The UK hosted a conference with 600 faith, belief, government and civil society leaders from 100 countries to urge increased global action on Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) for all. One of the 8 statements from the meeting, Statement on freedom of religion or belief and gender equality, has been the subject of pro-abortion criticism because references to committing to the repeal of laws restricting sexual and reproductive health and bodily autonomy were removed. While the statement did not contain the word 'abortion' the uproar from pro-abortion groups demonstrates that the terms 'reproductive and sexual health' and 'bodily autonomy' have become synonymous with abortion.

 

As reported in the Guardian's article, UK under international pressure over deletion of abortion commitments, the UK received complaints over removal of the text which said that laws which “restrict women’s and girls’ full and equal enjoyment of all human rights, including sexual and reproductive health and rights, bodily autonomy, and other laws that justify, condone, or reinforce violence, discrimination, or inequalities on the grounds of religion, belief or gender should be repealed.”

 

The commitment to repeal laws on abortion was replaced with: “Challenge discriminatory laws that justify, condone, or reinforce violence, discrimination, or inequalities on the grounds of religion, belief or gender and that restrict women and girls’ full and equal enjoyment of human rights.” It was revised to “to focus on the core issues and ensure consensus between signatories" according to a government spokesperson.  There is no international consensus that abortion is a human right.

 

Pro-abortion activists led by the NGO Humanists UK criticized Fiona Bruce MP, the UK’s special envoy on Freedom of Religion or Belief who was involved with the conference and who also serves as the co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Pro-Life Group.

 

In an open letter to Foreign Secretary Liz Truss, 20 pro-abortion groups including the Humanists UK, British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), MSI Reproductive Choices and Amnesty International UK, demanded that the government restore the deletions immediately. The letter even brought up the Dobbs decision: “At a time when abortion provision around the world is under serious threat, due to the reversal of Roe v Wade, it has never been more important for the UK government to stand up for sexual and reproductive health and rights and bodily autonomy.”

 

Pro-abortion activist countries joined the fray with the Norwegian and Danish Governments calling on the UK Government to reverse the change. Out of the original 22 signing countries, the final document has eight signatories with pro-life Malta joining the UK, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Malta, Romania, Slovenia, and Ukraine.

 

A new constitution is set to be approved or rejected in a national vote on September 4. The Catholic bishops conference in Chile has studied the text and is warning that “An informed discernment and a conscientious vote is necessary". The bishops most strenuously object to the proposition that abortion is a so-called right as the “most morally serious provision contained in the constitutional project”. The bishops write that the proposed constitution “introduces abortion, and it does so at the highest normative level, the constitutional one.” The bishops explain that it establishes that the State guarantees “the exercise of this right, free from interference by third parties, whether individuals or institutions" which excludes the father but also affects the exercise of personal and institutional conscientious objection which will “directly affect the ethical, religious and moral conceptions of many people.”

 

The bishops state that even in “sometimes complex situations in which a new life is born, we must not forget that the embryo is a human being whose inalienable rights of the person must be recognized”. They oppose the idea that problems can be solved by eliminating a human life expressing the belief that “the creature conceived in the womb is another human being, with a different and individual genetic code.”



Religious freedom is threatened, the bishops warn, as it must be exercised "in accordance with the law, respecting the rights, duties and principles established by this Constitution" (art. 67.4), The bishops list ways the Constitution conflicts with religious beliefs and write that the “problem is that the project, among other aspects, supports the right to abortion, assumes a questionable orientation of sexual education where parents participate in a very insufficient way, and promotes a radical theory of gender; all aspects incompatible with the Christian faith. By being subject to what is established in the proposed Constitution, religious freedom is put at risk, which is aggravated if we consider that the proposal does not give conscientious objection constitutional status.”

Voters in Kansas have the opportunity to approve or reject the "Value Them Both" amendment to the bill of rights of the Kansas state constitution on August 2. If approved, the amendment will undo a 2019 ruling by the Kansas Supreme Court that found the state’s constitution protects a woman’s “right” to abortion and would enable state legislators to pass legislation regulating or restricting abortion. If the amendment fails to pass, legislators will not be able to pass protections for babies in the womb and there is concern that existing abortion regulations could be eliminated including a ban on abortion after 22 weeks.

 

The new section reads as follows:

 

“Regulation of abortion. Because Kansans value both women and children, the constitution of the state of Kansas does not require government funding of abortion and does not create or secure a right to abortion. To the extent permitted by the constitution of the United States, the people, through their elected state representatives and state senators, may pass laws regarding abortion, including, but not limited to, laws that account for circumstances of pregnancy resulting from rape or incest, or circumstances of necessity to save the life of the mother.”

