Gag Rule Aff ClassHSDFHSic

Michigan Classic 2007
1
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Global Gag Rule Afirmative
Gag Rule 1AC.....................................................................................................................................4
Human Rights Advantage................................................................................................................17
AIDS Advantage...............................................................................................................................27
2AC Democracy Addon....................................................................................................................
2AC So!t "o#er Addon.....................................................................................................................$
2AC International %a# Addon.........................................................................................................&
Inherency'(o )unding...................................................................................................................*
A+, Re-eal Gag Rule (o#.................................................................................................................
A+, Contrace-tion /0em-tion (o#.................................................................................................41
A+, Court 2ill 3verturn Gag Rule...................................................................................................41
Overoulation Advantage
Gag Rule 4ad'Gender /5uality......................................................................................................42
Gender /5uality Good'"o-ulation.................................................................................................4
Gag Rule 4ad'3ver-o-ulation.......................................................................................................4$
Gag Rule 4ad'/liminates )amily "lanning...................................................................................4&
A+, Gag Rule Doesn6t /liminate )amily "lanning...........................................................................47
)amily "lanning Good'"o-ulation.................................................................................................4*
)amily "lanning Good'"o-ulation'/m-o#er 2omen.................................................................$1
)amily "lanning Good'"o-ulation')unding 7ey.........................................................................$2
A+, Social Changes 8ust Ha--en )irst..........................................................................................$
A+, Coercive )amily "lanning 7ey...................................................................................................$4
Gag Rule 4ad'Contrace-tives........................................................................................................$$
Contrace-tives Good'"o-ulation...................................................................................................$&
Contrace-tives Good'Gender and "o-ulation...............................................................................$7
Gag Rule 4ad'"o-ulation'Condoms............................................................................................$*
3ver-o-ulation (o#'Su9:Saharan A!rica.....................................................................................$.
A+, )ertility Rates Declining............................................................................................................&1
A+, AIDS is a Death Chec;...............................................................................................................&2
3ver-o-ulation 4ad'A!rica Drives Glo9al.....................................................................................&
3ver-o-ulation 4ad'AIDS..............................................................................................................&4
3ver-o-ulation 4ad'A!rica'%aundry %ist....................................................................................&$
3ver-o-ulation 4ad'A!rica'Civil 2ar..........................................................................................&&
3ver-o-ulation 4ad'2ater 2ars...................................................................................................&7
3ver-o-ulation 4ad')amine..........................................................................................................&*
3ver-o-ulation 4ad'/nvironment.................................................................................................&.
3ver-o-ulation 4ad'De!orestation................................................................................................71
3ver-o-ulation 4ad'2arming.......................................................................................................72
3ver-o-ulation 4ad'"overty..........................................................................................................7
3ver-o-ulation 4ad'+errorism......................................................................................................74
A+, "o-ulation 7ey to A!rican /conomies.......................................................................................7$
3ver-o-ulation'(G3s 7ey.............................................................................................................7&
Gag Rule 4ad'"o-ulation %eadershi-...........................................................................................77
"o-ulation %eadershi-')unding 7ey.............................................................................................7*
2
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Global Gag Rule Afirmative
!uman Rights Advantage
Gag Rule 4ad'Chilling /<ect.........................................................................................................*1
A+, /0em-tions !or AIDS )unding...................................................................................................*2
Gag Rule 4ad')ree S-eech............................................................................................................*
Gag Rule 4ad'2omen6s Rights......................................................................................................*$
Gag Rule 4ad'Human Rights.........................................................................................................*&
Gag Rule 4ad'International %a#...................................................................................................**
Re-roductive Rights Good'3verall 2omen6s Rights....................................................................*.
2omen6s Rights Good'/0tinction...................................................................................................1
Human Rights Good'/0tinction......................................................................................................1
Human Rights %eadershi-')unding 7ey........................................................................................2
A"#$ Advantage
Gag Rule 4ad'AIDS.........................................................................................................................4
Gag Rule 4ad'AIDS'2omen6s Rights...........................................................................................&
Gag Rule 4ad'AIDS'8other to Child +ransmission.....................................................................*
Gag Rule 4ad'Contrace-tives..........................................................................................................
Contrace-tives Good'AIDS..........................................................................................................111
A+, Condoms Increase AIDS..........................................................................................................112
A+, =ganda "roves A9stinence Solves..........................................................................................11
Gag Rule 4ad'Integration............................................................................................................114
Integration Good'AIDS................................................................................................................11$
Misc% Advantages
Gag Rule 4ad'Democracy............................................................................................................11&
Gag Rule 4ad'=S %eadershi-......................................................................................................11*
Gag Rule 4ad'=S %eadershi-'Health Di-lomacy.....................................................................11.
Gag Rule 4ad'Systemic Deaths...................................................................................................111
Gag Rule 4ad'Russian Democracy..............................................................................................111
Gag Rule 4ad'=S:/= Relations...................................................................................................112
A&' (eg Arguments
A+, Doctor Shortages 7ill Solvency...............................................................................................11
A+, A9ortions 4ad DA....................................................................................................................114
A+, S-ending..................................................................................................................................11&
A+, 8althus....................................................................................................................................117
A+, %i!t the Gag Rule C"................................................................................................................11*
A+, International Actor C".............................................................................................................121
A+, China C"..................................................................................................................................121
=S 7ey'+echnical /0-ertise........................................................................................................122
=S 7ey'Coercive )amily "lanning 4ad.......................................................................................12
=S 7ey'/m-irics..........................................................................................................................124
=S 7ey'Condoms.........................................................................................................................12$
=S 7ey'8odeling.........................................................................................................................12&
=S 7ey'8odeling'Glo9al %i9erali>ation o! A9ortion %a#s.......................................................12.
A+, "rovide Contrace-tion C".......................................................................................................11
A+, )und A9stinence?Religious (G3s C".....................................................................................11
+o-icality'A9ortion is "u9lic Health............................................................................................1
)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A+, Im-erialism Criti5ue................................................................................................................14
A+, )eminism Criti5ue...................................................................................................................1&
*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Global Gag Rule (egative
Case Arguments
Status @uo Solves..........................................................................................................................17
A+, 3ver-o-ulation'Declining (o#.............................................................................................1*
A+, 3ver-o-ulation'(o Im-act....................................................................................................1.
A+, Aour Catholic Institute /vidence is 4iased.............................................................................141
A+, 2arming Im-act......................................................................................................................141
A+, 3ver-o-ulation'Social )actors /ncourage %arge )amilies..................................................142
A+, Human Rights'(o S-illover..................................................................................................14
A+, AIDS'Status @uo Solves........................................................................................................144
A+, AIDS'Gag Rule Doesn6t "revent )unding.............................................................................14$
A+, AIDS'"eo-le 2ont Clinics.....................................................................................................14&
A+, Integration Solves AIDS..........................................................................................................147
A+, )ree S-eech Advantage...........................................................................................................14*
(o Solvency'/conomic )actors 3ver#helm...............................................................................14.
(o Solvency'Social )actors 3ver#helm.....................................................................................1$1
(o Solvency'Health "ro!essional Shortage 3ver#helms...........................................................1$1
+olitics ,in-s
"olitics'4ush 2on6t "ush.............................................................................................................1$2
"olitics'Beto %in;.........................................................................................................................1$
"olitics'"olitical Ca-ital %in;.......................................................................................................1$4
"olitics'G3" 4ac;lash %in;.........................................................................................................1$$
"olitics'Catholic %o99y %in;........................................................................................................1$&
"olitics')amily "lanning =n-o-ular............................................................................................1$7
"olitics'Religious Right %in;.......................................................................................................1$*
"olitics'/0ecutive 3rder %in;s....................................................................................................1$.
"olitics'"o-ularity %in;................................................................................................................1&1
"olitics'3live 4ranch %in;...........................................................................................................1&1
"olitics'4i-artisanshi- %in;.........................................................................................................1&2
"olitics'A+, G3" 4ac;lash...........................................................................................................1&
Counterlans
/uro-ean =nion C".......................................................................................................................1&4
Canada C"......................................................................................................................................1&&
Alternate Actor C".........................................................................................................................1&7
Allo# Advocacy C".........................................................................................................................1&*
)und 2omen6s /ducation C"........................................................................................................1&.
A9stinence?)und the Status @uo C".............................................................................................171
A+, Condoms Solve AIDS...............................................................................................................172
Glo9al Democracy "romotion Act C"............................................................................................17
Criti.ues
Im-erialism Criti5ue %in;s............................................................................................................174
Criti5ue'A+, Cede the "olitical....................................................................................................17$
/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
8isc'A+, Rights 8althus..............................................................................................................17&
0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 1AC
+lan' &he 1nited $tates 2ederal government should substantiall3 increase its 2amil3
lanning assistance to nongovernmental organi4ations 5ithin $ub $aharan A2rica
that romote abortion%
7
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 1AC
Observation One' Overoulation
6ush7s imlementation o2 the global gag rule has dramaticall3 cut do5n 1$ 2unding
2or global 2amil3 lanning8this is driving an overoulation crisis in sub9$aharan
A2rica that is destro3ing the environment and escalating global 5arming%
/ri; CurrenC -ro!essor o! /nglish at Dames 8adisonC communications consultant to the Sierra Clu9C the (atural
Resources De!ense Council and editor o! Conserve 8aga>ineC $?1&?2007. E+he RealC =ns-o;en Cause o! Glo9al
2arming, 3ver-o-ulationFC htt-,??###.conservemag.com?2117?1$?1&?glo9al:#arming?glo9al:#arming:-o-ulation?.
EIt is an inconvenient truth that all -ro-osals or e<orts to slo# glo9al #arming or to move
to#ard sustaina9ility are serious intellectual !raudsCF #rites -hysicist and sustaina9ility theorist
Al9ert 4artlettC Ei! they do not advocate reducing -o-ulations to sustaina9le levels at the localC national and glo9al
scales.F AetC as glo9al #arming comes to re-lace terrorism as the threat Americans !ear the mostC #e hear lots o! tal; o! clean energy and a little
a9out energy e<iciencyC 9ut almost nothing a9out slo#ing -o-ulation gro#th. +he =.S. reached 11 million in the !all and #e6re e0-ected to reach 411
million 9y mid:century. 2hatever ha--ens as a result o! glo9al #arming or the energy crisis coming #hen #orld oil -roduction -ea;sC overcro#ding
alone #ill ma;e America a very di<erent -lace than it is today. And not a 9etter one. /very dayC #e see the conse5uences o! too many Americans,
tem-er:testing tra<icG a shortage o! a<orda9le housing nation#ideG trash at -ar;s and on 9eachesG -ollution in riversC la;es and 9aysG and s-ra#ling
develo-ment that covers the 9est !armland and diverse #ildli!e ha9itat #ith master:-lanned su9ur9sC miles o! !ree#ays and acres o! -ar;ing lots.
4asicallyC everything #e love a9out America H !rom am9er #aves o! grain to -ur-le mountains maIesty H is threatened 9y overcro#ding. And no# our
-o-ulation seems a9out to collide #ith glo9al #arming. Coastal communities are some o! the !astest gro#ingC and more than hal! o! all Americans no#
live #ithin $1 miles o! a coastline in areas that #ill 9e vulnera9le to #orse storms and more Jooding. It #as only in 1.&7 that the =.S. reached 211
million. At that timeC "aul /hrlich6s controversial 9oo; +he "o-ulation 4om9 -redicted that the e0-losion
o! our s-ecies #ould over#helm the earth6s natural resources and lead to -estilenceC #arC
!amine and death. 4ut then the eco:a#are 1.71s gave #ay to the greed:is:good 1.*1s and the #orld6s natural
systems did not indeed colla-se. 8any -eo-le started claiming that the -o-ulation 9om9 #as a dud. )ree:mar;et
enthusiasts said that 9etter technology could !eed the #orld !or decades to come and that there #as no need to #orry
a9out ;ee-ing our num9ers do#n. +he 4om9 De!usedC !or A +ime E3ne o! the reasons #hy the -o-ulation
9om9 didn6t go o< is 9ecause some o! the #arnings #ere heeded and the =.S. and other donor
nations started -rograms to hel- cou-les choose ho# and #hen to have ;ids in the develo-ing
#orldCF says +od "restonC senior advisor #ith advocacy grou- "o-ulation Action International.
E4irth rates are still very high in some areasC 9ut they6ve come do#n. 3ur e<orts have 9een a
success. EAetC today around the #orld you still have huge and gro#ing -ro9lems in terms o!
resource scarcityC #aterC ara9le cro- landC !orests and other resources. And that6s only going to
get muchC much #orse i! #e don6t do more.F %i;e many e0-erts on -o-ulation issuesC "reston is
less concerned #ith the =.S. than #ith develo-ing nationsC #ho are the main contri9utors to a
runa#ay #orld -o-ulation o! &.$ 9illion. America reaching 11 million is Eindicative o! a much
9igger story in the develo-ing #orldCF "reston says. EHere #e6re tal;ing a9out sustaina9le
develo-mentC s-ra#lC ha9itat lossC and other -ro9lems. 4ut i! you loo; at the develo-ing #orldC
the situation is much more serious. In =ganda or /thio-ia !or e0am-le -o-ulations are dou9ling
every 1 years. +hey already have huge issues #ith hunger and !amine and are already de-endent on
!ood aid !rom !oreign donors including the =.S.F EImagine i! #e #ere tal;ing a9out the li;elihood that our -o-ulation
#ould Ium- to &11 million in 1 to 41 years. +here #ould 9e a strong sense that this #as a very grave -ro9lem.
"eo-le #ould term it a crisis or a catastro-he. 4ut that6s the reality in some countriesC -articularly in su9:
Saharan A!rica. =n!ortunatelyC it6s not 9eing tal;ed a9out much here and some easyC -o-ular -rograms to ease this crisis are 9eing neglected
9y the =.S. and other rich countries.F 2hen you hear so much 9ad ne#s !rom -laces #here -o-ulation gro#th is a -ro9lemC -articularly su9:Saharan
A!ricaC it6s all too easy to !all into !atalism and a-athy. +he -lace may seem 9eyond hel-C so #hat can #e doK 4ut this ;ind o! com-assion:!atigue is
unnecessary. +he most e<ective -o-ulation control measureC !amily -lanningC is many times chea-er
than any military o-tion. It is even chea-er than !amine relie!. )amily -lanning has 9een so
e<ective thatC 9ecause o! e<orts to educate #omen and cou-les a9out contrace-tion so that
they can choose to have the num9er o! ;ids they #ant at the time they #ant themC 9irth rates
have !allen in many develo-ing nations. In 8e0ico and /gy-tC !or e0am-leC 9irth rates have
9een halved in the last $ yearsC according to "reston. AetC des-ite its -roved e<ectivenessC
!amily -lanning has dro--ed to a small -ercentage o! the =.S. !oreign aid 9udget. E=.S.
:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
ta0-ayers s-end L1 9illion on !ood aid yearly. %ast year in /thio-ia alone #e s-ent more on !ood
aid than #e did on !amily -lanning across the -lanetCF "reston says. Since it came into o<iceC
the 4ush Administration has cut !amily:-lanning !unding signiMcantly. "o-ulation e0-erts li;e "reston say that
this is not 9ecause !amily -lanning doesn6t #or; H it does H or that -eo-le in develo-ing countries don6t #ant contrace-tives H they doC even in strongly
Catholic or 8uslim nations H 9ut !or domestic -olitical reasons. Some o--onents o! a9ortion also o--ose contrace-tionC and since the 2hite House has
9een eager to o9tain the su--ort o! its religious 9aseC it has tried to distance itsel! !rom 9irth control. 4ut since Americans over#helmingly su--ort
access to contrace-tion H *1 -ercent in a 2all Street Dournal?Harris Interactive -oll !rom last year H the administration has hesitated
to declare o-en #ar on 9irth control. InsteadC it has 5uietly cut !unding to su--ort !amily:
-lanning -rograms a9road. E+his administration is in thrall to a domestic -olitical 9ase that is !undamentally
o--osed to the right o! #omen to use contrace-tivesCF said 4rian Di0onC director o! government relations at another
advocacy grou-C "o-ulation Connection. E3ne o! the Mrst things that this -resident did in 2111 #as to
im-lement a glo9al gag:ruleC to cut o< =.S. aid to any !amily:-lanning -roviders around the
#orld #ho had any connection to a9ortion.F +he gag:rule said that i! health:care -roviders #anted to
receive =.S. !undsC then they couldn6t even counsel -atients on a9ortion or 9ring it u- as an o-tion. 4ecause many
doctorsC nurses and medical aides #ere not #illing to -lay 9y 2ashington6s ne# restrictionsC
they lost !unding. E+he rule caused clinics to close in Nam9ia and 7enya and it caused the
laying o< o! healthcare sta<. It has also led to a shortage o! contrace-tives in /thio-ia. 4ut the gag:
rule has had no im-act on a9ortionC e0ce-t may9e to increase itC 9ecause #e6ve cut o< access to contrace-tion. +he =.S. no longer contri9utes to the
=( "o-ulation )und 9ecause the "resident re!uses to release the !unds that Congress has a--ro-riated !or it. +he target in all o! these cases is
contrace-tives.F
;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 1AC
Overoulation 5ill culminate in e<tinction%
=hrlich > =hrlich 1;;0 O"aul P AnneC "ro!essors o! "o-ulation StudiesC Stan!ord =niversityC +he "o-ulation
/0-losionC -. 1*7Q
+he -o-ulation e0-losion contri9utes to international tension and there!ore ma;es a nuclear
holocaust more li;ely. 8ost -eo-le in our society can visuali>e the horrors o! a large:scale
nuclear #ar !ollo#ed 9y a nuclear #inter. 2e call that -ossi9ly an end to our civili>ation Ethe
4ang.F Hundreds o! millions o! -eo-le #ould 9e ;illed outrightC and 9illions more #ould !ollo#
!rom the disru-tion o! agricultural systems and other indirect e<ects largely caused 9y the
disru-tion o! ecosystem services. It #ould 9e the ultimate Edeath:rate solutionF to the
-o-ulation -ro9lem. +here remains the -ro9lem thatC as the #orld gets !urther and !urther out
o! controlC cra>ies on 9oth the le!t and the right may e0ert increasingly 0eno-ho9ic -ressures on
national governments. +he rise o! !undamentalism in 9oth /ast and 2est is a com-letely
understanda9le 9ut not at all encouraging sam-le o! #hat the !uture may hold in terms o!
conJict. +hose struggling to achieve a -ermanently -eace!ul #orld still have much #or; to doC
es-ecially as gro#ing and already over-o-ulated nations struggle to divide u- d#indling
resources in a deteriorating glo9al environment. 4ut !or no#C a!ter !orty years o! #orrying
a9out itC the 4ang seems to 9e getting less li;ely. +he same can6t 9e said a9out Ethe 2him-er.F
+he 2him-er is sim-ly the #ay that civili>ation #ill end i! current
-o-ulation?resource?environment trends continue. Such a continuation could 9ring us
essentially to the same sort o! #orld as #ould 9e le!t a!ter a nuclear #ar and a nuclear #inter'
Iust more slo#lyC on a time scale o! years rather than #ee;s.
