Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Joe Biden’s taxpayer-funded abortion order is government at its worst
Joe Biden’s taxpayer-funded abortion order is government at its worst
Dec 13, 2025 8:07 PM

Today with one stroke of the pen, President Joe Biden vitiated three unalienable rights. Biden signed a presidential memorandum order forcing U.S. taxpayers, including those with religious objections, to fund abortion-on-demand and abortion advocacy around the world.

In 1984, President Ronald Reagan enacted the Mexico City Policy, which excluded foreign non-governmental agencies that “perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning” from receiving U.S. Agency for International Development funds. President Donald Trump’s Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance policy expanded this to include largesse distributed by “all departments or agencies” of the U.S. government. Biden’s action reverses that policy.

Both Reagan and Trump allowed abortion referrals in the cases of rape, incest, or if the pregnancy endangers the life of the mother. Thus, today’s executive action requires U.S. taxpayers to pay for the promotion of elective abortion, or abortion-on-demand, which most Americans find objectionable – and which traditional Christianity teaches is sinful.

“Funneling U.S. tax dollars to abortion groups overseas is an abhorrent practice that flies in the face of the ‘unity’ Joe Biden and Kamala Harris promised to inspire,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of the pro-lifeSusan B. Anthony List.

A new Marist/Knights of Columbus poll released on Wednesday found that 77% of all Americans – including two-thirds of voters who describe themselves as “pro-choice” and 55% of Democrats – oppose taxpayer funding of abortion overseas.

A sizable majority of Americans also oppose taxpayer funding for U.S. abortions (58%), including nearly one-third of Democrats (31%) and two-thirds of independents (65%).

Biden also paved the way for U.S. organizations that perform or refer for abortion to receive Title X funding. The Trump administration denied Planned Parenthood $60 million in taxpayers’ dollars when the nation’s leading abortion provider withdrew from the women’s health program rather than stop performing terminations.

Dannenfelser said the reversal creates “a slush fund” for abortion providers and represents “a payout to the abortion industry that backed [the Biden-Harris] political campaign.”

Whatever the reasoning behind the expansion of elective abortion funding, one must seek it outside of the rationale offered up by the Biden administration. The measure fails on its own logic.

Take the White House “fact sheet” on the memo, which asserts that “Black, Indigenous and other people of color, LGBTQ+ people, and those with low es” have been “denied access to reproductive health care” – a euphemism for abortion.

In reality, non-Hispanic black women accounted for 33.6% of all U.S. abortions in 2018, although blacks make up only 13.4% of the U.S. population. “In pared with non-Hispanic White women, abortion rates and ratios were 3.4 and 3.0 times higher among non-Hispanic Black women and 1.7 and 1.4 times higher among Hispanic women,” according to the CDC’s 2018 Abortion Surveillance. “Non-Hispanic Black women had the highest abortion rate (21.2 abortions per 1,000 women) and ratio (335 abortions per 1,000 live births).”

The CDC does not measure the e of women who obtain abortions. However, the Guttmacher Institute conducted a groundbreaking study in 2004 investigating the “Reasons U.S. Women Have Abortions.” It found that 73% of women say they sought an abortion, because they “can’t afford a baby now.”

If this executive action truly sought to redress women’s inability to obtain an abortion on the grounds of race or e, it is a solution in search of a problem. Politicians who wanted to reduce the high rates of abortion or munities’ access to bona fide healthcare would promote economic policies that create prosperity – like limited government and economic opportunity.

Furthermore, it’s unclear why a politician would consider an industry that has decimated the black population a boon rather than a menace. Typically, such an industry would be found guilty of racial discrimination because of its “disparate impact” on minorities – the same standard Biden applies to other industries.

The official explanation also falters when it refers to the Reagan-Trump policy as a “global gag rule.” The most pithy es from a Supreme Court case decided 11 days before Joe Biden was born. The justices ruled in 1942’s Wickard v. Filburn, “It is hardly lack of due process for the [g]overnment to regulate that which it subsidizes.”

Foreign NGOs are free to advocate abortion all they wish – on their own dime. Once American citizens are forced to underwrite their political positions, U.S. citizens have the right to object. And polls suggest campaigning against financing foreign abortions pulsory taxation is a winning issue.

Some government officials have attempted to portray the redistribution of wealth from U.S. citizens to foreign abortion advocates as a coup for human rights. Dr. Anthony Fauci previewed the move last week, telling the World Health Organization that mandatory taxpayer funding of foreign prises one part of President Biden’s mitment to protect women’s health and advance gender equality at home and around the world.”

Forcing U.S. taxpayers to advance abortion around the world violates the purpose of government. Governments exist to secure our unalienable rights. First among these is the right to religious freedom, including the ability to live our lives according to our conscience – particularly the right not to entangle our hard-earned money in the intrinsic evil of abortion.

“The government should never force taxpayers to fund abortions, either here or abroad, but should work to protect the inherent dignity of all persons, born and unborn,” says Jeanne Mancini, president of the March for Life.