 

A poll conducted in the state showed that 47% of voters planned to approve the Value Them Both Amendment, while 43% said they intended to vote against it. The remaining 10% were undecided.

President Biden signed an executive order to facilitate the death of unborn children across the United States. During the signing ceremony Biden explained that he was issuing it “in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s terrible, extreme, and, I think, so totally wrongheaded decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.”

 

Biden, as head of the Executive branch of the government, challenged the decision by the Judicial branch calling the decision “an exercise in raw political power” and criticized Republicans serving in the legislative branch for their belief in protecting the lives of unborn children from the violence of abortion, a position he once shared.

 

A plea was made to supporters to vote in the November election to increase the number of Democrats serving in the Senate in order to secure abortion in federal law. Biden declared that this is needed for women and even for “little girls”. He stated: “So the choice is clear. If you want to change the circumstances for women and even little girls in this country, please go out and vote.” 

 

Biden continued his abortion praise saying, “This is a choice. This is a moment — the moment — the moment to restore the rights that have been taken away from us and the moment to protect our nation from an extremist agenda that is antithetical to everything we believe as Americans.” 

 

Biden would be well-advised to remember that America was born on self-evident truths that all men are created equal, and “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Life is the first right, given by the Creator of life. The extremist position is the one that allows and enables the fatal act of abortion to end the lives newly created human beings in the name of “freedom”.

 

The executive order Biden signed— “Protecting Access to Reproductive Health Care Services” builds on measures he already directed his administration to undertake as Biden does “everything in his power” to protect access to the killing of unborn children in abortion. A fact sheet on the executive order lists the details including a definition of the term “reproductive healthcare services” to mean “medical, surgical, counseling, or referral services relating to the human reproductive system, including services relating to pregnancy or the termination of a pregnancy”.

 

The White House listed statements from Members of Congress supporting the Executive Order including from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who said: “President Biden’s executive order today helps advance Democrats’ fight to defend Americans’ health freedom from all-out assault by right-wing extremists. This action will take steps to uphold a woman’s right to make her own health decisions: protecting access to FDA-approved medication abortion, strengthening enforcement of the Affordable Care Act’s contraceptive protections and defending the legal rights of both patients and providers.”

President Biden met with nine Democrat governors to discuss efforts to provide access to the killing of unborn children. Discussion centered on the actions each is taking including by: announcing funding for abortion; abortion awareness campaigns; supporting the codification of the right to access to abortion into state law and state constitutions; “issuing executive actions to defend patients, including out-of-state patients, providers, and third parties”; and joint action to support abortion access as undertaken by the governors of California, Oregon and Washington who issued a Multi-State Commitment “to be a safe haven for all people seeking abortions”. 

 

Governors in the meeting appealed to Biden and the federal government for assistance.  

Governor Hochul of New York asked for continued help at the federal level to fund more broadly fund family planning services so that providers and clinics can use “federal resources for these services” so that they “can focus on private dollars for abortion services”. So asked Biden to consider his ability to use federal facilities for abortion and explained that she is talking about veterans’ hospitals, military bases, and other places “where the federal government controls the jurisdiction in some of the states that are hostile to women’s rights, and make sure that those services can be available to other women.” 

 

Governor Cooper of North Carolina said that as Chair of the Democratic Governors Association, it is his mission to elect more Democratic governors in November.

 

Governor Lujan Grisham from New Mexico We should be using school-based health centers suggested using the Indian Health Service Clinics.

 

The meeting concluded with President Biden asking the governors to “think about what you think I should be doing, if you were sitting in my seat, that I should be considering that we haven’t already considered and could be useful.”

 

Read more here.

Vice President Harris has taken the White House lead in meeting with pro-abortion state legislators, activists, and health care providers to build coalitions on the state level to advance and secure access to abortion. She has held strategy sessions at the White House and around the country encouraging legislators to advance pro-abortion laws and coordinate with lawmakers from other states while issuing assurances of support from the Biden administration and federal government.

 

Harris has also been promoting the election of Democrat governors and state lawmakers in November in order to enact extreme laws allowing the greatest access possible to the killing of unborn children in abortion. She has convened state legislators from Florida, Indiana, Montana, North Dakota, and Nebraska at the White House and met as of writing with legislators in Florida, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, North Carolina and Indiana.

 

During the meetings, Harris often claims that the Dobbs decision put other privacy issues are at risk, including access to contraception, despite the fact that Justice Alito clearly stated in the Dobbs decision that the decision is only about abortion: “And to ensure that our decision is not misunderstood or mischaracterized, we emphasize that our decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right. Nothing in this opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.”