Resuming un9restricted 1$ 2unding is essential to create sustainable 2amil3 lanning
globall38this is the onl3 5a3 to revent environmental destruction and to
alleviate overt3%
Colin 6ro5nC De-uty "olitical /ditor o! the Inde-endentC 1?1?2007. E4irth rates Rmust 9e cur9ed to #in #ar on
glo9al -overtyCF +he Inde-endentC %e0is.
+he earthRs -o-ulation #ill a--roach an unsustaina9le total o! 11.$ 9illion unless contrace-tion
is -ut 9ac; at the to- o! the agenda !or international e<orts to alleviate glo9al -overty. A re-ort
9y 8"s released today challenges #orld leaders to -ut the contrace-tive -ill and the condom at
the centre o! their e<orts to alleviate glo9al -overtyC tac;le starvation and even hel- to avert
glo9al #arming. Gordon 4ro#n has sta;ed his !uture -remiershi- on leading the #orld in
tac;ling glo9al -overty. And the re-ortC 9y the all:-arty -arliamentary grou- on -o-ulationC
develo-ment and re-roductive gro#thC ma;es the -oint that the -o-ulation surge -resents a
massive stumbling bloc- !or his am9ition. Since the 1.71sC #hen coercion #as used in India
and ChinaC !amily -lanning has 9ecome a dirty #ord among environmental and hunger
cam-aigners. 4ut the re-ort #arns that eight =( targets !or reducing -overty in the develo-ing
#orld #ill 9e missed unless #orld leaders do more to sto- the soaring 9irth rates. +he grou-
says the =7 #ill have to ta;e on the religious ideology o! the neoconservatives in the 2hite
House against contrace-tion. +he 8"s call !or an end to the so:called Sglo9al gag ruleSC that
#as reintroduced 9y "resident George 4ush. It has -ut non:governmental organisations outside
the =S Sin an untena9le -ositionS and !orced them to choose 9et#een carrying out their #or;
sa!eguarding the health and rights o! #omen or losing their !unding !rom the =S. +he %a9our
8" Christine 8cCa<ertyC #ho chairs the grou-C said there #ould 9e a $1 -er cent rise in the
#orldRs -o-ulation 9y 21$1 unless !amily -lanning #as made more !reely availa9le in the
develo-ing #orldC #here .. -er cent o! the gro#th is e0-ected to occur. +he re-ort says there
is Sover#helmingS evidence that the =(Rs millennium develo-ment goals #ill 9e missed i!
10
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
-o-ulation gro#th is not cur9ed. +he goals include eradicating e0treme -overty and hungerC
achieving universal -rimary educationC -romoting gender e5ualityC reducing child mortalityC
com9ating HIB?Aids and ensuring environmental sustaina9ility. +he re-ort carries a gra-h
illustrating the S9ulgeS in -o-ulation gro#th in develo-ing countries since the 1.$1sC #hile the
9irth rate in develo-ed countries has stagnated. +he #orst:case scenario -redicts that unless it
is chec;ed the earthRs -o-ulation could soar out o! control to more than & 9illion over the ne0t
11 years. S3nce -o-ulation gro#th gains a certain s-eed it is hard to slo#CS says the re-ort.
SAs a result o! ra-id -o-ulation gro#th a generation agoC China has a gro#ing num9er o! young
married #omen o! child9earing age. SIn A!ricaC the diversion o! attention !rom -o-ulation and
the stalled !ertility decline has occurred Iust as -o-ulation momentum #as 9eginning to slo#
#ith e0tremely serious long:term im-lications.S +he -o-ulation e0-losion has led to an increase
in the num9ers in e0treme -overty living on less than L1 a day. In 1..1C 44.& -er cent o! -eo-le
in su9:Saharan A!rica #ere living in e0treme -overty and this gre# to 4&.4 -er cent in 2111.
4ecause o! -o-ulation gro#thC the num9er o! -eo-le a<ected rose !rom 21 million to 1*
million. 8any countries that lo#ered their 9irth ratesC such as South 7oreaC have reduced
-overty. 4ut the 8"s say, SContinued ra-id -o-ulation gro#th in todayRs -oorest countries
-resents a serious 9arrier to meeting the millennium target o! -overty reduction.S
11
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 1AC
+overt3 turns and out5eighs even nuclear imacts8structural violence -ills 1: million
eole a 3ear? comared to around 100?000 a 3ear in armed con@ict% Moreover?
structural violence is ine<tricabl3 related to the causes 5ar%
Gilligan? 1;;0 ODamesC "ro!essor o! "sychiatry at the Harvard 8edical School and Director o! the Center !or the
Study o! BiolenceC -. 1.$:.&Q
+he Mnding that structural violence causes !ar more deaths than 9ehavioral violence does is not
limited to this country. 7ohler and Alcoc; attem-ted to arrive at the num9er o! e0cess deaths
caused 9y socioeconomic ine5uities on a #orld#ide 9asis. S#eden #as their model o! the nation
that had come closest to eliminating structural violence. It had the least ine5uity in income and
living standards and the lo#est discre-ancies in death rates and li!e e0-ectancyG and the
highest overall li!e e0-ectancy in the #orld. 2hen they com-ared the li!e e0-ectancies o! those
living in the other socioeconomic systems against S#edenC they !ound that 1* million deaths a
year could 9e attri9uted to structural violence to #hich the citi>ens o! all the other nations #ere
9eing su9Iected. During the -ast decade the discre-ancies 9et#een the rich and -oor nations
have increased dramatically and alarmingly. +he 14:1* million deaths a year caused 9y
structural violence com-are #ith a9out 111C111 deaths a year !rom armed conJict. Com-aring
this !re5uency o! deaths !rom structural violence to the !re5uency o! those caused 9y maIor
military and -olitical violenceC such as 2orld 2ar II Oan estimated 4. million military and
civilian deaths including those caused 9y genocide: or a9out eight million -er yearC 1..:1.4$QC
the Indonesian massacre o! 1.&$:&& O-erha-s $7$C111 deathsQC the Bietnam #ar O-ossi9ly t#o
millionC 1.$4:7Q and even a hy-othetical nuclear e0change 9et#een the =S and =SSR O22
millionQ it #as clear that even #ar cannot 9egin to com-are #ith structural violenceC #hich
continues year a!ter year. In other #ordsC every M!teen yearsC on the averageC as many -eo-le
die 9ecause o! relative -overty as #ould 9e ;illed in a nuclear #ar that caused 22 million
deathsG and every single yearC t#o to three times as many -eo-le die !rom -overty throughout
the #orld as #ere ;illed 9y the (a>i genocide o! the De#s over a si0 year -eriod. +his isC in
e<ectC the e5uivalent o! an ongoingC unendingC in !act acceleratingC thermonuclear #arC or
genocideC -er-etuated on the #ea; and -oor every year o! every decadeC throughout the #orld.
Structural violence is also the main cause o! 9ehavioral violence on a socially and
e-idemiologically signiMcant scale O!rom homicide and suicide to #ar and genocideQ. +he
5uestion as to #hich o! the t#o !orms o! violence:structural or 9ehavioral: is more im-ortantC
dangerousC or lethal is mootC !or they are ine0trica9ly related to each otherC as cause to e<ect.
A2rican overoulation also causes genocide and civil 5ars%
1$A &oda3C Duly 1;;7. htt-,??Mndarticles.com?-?articles?miTm1272?isTn2&2&Tv12$?aiT1.&22&2
2ith #ar!are ty-ically analy>ed in terms o! -olitical and economic varia9lesC most o9servers !ail
to see the relation o! conJict and -o-ulation -ressures. In 1..4 and 1..$C 9et#een $11C111 and
1C111C111 -eo-le #ere ;illed in R#anda as ethnic Hutus and +utsis:rivals !or hundreds o! years:
indiscriminately slaughtered each other. In a nation a9out the si>e o! 8assachusettsC the
-o-ulation o! R#anda increased !rom 2C111C111 in 1.$1 to *C$11C111 in the mid 1..1s.
Demogra-her %eon 4ouvier noted thatC even #ithout the historical animosity 9et#een Hutus
and +utsisC R#anda #as on the road to disaster. 2ith the -o-ulation gro#ing !our!old in less
than hal! a centuryC !arms #ere getting smaller Oevery male over 1* is entitled to landQC
marginal lands had to 9e used to gro# cro-sC and there #as intense -ressure on natural
resources. It #as Iust a matter o! time 9e!ore the situation e0-loded. +he scene o! savage
Mghting in recent monthsC ethnically diverse %i9eria has a dou9ling time o! 22 years. "eriodic
12
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
conJict in that nation since 1.*1 has 9een -olitical?tri9al in natureC #ith some o! the ethnic
grou-s su--orting the government and others 9ac;ing the re9els. 8ilitary historian and social
commentator G#ynne Dyer noted that some 211 A!rican tri9es?ethnic grou-s have -o-ulations
in e0cess o! $11C111 and o!ten are lum-ed together in countries #hose -olitical 9oundaries
#ere determined via /uro-ean coloni>ation. R5anda9li-e tragedies are inevitable as these
!re5uently antagonisticC ra-idly e0-anding -o-ulations com-ete !or scarce or none0istent
resources such as Io9sC housingC health careC and education.
1)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 1AC
And? A2rican 5ar 5ill go nuclear%
#eutschC 2002. Dr. De<reyC Contri9uting /ditor !or Russian "oliticsC (ovem9er 1*C accessed 7?2$?14C
htt-,??###.ra9idtigers.com?rtn?ne#sletterv2n..html.
+he Ra9id +iger "roIect 9elieves that a nuclear #ar is most li;ely to start in A!rica. Civil #ars in the Congo
Othe country !ormerly ;no#n as NaireQC R#andaC Somalia and Sierra %eoneC and domestic insta9ility in Nim9a9#eC
Sudan and other countriesC as #ell as occasional 9rushMre and other #ars Othan;s in -art to SnationalS 9orders that
cut across tri9al onesQ turn into a really nasty ste#. 2eRve got all too many ra9id tigers and -otential ra9id tigersC
#ho are #illing to -ush the 9utton rather than ris; 9eing seen as #ishy:#ashy in the !ace o! a mortal threat and
overthro#n. Geo-olitically s-ea;ingC A!rica is o-en range. Bery !e# countries in A!rica are 9eholden to any
-articular -o#er. South A!rica is a maIor e0ce-tion in this res-ect : not to mention in that she also -ro9a9ly already
has the 4om9. +husC outside -o#ers can more easily Mnd client states there than C sayC in /uro-e #here
the -olitical lines have long since 9een dra#nC or Asia #here many o! the countries OChinaC IndiaC Da-anQ are -o#ers
unto themselves and donRt need any Shel-CS than; you. +husC an A!rican #ar can attract outside
involvement very 5uic;ly. 3! courseC a -ro0y #ar alone may not induce the Great "o#ers to Mght each other.
4ut an A!rican nuclear stri;e can ignite a much 9roader conJagrationC i! the other -o#ers are
interested in a Mght. CertainlyC such a stri;e #ould in the Mrst -lace have 9een !acilitated 9y outside hel- :
MnancialC scientiMcC engineeringC etc. A!rica is an ocean o! trou9led #atersC and some -eo-le love to go
Mshing.
Also? raidl3 e<anding develoing 5orld oulations are the rimar3 cause o2 global
5arming%
De<rey D. $achsC "ro!essor o! /conomics and Director o! the /arth Institute at Colum9ia =niversityC 1?14?200/.
E+he Case )or Slo#ing "o-ulation Gro#thCF htt-,??###.nami9ian.com.na?211$?Danuary?columns?1$*D11)&*).html.
4y contrastC i! glo9al -o-ulations continue to rise ra-idlyC the stresses on the #orldRs resources
#ill #orsen. Governments should there!ore re!rain !rom deli9erate -olicies to raise 9irthratesC
even in -laces #here 9irth rates are lo#. "art o! the con!usion o! the -u9lic de9ate reJects
di<erent -o-ulation trends in di<erent -arts o! the #orld. +he !astest -o-ulation gro#th is
ta;ing -lace in the -oorest regions. "oor -eo-leC es-ecially -oor -eo-le living on !armsC tend to
have the most children Oo!ten si0 or more -er #omanQC and there!ore the highest rates o! -o-ulation gro#th.
"oor !arm !amilies rely on their children !or !arm chores and !or security #hen -arents reach old age. "oor
!amilies lac; access to contrace-tion and !amily -lanning. )inallyC -oor !amilies have many
children as a ;ind o! insurance -olicy against high child mortality rates. As a result o! high
!ertility rates in A!ricaC the =( "o-ulation Division -redicts a dou9ling o! A!ricaRs -o-ulation
!rom around .11 million today to around 1.* 9illion in 21$1. Ra-idly gro#ing -o-ulations are also young -o-ulationsC
9ecause o! the high num9er o! children -er household. In A!ricaC the median age is no# a mere 1. years and is
-roIected to rise to around 2* years in 21$1. In /uro-eC the trends run in the other direction. +he =(
-roIects a decline in -o-ulation to around &1 million in 21$1C !rom around 72$ million -eo-le today. 2ith !e#
children and longer li!e e0-ectancyC the median age o! the -o-ulation rises shar-ly in this !orecastC !rom . years in
211$ to around 4* years in 21$1. )or the #orld as a #holeC -o-ulation is e0-ected to continue to
gro# 9y another 2.$ 9illion -eo-le !rom 211$ to 21$1. All o! that gro#th #ill 9e in the
develo-ing #orld, 1. 9illion more -eo-le in AsiaC .11 million more in A!ricaC the rest in %atin
America and other regions. Adding another 2.$ 9illion -eo-le to the -lanet #ill -ut enormous
strains not only on societies #ith rising -o-ulationsC 9ut on the entire -lanet. +otal energy use is
soaringC reJecting the com9ined e<ect o! rising -er ca-ita incomes :: and thus rising -er ca-ita
energy use :: and -o-ulation gro#th. Higher energy use is already changing the #orldRs climate
in dangerous #ays. )urthermoreC the strains o! increased glo9al -o-ulationsC com9ined #ith
income gro#thC are leading to ra-id de!orestationC de-letion o! MsheriesC land degradationC and
the loss o! ha9itat and e0tinction o! a vast num9er o! animal and -lant s-ecies.
1*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Global 5arming 5ill trigger raid global cooling and a oulation crash%
Calvin in 1;;: O2illiamC "ro!essor o! "sychiatry and 4ehavioral Sciences at =niversity o! 2ashingtonC +he
Atlantic 8onthlyC E+he Great Climate )li-:)lo-FC DanuaryC Bolume 2*1C Issue 1C "ro5uestQ
3(/ o! the most shoc;ing scientiMc reali>ations o! all time has slo#ly 9een da#ning on us, the
earthRs climate does great Ji-:Jo-s every !e# thousand yearsC and #ith 9reathta;ing s-eed. 2e
could go 9ac; to ice:age tem-eratures #ithin a decade:and Iudging !rom recent discoveriesC an
abrut cooling could be triggered b3 our current global95arming trend. /uro-eRs
climate could 9ecome more li;e Si9eriaRs. 4ecause such a cooling #ould occur too 5uic;ly !or us
to ma;e readIustments in agricultural -roductivity and su--lyC it #ould 9e a -otentially
civili>ations hattering a<airC li;ely to cause an un-recedented -o-ulation crash. 2hat -aleoclimate
and oceanogra-hy researchers ;no# o! the mechanisms underlying such a climate Ji- suggests that glo9al #arming
could start one in several di<erent #ays. )or a 5uarter century glo9al #arming theorists have -redicted that climate
cree- is going to occur and that #e need to -revent greenhouse gases !rom #arming things u-C there9y raising the
sea levelC destroying ha9itatsC intensi!ying stormsC and !orcing agricultural rearrangements. (o# #e ;no#:and !rom
an entirely di<erent grou- o! scientists e0-loring se- arate lines o! reasoning and data:that the most
catastro-hic result o! glo9al #arming could 9e an a9ru-t cooling.
1/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 1AC
&he imact is World War )%
Calvin in 1;;: O2illiamC "ro!essor o! "sychiatry and 4ehavioral Sciences at =niversity o! 2ashingtonC +he
Atlantic 8onthlyC E+he Great Climate )li-:)lo-FC DanuaryC Bolume 2*1C Issue 1C "ro5uestQ
+he -o-ulation:crash scenario is surely the most a--alling. "lummeting cro- yields #ould cause
some -o#er!ul countries to try to ta;e over their neigh9ors or distant lands:i! only 9ecause
their armiesC un-aid and lac;ing !ood, #ould go maraudingC 9oth at home and across the
9orders. +he 9etter:organi>ed countries #ould attem-t to use their armiesC 9e!ore they !ell
a-art entirelyC to ta;e over countries #ith signiMcant remaining resourcesC driving out or
starving their inha9itants i! not using modern #ea-ons to accom-lish the same end, eliminating
com-etitors !or the remaining !ood . +his #ould 9e a #orld#ide -ro9lem:and could lead to a
+hird 2orld 2ar:9ut /uro-eRs vulnera9ility is -articularly easy to analy>e. +he last a9ru-t
coolingC the Aounger DryasC drastically altered /uro-eRs climate as !ar east as =;raine. "resent:
day /uro-e has more than &$1 million -eo-le. It has e0cellent soilsC and largely gro#s its o#n
!ood. It could no longer do so i! it lost the e0tra #arming !rom the (orth Atlantic.
