included abortion as a method of birth control. President Obama's decision, made so early on in his first days in office, to rescind that executive order is, like his Democratic predecessor, Mr. Clinton, obviously a priority because of the special interest groups that support him. Make no mistake: this is a money issue, as the aborted fetuses are worth a lot to those who would sell their body parts.
What's being ignored here is the whole power of the President to give an executive order in the first place, whereby he creates a law outside of a Congressional act. That is, he appropriates funds without a bill which, according to the Constitution, must be passed by the House of Representatives. In 1997, the then Republican Congress passed a joint resolution that the United States should in no way be funding those agencies which actively lobby abortion as a basis for birth control in countries that are pro-life. While, on one hand, Mr. Obama seems to be voluntarily limiting his power to issue executive orders, there is no question but that he intends to expand it to promote those special interests who are sharpening their knives in anticipation of all those body parts from all those aborted fetuses. When did the United States get in the business of aiding foreign bio-research, if you want to call it that (for it is, in fact, butchery of human flesh rather than animals)? True, we may not be the conservative country we were as little as 10 years ago, but isn't this the steel fist behind the velvet glove?
The key to responsible foreign policy is to learn as much as possible about the cultures of those countries with which we have relations. If they do not, because they are predominantly Catholic, for instance, or Islamic, believe that abortion is lawful, then why should we actively be using Federal dollars to aid agencies for family planning groups in the United States to promote abortion as one of the means of birth control? Furthermore, any means of birth control is strictly forbidden by the Catholic Church. Can we, in our desire to have amicable relations with all the countries of the world, really withstand the onslaught of criticism that will inevitably come when we actively promote a policy so odious to their culture and their dominant religion? We are not the superpower we once were, and we need to look at the changes that have been made in Russia and the Middle East. They are heading the opposite direction away from liberalism and towards a more conservative approach. Russia has declared itself a Christian nation, and the Arabic countries are as committed to Islam as they ever were.
Instead of promoting something so morally repugnant to the customs of these nations, even if they don't need our funds, why shouldn't we take the high road to being one that promotes prosperity in those countries which are in dire circumstances? How can we do this? By promoting free trade, better methods of agriculture and business, limited government interference, higher standards of education, and liberty in all sectors of society, we should see more prosperity. With prosperity would come decreased birth rates by natural means. We need to be the light of the world, the city set upon a hill, not the purveyor of human flesh by way of abortion. This may only be the beginning of this Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden consortium. This is the agenda they have wanted for so many years, and now, using his power of executive orders, the President has that ability. There's an old saying in South Louisiana, "Watch out for the alligators!"