 

The vice president appears to recognize that there is strong opposition to abortion—there was a time in the not too distant past when the Democrat party believed that abortion should be “rare”—and frequently argues that agreeing women should have the right to abortion “does not require you to abandon your faith or your beliefs”.

 

In a meeting with state officials in New Jersey Harris said, “And I think it’s important to note that you don’t have to abandon your faith or your beliefs to agree that the government should not be interfering with her decision, that woman’s decision, over her body and her life.

 

“The government should not be interfering, and no one has to abandon their faith or their belief to agree that certain decisions are not the government’s to make, and that is one of them.”

 

Pro-abortion legislators were told that the Biden Administration is fighting on the national level to protect access to abortion medication, defend the right to interstate travel, and address patient privacy.

 

Harris has also made the charge in N.J. and elsewhere that those opposed to abortion are also fighting voting rights: “I will also note that, here in New Jersey, there is also work that is highlighting the Venn diagram, if you will, around these issues in that we are finding that in many of the states where there is an intent and there is work being done to deprive women of their right to make decisions about their own reproductive health and their care, the same people, and in those same states, we are finding laws being passed to restrict the ability of people to vote.”

 

Harris voices the need to elect pro-abortion governors, attorneys general and secretaries of state: “So I urge everyone to pay attention to this election and understand that right now, with the Court’s decision, a lot of the rules and the laws that are being put in place are occurring and the enforcement of those laws occurring at a local and state level.”

 

Supreme Court Enables Indiana to Implement Parental Notification Law

Chief Justice John Roberts, in a procedural order, granted a request from Indiana to bypass normal procedures and immediately transmit the Court's opinion from the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade to a federal appeals court so that the state can attempt to put in place its parental notification law that had been blocked. The 2017 law requires parents or guardians to be notified of a minor's intent to get an abortion if the court does not consider them mature enough to bypass parental consent. It also gives a path for civil recourse if someone fraudulently poses as a parent in order for a minor girl to get an abortion.

 

The Supreme Court granted that request before it officially announced the Dobbs judgement on July 26 because the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit refused to allow enforcement without the official Supreme Court order. “Delay would only serve to prevent enforcement of a duly enacted state statute designed to protect minors, families, and the unborn,” said lawyers for the state in their court filings. 

 

Georgia’s six-week ban on abortion was allowed to go immediately into effect by the United States 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Georgia’s Living Infants Fairness and Equality (LIFE) Act bans most abortions the moment “a detectable human heartbeat” is present, believed to be at the sixth week of gestation.

 

Georgia Governor Brian P. Kemp celebrated the decision saying, “Since taking office in 2019, our family has committed to serving Georgia in a way that cherishes and values each and every human being, and today’s decision by the 11th Circuit affirms our promise to protect life at all stages. We are overjoyed that the court has paved the way for the implementation of Georgia’s LIFE Act, and as mothers navigate pregnancy, birth, parenthood, or alternative options to parenthood – like adoption – Georgia’s public, private, and non-profit sectors stand ready to provide the resources they need to be safe, healthy, and informed.”

 

According to the opinion rendered by Chief Judge William Pryor, the Act also clarifies that removal of an “ectopic pregnancy” or “a dead unborn child caused by spontaneous abortion” is not an “abortion.”

 

Included in the law, is a “personhood provision” that states an unborn child is a “natural person” with rights and privileges.

 

A new lawsuit was filed against the law in state superior court by the Center for Reproductive Rights, ACLU and Planned Parenthood others on behalf of abortion providers and activist groups.

Pro-abortion lawmakers in the European Parliament passed a non-binding resolution that strongly condemns the Dobbs decision and called on Congress pass a bill to codify abortion at federal level. They called for abortion to be recognized as a “right” in the European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights and for all EU countries to legalize access to free abortion services. They also expressed fear that the decision will influence the development of “sexual and reproductive rights” in other parts of the world and that funding for pro-life groups around the world and in Europe will increase. They urged member states to remove remaining legal, financial, social and practical restrictions to abortion access in some member states.

 

The motion was passed with a majority of 324 votes in favor and 155 against. 

International Planned Parenthood Federation opened a new office in Trinidad and Tobago, its first in the Caribbean. Trinidad and Tobago allow abortion if the pregnancy would endanger the mother’s life, or if carrying the child to term would harm her mental health. Comments at the ribbon cutting reveal the targeting of the region in the promotion the radical reproductive and sexual rights agenda.

