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
Oct 18, 2026 4:39 AM

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
‘With God’s help, we can stop global warming’
A few others have addressed this issue in previous posts, but I wanted to jump in with my two cents. Yesterday’s New York Times notes that a group of evangelical leaders have entered the debate over climate change: Despite opposition from some of their colleagues, 86 evangelical Christian leaders have decided to back a major initiative to fight global warming, saying “millions of people could die in this century because of climate change, most of them our poorest global neighbors.”...
Eminent domain abuse, again
You probably remember when, last year, the Supreme Court upheld the taking of private land by the state for the purpose of private development in its Kelo decision. Sam Gregg highlighted the decision’s dangerous implications at the time. Religious groups were rightly among those worried about those implications, especially with respect to tax-free urban church properties. Now, in an ironic twist, Catholic sisters in Philadelphia have been party to an attempt to use eminent domain to gain property for a...
Addicted to influence
A brief but timely editorial appears in this month’s issue of Christianity Today, “We Are What We Behold.” Here’s a taste: “…evangelicals have wrestled with our relationship to power. When in a position of influence (and in our better moments), we leverage power to better the lives of our neighbors. Cultural savvy enables us to successfully translate the gospel for a changing world. But it’s a double-edged sword—influence and savvy can also dull the gospel’s transcendence. We achieve a royal...
‘Captialism’ according to the academy
For a quick overview of the current state of appreciation for economics and capitalism among various ‘academics,’ see the newly inaugurated e-journal Fast Capitalism. It might as well be subtitled: Marxism, Alive and Well. Most of the contributors to the first issue are in munications, or political science. Here’s a sampling: In “Beyond Beltway and Bible Belt: Re-imagining the Democratic Party and the American Left,” Ben Agger, who teaches sociology and humanities at the University of Texas at Arlington, writes,...
Religion and the EU
Kishore Jayalaban, Director of Acton’s Rome office, appeared on Kresta in the Afternoon yesterday to discuss a number of topics relating to religious freedom in the European Union, including abortion, homosexuality, “retrograde” Poland, and the troubles in Slovakia relating to the approval of a concordat with the Vatican. To listen to the interview, click here (3.1 mb mp3 file). It will also be available on Acton’s podcast, which is available for free through the iTunes Music Store. ...
Family and the new economy
On January 21, 2006, Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse, author of Smart Sex: Finding Life-long Love in a Hook-up World and a Senior Fellow in Economics at the Acton Institute, gave this lecture at the Centesimus Annus Conference in Rome. Dr. Morse talks about the failure of the European welfare state to sustain economy and the demographic implications resulting from the “marginalization of the family.” Dr. Morse covers quite a bit of ground in this lecture, beginning with a critique of...
The most corrupt countries
Forbes is featuring a slideshow highlighting a series of the most corrupt countries around the world, based on findings from Transparency International. The list of the “The Most Corrupt Countries” includes Chad, Bangladesh, Turkmenistan, Myanmar, Haiti, Nigeria, Equatorial Guinea, Cote D’Ivoire, Angola, Tajikistan, Sudan, Somalia, Paraguay, Pakistan, Kenya, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. “Under its current president, Nigeria is making a determined effort to clean up its act. President Olusegun Obasanjo has surrounded himself with a dozen senior government...
Aid does not equal growth
The traditional formula for understanding the relationship between the developed and the developing world is the following: Aid = Economic Growth. That is, foreign aid spurs economic development in poorer nations. A new study released by the National Bureau of Economic Research challenges this wisdom, however. “Aid and Growth: What Does the Cross-Country Evidence Really Show?” by Raghuram G. Rajan and Arvind Subramanian shows that “regardless of the situation — for example, in countries that have adopted sound economic policies...
Moral posturing on Africa
Over the weekend, the Daily Telegraph’s Charles Moore asked, “Why should the Left win the scramble for Africa?” : [T]he trouble with this subject – perhaps this is why the Left dominates it – is that it attracts posturing. Africa is, among other things, a photo-opportunity. As our own educational system makes it harder and harder to get British pupils to smile at all, so the attraction for politicians of being snapped with rows of black children with happy grins...
Oil—the forbidden fruit?
There’s something like a question of theodicy implicitly wrapped up in the debate about global warming among Christians. It goes something like this: Why did God create oil? One answer is that the burning of fossil fuels is simply a divine trap for unwitting and greedy human beings, who would stop at nothing to rape the earth. Another answer is that there is some legitimate created purpose for fossil fuels. I’m inclined to think the latter, for a number of...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved