I am EXTREMELY disappointed in the article, "Bush Signs Largest Family Planning Bill In U.S. History" by Jim Rudd. The article states "The bill authorizes $446.5 million U.S. tax dollars to be given to other countries for abortion-family planning activities throughout the world." I read the HR 2506, and in fact it clearly bans using the funds for abortion or coercing an abortion. The spin in this article is completely untrue. I don't like the extra spending in this bill for family planning or any other of the foreign uses, but I don't like being lied to either.
THE RESPONSE:
Wrong.
They use the money to do abortions to Terminate Pregnancies. Yet they cannot use the money if they call it "family planning", "lobby for or against abortion", or any program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization:" But if a woman walks in any hospital in any country that receives the U.S. Taxpayer funds and says she want to "terminate her pregnancy" then the U.S. picks up the tab - thanks to Mr. Bush.
It's Semantics.
Family Planning by any other name.
Jim Rudd
MY REPLY:
Jim:
Thanks for the reply, but I suggest you read the bill again. Here is some text from the actual bill:
"Provided further, That none of the funds made available in this Act nor any unobligated balances from prior appropriations may be made available to any organization or program which, as determined by the President of the United States, supports or participates in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization: Provided further, That none of the funds made available under this heading may be used to pay for the performance of abortion as a method of family planning"
and further...
"That none of the funds appropriated under this heading shall be used to pay for abortions"
So in your example, if a woman walks into some clinic, it would not be legal for them to use the US money for the abortion. Will it happen, maybe. But that is not what the money is "for" as you incorrectly stated in the article.
STILL WAITING..........