 

IPPF regional director Eugenia Lopez Uribe told reporters that the office would complement the one in it has in Colombia. She said that they opened the office “because we're re-building our presence in the region” and the office will “give the space and effort required that the Caribbean needs in our fighting ensuring universal access to reproductive and sexual rights. It is also a matter of reproductive justice, social justice."

 

Present at the event was Tobago House of Assembly (THA) Secretary for Health Dr Faith B. Yisrael, a pro-abortion proponent, who explained to reporters that she supports access to reproductive rights even if it costs her politically.

 

When asked “whether Tobago is prepared to lead Trinidad on access to abortion” the Health Secretary responded that “Tobago had demonstrated a willingness to do the things that most people were not willing to do and if a policy needed to be made, then the PDP-led (Progressive Democratic Patriots) THA administration would be willing to make it.”

 

“Our Chief Secretary has shown that we are willing to stand up and that we are willing to speak about things that even Central Government has not been willing to do,” she said.



Also present at the office opening was UNFPA’s Regional Advisor.

Sierra Leone’s President Julius Made Bio has announced his and his cabinet’s full support for legislation to legalize abortion. The proposed safe motherhood bill would expand access to abortion, which is currently only permitted when the mother’s life is at risk. Referring to Dobbs, President Bio told the 10^th Africa Conference on Sexual Health and Rights, “At a time when sexual and reproductive health rights for women are either being overturned or threatened, we are proud that Sierra Leone can once again lead with progressive reforms.” Pro-abortion groups had lobbied for such a bill for years and call it a “monumental step forward”. The bill is expected to be presented to parliament this fall. 

The World Health Organization (WHO) continues its work to advance access to abortion— now it wants abortion recognized globally as part of primary health care (PHC) and as a component of universal health coverage (UHC). WHO explains the importance of PHC in its announcement about two new “tools”: “Health systems that achieve UHC and the health-related Sustainable Development Goals rely heavily on a solid foundation of PHC. The majority of SRH services, such as antenatal and post-natal care, contraception and abortion care, can be provided through PHC.” The SDGs mentioned by WHO are SDG3 related to good health and well-being and SDG5 on gender equality.

 

It is explained that “integrating SRH within PHC for UHC requires both political commitment, as well as defined and coherent strategies”. WHO seeks to use the new tools to help decision-makers, program managers, implementers, civil society, researchers, and wider health systems communities to ultimately achieve universal access to abortion with primary health care as the pathway.

 

The first tool is the handbook Critical considerations for achieving universal access to sexual and reproductive health in the context of universal health coverage through a primary health care approach. The intervention categories listed include abortion. The question as to why comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services are not already fully integrated within health benefit packages is answered by claiming gender bias against women prevents access to abortion and “prohibitive or restrictive national laws and policies” block “consideration of abortion in the health benefit package”.

 

It explores actions in a number of countries that broadened access to abortion including Ireland in the hope that the examples “demonstrate a variety of approaches across countries that take into account economic, social and cultural contexts which influence SRH services, but also lessons and tactics that can be applied in nearly every context.”

 

The second tool is the Learning by Sharing Portal (LSP) designed “to support the integration of SRH in wider UHC related reforms” and is a space for examples of countries where laws and policies have been changed. WHO developed the portal along with the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) to advance a link between SRH and UHC with “national-level implementation stories from across the world”.



WHO’s research division tweeted about the new tools: @HRPresearch “Spread the word: Access to sexual & reproductive health services is a #HumanRight. Check out: New evidence and tools that will bring everyone closer to accessing all essential health services, including #SRH.”

The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a bill to fund Planned Parenthood and promote abortion drugs under the guise of “contraception”. Entitled the “Right to Contraception Act”, H.R. 8373 would override state laws to make abortion drugs available and override conscience protections requiring doctors to provide them.

 

Rep Cathy McMorris Rodger criticized the bill, saying it is dangerous for women and for religious liberties. She pointed out the phoniness of the bill and criticized Democrats for refusing to work with Republicans to create sound legislation. “It should be called the ‘Payouts for Planned Parenthood Act,’” said McMorris Rodgers. “It would send more taxpayer dollars to Planned Parenthood, freeing up more funds for them to provide abortions and end vulnerable lives.”

 

The bill would also make funding for Planned Parenthood permanent, prohibiting any future attempts to defund the abortion provider and removing the ability to restore the Protect Life Rule- the policy initially created by President Reagan and reinstated by President Trump to separate federal funding for family planning from abortion services.

