Truth is the beginning of wisdom…

Archive for January 27th, 2009


Posted by straight shooter on January 27, 2009 under Abortion, Political, Social Concerns

The Mexico City policy was first implemented via a memorandum by President Reagan in 1984 at a United Nations population conference in Mexico City, thus the name Mexico City policy. Prior to President Reagan’s actions American policy on paper was to never promote abortion overseas, however in practice US tax dollars directly supported organizations which advocated and performed abortion. It remained in effect until 1993 when President Clinton rescinded the Mexico City policy on January 22, 1993 for the entirety of his tenure in office. On January 22, 2001, President Bush issued a memorandum restoring the Mexico City policy.

In as little words as possible, the Mexico City policy halts U.S. family planning funds from going to foreign non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that perform abortions or “actively promote” abortion as a method of family planning in other countries.

What does this mean? Under the Mexico City Policy for an NGO to be “actively promoting” abortions means they provide advice and information regarding the availability of abortion or encourage women to consider abortion; lobby a foreign government to legalize or make more available abortion; or conduct a public information campaign regarding the benefits and/or availability of abortion.

That is what NGO’s can’t do. What they CAN still do under the Mexico City Policy is provide referrals for abortion in cases of rape, incest, or where the mother’s life would be endangered if the unborn child were carried to term; and treat injuries or illnesses caused by legal or illegal abortions, i.e., post-abortion care. The argument that the Mexico City Policy is in actually a “global gag rule” is pure and utter nonsense – unless you actually believe that abortion, killing the child in the womb, is a form of family planning.

The effect of President Obama rescinding the Mexico City Policy is that now millions ($461 million in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008) of dollars are taken away from family planning groups that do not promote abortion, and delivered into the hands of organizations that are the most militant in promoting abortion as a population-control method – especially in countries that find abortion objectionable on moral grounds.

To those like Pelosi who refuse to learn from history, and think population control and controlling people is the answer, are not just socialists but are working out of Marxist thought of government. That government, among other things, sees themselves as smarter and superior than their people, and that they have the ability to take care of the people better than they can take care of themselves.

Population control, abortion, entitlement programs, industry takeovers, etc. are all part of this thinking.

The notion that a larger population will produce a lower standard of living can be traced to the 18th-century economist Thomas Malthus. But during Malthus’s own lifetime, his prediction was proved false, as he later acknowledged. Population and living standards rose simultaneously, and have continued to do so.

Ms. Pelosi’s remarks ignore the importance of human capital, which is the ultimate resource. Fewer babies would move the U.S. in the demographic direction of Europe and Asia. On the Continent, birth rates already are effectively zero, and economists are predicting labor shortages in the years ahead. In Japan, where the population is aging very fast, workers are now encouraged to go home early to procreate. Japan is projected to lose 21% of its population by 2050.

America needs to produce 2.1 children per couple to keep up with births to support the population — and that rate is not being maintained. Economies in Europe have been especially hurt by a drop in birth rates. International

Set your edition

Log In / Register to set your edition

The age and growth rate of a nation help determine its economic prosperity. A smaller workforce can result in less overall economic output. Without enough younger workers to replace retirees, health and pension costs can become debilitating. And when domestic markets shrink, so does capital investment. Taxpayer subsidies for contraception as economic stimulus are suicide.

What planet was Nancy Pelosi hatched on … Planet Hollywood? Just when you think you have heard the stupidest statements come out of the mouth of a politician … another one tops it!

It is not bad enough that we have a burgeoning stimulus package that will virtually do nothing for the economy except bailout mismanagement by the states and others … along comes “Dr.” Nancy with the calculation that FEWER BABIES = STRONGER ECONOMY. Does she come up with this on her own or are her advisors just as dumb?Birth Control New Economic Stimulus

What a shocking statement, that the Speaker of the House would actually go on national television and claim, that contraception would reduce the cost to the government and in some asinine way be seen as stimulating the economy.

Whose economy … the economy of the multi-billion dollars abortion industry? You mean the abortion industry is not getting enough taxpayer dollars already? How can even the idea of spending of millions of dollars on birth control and abortion be part of the economic stimulus package?

Of course, it is once again under the guise of “Medicaid” … “children’s health” … “children’s education” … “family-planning services.” When did abortions become healthy for children? When did encouraging children to have sex before marriage become healthy for children? What family planning service is offered except to terminate the family part? … This is not for families and society – it is for the invigorated abortion industry with renewed hope as the new administration of death has just increased their market!

“Contraception,” argued Pelosi, “will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.” How do more people mean less economic growth? They leave illegal immigration wide open and instead kill our own babies … how logical is that?

Will the spending of $87 billion on “family-planning services” help dig America out of its economic doldrums? No! It doesn’t even make sense to think this would reduce our economic crisis. The very thought is so wrong on so many different levels. This shouts a very deviant and flawed thought process. It is inconceivable that she would try to stimulate the economy by “seeking to reduce the number of children.”

We have reached a new low when our high-ranking public office holders in the federal government cast children as the enemy … but it does explain their enthusiasm for their abortion-on-demand war cry on human life. This all is part and package of the social engineering of socialism.