Overoulation in sub9$aharan A2rica 5ill cause massive migration8this oens u a
+andora7s bo< o2 disease that 5ill sread globall3%
As Su9:Saharan A!rican -o-ulations s#ell and their e0isting -hysical and social environments
-rove una9le to meet 9asic human needsC -eo-le are moving in ever larger num9ers. +his
massive relocation o! individuals into hitherto unsettled territory may unleash biological
2orces in a nightmarish scenario the li-e o2 5hich human-ind never be2ore has
5itnessed. 2hereas viruses such as HIB:1 and /9ola once #ere thought o! as genetic
mutationsC some health e0-erts are o! the o-inion that these organisms have e0isted !or
decadesC i! not centuries. "rior to 1.&1C they #ere dormantC hidden a#ay in remote Iungles and
rain!orests. Ho#everC #ith the movement o! -eo-le into these regionsC millions o! acres o!
-reviously undistur9ed vegetation #ere cleared and settled as human;ind inadvertently
oened u a biological +andoraAs bo<. As Aale e-idemiologist Ro9ert Ryder -ointed outC
S+hese viruses 9asically say to man UAou stic; to your territory and IRll stic; to mine.R 4ut then
man 9egins to encroach on the ha9itat o! viruses.S I! emerging diseases are caused 9y
im-overished -eo-le moving into the remotest areas o! the -lanetC AIDS and /9ola may 9e Iust
the Mrst o! a long and -erha-s even deadlier Band more contagiousC line o2 viruses to be
unleashed on human oulations. As one -rominent virologist concluded regarding these
ne# maladiesC S+he -rimary -ro9lem is no longer virologicalC 9ut social.S
And the ne<t athogen could cause e<tinction%
Dohn $teinbruner, senior !ello# at the 4roo;ings InstitutionC chair o! the committee on international security and
arms control o! the (ational Academy o! SciencesC )oreign "olicyC Decem9er 22, 1;;7.
"athogens are aliveC #ea-ons are not. (uclear and chemical #ea-ons do not re-roduce
themselves and do not inde-endently engage in ada-tive 9ehaviorG -athogens do 9oth o! these
things. +hat dece-tively sim-le o9servation has immense im-lications. +he use o! a manu!actured #ea-on is a
singular event. 8ost o! the damage occurs immediately. +he a!tere<ectsC #hatever they may 9eC decay ra-idly over
time and distance in a reasona9ly -redicta9le manner. /ven 9e!ore a nuclear #arhead is detonatedC !or instanceC it is
-ossi9le to estimate the e0tent o! the su9se5uent damage and the li;ely level o! radioactive !allout. Such
-redicta9ility is an essential com-onent !or tactical military -lanning. +he use o! a -athogenC 9y contrastC is an
e0tended -rocess #hose sco-e and timing cannot 9e -recisely controlled. )or most -otential 9iological agentsC the
-redominant dra#9ac; is that they #ould not act s#i!tly or decisively enough to 9e an e<ective #ea-on. 4ut !or a
10
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
!e# -athogens : ones most li;ely to have a decisive e<ect and there!ore the ones most li;ely to 9e contem-lated !or
deli9erately hostile use : the ris; runs in the other direction. A lethal -athogen that could e<iciently s-read
!rom one victim to another #ould 9e ca-a9le o! initiating an intensi!ying cascade o! disease that
might ultimately threaten the entire #orld -o-ulation. +he 1.1* inJuen>a e-idemic
demonstrated the -otential !or a glo9al contagion o! this sort 9ut not necessarily its outer limit.
17
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 1AC
"ncreasing 2oreign assistance 2or 2amil3 lanning is critical to establish 1$ leadershi
on oulation issues and encourage other nations to ma-e oulation control a
to riorit38absent a global efort overoulation 5ill drive us to5ards
e<tinction%
+oulation ConnectionC $??200). htt-,??###.-o-ulationconnection.org?A9outT=s?-olicies.html.
"o-ulation Connection 9elieves the #ell:9eing and even the survival o2 humanit3 deend on
the attainment o2 an e.uilibrium bet5een oulation and the environment. Dust as the
earth and its resources o! landC air and #ater are limitedC so are the demands that can 9e
-laced u-on them. Continued -o-ulation gro#th is !oremost among the !actors aggravating
de!orestationC #ildli!e e0tinctionC climate change and other critical environmental and social
-ro9lems. It also erodes democratic governmentC multi-lies ur9an -ro9lemsC consumes
agricultural landC increases volumes o! #asteC heightens com-etition !or scarce resources and
threatens the as-irations o! the -oor !or a 9etter li!e. +he only acce-ta9le solution to the
-o-ulation -ro9lem is through e0-anding educationalC advocacy and service e<orts that lo#er
9irth rates. Rather than su--ort a larger -o-ulation at a -oorer levelC #e 9elieve it is -re!era9le to su--ort a
smaller -o-ulation at ade5uate standards o! living. "o-ulation Connection recogni>es the gravity o! glo9al
over-o-ulation and encourages citi>ens in every nation to #or; to#ards slo#ing -o-ulation gro#th. Recogni>ing the
interde-endence o! the nations o! the earthC #e su--ort the develo-ment and gro#th o! citi>en organi>ations in other
countries dedicated to those ends. As a =.S. 9ased organi>ationC "o-ulation Connection #or;s -rimarily to educate
and motivate Americans to hel- meet the glo9al -o-ulation challengeC and to mo9ili>e this su--ort !or the ado-tion o!
-olicies and -rograms necessary to slo# glo9al -o-ulation gro#th. 4ecause the =nited States is the chie! consumer
o! the #orldRs resourcesC slo#ing its -o-ulation gro#th is dis-ro-ortionately im-ortant !or -rotecting the glo9al
environment. 6ecause the 1nited $tates has a maDor in@uence on international olitical?
economic and militar3 afairs? reshaing its olicies is imortant 2or the success o2
international eforts to slo5 oulation gro5th. In -ursuit o! these goalsC "o-ulation Connection
-artici-ates in coalitionsG inJuences governmental -olicies on the internationalC nationalC state and local levelsG
#or;s e0tensively #ith the mediaG engages in teacher training and -u9lic education -rogramsG and -roduces
educational materials. 2e conduct researchC inter-ret and a--ly the research o! othersC and -rovide a -o-ulation
-ers-ective on social and environmental -ro9lems. Achieving a Sustaina9le Society "o-ulation Connection
recogni>es the signiMcant roles #hich consum-tionC li!estylesC and technology -lay in determin ing the total im-act o!
human society on the earth. +ogetherC these !actors #ill determine #hether #e maintain a ha9ita9le -lanet and
achieve a sustaina9le societyC i.e.C one #hich meets the needs and as-irations o! -resent generations #ithout
com-romising the a9ility o! !uture generations to meet their needs. 2e su--ort e<orts to create a sustaina9le
societyC 9oth in the =nited States and #orld#ideC that integrates an a#areness o! the central role -o-ulation -lays in
meeting this o9Iective. S-eciMcallyC !or the =nited StatesC these include e<orts to conserve energy and natural
resources and im-rove e<iciencyC eliminate our Sdis-osa9le societyS li!estyleC and use the 9est -ossi9le technology to
-rotect the natural and human environment. A--roach "o-ulation Connection recogni>es that 9road socialC
economic and -olitical changes may 9e necessary to slo# -o-ulation gro#th. 2e endorse and actively su--ort
methods #hich are voluntary and #hich are -ositive enhancements o! human rights and conditions. "o-ulation
Connection condemns any use o! !orce or violence. "o-ulation Connection condemns racism in all o! its !orms. 2e
#ill not su--ort or tolerate 9eing ;no#ingly associated #ith organi>ations #hich su--ort or -romote the use o! !orce
or violence or #hich es-ouse racism or racist 9elie!s. "o-ulation Connection strives to 9e 9elieva9le on a com-le0
to-icC creative in thin;ing a9out the !utureC concerned !or the #el!are o! all human 9eingsC and !orce!ul 9ut not
strident in the -resentation o! its vie#s. S-eciMc "o-ulation Issues International "o-ulation %eadershi- 2orld
-o-ulation no# e0ceeds si0 9illion and at current gro#th rates could e0ceed nine 9illion 9y
21$1. +he continued -ressures o! a gro#ing #orld -o-ulation are -ushing the #orld to#ards
global environmental catastrohe. "o-ulation Connection 9elieves that to achieve lasting
im-rovements in the 5uality o! li!e !or allC the nations o! the #orld must ma;e slo#ing
-o-ulation gro#th a to- -riority. &he 1nited $tates should assume a leadershi role in
international eforts to slo5 oulation gro5th and should set an e<amle b3 adoting
a national oulation olic3 5hich commits the 1nited $tates to this goal% We should
1:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
dramaticall3 e<end our 2oreign assistance eforts to achieve these ends. +he =nited States
should 9e s-ending at least as much to de!end the integrity o! our -lanet !rom environmental catastro-he as it
s-ends to de!end itsel! !rom #ar and nuclear holocaust. "o-ulation Connection 9elieves that the !ate o! the -eo-le o!
the =nited States cannot 9e se-arated !rom the !ate o! the other -eo-les o! the #orld. 2e !urther recogni>e that
slo#ing -o-ulation gro#th #ill re5uire addressing other socialC economicC and -olitical -ro9lems including -overtyC
the status o! #omenC nutrition and health careC hungerC and social Iustice. 2e su--ort 9oth 9ilateral and multilateral
e<orts and 9elieve that e<ective action 9y the =nited (ations and its -rograms is critical to achieving these
o9Iectives. 2e su--ort the active involvement o! non:governmental organi>ations and -rivate voluntary organi>ations
in these -rograms.
1;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 1AC
1%$% leadershi is vital to reventing coercive 2amil3 lanning rograms%
3lym-ia $no5eC =S Senator !rom 8aineC 2001. Committee on )oreign RelationsC E8/VIC3 CI+A "3%ICA,
/))/C+S 3) R/S+RIC+I3(S 3( I(+/R(A+I3(A% )A8I%A "%A((I(G )=(DI(GFC Duly 1.C
htt-,??!r#e9gate.access.g-o.gov?cgi:9in?getdoc.cgiKd9nameW117TsenateThearingsPdocidW!,7$&14.#ais.
+he real issue 9e!ore us today is o!ten re!erred to as the UU8e0ico City "olicyRR 9ecause it #as at
the 1.*4 =.(. "o-ulation Con!erence in 8e0ico City that the Reagan Administration ado-ted
this -olicy. =nder the 8e0ico City "olicyC the Reagan Administration #ithheld international
!amily -lanning !unds !rom all grou-s that had the slightest involvement in legal a9ortion:
related services even though they #ere -aid !or #ith their o#n -rivate !unds. +his #as done
des-ite the !act that similar restrictions #ere not -laced on !unding -rograms run 9y !oreign
governments that related to legal a9ortions. It is also o!ten re!erred to as the international
UUgag ruleRR 9ecause it -revents organi>ations !rom even -roviding a9ortion counseling or
re!erral services. +he matter 9e!ore us is in -art a9out leadershi-. +he =nited States has
traditionally 9een the leader in international !amily -lanning assistance. +his has 9een the case
ever since this issue rose to international -rominence #ith the 1.74 =.(. "o-ulation Con!erence
in 4ucharest. At that timeC a great num9er o! the #orldRs develo-ing countries -erceived !amily
-lanning as a 2estern e<ort to reduce the -o#er and inJuence o! +hird 2orld countries.
Ho#everC in the years sinceC the need and im-ortance o! !amily -lanning has 9een recogni>ed
and em9raced 9y most develo-ing nations. I!C as a countryC #e 9elieve in volunteerism in !amily
-lanning::and #e do::then #e should maintain our leadershi-. 4ecause o! our leading role in
international !amily -lanningC #e have unrivaled in@uence in setting standards 2or 2amil3
lanning rograms . A great num9er o! other donors and reci-ient countries adot our
models in their o5n eforts%
20
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 1AC
Coercive oulation control olicies 2ail at reducing birth rates85omen7s
emo5erment is the onl3 sustainable strateg3%
/li>a9eth $ahn? "ro!essor o! la# at the (e# /ngland School o! %a#C 1;;7. /nvironmental %a#C 12?22C E)eeling
grounded, a gendered vie# o! -o-ulation controlFC htt-,??###.the!reeli9rary.com?)eelingXgrounded,
XaXgenderedXvie#Xo!X-o-ulationXcontrol.OSym-osiumXon...:a121$2&.&2.
As those o! us #ho have 9een through the Ioys o! the Socratic method in la# school ;no# all too
#ellC the use o! !ormal dichotomies is classically -aired #ith the sli--ery slo-e techni5ue, i!
thisC then thatC and that. +he ne0t thing you ;no# the s;y has !allen. A-ocaly-se no#. I! no damC
then revolution. I! no -o-ulation controlC then o9literation.
+he ;ey to e<ective sli--ery slo-e techni5ue is to -resent the dire conse5uence as inevita9leC
unavoida9leC and -redestined. In the late t#entieth centuryC this is o!ten accom-lished through
linear 5uantitative analysisO2Q or religion. +he e<ectC i! not necessarily the -ur-oseC o! control
methodology is o!ten to -reclude dialogue.O24Q Control strategies o-erate through a rigid
stance, my #ay or no #ay. Alternatives or suggestions regarding other o-tions are understood
9y the control advocates as insu9ordinate challenges to authorityC or -erha-s as so!t:heartedC
!u>>y thin;ingC uto-ianism. +he Chinese o--osition to the +hree Gorges Dam -roIect suggested that a series o!
smaller darns on the Aangt>eRs tri9utariesO2$Q could -rovide needed -o#er #ith less disastrous environmental and
-o-ulation e<ectsC and #ere 9etter suited !or a silty river such as the Aangt>e.O2&Q A!ter a close voteC the Mrst o-en
-arliamentary de9ate since Sthe incidentS at +ienanmen S5uareC "remier %i "eng -revailed.O27Q 3ne gigantic damC
coming right u-. 2hyK I ;e-t as;ing. 2hy #ould China insist on going ahead #ith such a large -roIect #hen many
smaller dams might #ell do the Io9 9etterC chea-erC and #ith less harmK )inally a Chinese !riend #ell versed in
4eiIing -olitics too; me aside. %oo;ing around nervously to ensure no one #as #ithin earshot O#e #ere outsideC
#al;ingQ my !riend told me his vie#. %i "eng #as educated 9y the Soviets as a hydro:engineer in the 1.$1s.O2*Q +he
Soviets 9uilt the As#an Dam !or /gy-t. /gy-t has the "yramids. China has the Great 2all. ChinaRs dam should 9e
9igger than /gy-tRs. ChinaRs dam should 9e (um9er 3ne.O2.Q 8y Ia# dro--ed. I still canRt 5uite !athom that this
-otential ecological trans!ormation might ultimately 9e a9out #ho has the 9iggest dam. +he Smine is 9igger than
yours syndromeCS literally. In a culture that develo-ed the notion o! 9alance 9et#een yin and yang -o#erC "engRs yang
seems im-ressiveC even allo#ing !or the vast scale on #hich everything is done in China. In -o-ulation control
-oliciesC as "ro!essor "aula A9rams has demonstratedC controlling !emale !ertility is also
!re5uently motivated 9y dominance com-etition game.O1Q Sometimes it is an anti:natalist
-olicyC as in China today or India under Indira GhandiCO1Q #hich aims to control !emale !ertility
to reduce -o-ulation and move ahead in the standard o! living com-etition. 3ther timesC as is
o!ten the case #ith !undamentalist religionsCO2Q or Romania under CeausescuCOQ or the
=nited States in the late nineteenth centuryCO4Q the com-etition is to out 9reed the other side
9y 9anning a9ortion and limiting access to contrace-tives. Still other situations involve
selective 9reeding -oliciesC in #hich !avored -o-ulations are !orced or encouraged to 9reedC
#hile dis!avored -o-ulations are murderedC involuntarily sterili>edC or ra-ed into e0tinction.
/ugenicsC #hether -racticed 9y (a>isC or in 4osniaC or in the =.S. against those o! A!rican
ancestryO$Q -resent the ultimate sli--ery slo-e o! the -o-ulation control game. 3! course
-o-ulation strategies #hich narro#ly !ocus on controlling !emale !ertility do not actually #or;
very #ell to reduce !ertility rates. AdditionallyC they do great harm to the #omen 9eing
controlled. Indira GhandiRs -olicy o! involuntary sterili>ation resulted not only in the to--le o!
her government 9y -o-ular electionC 9ut also in a dee- sus-icion o! !amily -lanning -rograms
and clinics and a long -eriod o! stagnation in the decline o! the 9irth rate.O&Q A consensus
develo-ed at the 1..4 =nited (ations International Con!erence on "o-ulation and Develo-ment
OIC"DQCO7Q is that the most e<ective a--roach to lo#ering !emale !ertility involves em-o#ering
#omen rather than attem-ting to control them. +he 1..2 2orld Develo-ment Re-ort 9y the 2orld 4an;
li;e#ise e0-ressed the vie# that gender e5uityC economic develo-mentC the environmentC and -o-ulation gro#th
should 9e a--roached #ith an integrated set o! -olicies #hich #in -roduce a synergistic e<ect.O*Q +he =nited
(ations "o-ulation )und O=(")Q re-ort Investing in 2omen, +he )ocus o! the .1sC also -u9lished in 1..2C stresses
21
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
that investments in #omen include Ssocial investmentsS such as health and education servicesC e5ual economic
o--ortunitiesC as #ell as !amily -lanning investment.O.Q +he -ro9lem o! limiting -o-ulation gro#th #hile
res-ecting #omenRs human rights is not an either?or dichotomy #ith the only choice 9et#een
9rutal coercion or massive num9ers o! 9irths. +his is similar to the situation #ith the +hree Gorges Dam.