 

Rep Chris Smith emphasized this provision in debate: “A future pro-life president should not be precluded by any law including H.R. 8373 from reestablishing the Protect Life Rule or any similar policy. Madame Speaker, no one can seriously deny anymore that unborn children are alive, dynamic, precious, a miracle, and defenseless. Title X was intended to be about family planning—prevention—not the hideous dismemberment, beheading, chemical poisoning, or deliberate starvation and forced expulsion of a defenseless unborn baby. There is nothing benign or compassionate about exterminating an unborn baby girl or boy.”

 

The bill passed the Democrat controlled House by a vote of 228-195 and now awaits consideration in the Senate.

The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations held a hearing on the impact of the Dobbs decision on abortion. Dr. Christina Francis, MD, a board member of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists (AAPLOG) and associate scholar of the Charlotte Lozier Institute, was the minority witness. Dr. Francis testified that despite having abortion on demand for the last 49 years, the U.S. has one of the worst rates of maternal mortality and preterm birth in the developed world. “Pregnancy is not a disease and elective abortion is not healthcare. Despite what proponents of abortion may claim, elective abortion carries no maternal benefit and ends the life of a separate human being. As demonstrated by hundreds of studies over nearly five decades, abortive procedures carry several deleterious effects for women, including the risk of preterm birth and mental health problems. These problems have a statistically greater impact on minority populations,” Dr. Francis said.

 

Pro-life members Reps Morgan Griffith, Cathy McMorris Rodgers, and Michael Burgess gave opening statements and raised questions highlighting the advancement of science since Roe, the dangers of medical abortion for women, the extremism of abortion advocates and their attacks on pregnancy care centers, and the risk to physician’s conscience rights.

A new bill would provide federal funding for travel for pregnant women who travel out of state for abortion services. The legislation, the Reproductive Health Travel Fund Act, would create a grant program under the Department of Health and Human Services. The bill is sponsored by Reps Marilyn Strickland, Lizzie Fletcher, and Cori Bush and supported by several abortion advocacy groups including NARAL, the Center for Reproductive Rights, and Planned Parenthood. 

Republican Attorney Generals (AGS) warn Google they will sue if the company agrees to censor pregnancy resources centers on its search engine, as Democrat lawmakers have asked it to do. In a letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares, joined by 16 other AGS, said the Democrats’ request was “inappropriate” and would restrict free speech. “We trust that you will treat this letter with the seriousness these issues require, and hope you will decide that Google’s search results must not be subject to left-wing political pressure, which would actively harm women seeking essential assistance,” wrote the attorneys general. The AGs praised the work of pregnancy resource centers who help women facing a crisis pregnancy with diapers, food, temporary housing, education/career help, mentoring, parenting classes, and a life affirming option.

Spain’s ombudsman Ángel Gabilondo has expressed concern over the large number of Spanish doctors who object to abortion. Consequently, there are public medical facilities with no provision of abortion. In a letter to a lawmaker which was leaked to the newspaper El País, Gabilondo said this “should be subject to assessment and analysis.” While acknowledging an individual’s right to conscientious objection, he also says it should not prevent abortion services from being available in public health centers. Health care providers reportedly “are surprised by how they intend to force abortions to be performed in some public hospitals,” said the president of the Madrid College of Physicians, Manuel Martínez-Sellés. The National Association for the Defense of the Right to Conscientious Objection by Biomedical Personnel (ANDOC) responded that the ombudsman duty is to protect individuals’ fundamental rights, and that abortion “is not a fundamental right; it doesn’t appear in our magna carta or in any universally recognized declaration of rights.” Conversely, the right to conscientious objection is in the Spanish Constitution.

A new initiative in the UK will recognize babies who die before 24 weeks gestation with a pregnancy loss certificate. Currently, babies who die in the womb after 24 weeks are registered as a stillbirth, while those under 24 weeks are registered as a miscarriage. The policy is part of a new government women’s health strategy. “[I]t has finally been recognised that a child born before 24 weeks deserves the acknowledgement that any other human being receives,” said Amy Jackson with the Lily Mae Foundation, a group that provides support to families impacted by a baby’s death. “To discriminate between gestations only serves to belittle a loss before 24 weeks and we at the Lily Mae Foundation truly believe that a loss is devastating no matter what the gestation. The loss of an entire lifetime of hopes and dreams”.

In response to Dobbs, pro-abortion activists in Canada are fearful over the large number of pregnancy care centers that overshadow the number of abortion clinics and want Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to defund pro-life groups and pregnancy care centers and revoke their nonprofit status. The abortion supporters are critical of the government for giving pregnancy centers federal COVID relief funds, claiming the centers are harmful to women. A spokesperson for Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said the government is “fully committed” to revoking the nonprofit status of centers “that provide dishonest counseling to women about their rights and about the options available to them at all stages of the pregnancy.”