Trump Admin Strongly Opposes UN Resolution Supporting Abortion

International   |   Steven Ertelt   |   Jun 22, 2017   |   3:28PM   |   Geneva, Switzerland

In a huge change from the pro-abortion regime of Barack Obama, the Trump administration is taking pro-life values to the United Nations.

The United States rejected a United Nations Human Rights Council resolution today because it included the sanctioning of abortion. The decision was praised by leading pro-life advocates.

Advocates of abortion on demand have worked for many years to insert abortion rights language into every conceivable UN document, treaty and statement, regardless of whether those instruments address the care of unborn children and their mothers. Today’s resolution addressed violence against women particularly in the context of war. It called for access to abortion for women and girls.

U.S. First Secretary to the UN in Geneva Jason Mack articulated the Trump administration’s position, which excludes abortion and abortion funding from international agreements.

“We do not recognize abortion as a method of family planning, nor do we support abortion in our reproductive health assistance,” Secretary Mack said to the Council. He added that the U.S. “strongly supports the spirit of this resolution and joins other members of this Council in condemning all acts of violence against women and girls.”

Pro-life leaders were excited about the move.

SUPPORT PRO-LIFE NEWS! Please help with a donation

“The United States has rightly refused to support an effort to treat abortion as family planning,” says Scott Fischbach, Executive Director of MCCL GO. “MCCL GO fully supports the U.S. decision to oppose abortion as a legitimate ‘treatment’ for women.”

“MCCL is encouraged by the Trump administration’s support of the right to life of unborn children,” says Fischbach. “There is no right to abortion under international law. In fact, a foundational document of the UN, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, explicitly protects the right to life.”

Following adoption by the Human Rights Council of a resolution by Canada that focused on the elimination of violence against women, A/HRC/35/L.15 : Accelerating efforts to eliminate violence against women: engaging men and boys in preventing and responding to violence against all women and girls, an explanation of position was read by U.S. First Secretary to the U.N. Jason Mack.

The statement confirmed U.S. support for “the spirit” of the anti-violence resolution and that the U.S. joined other the members of the Human Rights Council “in condemning all acts of violence against women and girls and in calling for the elimination of all forms of sexual and other forms of gender-based violence, including sex trafficking of women and girls”.

But then, the U.S. took a giant pro-life step and declared “the U.S. ‘must dissociate from the consensus’ specifically on access to safe abortions.”

PNCI Director Marie Smith reacted to the US action in an email to LifeNews.

“The statement by the U.S. is welcomed by all those who respect life from its very beginning and who object to the seemingly endless promotion of abortion by activists at the U.N. It is our hope that the overwhelming majority of countries at the U.N. that ban or restrict abortion will be encouraged and inspired by the strong pro-life position taken by the Trump administration and will join the U.S. in standing up for the world’s most at-risk population-children in the womb.”

The U.S. opposed section 9 (d) which included “safe abortion where such services are permitted by national law” in the list of “health care services” that are needed to ensure “the promotion and protection of the human rights of all women and their sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights”. The US explained that there is no international right to abortion and that the US does not support access to abortion in reproductive health assistance, affirming President Trump’s Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance, the expansion of the Mexico City Policy.

The position paper explained that the US remains committed “…to the commitments laid out in the Beijing Declaration and International Conference on Population and Development Programme of Action” but that it objected to pro-abortion claims regarding a ‘right to abortion’.

The U.S. stated, “As has been made clear over many years, there was international consensus that these documents do not create new international rights, including any “right” to abortion. The United States fully supports the principle of voluntary choice regarding maternal and child health and family planning. We do not recognize abortion as a method of family planning, nor do we support abortion in our reproductive health assistance. The United States is the largest bilateral donor of reproductive health and family planning assistance.”

The US in opposing the pro-abortion language in the resolution undermines the pro-abortion tactic that hijacks valid measures to protect women and girls from acts of violence in order to promote the violent and deadly act of abortion that ends the lives of countless unborn children and in the case of sex selection abortion, targets the youngest of females for elimination.