+he choices are not either?orC a sim-le choice 9et#een a huge dam or no develo-ment at all. Smaller dams along the
tri9utaries could allo# develo-mentC -roduce electricityC #ith a--arently much less environmental damage.O41Q
Controlistas o!ten a--ear to 9e charging straight at #omenRs !ertility li;e an angry 9ull overcoming any -erceived
resistance #ith 9rute !orce. 2omenC o! courseC Mnd #ays to avoid the angerC #ays around 9rutal e<orts to coerce
their re-roductive lives. In ChinaC the #ays around such charging 9ulls are through se0:selective a9ortionsC giving u-
their daughters !or ado-tionC or even !emale in!anticide until the much needed son is -roduced.O41Q
22
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 1AC
Access to 2amil3 lanning is critical to curb oulation gro5th85hen 5omen are
educated about contracetive methods the3 choose to have smaller 2amilies%
(dola +rata? "ro!essor o! "u9lic Health at the =niversity o! Cali!ornia H 4er;eleyC #ith 11 years o! clinical -ractice
in AngolaC 2000. E"o-ulation Gro#th and its Im-act on 8aternal HealthCF htt-,??###.a--g:
-o-devrh.org.u;?"u9lications?"o-ulationY21Hearings?/vidence?=niY21o!Y21CalY21evidence.doc.
8ost countries #here maternal mortality is the highest are not im-lementing e<ective
interventions on a large scaleC such as the -rovision o! !amily -lanning and sa!e a9ortion. +he
9eneMcial -u9lic health im-act o! these interventions is #ell ;no#nC and so is their im-act on
reducing -o-ulation gro#th and im-roving maternal health. +here is an enormous and #ell
documented unmet need !or !amily -lanning in the develo-ing #orld ZMgure [. A9out 1$1
million married #omen in develo-ing countries #ant to delay or avoid -regnancy 9ut are not
using contrace-tives. /ach -regnancy multi-lies a #oman6s chance o! dying !rom com-lications
o! -regnancy or child9irth. In settings such as su9:Saharan A!rica #here most o! the #omen do
not have access to 9asic o9stetric careC access to contrace-tion may 9e a matter o! li!e and
deathC -articularly #hen -resented #ith ris;s o! an un#anted or un-lanned -regnancy.
According to the =()"AC meeting the e0isting demand !or !amily -lanning services #ould
reduce -regnancies in develo-ing countries 9y 21 -er centC and maternal deaths and inIuries 9y
a similar degree or more. 2e also ;no# that as !amily -lanning use risesC #omen6s desired
!amily si>e declines. 2hen !amily -lanning is made easily availa9leC along #ith the correct
in!ormation re5uired to ma;e the various methods use!ulC the -o-ulation !actor is indeed
amena9le to change. A9out 1 to 2$ -er cent o! all maternal deaths are attri9uted to unsa!e
a9ortionsC cou-led #ith lac; o! s;illed !ollo#:u-. +he high level o! unmet need !or 5uality
contrace-tive servicesC along #ith the corres-onding num9er o! un#anted -regnanciesC is a ;ey
reason #hy so many #omen #ho #ant to control their !ertility see; out a9ortions. 8ore than
one 5uarter o! -regnancies #orld#ideC a9out $2 million annuallyC end in a9ortion. +here is a
small di<erence in a9ortion rates -er 1111 #omen aged 1$:44 9et#een develo-ed and
develo-ing countries O .?1111 and 4?1111 res-ectivelyQ . +he large di<erences lay in the !act
that develo-ing country a9ortionsC -articularly in su9:Saharan A!ricaC are unsa!e a9ortions and
many o! these results in the death o! the #oman.
2)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 1AC
1$A"# is the onl3 actor 5ith the technical caabilit3 and Eeld resence to ensure
success2ul 2amil3 lanning rograms8decades o2 e<erience rove%
+oulation Action "nternationalC )/:/1;;:. E"aying their )air Share : Donor Countries and International
"o-ulation AssistanceCF
htt-,??###.-o-ulationaction.org?"u9lications?Re-orts?"ayingTtheirT)airTShare?=(I+/DTS+A+/S.shtml.
Sta<ing,
+he technical ca-acity o! the =.S. international -o-ulation assistance -rogram is unmatched
b3 an3 other donor. 2ith technical sta< 9ased 9oth at head5uarters and overseasC 1$A"# has
a 5ide base o2 -no5ledge and e<erience in the international oulation Eeld. At
=SAID head5uarters in 2ashingtonC D.C.C a critical core o! over *1 e0-erts has e0-erience in
-o-ulation -rograms. 2ithin =SAIDC there is an increasing trend to#ards integrated
management o! -o-ulation and health activities. +he Center !or "o-ulationC Health and
(utrition O"H(QC #ithin the 4ureau !or Glo9al "rogramsC )ield Su--ort and Research at =SAID
head5uartersC #as created in 1..4. +he Center 9rings together the 3<ice o! "o-ulationC 3<ice
o! Health and (utritionC and 3<ice o! )ield and "rogram Su--ort under uniMed management.
Sta< !rom all three o<ices increasingly #or; together on Iointly:!unded -roIects. 1$A"#7s Eeld
resence is also a uni.ue strength o2 its oulation assistance efort. +he agency has
nearly 111 e0-atriate and local -o-ulation and health sta< in nearly $1 o! its *$ country o<ices.
=SAID6s a9ility to -rovide technical and managerial oversight !or its assistance through a
ro2essional cors o2 Eeld9based oulation oficers has contributed to efective
imlementation o! 9ilateral -o-ulation -roIectsC as #ell as to the success o! country -rograms.
Due to the overall decline o! agency resourcesC =SAID has seen a su9stantial reduction in the
num9er o! -ermanent -o-ulation and health sta<. 8ean#hileC management 9urdens on
technical sta< are increasingG e0-ert -o-ulation and health sta< manage roughly dou9le the
volume o! !unds com-ared to a decade ago. +he agency is no# moving to recruit ne# sta< in
the -o-ulation and health Melds.
+echnical /0-ertise o! Colla9orating Institutions,
Adding strength to =SAID sta< is the esta9lished net#or; o! =.S.:9ased coo-erating agencies
#hich im-lement =SAID:!unded -roIects. +hese coo-erating agencies include over 1
universitiesC -rivate com-aniesC research and educational organi>ationsC other =.S. government
agenciesC international organi>ationsC and non-roMt organi>ations #ith the e0-ertise and sta<
to !ulMll 9road contractual mandates. +he 3<ice o! "o-ulation enters into agreements #ith
these institutions to -rovide technical assistance to national governments and (G3s in
develo-ing countries. 8any o! these agencies have e0-ertise in s-eciali>ed areas such as
-o-ulation -olicy develo-mentC !amily -lanning service deliveryC communicationsC training or
evaluationC heling to broaden 1$A"#7s technical caacit3.
2*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 1AC
1$A"# has decades o2 e<erience in creating culturall3 sensitive strategies to romote
2amil3 lanning8no other donor has their e<erience%
Donald $heard et alC "ro!essorC Schneider lnstitute !or Health "olicy at 4randeis =niversityC Dune 200). Studies
in Family Planning, Volume 34.2, Cost:e<ectiveness o! =SAID6s Regional "rogram !or )amily "lanning in 2est
A!rica.F
+he regionali>ation strategy !eatured a !orced colla9ora:tion model under #hich !our =S
agencies contracted 9y =S AID 9ecame Iointly res-onsi9le !or achieving s-eci:Med outcomes
under the direction o! a uniMed manage:ment team. +he ne# strategy relied much more heavily
on im-lementation through A!rican organi>ations and managers. )urthermoreC the num9er o!
-ersonnel admin: istering the -rogram #as considera9ly leaner than cor:res-onding mission:
9ased -rograms. +he ne# strategy also em-hasi>ed the mo9ili>ation o! other -artners #herein
strong e<orts #ere made to attract su--ort o! =SAID o9Iectives !rom other donors as the
-resence o! =SAID in these countries #as 9eing reduced. +he !our:country regional model
!ostered cross: 9order coordination o! -lanningC sharing o! resourcesC !eed9ac; on com-arative
-rogressC and economies o! scale and communicationC em-loying the uniMed man: agement
team. &he greater use o2 A2rican organi4ations and technical leadershi li-el3 engaged
local leaders and encouraged adatation to each countr3As culture and conte0t Otermed S
A!ricani>ationSQ.
Determinants o! Success in )amily "lanning
3ur regression analysis sho#ed that the Mtted logistic o! the contrace-tive-revalence rateC adIusted !or the gen: der
develo-ment inde0C #as a -ositive !unction o! O1Q yearG O2Q total =SAID !amily -lanning dollars -er #oman aged 1$:
44G OQ -ro-ortion o! total !amily -lanning dol: lars -er #oman aged 1$:44 !rom all sources -rovided 9y =SAID
O-ercent =SAID conti9utionQG and O4Qthe region: ali>ation strategy itsel! O)HAQ. Although our -i-eline analysis
adIusted !or lags 9et#een authori>ation and s-endingC our data did not allo# !or e0amining -ossi9le lags 9et#een
s-ending and use o! contrace-tives. 4e: cause the -o-ulation -rograms in 9oth mission:9ased: -rogram and )HA:
-rogram countries em-hasi>ed ser: vices and -roductsC #e do not 9elieve that such lags #ere large. As our
de-endent varia9le is MttedC it may contain some error. 4ecause our Mtting -rocess #as not inJu: enced 9y the
inde-endent varia9lesC this -rocess should have introduced no 9ias andC li;e any random errorsC the -rocess made it
more di<icult !or our Mndings to reach statistical signiMcance. +he signiMcant -ositive coe<icient !or the year vari:
a9le conMrms that !amily -lanning -rograms in 2est A!: rica have made ra-id -rogress in recent yearsC although
contrace-tive:use levels remain lo# com-ared #ith those in other -arts o! the #orld. SAearS O-assage o! timeQ li;ely is
a -ro0y !or other varia9les that may have had a -ositive inJuence on the acce-tance o! !amily -lanningC including
inter-ersonal communication net#or;s and di<usion o! in!ormation and 9ehavioral change. +he educationalC
economicC and health status o! #omen has slo#ly advanced over the decade in these countries. +he gender
develo-ment inde0 -roved to 9e an e0:traordinarily -o#er!ul adIuster !or e0-laining di<erences among countries in
terms o! contrace-tive:use -reva: lence. Im-ortant -olicy changes !avoring !amily -lan:ning have trans-ired in some
o! these countriesG indeedC some have moved !rom -ronatalist -olicies to the ado-:tion o! national !amily -lanning
-olicies O!or e0am-leC +ogoQ. "rivati>ationC including commercial retail sales related to social mar;etingC has s-read
over most o! 2est A!ricaC meaningC among other thingsC that more contra: ce-tive methods are availa9le in the
-rivate sector to meet the demand created 9y mar;eting. 3ther im-or:tant varia9les inJuencing re-roductive
9ehavior during the decade include civil conJict and economic changesC such as the monetary devaluation that
occurred in 2est A!rica in 1..4. More than an3 other donor C =SAID has made a ma:Ior e<ort to
inJuence -o-ulation gro#th and re-roduc: tive health in 2est A!rica 9y 9oosting demand !or
con:trace-tionC strengthening !amily -lanning services and logisticsC and !unding -olicy
develo-mentC institution:ali>ationC and evaluation. +his study sho#s that greater !unding
signiMcantly increases the use o! modern con:trace-tive methods. Contrace-tive -revalence #as
also -ositively inJu: enced 9y the share o! total !amily -lanning dollars -er #oman aged 1$44
!rom all sources -rovided 9y =SAID. +his varia9le O-ercent =SAID contri9utionQ suggests that
the greater the e<tent that 1$A"# is the dominant do9 nor in 2amil3 lanning? the
larger the imrovement in the -revalence o! modern methods. 2e s-eculate that =SAIDRs
-redominant role in !amily -lanning may have !ocused management and ensured consistent
2/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
messages%
20
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 1AC
&he 1$ is a critical 2amil3 lanning model 2or the rest o2 the 5orld8the e<istence o2
1$ restrictions on 2unding deter other countries 2rom imlementing 2amil3
lanning%
Ann 6lanc and Amy &sui? "resident o! 4lancro!t Research International and "ro!essorC "o-ulation and )amily
Health Sciences De-artmentC Dohns Ho-;ins 4loom9erg School o! "u9lic HealthC 200/. E+he Dilemma o! "ast
Success, Insiders6 Bie#s on the )uture o! the International )amily "lanning 8ovementCF Studies in )amily "lanningC
Decem9er.
8oreoverC the reinstatement o! the Eglo9al gag ruleF 9y the 4ush administration #as seen 9y
some in!ormants as undermining the !amily -lanning activities o! (G3s. +his -olicy -rohi9its
=S su--ort !or !amily -lanning !rom 9eing -rovided to !oreign (G3s that use !unding !rom any
other source to -rovide a9ortion services Oe0: ce-t in cases in #hich continued -regnancy
constitutes a threat to the mother6s li!e or #here -regnancy is the result o! ra-e or incestQ.
3rgani>ations that re!use to com-ly #ith these restrictions lose access to contrace-: tive
commodities donated 9y the =S government. )ur: thermoreC =S (G3s cannot !urnish
assistance to non: com-liant !oreign (G3s O(o#els 211Q. Develo-ing countries are trying to
do their 9estC 9ut donors have not !ulMlled their commitment to the Meld. +he =S -olicy is a
chilling #ind 9lo#ing around the #orld. 2hat ha--ens in America can in!ect and a<ect #hat
ha--ens around the #orld. +his Zha--ens[ not Iust 9y -utting restrictions on !undingC 9ut also
9y changing attitudes. O8aleC %DCQ +he =S has a tremendous inJuenceC 9oth -sy: chologically
and MnanciallyC on !amily -lanning -rograms. O)emaleC 8DCQ Recently -u9lished re-orts and
commentaries on the to-ic o! the glo9al gag rule -rovide e0am-les o! several countries in #hich
this -olicy #as im-lemented and re: sulted in a decline in availa9le services and contrace-: tive
commodities O8ayhe# 2112G "AI 211G H#ang and Ste#art 2114Q. "arado0icallyC the
im-lementation o! the -olicy and its conse5uences have raised the visi9ility o! !amily -lanning
internationally as ne#s-a-ers and other -o-ular media re-ort on the controversy surrounding
the -olicy and its a!termath O!or e0am-leC see +he (e# Aor; +imes 2111 and Itano 211Q.
Among the !ocus:grou- -artici-antsC a clear -erce-: tion #as voiced that =S -olitics dominates
international aid and that donorsC not reci-ient:country governments or their citi>ensC o!ten
drive !unding -riorities. +he government o! the =S dictates the situa: tion'#hat !unding is
going to 9e li;e. O)emaleC !ocus grou- Z)G[ 2Q It6s easy !or -olicyma;ers to side #ith AmericaC
Zto[ ;ee- !ollo#ing #hat6s ha--ening in the =S. I! America doesn6t #ant itC #hy should you in:
troduce itK O)emaleC )G2Q 4ecause #e6re receiving moneyC #e can6t voice the needs o! the
-eo-le. +here6s no clear articu: lation o! the -eo-le6s needs. O8aleC )G1Q Donor -riorities are
more -olitically driven than -o-ulation driven. +he sources o! money change as -olitics change.
O8aleC )G1Q
27
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Observation &5o' !uman Rights
1$ restrictions on 2unding (GOs that rovide abortion have ut A2rica in the midst o2
a ublic health crisis 5here thousands o2 5omen die ever3 3ear due to unsa2e
abortions and lac- o2 reroductive health care%
Charlotte !ord and 8errill Wol2C Director o! the "olicy Division o! I-as and mem9er o! I-asC a
#omen6s (G3C A-ril 200*. E4rea;ing the Cycle o! =nsa!e A9ortion in A!ricaCF A!rican Dournal o!
Re-roductive HealthC Bol. *C (o. 1C A-rilC 2114 --. 2.:&C Data9ase, 4ioline International.
An A!rican #oman #ho reaches re-roductive age has trium-hed over many childhood threats 9ut still !aces numerous ris;s.
According to the 2orld Health 3rgani>ationC one in 11 girls in /ast A!rica #ill have her li!e cut short or her health harmed 9y a
-regnancy:related causeC com-ared to one in 4111 in 2estern /uro-e. In A!rica overallC the statistics are not much 9etterG an
average o! one in 1& A!rican #omen #ill die during -regnancy or child9irth. Considered another #ayC
A!rican #omen !ace a ris; o! death !rom -regnancy:related causes that not only is many times greater than that !aced 9y #omen in
develo-ed countriesC 9ut also is signiMcantly higher than the ris;s that #omen in other develo-ing regions con!ront.4 In A!ricaC
as glo9allyC unsa!e a9ortion is a leading cause o! maternal deathsC accounting !or a glo9al average o! 1Y o! !atalities
related to -regnancy.$ 2H3 estimates that o! a #orld#ide annual total o! 4& million a9ortionsC 1. million are unsa!e.C& +he vast maIority o! these unsa!e -roceduresC a9out
.$YC occur in develo-ing countries.$ And the greatest -ercentageC more than one 5uarter o! the total or a9out 4.2 million
unsa!e a9ortions each yearC occur in A!rica.& According to 1..$ estimatesC nearl3 100F o2 all
abortions in A2rica are er2ormed illegall3.7 ClearlyC i! the regionRs -redominantly
restrictive a9ortion la#s are meant to -revent a9ortions !rom ha--eningC they are not #or;ing.