The Founding Fathers said the right to “property” included both the right to life and the right to be free of confiscatory taxation. As the U.S. Commission on Unalienable Rightsexplained:

For the founders, property refers not only to physical goods and the fruit of one’s labor but also passes life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They assumed, following philosopher John Locke, that the protection of property rights benefits all … Without the ability to maintain control over one’s labor, goods, land, home, and other material possessions, one can neither enjoy individual rights nor can society build mon life.

Biden’s taxpayer-funded abortion order is government at its worst: undemocratic, unconstitutional cronyism that pulsory taxation to crush fundamental rights and harm the most vulnerable.

The Founding Fathers understood that losing sight of the purpose of government, and the Source and substance of our rights, assures that we can build mon life at all.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
3 reasons France’s ‘yellow vest’ protests are moral (and 2 reasons they’re not)
French highways found themselves clogged with indignation during the fifth week of the gilets jaunes (“yellow vest”) protests. How should Christians think about these demonstrations? Are their means and ends moral or immoral? Background The leaderless grassroots uprising originally targeted the massive carbon taxes levied on gasoline and diesel in order to reduce carbon emissions and “nudge” the public to purchase electric vehicles. French environmentalist policy caused gasoline costs to rise as high as $7 a gallon in Paris....
The way of the manger: How the incarnation transforms work into witness
“Our Lord was not predestined by his Father to birth where we might have expected him…He was born, by divine design, into a laboring man’s dwelling…Our Lord precedes understanding with doing. He sets the way before the truth.” –Lester DeKoster and Gerard Berghoef With each passing holiday season, we see the sudden manifestation of an underlying cultural dualism, with gift-givers either over-indulging in the material stuff or feverishly guarding their spirits and souls from the cold grip of consumerism. Yet...
RFA Redux: David LaRocca on Brunello Cucinelli’s new philosophy of clothes
On thisepisode of Radio Free Acton, we revisit a previous RFAinterview with David LaRocca: a philosopher, author, and filmmaker who has released a documentary on Italian fashion designer and entrepreneur Brunello Cuccinelli. Cucinelli has built a pany by creating high-quality apparel, but more interesting than that is the philosophy that undergirds his business and all of his life. Check out these additional resources on this week’s podcast topics: Learn more about Brunello Cucinelli Learn more about David LaRocca Watch the...
Scratching our way back from World War I
This year witnessed the memoration of the respective births of two champions of Christian thought and human liberty, Russell Kirk and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. Both men were born coincidentally in the same time frame – October and December 1918 respectively – in which the “war to end all wars” ceased. The ensuing years, however, gave lie to that assessment – worse, far worse, was on the horizon. But the First World War was the moment the fragile crockery of Western civilization...
Sirico on Russell Kirk and populism
On November 15, Acton President and co-founder Rev. Robert Sirico participated in a panel conversation to not only honor the centenary of Russell Kirk’s birth but as well discuss the rise of populism in the United States and abroad. The event was held at the Jack H. Miller Auditorium at Hope College, Holland, Mich. The panel also included John O’Sullivan, editor-at-large of National Review; Jeff Polet, professor of political science at Hope College; and Kathryn Jean Lopez, senior fellow at...
John Bolton unveils new Trump Administration Africa policy; Joel Salatin on how past practices harmed Africa
On December 13, National Security Advisor John Bolton delivered an address at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C. unveiling the Trump Administration’s new approach to relations with Africa. Part of the revised approach includes re-focusing US Aid efforts away from traditional government-to-government aid, and placing an increased focus on fostering private economic growth and governmental transparency. Acton has been speaking about the problems with foreign aid programs for many years; here we feature a portion of an interview conducted in...
Home to Bethlehem
Although the word nostalgia can be used to express a bittersweet longing for some pleasant remembrance of one’s past, it is safe to say that this is the time of the year when it is virtually unavoidable to drift into a sustained sense of nostalgia and where its experience is most intense. This is a time when our minds go back to a younger version of ourselves: to the sights and the sounds and the smells of our mothers’ kitchens,...
Explainer: What you should know about the latest criminal justice reform bill
What just happened? Yesterday the U.S. Senate passed an overhaul of the criminal justice system known as the FIRST STEP Act. The vote of 87 to 12 included all Senate Democrats and dozens of Republicans. The Act was approved earlier this year by the House by a vote of 360-59 vote, including 134 Democrats. President Trump has signaled that he will sign the bill into law. The legislation was also supported by a number of faith-based groups, such as Prison...
Edmund Burke and the importance of natural law
As conservatives consider how to approach issues such as free trade, populism and the role of the market, it’s helpful to look back to foundational thinkers who paved the way for conservatism. “One such ongoing discussion among conservatives concerns natural law’s place in conservative thought,” says Acton’s Director of Research, Samuel Gregg, in a new article published by Law and Liberty. Natural law was central to the ideas of the eighteenth-century political thinker Edmund Burke, driving him to stand against...
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn: The writer who destroyed an empire
In December, the PowerBlog is marking the centenary of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s birth (Dec. 11, 1918) At the NewYork Times, Solzhenitsyn biographer Michael Scammell says the Russian novelist and historian “did more than anyone else to bring the Soviet Union to its knees.” For his critical approach to Soviet life, Solzhenitsyn was evicted from the state-sponsored Writers’ Union and became a virtual outlaw in his own country. But he was far from alone. Many talented and independent writers — Varlam Shalamov...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved