Beliefnet News

Beliefnet News

Conservatives Angry at Changes in AIDS Funding

posted by nsymmonds | 4:21pm Thursday February 14, 2008

By Matthew Streib
c. 2008 Religion News Service

WASHINGTON — Religious anti-abortion groups are angry over proposed changes in the Bush administration’s global AIDS relief program, which has reportedly provided lifesaving medicine to 1.4 million people worldwide.
“The way the bill’s been reworked, it would steer money intended to help reduce HIV/AIDS into the coffers of family planning groups that promote abortion,” said Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America, a Christian advocacy group.
Five years after its inception, the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, commonly known as PEPFAR, may be the most lasting bipartisan accomplishment of the Bush presidency. Announced by Bush in 2003, the plan called for $15 billion for AIDS prevention, treatment and care, concentrating on 15 hard-hit nations in Africa and the Caribbean.
Congress approved initially approved $19 billion for the program.
But as it approaches a $50 billion renewal, Democrats in Congress want changes that would remove abstinence education quotas and an anti-prostitution clause. Conservative religious groups say Bush should veto the bill if it passes in its current form.
The House Foreign Affairs Committee is scheduled to take up the bill, despite the death on Monday (Feb. 11) of Chairman Tom Lantos, D-Calif.
In the 2003 legislation, one-third of all AIDS prevention funding was steered to abstinence-only education programs. In addition, groups receiving PEPFAR funding are required to sign a pledge that they oppose legalizing prostitution, a policy proponents said was intended to combat exploitation of women.
Under the new proposal, spearheaded by Lantos, both provisions are removed, and a provision that enables partnerships between U.S.-funded projects and voluntary family planning programs is added.
The proposed changes reflect reports by the Government Accountability Office and the National Academy of Science that said earmarking funding for abstinence-only education reduced prevention efforts aimed at high-risk groups, such as prostitutes.
The GAO said 17 of the 20 countries that received PEPFAR funds reported that the spending requirements limited their ability to respond to local prevention needs. Ten of those countries received exemptions from the requirement.
The new bill would remove the one-third quota for abstinence-only programs, but would not require a change in the groups’ current funding.
Nevertheless, conservative groups believe the programs are in danger.
The bill “leaves it up the bureaucrats to decide who gets the money, and our experience has been that they will side with the abortion groups and not with what truly helps the people,” said Concerned Women for America’s Wright.
On Friday, Bush will begin a weeklong tour in Africa, pressing for a new five-year commitment of $30 billion. Concerned Women for America, along with other conservative religious groups, such as the Family Research Council and the Population Research Institute, are encouraging Bush to veto the bill in its current form.
“It would be better if President Bush had never proposed PEPFAR, than to have $50 billion hijacked by abortion-promoting, chastity-mocking, anti-people groups,” said Steven Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute.
Religious groups that support abortion rights, such as Catholics for Choice, the Methodist Federation for Social Action and the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice, believe the bill is a step in the right direction.
“It is immoral and ultimately anti-life and anti-family to play politics with HIV/AIDS prevention programs for the world’s poorest countries, yet organizations that claim to be religious and pro-family … are shamelessly doing just that,” said the Rev. Carlton Veazey, president of the coalition.
“Denying people accurate, complete information that can save their lives and keep their families healthy and intact is cruel. Doing it for partisan political purposes is unconscionable.”
Copyright 2008 Religion News Service. All rights reserved. No part of this transmission may be distributed or reproduced without written permission.



Previous Posts

Did Obama mean to pick a fight with America’s two largest denominations?
In an election year of all times, why would President Barack Obama choose to infuriate both America’s Catholics and Southern Baptists? “It seems that Obama, in a classic act of hubris, has created the means of his own destruction,” writes conservative commentator J.R. Dunn in the American T

posted 4:42:46pm Feb. 13, 2012 | read full post »

Did Rastafarian spokesman Bob Marley become a Christian on his deathbed?
Three decades after the death of legendary Jamaican musician Bob Marley, an intriguing story is circulating. “What most people don't know, and many try to cover up, is the fact that Bob Marley converted to Christianity in 1980,” proclaims an article that has appeared on a number of websites.

posted 4:52:03pm Feb. 10, 2012 | read full post »

Are U.S. colleges hostile to Christian students?
Are Christian kids on U.S. college campuses facing open hostility and discrimination because of their faith? Supreme Court Justice Justice Samuel Alito seems to think so. So does U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Daniel Ripple – and human rights attorneys Gregory Baylor and Jordan Lorenc

posted 12:18:26pm Feb. 09, 2012 | read full post »

Building a Temple to Atheism
When I say temple, you think religious place of worship right?  When I say atheist, you think one that believes there is no God.  Stay with me now, when I say religion, don’t you think about the worship of God?  Before this blog becomes a full blown say what you are thinking game, let me get to

posted 5:49:11pm Feb. 03, 2012 | read full post »

Romney Nabs Second Primary Victory in Florida
"I stand ready to lead this party and to lead our nation.  My leadership will end the Obama era and begin a new era of American prosperity," Romney said in his victory speech in Tampa Tuesday night.  Romney who won all 50 of Florida’s convention delegates is the only Republican candidate to have

posted 5:15:58pm Feb. 02, 2012 | read full post »

Advertisement
Comments read comments(9)
post a comment
Joey

posted February 14, 2008 at 5:25 pm


See, this is why reality stinks—you either have to be pro-prostitution and -abortion, or be against fighting AIDS. Grr. Well, God guide the Congress to figure out which solution is the lesser evil.



report abuse
 

nnmns

posted February 14, 2008 at 6:19 pm


‘It would be better if President Bush had never proposed PEPFAR, than to have $50 billion hijacked by abortion-promoting, chastity-mocking, anti-people groups,” said Steven Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute.’
Better to do nothing for 1.4 million people than to do something he doesn’t like that works. What kind of person is it for whom that seems like morality?



report abuse
 

Henrietta22

posted February 14, 2008 at 8:29 pm


The people who want to control everyone so they must think and act as they do should stop. What they want they can have, just don’t have abortions in their families, and homes. Their needs are not other peoples needs. Their understanding is not other peoples understanding.
The people who are educated in what is needed by the people themselves who have needs in foreign countries should be in charge, not Church motivated womens groups. People like Catholics for Choice, Methodist Federation for Social Action and the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice don’t exactly sound dangerous to life on earth. It sounds very well thought out. Controlled Prostitution cuts out sexually transmitted disease, puts pimps and sex trade out of business because records of where these women are are kept for authorities and police. It isn’t something we would aspire to, but it’s here and ways should be found to regulate it. Controlling AIDS is of paramont importance, if you don’t want countries to be wiped out. This is reality, face it.



report abuse
 

pagansister

posted February 14, 2008 at 9:05 pm


Wendy Wright and Steven Mosher and the others who think like them need to go live on another planet! It is so hard for me to believe that folks that they represent actually want to kill a bill that would help prevent the spread of HIV/ AIDS because the restrictions on abstinence only programs and anti-prostitution clause would be removed. They want Bush to veto it if those 2 things are removed? What is scary…”W” might just do it…even though he is off to Africa soon. (bet Africa is thrilled!). Guess Wendy and Steven and friends don’t mind that innocent folks are dying, children as well as adults, because of AIDS. They are more worried about a woman having a possible abortion, or learning about condoms!
My hat is off to Catholics for Choise, The Methodist Federation for Social Action, and the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choise….they are backing the bill in the proposed form.



report abuse
 

jestrfyl

posted February 14, 2008 at 11:49 pm


Abstinence only does not work. ‘Nuff said.
The whole concept of health care is prevention as well as treatment. So we need to fund that. Anything else is just teaching pigs to whistle.



report abuse
 

Thelemite

posted February 15, 2008 at 10:28 am


I would really like to give people like Steven Mosher & Wendy Wright credit for having good intentions, but the stupidity of their stance on this is so staggering that I just can’t bring myself to see anything positive in their opinions.



report abuse
 

jgross

posted February 15, 2008 at 6:22 pm


i love these christian groups…nothing but tough love. didn’t christ heal people and he didn’t expect anything in return. you can’t demand people stop doing what you think is sinful before you help them. i love how conservative christians have to put guidelines on other people’s lives before they help them. if you can help someone then help them…no questions asked



report abuse
 

JohnQ

posted February 15, 2008 at 9:17 pm


Any time I see or hear “Concerned Women of America”, I become concerned. I can not think of one issue on which I agree with them.
I certainly do not agree with them on this.
Peace!



report abuse
 

Hugh (Bart) Vincelette

posted March 10, 2008 at 5:45 pm


If , as Concerned Women for America want in the event that their unreasonable conditions aren’t met ; the president veots the AIDS bill , people will die as a direct result of not getting help . This inevitably will include innocent children. This suggests a tyrannical view of the lives of others. ‘Do as I say , or die’.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.

Share this story


About Beliefnet

Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness. More about Beliefnet.

Help

Media Kit

Subscribe

Legal

Copyright © Beliefnet, Inc. and/or its licensors. All rights reserved. Use of this site is subject to Terms of Service and to our Privacy Policy. Constructed by Beliefnet.

Advertisement

Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.