Country:9ased studies sho# much higher estimates !or annual num9ers o! a9ortions than is evident !rom glo9al or regional averages. In (igeriaC !or instanceC #here a9ortion is
-ermitted only to save the li!e o! the #omanC there are an estimated &11C111 a9ortions -er!ormed each year.* 8any o! these a9ortions are undou9tedly -er!ormed unsa!elyC as
evidenced 9y hos-ital:9ased studies in (igeria that re-ort that 9et#een si0 and $1Y o! maternal deaths are caused 9y unsa!e a9ortion.. +hese Mgures indicate that there are
2$ a9ortions -er 1C111 #omen aged 1$:4. yearsC a rate much higher than most 2estern /uro-ean countries and close to the 1..$ =S rate o! 2 a9ortions -er 1C111 #omen o!
child9earing age.* A!rican #omen also !ace the highest ris; o! death !rom a9ortion:related com-lications. 2H3 estimates that around the #orld
nearly 71C111 #omen die every year !rom com-lications o! unsa!e a9ortion. +his translates to
a--ro0imately 1.1 deaths -er dayG a9out the e5uivalent o! a !atal Ium9o Iet crash #ith nearly 411 -eo-le on 9oard every t#o days
year round. Ho# does death on such a massive daily scale not raise a glo9al outcryK +he only
-ossi9le e0-lanation is that societies do not value the lives or contri9utions o! #omen enough
to raise the alarm. =n!ortunatelyC this lac; o! res-onse may also reJect the !act that the -rimary
victims o! unsa!e a9ortion are not onl3 5omen but A2rican 5omen . 8ore than 41Y o! all
deaths due to unsa!e a9ortion glo9ally occur in A!rican countries.$ /very yearC a9out 4C111
A!rican #omen die !rom this totally -reventa9le cause.$ Im-ortantlyC this Mgure is #idely ac;no#ledged to 9e a gross under:
estimation. 4eyond the tens o! thousands o! deaths already mentionedC unsa!e a9ortions ta;e their toll on #omenC !amilies and communities. /0-erts estimate that !or every
#oman #ho dies !rom unsa!e a9ortionC many more su<er seriousC o!ten long:termC inIuries and disa9ilities. "otential com-lications o! unsa!e a9ortion include uterine
-er!orationC haemorrhage and in!ectionC sometimes leading to -elvic inJammatory disease and -artial or total in!ertility. A large -ro-ortion o! unsa!e a9ortion occurs among
adolescents #ho have not yet had children. As a result o! trying to terminate un#anted or mistimed -regnanciesC many !orever sacriMce that e0-erience and com-romise their
social standing and -ros-ects in societies that very highly value motherhood and children. ChildrenC es-ecially young childrenC o! #omen #ho are hurt or ;illed 9y unsa!e
a9ortion su<er as #ell. Studies sho#C !or instanceC that among in!ants #hose mothers dieC !e#er than 11Y #ill live 9eyond their Mrst 9irthday.11 2hen #omen die !rom unsa!e
a9ortionC communities lose -roductive as #ell as 9eloved mem9ersC and health systems incur tremendous -reventa9le e0-enses.=nderlying Reasons
/<ectively addressing unsa!e a9ortion re5uires understanding #hy it is so alarmingly -revalent on the A!rican continent. I! #e loo; closelyC the e0-lanation is not sur-rising.
+his neglected ublic health crisis reJects numerous !actors that contri9ute to other health
-ro9lems in the regionC and many that are uni5ue to this sensitive to-ic. +hey include inade5uate health care resources and in!rastructureC restrictive la#s
and -olicies governing -rovision o! a9ortionC and -olitical and social stigma surrounding a9ortionC e0acer9ated 9y #omenRs lo# social status and lac; o! em-o#erment. %ac; o!
access to ade5uate health care underlies many health -ro9lems on the A!rican continent. In the case o! a9ortionC limited access to contrace-tive
in!ormation and servicesC as #ell as to 9roader in!ormation a9out re-roductive -hysiology and
re-roductive healthC contri9utes to the high incidence o! unintended -regnancyC #hich o9viously is a
-recursor o! unsa!e a9ortion. In A!rica overallC only 1Y o! married #omen use modern contrace-tionC according to the "o-ulation Re!erence 4ureau11C and usage is much
lo#er in several countries in the region. +he many com-eting health -rioritiesC most nota9ly the HIB?AIDS -andemicC #hich con!ront A!rican health systems certainly are one
reason modern contrace-tive methods are not more availa9le in A!rica. Some#hat ironicallyC another is their longstanding de-endence on !oreign donor governments and
organisations !or contrace-tive -rogrammes and su--lies. 4ecause !e# A!rican governments allocate signiMcant resources
o! their o#n to this crucial com-onent o! re-roductive health careC !amily -lanning -rogrammes
lac; the sustaina9ility that is so im-ortant to ensuring long:term consistent use o! e<ective
methodsC and the su--ly o! such methods is su9Iect to JuctuationC de-ending on the shi!ting
-olicies and -riorities o! the donor nations.. )or e0am-leC a!ter the =S government reinstituted
the 8e0ico City "olicyC or Glo9al Gag Rule in 2111C leading !amily -lanning -roviders in 7enya and /thio-ia too; a -rinci-led stand and
2:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
re!used to acce-t its restrictions. +he -olicy -rohi9its !oreign non:governmental organisations O(G3sQ that receive
=S !amily -lanning !unds !rom 9eing involved in any a9ortion:related activities including
counsellingC re!erral and even discussion o! a9ortion as an o-tionC even #ith their o#n money.
As a resultC these organisations lost not only signiMcant -ortions o! their !unding 9ut also
contrace-tive commodities that had -reviously 9een donated 9y the =nited States. According to a recent
re-ort on the im-act o! the Gag RuleC 9y 2112 it had resulted in an end o! shi-ments o! =S:donated contrace-tives to 1& countries and to leading !amily -lanning agencies in
another 1.12
2;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
&he gag rule legitimi4es and rein2orces conservative atriarchal values 5ithin $ub
$aharan A2rica and undermines the 1%$% commitment to reroductive health
globall3%
Dames GathiiC GovernorC "ro!essor o! International Commercial la# at Al9any %a# SchoolC 2000. =.C. Davis
Dournal o! International %a# P "olicyC E/0-orting Culture 2arsCF )allC 211&C %e0is..

+he underlying moral 9asis o! the glo9al gag rule overla-s #ith the criminali>ation o! a9ortion
and the -atriarchal customary and religious norms and -ractices in su9:Saharan A!rican
countries. +his overla- serves to deter access to sa!e and a<orda9le re-roductive health care
servicesC as #ell as to encourage and maintain gender ine5ualities. 117
Z\*[ In most su9:Saharan A!rican countriesC a9ortion is a criminal o<enseC 11* although a maIority o!
countries no# have an e0ce-tion i! the a9ortion is re5uired to save a #omanRs li!e. 11. 8ost o! these la#s are the -roduct o! colonial
inJuence or enactment. 111 /thio-iaC GhanaC and Nim9a9#eC recently amended their a9ortion la#s to allo# more li9eral a--licationsC so that #hen #omen
see; and receive a9ortionsC they are conducted in a sa!e manner. 111 South A!rica has legali>ed the -ractice during the Mrst trimester Z\*4[ o! the -regnancy. 112
+raditional norms in many su9:Saharan A!rican countries e0acer9ate -ro9lems relating to
unsa!e a9ortions and the s-read o! se0ually transmitted diseases and HIB including, the
une5ual socialC culturalC and religious status o! #omen as com-ared to men and #omenRs lac; o!
em-o#ermentG and more s-eciMcallyC -ractices such as early marriagesC multi-le -artnersC -olygamyC #i!e sharingC #i!e inheritanceC #ido#hood -ractices and lac;
o! inheritance rightsC violence against #omenC as #ell as -ractices such as !emale circumcision. 11 2hile some o! these traditions are more e0treme in their e0-ression than
othersC they largely coincide #ith male dominance -articularly in the -rivate and economic s-heres o! the mar;et and the !amily. )urtherC to the e0tent that these -ractices are
inimical to the e5ual rights o! #omanC in many #ays they -arallel the values -romoted 9y the ne# right. In -articularC these -ractices and the values o! the (e# Right reIect
se0ual and la9or e5uality 9et#een men and #omen #hile -lacing a high value on the traditional male headed !amily. 114 2ithin the A!rican countriesC Z\*$[ such -ractices
intersect #ith the sheer lac; or denial o! re-roductive rights. +he -re:colonial value -laced on re-roductive la9or o! #omen in A!ricaC #as SScontrolled and e0-loited 9y men
through customs such as 9ride-rice and -olygamous marriages.RS 11$ )urther com-licating #omenRs access to re-roductive services in these countries is the reality that a
hus9and may !or9id a #oman !rom receiving such services. 11& +he -ractice o! !emale circumcision has 9een the target o! the 4ush administrationRs voci!erous condemnation.
117 2hile such condemnation o! the -ractice is certainly #elcomeC the glo9al gag rule endorses de:!unding re-roductive
health care -rograms there9y undermining the o9Iective o! consistently -romoting the goals o!
!reedom o! individual choice and e5uality o! o--ortunity !or #omen. 11* Another customary -ractice inconsistent #ith
the rights o! #omen is the use o! #omen as com-ensation or cure. 11. )or e0am-leC in GhanaC there e0ists a -ractice o! im-risoning #omen in tro;osi shrines Sostensi9ly to
atone !or sins committed 9y !amily mem9ersCS 121 !urther reJecting the -ro-ensity in -articular renditions o! culture to use #omen as means to other endsC rather than as
individuals. South A!ricaC des-ite its -rogressive legislation legali>ing a9ortionC still has incidents o! o<ensive traditional -racticesC including virginity testing o! adolescent girls
and engagement in se0 #ith such virgins as a cure !or AIDSC 121 reJecting the e0-losive legacy o! Sraciali>ed se0ual su9ordinationS in a -atriarchial society. 122"ractices #hich
em-hasi>e male -leasure over that o! the #oman Z\*&[ include the tradition in South A!rica and Nim9a9#e o! -re-aring a #omanRs vagina 9e!ore se0 Sin order to ma;e it SdryRS
!or the -ur-ose o! enhancing the male -artnerRs -leasureG this -ractice 9eing associated #ith increased ris; o! HIB and S+D in!ection. 12 Argua9lyC the
-atriarchal assum-tions that Iusti!y and underlie these -ractices -arallel the -atriarchal 9elie!s
on the su9ordinate -osition o! men in relation to #omen.. 124 +he -o#er and economic dynamics in the !amily e0acer9ate the
increased ris; o! AIDS resulting !rom these -ractices. As a result o! relationshi-s 9ased u-on ideasC such as those asserted 9y the (e# RightC that it is natural and -ro-er that
#omen 9e de-endent u-on their hus9andsC #omen in many A!rican countries have com-romised 9argaining -o#er #ithin their marital relationshi-sC and there!ore are o!ten
not in a -osition to insist their hus9ands use condoms. 12$ "ractices associated #ith traditional la9els may also 9ecome dangerous !or #omen. 2ido#s in Ghana may 9e stoned
to death 9ased on accusations o! #itchcra!t and communities sometimes 9anish #omen la9eled as #itches Ousually unmarried #omenQ to the outs;irts o! the country. 12&
/conomic control is yet another area #here tradition -ersistsC such as in Nim9a9#eC #here a man ma;es -ayments to the !amily o! his -ros-ective 9ride in a -ractice called
lo9ola. 127 +his tradition 9rings to mind the image o! the male 9read#innerC as endorsed 9y the -rinci-les o! the (e# RightC Iusti!ying his control over his #i!e and his children
9y his economic role in the !amily. SigniMcantlyC as o! the year 2111C a num9er o! northern Islamic (igerian states ado-ted ShariRah la# as their -enal code, Islamic scri-turesC
the legal a--lication o! #hich #as traditionally limited to issues o! -ersonal statusC such as marriage and divorce. 12* Amnesty International s-o;e out against the a--lication
o! the religious la#s 9ecause they violated human rights la#. 12. +he organi>ation descri9ed the im-act o! the ShariRah la# Z\*7[ relating to a9ortion 11 in the #ords o! one
young #oman #ho #as given the death sentence !or cul-a9le homicide, I had a 9a9y 9ut the 9a9y died. +he !oetus #as only eight months old. 8y hus9and had divorced me.
2hen I #as 5uestioned at the -olice station I said the 9a9y #as still:9orn. In courtC I -leaded !or mysel!. +he court as;ed SDid you murder this childKRC and I re-lied S(oR. A
doctor loo;ed at the dead 9a9y. He said it #as still:9orn. He told the -olice 9ut #as never called to court to #itness. I have 9een in detention and -rison !or over 11 years. 11
+he ShariRah "enal Code contains numerous other -rovisions o<ensive to #omenRs rightsC resulting in harsh -unishmentsC such as an order !or -u9lic Jogging o! a young
adolescent girl !or giving 9irth out o! #edloc;. In an e<ort to cur9 -rostitutionC the code re5uires all single and divorced !emale em-loyees o! the state to marry or lose their
Io9s. 12 A #i!eRs inMdelity in her marriage re5uires a -unishment o! death 9y stoning at the hands o! her hus9and. 1 Z\**[ Religious inJuences o! the (e# Right in the
=nited States have also vigorously sought to limit the a9ility o! #omen to ma;e re-roductive choices. +he (e# Right o!ten aligns itsel! #ith the SChristian RightCS and
conservative Catholicism in their o--osition to the gro#th o! re-roductive !reedoms. 14 ReligionC thusC is yet another inJuence that a<ects the discursive analysis o! #omenRs
rights. 1$ %i9eral !eminists #ould argue that slo# -rogress o! social re!orms in develo-ing societies results !rom conservative religious and cultural norms and the general
re!usal o! these societies to recogni>e #omenRs contri9utions to the economicC socialC and -olitical s-heres. 1& As #e have seenC these norms in many #ays -arallel the
ideologies asserted 9y the (e# Right. Aet gender ine5uities do not result merely !rom conservative religious and
cultural norms. 17 In addition to such normsC social inJuences and -olitical institutions sha-e gender norms and their
conse5uences !or #omen. 1* As glo9ali>ation !ragments the sovereign stateC 1. develo-ed countries have -otential to
ma;e a -ro!ound im-act. Countries in the osition to ofer or decline 2unding assert
tremendous o5er . +husC the glo9al gag rule serves not only to su--ort traditional -atriarchal
customs o! develo-ing countriesC 9ut it also legitimi4es? maintains? and shaes such
ractices%
4. 3verla- o! (e# Right Ideology #ith "atriarchial Regimes
)0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
At international -o-ulation meetingsC the =.S. has !ound itsel! in the com-any o! countries that -romote -atriarchal religious and cultural -ractices inconsistent #ith e5ual
rights !or #omen. In the Cairo Con!erence on "o-ulation and Develo-mentC 141 as #ell as in the 4eiIing Con!erence on 2omenC 141 the =.S. o!ten sided #ith the Batican and
countries li;e SyriaC IranC and Sudan in su--orting -ositions inimical to the rights o! #omen. In the M!th Asian and "aciMc International Con!erence on "o-ulation and
Develo-ment OIC"DQ in 2112C the =.S. reversed its -rior -osition in su--ort o! the IC"DRs 1..4 "rogram o! Action 9y !orce!ully -ro-osing deletions o! the #ords Sre-roductive
rightsS and Sre-roductive health servicesS 9ecauseC the =.S. arguedC these terms #ere code #ords !or a9ortion. 142 +he =.S. also sought the deletion o! the #ord SadolescentS
in the "lan 9ecause the =.S. argued that it #ould have resulted in encouraging underage se0. 14 (o other country su--orted the =.S. in this e<ort. 144 SimilarlyC at the =(
S-ecial Session on Children in 2112C the =S too; issue #ith re!erences to re-roductive health in!ormation and services !or adolescents. 14$ +here isC there!oreC credi9ility in
ma;ing the claim that =.S. su--ort !or the glo9al gag rule coincides #ithC rein!orcesC and is rein!orced 9y conservative
religious and customary -racticesC 9oth on the groundC as #ell as in international standard and
legal setting !orums. 14& +he cross:-ollination o! the (e# RightRs e0tension o! its culture #ars a9road #ith Z\.1[ conservative customary norms and
-ractices o-erates to limit and su9vert -rogress to#ards the -oliticalC economicC and cultural em-o#erment o! #omen. It contradicts the =.S.Rs
commitment to e5ual rights !or #omen and may em9olden the very !orces that undermine the
democracy and !reedom that the =.S. see;s to su--ort a9road. As a more regressive and immediate im-actC the
glo9al gag rule severely ho99les and restricts the a9ility o! (G3s to -rovide re-roductive
health care services to #omen around the #orld.
)1
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
1%$% 2unding o2 nongovernmental organi4ations is vital to the entire global human
rights movement8restricting abortion 2unding chills their olitical seech and
revents transnational lin-ages bet5een (GOs that have been the 2oundation o2
human rights rogress%
Aryeh (eier? "resident o! the 3-en Society Institute and !ounder o! Human Rights 2atchC 2001. Committee on
)oreign RelationsC E8/VIC3 CI+A "3%ICA, /))/C+S 3) R/S+RIC+I3(S 3( I(+/R(A+I3(A% )A8I%A "%A((I(G
)=(DI(GFC Duly 1.C 2111C htt-,??!r#e9gate.access.g-o.gov?cgi:9in?getdoc.cgiK
d9nameW117TsenateThearingsPdocidW!,7$&14.#ais.
8y testimony addresses the central advocacy role (G3s -lay in !ormulating and monitoring
international agreementsC sha-ing international human rights la#C inJuencing the -olicies and
la#s o! the =nited StatesC and -romoting o-en and civil societies #orld#ide. I #ould also li;e to em-hasi>e my
strong su--ort !or the Glo9al Democracy "romotion ActC #hich #ould overturn the censorshi- im-osed 9y the =nited States Agency !or International Develo-ment O=SAIDQ on
-rivately !unded s-eech that -romotes a9ortion la# re!ormC other#ise ;no#n as the UUGlo9al Gag Rule.RR In over * years o! e0-erience in
the human rights MeldC the Glo9al Gag Rule is the only time I have encountered =.S. censorshi-
o! s-eech -romoting la# re!orm through democratic -rocesses. +he entire human rights
movement relies on the a9ility o! (G3s to gather in!ormation and s-ea; #ithout im-ediment
and to associate !reely #ith !oreign (G3s to increase the e<ectiveness o! their s-eech and
advocacy. +his la# re!orm gag not only irre-ara9ly damages the associationC !ree s-eechC and
-olitical advocacy rights o! international human rights advocates. 9ut causes continuing irre-ara9le inIury to the
American -u9lic. Im-eding the in!ormation gathering and !reedom o! e0-ression o! human rights
advocates sends a message 5orld5ide that #e are #illing to diminish )irst Amendment
-rotections !or -olitical ends and undermines the commitment o! the =nited States to !ree
dissemination o! in!ormation and democratic values #orld#ide.
