The Catholic Fear Validated

One of the latest policies that he has unleashed is to strike down the Mexico City Policy that the Bush administration has adopted. It is about the granting of federal money (read: US taxpayers’ money) to international groups that do abortions or provide abortion information. Definitely, this is one hell of an inflammatory policy, which since the past years has become one of the clear dividing lines between the Democrats and the Republicans as well as between these two parties’ respective supporters: the liberals who surely welcome this development in line with their pro-choice stance, and the conservatives who certainly denounce this occurrence as it is counter to their pro-life position.

If we are to refresh our memory concerning the Mexico City Policy, we are to recall that it was President Ronald Reagan who first adopted it in 1984. Then, in 1993, Bill Clinton ended the ban only to be reinstituted by George W. Bush in 2001 as one of his first acts in office. And, as we are saying, Obama repudiated the Bush Policy a day after the 36th anniversary of the US Supreme Court ruling in Roe v Wade that practically legalized abortion.

As if they were prophets who very clearly can see the future, the Catholic bishops are proven correct in their prediction that a vote for Obama is a vote for abortion. And they are among those who must be cursing the first African-American president for his fresh decision.

But, what’s really at stake here?

Firstly, let us situate the news within the broader context of Obama’s progressive policies in his first days in the Oval Office like his announcement on ethics rules and his hammering of the last nails to close the coffin of the Guantanamo Bay prison camp with complementary order to effectively ban the resorting to torture by the military when they do question terror suspects. In certain respect, his moves may really be called progressive particularly when considered under the light of Bush-ism that was an era of US withdrawing into the period of its own Dark Ages.

In this light, the lifting of the ban by Obama is without question a cause for celebration. Finally, after eight years, traces of rationality and purposive-ness again become manifest to the Americans.

Secondly, let us situate the news too within the practical context of who really benefit or are deprived by the Mexico City Policy.

Obama is very clear: “For too long, international family planning assistance has been used as a political wedge issue, the subject of a back and forth debate that has served only to divide us… I have no desire to continue this stale and fruitless debate.” I may be utilitarian in this approach; however, I simply intend to bring forward here that in political sphere the primary test of policy’s soundness is whether it is able to have positive impact on the population. Precisely, people do not and cannot have for their supper moralizing or pontificating justifications for different approaches in resolving life issues in society. In the final analysis, what matters is the change in quality of life that any public policy brings about.

Thus, Obama’s calculated statement is worth pondering: “In the coming weeks, my administration will initiate a fresh conversation on family planning, working to find areas of common ground to best meet the needs of women and families at home and around the world.” He adds that the ban was unnecessarily broad and (actually) undermined family planning in developing countries.

Now, it is along this line that we can only wait for the consolidated position from the conservatives.

We can only hope that this issue is resolved with us aided principally by human reason as we bracket our dogmas and other biases coming from our diverse backgrounds, ideologies, cultures, and ethical traditions.