4AC7GR3=(D A(D /V"/RI/(C/
I have s-ent my career as a human rights advocate and scholar -romoting the esta9lishment and en!orcement o! civil and human rights under the =nited States
Constitution and international treatiesC agreements and norms. I have 9een the "resident o! 3SI since it #as !ounded in 1... +he Institute 9egan 9y !unding local (G3s in
/astern /uro-e and the !ormer Soviet =nion to encourage -olitical de9ate and la# re!orm. 3ver the last * yearsC 3SI has !unded and su--orted hundreds o! (G3s in the
=nited States and around the #orld. A num9er o! these (G3s #or; on human rights issuesC including many #hose #or; !ocuses on re-roductive rights and health. In 1.7*
I #as a !ounder o! #hat is no# Human Rights 2atch OHR2QC and s-ent t#elve years as its /0ecutive Director. HR2 is dedicated to -rotecting the human rights o! -eo-le
around the #orldC and is the largest =.S.:9ased (G3 o-erating internationally to -rotect human rights. HR2 9egan #ith my -artici-ation in the esta9lishment o! the Helsin;i
2atch committee to monitor the im-lementation o! the 1.7$ Helsin;i )inal AccordsC a human rights treaty #ith thirty:Mve /uro-ean and (orth American countries as -arties
including the Soviet =nion and the countries o! Central and /astern /uro-e it controlled. Helsin;i human rights monitoring #as a critical catalyst !or human rights and
democracy movements that created -olitical o--ortunities !or some o! the !orces that ultimately overthre# Communist rule. Central to this e<ort Oand illustrative o! the harm
o! the Glo9al Gag RuleQ #ere the advocacy net#or;s o! domestic and international (G3sC #hich my colleagues and I !ormed #ith the 2atch Committees to monitor and
-u9lici>e a9uses under communist governments. "rior to my #or; at HR2C I s-ent M!teen years #ith the American Civil %i9erties =nion OAC%=QC eight o! those as (ational
/0ecutive Director. +he AC%= is a non-roMt civil rights organi>ation #ith nearly 11C111 mem9ers and su--orters. )ounded in 1.21C the AC%= is the largest =.S. (G3
-rotecting the 4ill o! Rights. +he AC%= !ulMlls its mission o! de!ending the individual rights and li9erties o! all -eo-le under the Constitution through litigationC advocacy and
-u9lic education. 3ur doc;et historically stressed -rotection o! )irst Amendment rights and e0-anded to include voting rightsC #omenRs rightsC racial e5uality e<orts and
-rivacy rights. A co-y o! my curriculum vitae is attached hereto as /0hi9it A. Z/0hi9its A and 4 have 9een retained in the committeeRs Mles.[ I have #or;ed #ith virtually
every maIor human rights grou- internationally and am !amiliar #ith the advocacy -rocess across national !rontiers that has resulted in enormous gains in acce-tance o! and
com-liance #ith international human rights la#.
4AC7GR3=(D 3) +H/ H=8A( RIGH+S 83B/8/(+
+he human rights movement see;s to have certain !undamental human rights -rinci-les acce-ted as international norms. I! universally acce-tedC these human rights #ould
esta9lish 9asic en!orcea9le -rotections and rights !or all -eo-le. +he movement !or human rights too; on a glo9al -ers-ective a!ter 2orld 2ar II as a result o! the Holocaust
and the 2ar Crimes +ri9unals. +he events o! 2orld 2ar II galvani>ed the international community and led to the creation o! the =nited (ations in 1.4$. +he =nited (ations
committed itsel! in its Charter to -rotect human rights and s-elled out its understanding o! universal rights through the ado-tion o! the =niversal Declaration o! Human
Rights O=DHRQC]1] #hich #as ado-ted #ithout dissent 9y the General Assem9ly in 1.4*. +he =DHR -roclaims that all men and #omen are entitled to the right to li!eC li9ertyC
nationalityC and to -artici-ate in governmentC and to !reedom o! thoughtC conscience and religion. /leanor Roosevelt and the =nited States delegation to the =nited (ations
#ere instrumental in dra!ting the =DHR and securing its -assage.
+he -rinci-les set !orth in the =DHR are legally 9inding on -arty nationsC including the =nited StatesC through t#o international covenants, the International Covenant on
Civil and "olitical Rights OICC"RQ ]2] and the International Covenant on /conomicC Social and Cultural Rights OIC/SCQC]] 9oth o! #hich entered into !orce in 1.7& #hen
ratiMed 9y $ countries. +he =nited States has ratiMed the International Covenant on Civil and "olitical Rights. CollectivelyC the =DHRC ICC"R and IC/SC are commonly ;no#n
as the International 4ill o! Rights. +hey are attached hereto as /0hi9it 4. Since 1.7&C numerous countries have signed and ratiMed the treatiesC ta;ing im-ortant ste-s
to#ards the im-lementations o! their -rovisions. In addition to these documentsC more than *1 other conventions and declarations related to human rights have 9een
ado-tedC including conventions to end discrimination on the 9asis o! race and genderC and declarations !or the -rotection o! re!ugees and to end genocide. A central tenet o!
the International 4ill o! Rights and many o! the su9se5uently dra!ted documents is the recognition o! !reedom o! e0-ression and the right to UUsee;C receive and im-art
in!ormation and ideas through any media and regardless o! U!rontiers.R RR SeeC e.g.C article 1. o! =DHR and article 1.O2Q o! ICC"R. %i;e the )irst AmendmentRs rights to
!reedom o! s-eechC o! the -ress and o! -eacea9le assem9lyC these rights are not only !reestanding human rightsC 9ut are essential tools !or advancing all other rights. +he
human rights movement over the last M!ty years has had tremendous success in securing the ado-tion o! human rights treaties as -art o! international and =.S. domestic la#.
As human rights and international la# have develo-edC the =nited States has endorsed many covenants and declarationsC and has ratiMed a num9er o! human rights treaties in
accordance #ith the treaty:ma;ing authority -rescri9ed 9y the Constitution. +his has created ne# avenues !or the human rights movement and (G3s to inJuence the =nited
States. +he Glo9al Gag RuleC ho#everC inter!eres #ith the develo-ment o! international and domestic
la# related to re-roductive health and rights at every stage in the develo-ment o! such la#.
+H/ H=8A( RIGH+S ADB3CACA "R3C/SS
+he -rocess o! -olitical advocacy in the conte0t o! the advance o! international human rights is revolutionary. An understanding o! this -rocess is crucial to understanding
the degree o! harm caused 9y the Glo9al Gag Rule due to the critical stage o! develo-ment o! the glo9al re-roductive rights movement. It also illustrates the direct e<ect o!
the la# re!orm gag on human rights organi>ationsC individual human rights attorneysC and other individuals #ho are instrumental in that movement. +here are t#o main
)2
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
com-onents to human rights advocacy, 1Q the develo-ment and ado-tion o! human rights norms into domestic and international la#G and 2Q encouraging and ensuring
com-liance 9y governments #ith human rights standards through the collection and dissemination o! in!ormation a9out -ractices that may diverge !rom those norms.
+ransnational advocacy net#or;s o! human rights (G3sC 9oth international Oli;e HR2Q and domesticC are essential -artici-ants in each stage o! this -rocess. +he Mrst ste-
in the human rights advocacy -rocess is to deMne human rights. +his has -rimarily 9een accom-lished through coalitions o! (G3s #or;ing #ith government delegations at
regional and international meetings or !orums to esta9lish certain human rights norms. +hrough this -rocess human rights theories are trans!ormed !rom ideals into
en!orcea9le rights. %anguage is dra!ted and agreed u-onC and the resulting documents are ado-ted 9y -artici-ating countries. +hese documents esta9lish international la#C
and u-on ado-tion may 9ecome incor-orated into the ado-ting countryRs domestic la#. +here are numerous e0am-les illustrating the inJuence o! (G3s in the develo-ment
o! human rights norms. +he 1..7 (o9el "eace "ri>e #as a#arded to an (G3 coalitionC the International Cam-aign to 4an %andmines !or its leadershi- in the ado-tion o! a
treaty 9anning anti-ersonnel mines 9y 12 governments meeting that Decem9er in 3tta#a. Another such e0am-le is the 1..* Rome treaty calling !or the esta9lishment o!
the International Criminal Court OICCQ. +his treaty #as endorsed 9y 121 governments at a con!erence in Rome in #hich (G3s -layed a maIor -art. It #as the #or; o! these
human rights grou-s that -rovided the im-etus to ado-t the treaty and o9tain the signatures and ratiMcations necessary !or it to ta;e e<ect. +he organi>ation o! #hich I #as a
!ounderC Human Rights 2atchC -layed a leading role in 9oth treaties. (G3s #ere also critical in ensuring the recognition o! gender:sensitive and re-roductive s-eciMc issues
Osuch as !orced -regnancy as #ar crimesQ #ere included in the mandate o! the ICC. 2hen the government o! %i9ya tried to 9loc; (G3s !rom s-ea;ing at the Rome
Con!erenceC the =nited States government too; a leading role in u-holding the rights o! (G3s. (G3s #ill continue to #or; domestically and internationally to increase the
num9er o! countries 9ecoming state -arties to treatiesC covenants and declarations -rotecting human rights. As su--ort 9uilds !or the acce-tance o! a human rights normC
demonstrated 9y the endorsement o! documents enshrining those norms 9y an increasing num9ers o! countriesC international -ressure 9uilds on those countries that have
not yet endorsed the documents. "ressure can 9e 9rought to 9ear through tangi9le actionsC such as a =nited (ations censure or economic sanctions. Human rights
movements can also come !rom #ithin a countryC such as the non:governmental democracy movement in "olandC UUSolidarityCRR #hich -layed a leading role in the !all o!
communism in that country and throughout the !ormer Soviet 9loc. International -ressure legitimi>es and su--orts the e<orts o! local (G3s. 3nce a human rights norm has
9een deMned and acce-tedC it -rovides a yardstic; 9y #hich to measure the com-liance o! governmentsC #hether or not a -articular country has agreed to 9e 9ound 9y a
document. 8any o! the international agreements on human rights include re5uirements that ado-ting governments re-ort to the =nited (ations on com-lianceC and that they
must assist in e<orts to monitor the com-liance o! other governments. +husC a critical com-onent o! human rights advocacy is the a9ility to hold countries accounta9le. In
!actC the =nited States has ado-ted a set o! statutes 9y #hich the State De-artment monitors and re-orts to Congress u-on com-liance #ith international human rights norms.
A -articularly im-ortant statute is Sec. $124 o! the )oreign Assistance Act o! 1.&1C as amended O22 =SC 214Q. It re5uires the State De-artment to su9mit an annual re-ort to
Congress on human rights -ractices #orld#ide. +he la# -rovides that in -re-aring such re-orts UUthe relevant Mndings o! a--ro-riate international organi>ationsC including
non:governmental organi>ationsRR should 9e considered OQO9QO1QG as #ell as UUthe e0tent o! coo-eration 9y such government in -ermitting an unim-eded investigation 9y any
such organi>ation o! alleged violations o! internationally recogni>ed human rightsRR OQO9QO2Q. In doing soC the State De-artment relies e0tensively on in!ormation su--lied 9y
HR2 and !re5uently cites HR2Rs Mndings. (G3s
ContinuesG
))
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
ContinuedG
-lay a critical role in monitoring com-liance 9ecause they o!ten have direct access to
in!ormation through their contacts #ith their (G3 counter-arts #orld#ide and the a9ility to
document human rights a9uses C and are in a -osition to -ut governments on notice o! ho# they are violating an international norm or right.
3ne o! the most -o#er!ul #ea-ons !or ensuring government com-liance #ith human rights
norms is the dissemination o! in!ormation a9out a9uses . +he -resentation o! such in!ormation through the media and in
international !orums o!ten UUshamesRR the government into res-ondingC and can lead to international isolation and sanction i! governments !ail to remedy a9uses. +he
in!ormation necessary to 9ring such a9uses to light may 9e di<icult to o9tain #ithout the assistance o! local (G3sC as this is the very ty-e o! in!ormation that non:com-liant
governments are li;ely to su--ress. %ocal (G3sC ho#everC o!ten do not have the ;no#ledgeC resources or international contacts necessary to disseminate the in!ormationC and
need to !orm -artnershi-s and coalitions #ith other (G3s in order to advocate e<ectively. +he most e<ective engine !or change comes #hen local and international (G3s
#or; together. IndeedC the human rights movement as it e0ists #ould not have occurred #ithout transnational coalitions o! (G3s. +he -rocess that I have descri9ed reJects
9oth my -ersonal e0-erience and e0tensive academic analysis in the Melds o! international relations and -olitical science.]4] R/"R3D=C+IB/ RIGH+S ADB3CACA A(D
+H/ H=8A( RIGH+S 83B/8/(+ In order to e0-lain !ully the -ernicious e<ect o! the Glo9al Gag RuleC it is necessary to understand the history o! re-roductive rightsC
and -articularly the right to a9ortionC #ithin the conte0t o! human rights la#. Com-ared to the civil and -olitical rights recogni>ed in the Helsin;i Accords and ICC"RC
re-roductive rights Oalong #ith other #omenRs rightsQ have not -rogressed very !ar yet in their acce-tance as human rights norms. It has only 9een 5uite recently that
discussion o! re-roductive rights as human rights has occurred at the international level. 8uch o! the -rogress on this issue has come through con!erences s-onsored 9y the
=nited (ationsC including the 2orld Con!erence on Human RightsC held in Bienna in 1..C the International Con!erence on "o-ulation and Develo-mentC held in Cairo in 1..4C
the )ourth 2orld Con!erence on 2omenC held in 4eiIingC ChinaC in 1..$C and the Mve:year revie# con!erences !or 9oth the Cairo and 4eiIing con!erences. +he right to legal
a9ortion is considered 9y many to 9e inse-ara9le !rom the uniMed #hole o! re-roductive rights. )ailure to incor-orate the right to
a9ortion #ithin the human rights norms recogni>ing re-roductive rights renders the -rotection
a<orded incom-lete and undermines the im-lementation o! those rights that are recogni>ed .
4ecause o! the controversy surrounding a9ortionC although other as-ects o! re-roductive health are recogni>edC such as the right to !amily -lanningC]$] healthC]&] and -hysical
integrityC]7] there is yet no universally recogni>ed right to legal a9ortion -er se. 2hile not a<ording a9ortion !ull status as an en!orcea9le human rightC ground9rea;ing
-rogress on the a9ortion issue #as made at the Cairo and 4eiIing con!erences. +he Cairo "rogramme o! Action recogni>es that unsa!e a9ortion is a maIor -u9lic health issue
and urges that in locations #here it is legalC a9ortion should 9e sa!e.]*] +he 4eiIing "lat!orm o! Action goes even !urtherC urging countries to UUconsider revie#ing la#s
containing -unitive measures against #omen #ho have undergone illegal a9ortionsRR and calling !or UUresearch to understand and 9etter address the determinants and
conse5uencesRR o! unsa!e a9ortion. 4eiIing "lat!orm !or Action -ara. 11&O;QG 11.OiQ. Although the -lat!orms are only incremental ste-s to#ard universal norms on legal
a9ortionC the Cairo and 4eiIing con!erence re-orts are normative documents that have 9een
endorsed 9y 1*1 countriesC including the =nited States. +he Cairo and 4eiIing documents thus create measures 9y #hich =.S.: 9ased human rights
organi>ationsC in coalition #ith !oreign (G3sC can hold governments accounta9le through monitoring and re-orting. +he Glo9al Gag RuleC ho#everC
-rohi9its Oor at least chillsQ hundreds o! the most inJuential (G3s in the re-roductive health
MeldC active in do>ens o! countriesC !rom engaging in advocacy related to im-lementation or monitoring o!
the a9ortion -rovisions o! these agreements. 3ver 1$11 (G3s !rom 1*1 countries -artici-ated in the
Cairo con!erenceC and the ro9ust de9ate made -ossi9le 9y their #ealth o! ;no#ledge and their
vigorous advocacy #as instrumental in the recognition o! re-roductive rights as human rightsC
and in the ado-tion o! the statements on a9ortion descri9ed a9ove. 8any o! these (G3s could not have engaged in o-en
discussion o! the a9ortion issue Oe0ce-t -eIorativelyQ in 1.. or 1..4 had the Glo9al Gag Rule
9een in e<ect. In addition to -reventing those organi>ations !rom direct -artici-ation and advocacyC the loss o! in!ormation that they -ossessed #ould have
limited the advocacy o! many other (G3s. "recluding organi>ations !rom creating coalitions and net#or;s #ith strategic (G3s in the countries a<ected 9y the Glo9al Gag
Rule !or the -ur-ose o! monitoring the Cairo and 4eiIing agreements signiMcantly devalues these agreements as normative documents. +he current -eriod is a critical one
in history !or the advocacy o! re-roductive rights as human rightsC including the right to a9ortion. +he gains made throughout the 1..1s and the #orld#ide attention
resulting !rom the Cairo and 4eiIing Con!erences and their Mve:year revie#s all sho# that momentum is 9uilding 9ehind the e<orts o!
the transnational coalitions to give international legal -rotection to a9ortion. As a resultC
censorshi- 9y the =nited States o! an im-ortant -iece o! this advocacy #ill li;ely have a
devastating im-act.
+H/ I8"3R+A(C/ 3) ASS3CIA+I3(S A83(G (G3S
Human rights la# re!orm advocates #ill 9e signiMcantly ham-ered in achieving their goal o! recognition o! re-roductive rightsC including the right to a9ortionC as human
rightsC i! they cannot o9tain in!ormation and -ersuasive evidence !romC s-ea; !or -ur-oses o! -ersuasion toC and other#ise #or; #ith the (G3s a<ected 9y the la# re!orm
gag. +he im-ortance to the human rights movement o! the a9ility o! (G3s to associate #ithC
communicate !reely #ithC and e0change in!ormation #ith one another cannot 9e overestimated.
"erha-s the most im-ortant o! these associations are those 9et#een international (G3s and local Onational or regionalQ organi>ations. +hese -artnershi-s
are the cornerstone o! e<ective human rights advocacy. IndeedC I am a#are o! no instanceC
and do not 9elieve it #ould 9e -ossi9leC !or an international (G3 Oor indeed any (G3 #or;ing
in a country that is not its 9ase o! o-erationsQ #or;ing alone to have a signiMcant im-act at the
national level. "rogress in changing national la#s and ensuring com-liance #ith international
norms through monitoring and e0-osing a9uses de-ends on the #or; o! local (G3s. Human rights
advances and la# com-liance #ould li;ely not occur i! de-endent solely on a governmentRs initiative. +he resources o! (G3s are limitedC ho#everC and to 9e e<ective advocacy
strategies must 9e strategic. International human rights grou-s that have technical e0-ertise and the
!reedom and resources to o-erate across 9orders must rely on local (G3s Osuch as those
)*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
su9Iect to the la# re!orm gagQ #ho -rovide the ;no#ledge o! the local -oliticsC the local la#
and the local -eo-le su<ering !rom a9uses. Success!ul -olitical advocacy and change needs the association o! these t#o together. +he
international grou-s 9ring e0ternal -u9lic o-inion to 9earC can have !ree access to the -ressC
and can usually 9e !reer in monitoring and -u9lici>ing a dangerous situation than a local entity
#hich might 9e a!raid to do so. In many countries it is !or9idden !or a non:citi>en to set u- an (G3. +here!oreC international grou-s must
o-erate in conIunction #ith local (G3s in order to e<ect -olitical change. )or e0am-leC HR2 #or;s e0tensively in coalition #ith strategic local (G3s and could not have
!urthered its mission o! im-lementing and monitoring the ICC"R #ithout these critical associations. I cannot imagine ho# di<erent the
state o! human rights around the #orld #ould 9e today i! hundreds o! (G3s relevant to HR2
cam-aigns had 9een censored over the -ast t#enty years. 8y e0-erience -rovides many e0am-les 9oth #ithin the =nited
States and a9road that illustrate the im-ortance to (G3s o! the a9ility to #or; in association #ith one another. It #as critical !or the AC%= to #or; in association #ith other
li;e:minded religious or civil rights grou-s to#ard the reali>ation o! many civil rights and li9erties goals. In !actC it #as only 9y such -olitical associations that the movements
!or racial e5uality and #omenRs rights #ere success!ul. In 1..1C leaders o! several other (G3s and I launched an (G3: centered movement that advocated !or a treaty on
landmines. +he landmine cam-aigns garnered inJuential and #ide su--ort only #hen HR2 and "hysicians !or Human RightsC #or;ing #ith an (G3 treating victims o!
landmines in Cam9odiaC -u9lished our Mrst human rights re-ort on the issue highlighting the -light o! the victims. +his humanitarian (G3C #hich gave -rostheses to victimsC
received !unds !rom the =nites States Government. I! there had 9een censorshi- o! organi>ations that dealt #ith these victims o! land minesC as there is #ith the la# re!orm
gag as to the harm!ul e<ects o! illegal a9ortionC the landmine treaty might not e0ist todayC and its ado-tion #ould certainly have 9een signiMcantly retarded. /<ective advocacy
#as only -ossi9le through unim-eded access to the victims o! the mines. In ArgentinaC the Center !or %egal and Social Studies monitored torture and #or;ed #ith torture
victims. HR2 #as a9le to #or; #ith the Center to -u9lici>e the -ro9lemC and the e<ectiveness o! the cam-aign hel-ed lead to the end o! the military government in Argentina.
+he cam-aign also a<ected =nited States -olicy 9ecause it resulted in human rights conditions on =.S. assistance to Argentina. It #as only through the un!ettered association
9et#een HR2 and this -articular (G3C the only one #ith the necessary in!ormation and access to victims o! tortureC that these changes #ere -ossi9le. In ChileC a Roman
Catholic organi>ationC the Bicaria de la SolidaridadC also documented torture. +his (G3 #as the main source !or HR2 to document these human rights a9uses. Although
una9le to inJuence the "inochet government directlyC the Bicaria and HR2 #ere very e<ective in 9ringing a9out re!orm 9y getting the =.S. government to 9ring -ressure on
the Chilean government. I! the =.S.
ContinuesG
)/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
ContinuedG
government had censored BicariaC severe human rights a9uses in Chile may have -ersisted much longer. In 9oth Argentina and ChileC e<ective advocacy #as de-endent on
HR2Rs a9ility to #or; #ith those (G3s. In my e0-erienceC it is !re5uently the case that only one (G3 in a -articular country has gathered the human rights in!ormation
needed 9y the international human rights movement to 9ring e<ective -ressure against a9uses in that country. )re5uentlyC there is onl3 one
such grou in a country or only one grou- may have the nation#ide structure and the trust
re.uired to gather in2ormation . +he -roli!eration o! (G3s in the =nited States is not matched in most other countries. /s-ecially in !ormer
communist countries or other states that e0-erienced authoritarian ruleC (G3s #ere !or9idden or severely harassed and it is o!ten the case that only a single grou- has
su9se5uently emerged as a relia9le source o! human rights in!ormation. An e0am-le is Augoslavia #hich only ended the authoritarian rule o! Slo9odan 8ilosevic in 3cto9er
2111. A single grou-C the Humanitarian %a# CenterC has 9een the indis-ensa9le source o! human rights in!ormation in that country. I! it #ere silencedC no other grou- could
have -rovided relia9le human rights in!ormation. +husC in the time o! glo9ali>ationC and international agreements
on many issues such as land minesC endangered s-eciesC environmental issuesC and glo9al
#armingC it is essential that -olitical advocacy 9e -rotected #ithout res-ect to national
9orders. IndeedC the =nited States has endorsed this -rinci-le 9y its ratiMcation o! Article 1. o! the ICC"RC #hich e0-licitly -rotects !reedom o! e0-ression and the
!reedom to gather and disseminate in!ormation regardless o! !rontiers.
+H/ G%34A% GAG R=%/ C/(S3RS I()3R8A+I3( CRI+ICA% +3 "/RS=ADI(G =.S. "3%ICA8A7/RS
+he =nited States holds a uni5ue -osition among all other nations. 4ecause o! its -o#er and
resourcesC -olicy decisions 9y the =.S. o!ten have #orld#ide im-act. +he =nited States is also res-onsi9le !or a
signiMcant amount o! the !oreign assistance -rovided to develo-ing nations. Decisions a<ecting these a--ro-riations a<ect numerous governmentsC (G3s and individuals.
+he =nited States is also inJuential #ithin the international community on human rights issues.
It has endorsed many o! the signiMcant human rights agreementsC and has there9y o9ligated itsel! to monitor com-liance 9oth #ithin its 9orders and in other countries. +his
is also re5uired 9y many =.S. la#s including Section $124 o! the )oreign Assistance Act. +he Glo9al Gag Rule not#ithstandingC several -rovisions o! =nited States la#
condition !oreign assistance on com-liance 9y reci-ient countries #ith human rights normsC including !ree s-eech and -olitical association. In addition to Section $124 o! the
)oreign Assistance ActC see Section 711 o! the International )inancial Institutions Act o! 1.77 O22 =SC 2&2gQ. +he =nited States is also a
-artici-ant at all maIor international =nited (ations s-onsored con!erencesC and can 9ring
signiMcant inJuence to 9ear on the dra!ting and negotiating -rocess o! human rights
documents. Although inJuential in the arena o! human rightsC the =nited States does not
o!ten ta;e a leading role in the ado-tion o! human rights norms. It is usually only a!ter signiMcant international su--ort
has 9een demonstrated that the =nited States endorses human rights agreements. )or e0am-leC the =nited States #as one o! the last develo-ed countries to rati!y the ICC"RC
and the =nited States is one o! only a hand!ul o! nations that has not yet ratiMed the Convention on the /limination o! All )orms o! Discrimination Against 2omen. +he
a9ility o! =.S. (G3s to #or; directly #ith !oreign (G3s is central to human rights advocacy
directed at the =.S. government. +he most e<ective #ay to sha-e =.S. !oreign -olicy on human
rights is to 9ring -eo-le !rom the a<ected countries to -rovide Mrsthand in!ormation. In my e0-erience
at HR2C 9ringing the victims o! a9uses and re-resentatives !rom !oreign (G3s to tal; to mem9ers o! CongressC the State De-artment and the (ational Security Council #as
e0ceedingly e<ective. Direct e0-osure to )(G3s and the #itnesses and victims to #hom they have access continues to 9e a critical com-onent o! the =.S. advocacy o! many
=.S. human rights organi>ations. I have seen many times ho# !oreign (G3s can a<ect =nited States -olicy. 2hen the Augoslavian government shut do#n a !oundation
!unded in that country 9y 3SIC #e 9rought mem9ers o! this (G3 to 2ashingtonC D.C.C to educate =.S. -olicyma;ers. As a resultC then Bice "resident Al Gore issued a
statement critical o! the closureC and the !ollo#ing day the !oreign minister o! Augoslavia in!ormed the (G3 it #ould 9e reo-ened. SimilarlyC the most e<ective strategy that
3SI has !ound !or 9ringing attention to human rights a9uses in 4elarusC 7osovo and 4osnia #as to 9ring re-resentatives o! (G3s !rom those regions to 2ashington. In
stri;ing contrast is the e0-erience o! South A!rican activists #ho came to 2ashington during a-artheid. =nder South A!rican la# at that timeC citi>ens o! that country #ere
-rohi9ited !rom s-ea;ing in !avor o! sanctions aimed at eliminating a-artheid. 2hen these activists met #ith mem9ers o! CongressC they could not advocate !or sanctions
9ecause to do so #ould -ut them at ris; o! severe criminal -enalties. +he Glo9al Gag Rule a<ects many as-ects o! =nited
States -olicyC andC there!oreC advocacy on these issues 9y domestic and !oreign (G3s. )or
e0am-leC due to the gagC human rights organi>ations are -revented !rom 9ringing
re-resentatives o! gagged (G3s to 9rie! mem9ers o! Congress a9out the -ernicious e<ect o! the gag itsel! #ithout Mrst
having to o9tain e0-licit -ermission !rom government attorneys. As a resultC (G3s #ith the most relevant in!ormation a9out the e<ects o! the la# re!orm gag may not -rovide
it to Congress #ithout Ieo-ardi>ing essential !unding. In my e0-erienceC this #ill im-edeC and -ossi9ly -reventC e<orts 9y organi>ations to re-eal the Glo9al Gag Rule and to
-ass the Glo9al Democracy "romotion Act. In!ormation in the -ossession o! !oreign (G3s is also relevant to
congressional deli9erations as to the amount and sco-e o! !unding !or 9oth =SAID and =()"A.
As notedC 9oth the Cairo and 4eiIing documents recogni>e unsa!e a9ortion as a maIor -u9lic
health threat. %imiting advocacy in Congress to in!ormation a9out this issue !rom =.S.:9ased
(G3s results in an incom-lete -icture as to ho# a--ro-riated !unds may 9e -ut to 9est
advantage to im-rove re-roductive health in reci-ient countries. +he =nited States has an
inde-endent o9ligation to monitor and -romote com-liance #ith the agreements it has ado-ted
9oth #ithin the =.S. and in other countries. +he Glo9al Gag Rule inter!eres #ith this o9ligation in t#o #ays. )irstC 9y restricting s-eech in
other countriesC it undermines !reedom o! e0-ressionC a right e0-ressly recogni>ed in the =DHR and ICC"R. SecondC 9y limiting discussion and the !ree Jo# o! in!ormationC
the gag limits the a9ility o! the =nited States to monitor com-liance 9y other countries #ith agreements such as Cairo and 4eiIing. Human rights are 9y deMnition glo9alC or
universal. +he -olitical advocacy o! (G3s #or;ing on human rights issuesC such as re-roductive rightsC is there!oreC 9y deMnitionC glo9al. 3rgani>ations
cannot engage in necessary -olitical s-eechC nor engage in e<ective -olitical advocacyC
#ithout un!ettered associations and communications #ith !oreign (G3s a<ected 9y the Glo9al
)0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule. In order to truly e<ectuate the constitutional guarantees that ensure !ull de9ate and consideration o! im-ortant -olitical issuesC these e0traterritorial
associations and communications must 9e a<orded the highest -rotection.
)7
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
=nhancing transnational human rights movements 5ill in2use globali4ation 5ith a
2ocus on eace and cooeration8this eliminates the ris- o2 nuclear 5ar%
Ale0 $eita? "ro!essor o! la# at Al9any %a# School o! =nion =niversityC 1;;7. 1 Cornell IntRl %.D. 42.C le0is.
4ecause glo9ali>ation -romotes common values across nations and can ma;e !oreign -ro9lemsC
conditionsC issuesC and de9ates as vivid and ca-tivating as nationalC stateC and local onesC it
contri9utes to a sense o! #orld community. n.. It develo-s a !eeling o! em-athy !or the conditions o! -eo-le a9roadC
enlarging the grou- o! human 9eings that an individual #ill identi!y #ith. Glo9ali>ation thus hel-s to 9ring alive -ersons in !oreign
landsC ma;ing them !ello# human 9eings #ho sim-ly live in di<erent -arts o! the #orld rather than a9stract statistics o! deathsC
-overtyC and su<ering. +he convergence o! 9asic -olitical and economic values is thus !undamentally
im-ortant 9ecause it hel-s to esta9lish a common 9ond among -eo-le in di<erent countriesC
!acilitating understanding and encouraging coo-eration. All other things 9eing e5ualC the commonality among
countries : #hether in the !orm o! 9asic valuesC cultureC or language : enhances their attractiveness to each other. n111 In additionC
convergence increases Z\4&1[ the -ossi9ility that a trans!ormation o! attitude #ill ta;e -lace !or those #ho -artici-ate in
transnational activities. "eo-le #ill 9egin to regard !oreigners in distant lands #ith the same concern that they have !or their
!ello# citi>ens. n111 +hey #ill endeavor to hel- these !oreigners o9tain 9asic -olitical rights even though
the status o! -olitical rights in other countries #ill have no tangi9le 9eneMcial im-act at home.
n112 Convergence does not mean that there is a single model o! a mar;et economyC a single ty-e o! democracyC or a single -lat!orm
o! human rights. +hey e0ist in di<erent !ormsC and nations may have di<erent com9inations o! these !orms. n11 Z\4&2[
A. +he "ers-ective o! 3ne Human Race
+he convergence o! !undamental values through glo9ali>ation has -ro!ound conse5uences
9ecause it increases the chance that a ne# -ers-ective #ill develo-C one #hich vie#s
mem9ershi- in the human race as the most signiMcant societal relationshi-C e0ce-t !or nationality. n114
A -erson o#es his or her strongest collective loyalties to the various societies #ith #hich he or she most intensely identiMes. +odayC
this societal identiMcation can 9e 9ased on numerous !actorsC including nationalityC raceC religionC and ethnic grou-. n11$ 2hile it is
unli;ely that nationality #ill 9e sur-assed as the most signiMcant societal relationshi-C glo9ali>ation and the convergence o!
values may eventually convince -eo-le in di<erent countries that the second most im-ortant
social grou- is the human raceC and not a -ersonRs racialC religiousC or ethnic grou-. n11& 3ne
o! the Mrst ste-s in the !ormation o! a society is the recognition 9y -ros-ective mem9ers that
they have common interests and 9onds. An essential commonality is that they share some
!undamental values. A second is that they identi!y themselves as mem9ers 9elonging to the
same community on the 9asis o! a num9er o! common tiesC including shared !undamental values. A third commonality
is the universality o! rights : the active a--lication o! the Sgolden ruleS : 9y #hich mem9ers
e0-ect that all must 9e entitled to the same rights as #ell as charged #ith the same
res-onsi9ilities to ensure that these rights are -rotected. Glo9ali>ation -romotes these three ty-es o! commonalities.
Glo9ali>ation esta9lishes common ground 9y !acilitating the almost universal acce-tance o! mar;et economiesC the #ides-read emergence o! democratic governmentsC and the
e0tensive a--roval o! human rights. +he most visi9le e0am-le is economic. 2ith the end o! the Cold 2arC the !ree mar;et economy has clearly trium-hed over the command
economy in the 9attle o! the Z\4&[ economic -aradigms. 4ecause some variant o! a mar;et economy has ta;en root in virtually all countriesC there has 9een a convergence o!
sorts in economic systems. n117 )urtherC 9ecause it o!ten re5uires e0-osure to and -ervasive interaction #ith !oreigners : many o! #hom share the same !undamental values :
glo9ali>ation can enlarge the grou- that one normally identiMes #ith. Glo9ali>ation ma;es many o! its -artici-ants em-athi>e
#ith the conditions and -ro9lems o! -eo-le #ho in earlier years #ould have 9een ignored as
un;no#n residents o! remote locations. +his em-athy o!ten leads to sym-athy and su--ort
#hen these -eo-le su<er un!airly. )inallyC the com9ination o! shared values and identiMcation -roduce the third
commonalityC universality o! rights. n11* Citi>ens o! one country #ill o!ten e0-ectC and #or; actively to
achieveC the same 9asic values in other countries. +hey #ill treat nationals o! other nations as
they #ould #ish to 9e treated. +he e<ects o! shared valuesC identiMcationC and universality o!
rights in glo9ali>ation could have a ivotal long9term efect : the -ossi9ility that a maIority o!
human 9eings #ill 9egin to 9elieve that they are truly -art o! a single glo9al society : the human
race. +his is not to say that -eo-le dis9elieve the idea that the human race encom-asses all human 9eings. 3! courseC they reali>e that there is only one human s-ecies.
RatherC the human race does not usually ran; high on the hierarchy o! societies !or most -eo-le. Smaller societiesC es-ecially those 9ased on nationalityC raceC religionC or
ethnicityC command more loyalty. n11. +he idea o! the human raceC the 9roadest and all:inclusive category o! the human s-eciesC is a9stract and has littleC i! anyC im-act on the
lives o! human 9eings. +o 9elieve in the singular im-ortance o! the human race re5uires an attitudinal shi!t in #hich a -erson vie#s the human race seriously. Z\4&4[ +his may
occur 9ecause the convergence o! values does not only mean that the -eo-le o! di<erent countries #ill share the same 9asic values. It may also lead to the greater -romotion o!
these values !or the -eo-le o! other countries. Historically and certainly todayC America and the other industrial democracies have attem-ted to !oster democracy and human
rights in other countries. n111 2hile some -art o! this e<ort has 9een attri9uta9le to Ssel! interestCS it has also 9een due to the em-athy that the industriali>ed democracies
):
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
have had !or other countries. n111 +he magnitude o! these e<orts in the !utureC as in the -astC #ill de-end not solely u-on the availa9le Mnancial and human resources o! the
industriali>ed democracies. It #ill also de-end u-on their national #ill : a !actor undou9tedly inJuenced 9y the intensity #ith #hich the -eo-le o! the industriali>ed democracies
identi!y #ith -eo-le in !oreign lands. +he -ers-ective that the human race matters more than its com-onent
divisions #ould accelerate coo-erative e<orts among nations to attac; glo9al -ro9lems that
adversely a<ect human rights and the 5uality o! human li!e. n112 39viouslyC there is no
shortage o! such -ro9lems. Great su<ering still occurs in so many -arts o! the #orldC not Iust
!rom internal armed conJictsC n11 9ut also !rom conditions o! -overty. n114 +here are severe
health -ro9lems in much o! the #orld #hich can 9e mitigated #ith relatively little cost. n11$
+here are the lives lost to the AIDS e-idemicC and Z\4&$[ the deaths and disa9ilities caused 9y land mines. n11& RussiaC a nuclear
su-er-o#er that could end li!e on this -lanetC has severe socialC economicC and -olitical -ro9lems. n117 8a;ing the human race im-ortant
#ould not Iust -romote li9eral democratic values 9ut #ould also reduce human su<ering and
-erha-s eliminate comletel3 the ris- o2 nuclear 5ar%
);
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
&he demand 2or ensuring human rights through international la5 nourishes a olitics
grounded in universal dignit3 H this aroach to sufering enacts a 2rame5or- that
not onl3 rutures the 5estern colonialist aroach to human rights H it is the onl3
mechanism 2or reventing nuclear 5ar%
Ras-in? 1;;; O8arcusC -ro!essor o! -u9lic -olicy at George 2ashington =niversityC . +ransnatRl %. P Contem-.
"ro9s. $1C )allC le0isQ
%i;e la# itsel!C international la# has 9een a dou9le:edged s#ordC organi>ing the -o#er o! status 5uo
nations and !orces as IustiMcation !or na;ed -o#er. 3ther times it seems that international la#
continues as an instrument !or the violated and the #retched see;ing moralC -olitical and social
recom-ense. Sometimes these !orces are re-resented or -resent themselves directly in struggles that have no name. And sometimes they are recogni>ed as a result
o! the -ro!ound shi!ts in consciousness #hich then guide la# in ne# directions asC !or e0am-leC in the discovery and a--lication o! human rights. =mhasis on
human rights might trans2orm the current dominant con@ict/o5er/2orce aradigm o2
international relations to one o2 common cooeration #here conJict is recogni>ed 9ut su9sumed and transmuted. 3ther timesC those
-recedents o! reason and coo-eration 9ased on a -aciMc sentiment #ithin humanity and international la# are called u-on and a--lied to ne# situations. +he latter t#o notions mean the retiring o! the
+hucydides?Ho99es?8achiavelli O+H8Q !rame#or; n2 9ecause it is not easily a9le to recogni>e anything 9ut #ar and conJict as the !undament o!
civili>ation itsel!. +he +H8 !rame#or;C as )rancis 4oyle has suggestedC is one #hich retains dominance and has as its logical conse5uence the #ill to destroy and assert dominance. n It o<ers
humanity nothing 9ut a doomsday !uture in slo# motion #hereC at 9estC -ractitioners o! international la# and international relations are
consigned li;e Sisy-hus either to !orestall the inevita9le or to engage in la9ors o! 5uestiona9le value. 4ut the +H8 vie# re-resents the detritus !rom the -astC #hichC in the light o! -resent moral standardsC is
either sus-ect or reIected. +husC ta;e as an e0am-le George 7ennanC one o! the -remier thin;ers a9out American !oreign -olicyC #ho -romulgated the vie# that an elitistC virtually monarchialC system that #as
Z\$1$[ authoritarian in nature #as 9etter than a democracy. n4 7ennan called !or the Se0tensive restriction o! su<rage in national a<airs.S n$ +hose denied the vote #ould 9e #omenC considered !rivolous 9y
7ennanC 9lac;sC considered #ards o! the state #ithout need o! the !ranchiseC and immigrantsC #ho #ere e0ercising more -olitical -o#er than SrealS Americans. n& +he treatment o! minorities as in!erior and not
-art o! civili>ation #as acce-ted as Sgood and necessaryS la# through the Second 2orld 2ar. n7 +husC #hole grou-sC #hich at the 9eginning o! the century #ere classiMed as 9eyond the am9it o! concern and
#ithout rightsC 9y the end o! the century could no longer 9e denied even in international -olitics and la#. n* Ho#everC the t#entieth century has sho#n that
such notions o! -o#erC racism and dominance need not endure in light o! changed
consciousness and international la# once the -roIect o! human rights and inclusivity is clearly
articulated as emanci-ation and reconstruction. +his characteri>ation o! a reconstructed international la#C lin;ed to international and transnational
relationsC Mts #ithin the underlying -atterns o! modern history that have emerged since the )rench revolution. In !actC #ithin American li!eC -ro!ound cultural changes have led to a trans!ormation o!
understanding regarding #orld -olitics and historical mar;ers. +odayC there is a !ar greater a#areness in the -o-ulace as a #holeC such that ideas reJected 9y 7ennan si0ty years ago have 9een reduced to the
marginal and dar; recesses o! the minds o! segregationists and Colonel 4lim-s. n. DemystiMcationC #hich occurred through social movements Mnding their o#n voices and through ne# studies in tune #ith these
movementsC resulted in 9rea;ing the coloni>ing ;no#ledge and -o#er ne0us. (ot sur-risinglyC icons su<ered. Christo-her Colum9usC once vie#ed uncritically O#ith the e0ce-tion o! Adam SmithQ n11 and nearly
universally as a sym9ol o! Z\$1&[ e0-loration and li9erationC today can 9e seen as a har9inger o! e0-loitation and genocide. School children in the 2est can recount the role o! Colum9us and the startling and
a#!ul role o! the settlers in the destruction o! native cultures. +his destruction #as no less !urthered 9y the sanctimonious and s#eet:tal;ing missionaries #hose crosses 9ecame s#ords stuc; in the hearts o! the
indigenous. +odayC school children learn that #hen a continent had to 9e cleared and (ature con5ueredC it #as re-rehensi9le !or those such as Andre# Dac;sonC and Generals Sherman and Sheridan to relish in
their tas;s o! the genocide o! Indians. 8ore -roo! o! humane -rogress in this century can 9e seen among the coloni>ed in the CongoC China or 4ra>ilC indigenous -eo-le and tri9es once ca-tured to digC mine and
9uild !or the 2estC #ho have since -resented their o#n cases and !ound their o#n voices and re-resentation. AetC not much has changed in terms o! the distri9ution o! -olitical -o#erC the assum-tions held 9y the
-o#er!ulC and the institutional structures that rein!orce very traditional and un-leasant vie#s o! the role that states have in the #orld::a #orld #hich is characteri>ed 9y -aranoiaC !ear and an ina9ility to render
solutions to #orld -ro9lems. Ho#everC the givens o! international la# changed #ith the idea that la# should 9e undergirded 9y notions o! humane -rogress. %a#C humaneness and Iustice came to 9e conJated
andC 9y the end o! the centuryC democracy O9ecause it meant inclusivity and choiceQ #as also 9eing invo;ed as a -olitical rallying cry to -romote IusticeC e5uality and dignity. 3nce #hole
grou-sC #hether #omenC minorities or the indigenousC are recogni>ed as having human rights as
#ell as individual and grou- dignityC they are included in a social com-actC #hich the la# codiMes in actionsC rituals and sym9ols !or -olitical e5uality. In their continuing strugglesC the !ormerly denied
grou-s then use the la5 as their 5edge !or human rights. In this dialectical 9ut com-lementary -rocessC international la# is no longer
the -assive IustiMer o! the status 5uo and im-enetra9le state -o#er. It 9ecomes an instrument
!or continuing li9eration among elites and -o-ular movements ali;e. n11
ContinuesG
3! courseC #ords and conce-ts can go only so !ar in changing reality. In the meantimeC S#e the -eo-lesS are re5uired to Mnd the means
o! dissolving u-dated versions o! the traditional -lagues o! human;indC 9e they #arC -estilenceC
nuclear #arC !amine or that 5uality o! institutional -arochialness and selMshness #hich no# includes a runa#ay technology that can 9e used !or -urely sadomasochistic and criminal ends.
"erha-s more dangerous are those technologies that intend to have a -ositive conse5uenceC 9ut #hich have dangerous and unintended conse5uences due to a lac; o! ;no#ledge and understanding o! the
interactions o! di<erent sciences and technologies. B. CA( I(+/R(A+I3(A% %A2 S+A(D 2I+H +H/ 2R/+CH/DK A su<ering humanity is caught in cultural residues #hich are used 9y leadershi- to de!end and
aggress against the 3ther. +hrough the social categories #e use to -erceive the 3therC they are turned into o9Iects that 9ecome the /nemy 3ther. Surely that is one lesson o! the Cold 2ar and -ost:Cold 2ar
struggles. Real-oliti;ing teaches its adherents to see the enemy as 9li-s on a screenC or as -art o! the
racist detritus o! -rior times in #hich human 9eings #ere thought o! as -igsC as dogsC or as
slaves. As I have notedC #orld social categories and ;no#ledge systems have changed so that they no# see the coloni>ed as human 9eings. +he shi!ting in social categoriesC o!ten 9y those #ho are the
radicals and li9erals o! the -rivileged grou-sC created dee- divisions 9et#een reality and its descri-tion. 4ut this has not necessarily resulted in !undamental a<irmative change. )or those #ho #ere consigned to
the role o! slaveC ser! and o--ressed 9y im-erial 2estern nationsC it may 9e disconcertingC 9ut -leasantly sur-risingC that some leading international la#yers and intellectuals stand #ith those movements that
ta;e their strength !rom the dis-ossessedC #retched and e0-loitedC #hether in #ar or -eace. /ven though these idealists are educated in 2estern and im-erial categories o! social realityC they haveC nonethelessC
ta;en as their tas; the reconstruction and trans!ormation o! international la# as it is understood in the =nited States. +he s;e-tical are -ermitted their dou9tsC ho#ever. A!ter allC #hat can those #ho re-resent
the -ain o! othersC and only indirectly their o#nC do to ameliorate the -ain o! misery sanctioned 9y im-erial la#K 2hat do such a 9and o! idealists dare to teach to those #ho su<erC es-ecially #hen that su<ering
is o!ten causedC directly or indirectlyC 9y the choices made 9y the very class o! #hich these 2estern intellectuals and la#yers are mem9ersK 2hy should the o--ressed listen to those educated in a language and
thought:-attern #hichC 9eneath the honeyed #ordsC are the egocentric and ethnocentric doctrines o! the Z\$24[ dominatorK Certainly until decoloni>ationC the a9stract meaning o! the #ords #ere em-loyed as
signiMers and ;illers o! the culturally o--ressed. +he language o! descri-tion and the mode o! argumentC the very #ords themselvesC #ere instruments o! the coloni>er. +heir very rulesC la#sC -recedents and
citations acted as a steel:9elted noose to stiJe the cries o! the #retched. And yetC these #ere the very lessons the coloni>ed needed to learn in order to stand u- to the coloni>er and survive. (ot only did they
*0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
surviveC they -ressed on to re!orm nineteenth and early t#entieth century im-erial la# using the =(C and the International Court o! Dustice. 8ost im-ortantlyC they e<ected the consciousness o! nations.
(everthelessC the #retched must #onder #hyC 9ehind claims o! universality and universal human rightsC our actions and thoughts have an o!ten indeterminate or contradictory e<ect. )or AmericansC the reason is
a com-le0 one. Americans see; identiMcation #ith the victim in their dreamsC 9ut the reality !or the American -olitical and legal class is some#here 9et#een carelessness and negligence o! the o--ressed #or;erC
toleration !or the destruction o! other -eo-leRs cultures !or -ur-oses o! e0traction and commodiMcationC e0-loiter o! their landsC and e0ecutioner in counter:revolutions #hich rain 9om9s o! state and Mnancial
terror around the #orld. So even #hen some in the =nited States stand #ith the victimC they must al#ays #onderC S2ho are #e that come !or#ard #ith our notions that s-ea; o! human a<irmationK 2ho are #e
to tell the coloni>ed #hen inde-endence is a drag on themselves and on others as #ellC -ossi9ly leading to #ar and internecine conJictKS And the #retched can go !urther and sayC SAou have recogni>ed our
struggleC ta;en a#ay our language and su9stituted your #ords o! understandingC 9ut no# #hatK Ho# is !reedom to 9e sustainedK 2eC the !ormerly marginali>edC the indigenous and the merely #retchedC have
come to recogni>e that #hat is -resented 9y the 2est to humanity as conventional ;no#ledge is a 9etrayal.S In truthC it #as a 9etrayal 9y intellectuals and all those #ho dared to suggest that the t#entieth
century could 9e a time o! li9eration and !reedom. /ducation and ;no#ledge as mediated through the coloni>erRs strainer has le!t humanity in #orse sha-e than at the 9eginning o! the t#entieth century. )or
someC the god that really !ailed them #as education?;no#ledgeC #hichC through its institutionsC set itsel! u- as the emanci-ator. +his !ailureC this sense o! !utility #here ;no#ledge is an instrument o! domination
!or the !e#C demands recognition. +he com-laints o! Rousseau a9out the enlightenment -hiloso-hies #ere not !oolish. n2* GandhiRs similar !ears and the claims o! the anarchists a9out state -o#er #ere also not
#rong. n2. 7ro-ot;inRs claims Z\$2$[ against -risons in #hatever nation are as a--osite no# as they #ere at the 9eginning o! the t#entieth century. n1 At the turn o! the centuryC #here do the coloni>ed turn
!or aidK 2here do they turn to assuage their angerC !rustration and grie! at having their land evisceratedC their lives serrated into the sections o! social roles #hich are not their o#nC and their language Oand their
conce-tsC sense o! identity and ethical oughtsQ stolen or re-ressedK +hey turn to t#o -laces. 3ne is to themselvesC as theyC the coloni>edC see; to remove the layers o! dead ideological s;in #hich cover their o#n.
+his -rocess e0-oses their o#n identityC including their language and conce-tions that need to 9e 9rought !or#ard and ree0amined in the light o! the goal o! changing the !uture !or humanity as a #hole. +he
second -lace to #hich they turn is that curious set o! -ro-ositions and 9oundary limits that #e call la#. HereC 9e!ore economistsC anthro-ologists and -hiloso-hersC they turn to a
hardy 9and o! international la#yers. And soC 9e!ore I go !urther in this essayC I #ant to ac;no#ledge the several among usC #ho throughout their
lives have sought the ;ey to unloc; the steel:9elted nooseC so that la# and -recedent #ould 9ecome a living aid to -eo-le #hose su<eringC #hose yearning !or -eace and
economic and social IusticeC #hose struggles to stand straightC and #hose des-erate and -laintive #ishes !or decency could 9e legitimated and voiced through international la#.
+he #or; o! these activists creates a discordC as it !orces a ne# harmony #hose strands are 9eing recogni>ed in the common roomsC great assem9ly halls and even in the
streets and villages o! the dis-ossessed as the standard that #ill deMne international la# and common decency !or the t#enty:Mrst century. +his hardy 9andC and
I have in mindC Richard )al;C 4urns 2estonC Saul 8endlovit>C "eter 2eissC )rancis 4oyleC Anthony DRAmatoC Cheri! 4assiouniC the American =niversityC the George 2ashington
=niversity international la# grou-sC as #ell as the Center !or Constitutional RightsC has searched !or a language and a #ay o!
a--roaching the la# #hich #ould -rotect and cele9rate the de!enselessC the torturedC the
indigenousC and the environmentally ro99ed against all manner o! -rior inhuman incursions and
li;ely !uture ones. +hey have sought to call on that democratic as-ect o! the American tradition that is universal in nature and caring in result. In the latter third o! the t#entieth centuryC it is -rimarily through
the e<orts o! this hardy 9and that international la# has come to recogni>e the -ersonRs rights o! dignityC #hether in economic and social rightsC or in the right o! -eaceC or against crimes occurring in #arC such as
ra-eC as #ell as the des-oliation o! the environment. +heir tas; has 9een
*1
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
ContinuedG
to reconMgure the la# so that the su9Iectivities o! the su<ering #ould 9e translated into a voice and language that touched the coloni>ing classC causing it to reconsider its o#n assum-tions and -ur-oses. In their
o#n #ay they insisted that #ithin the coloni>erRs heartC 9eneath his social roleC there #as a moral
sensi9ility that Z\$2&[ could redeMne the la# o! nations and individual states to standards o!
!elt Iustice. +hey recogni>e in their #or; those as-ects o! caring and em-athyC and the !or9idden !our letter #ord in la#::love::as the 9asis o! the !uture o! human;ind. 3!ten the language and
conce-ts #ere already -resent in documentsC or #hat #e #ould see as the inner s-irit o! those documents. 2here necessaryC these 9old thin;ers success!ully invented ne# conce-tions that addressed -ro9lems
understood to 9e universal in natureC re5uiring glo9al attention. In other #ordsC !or the reconstructor and emanci-atorC la# and ideas 9ecame the means o! li9erating 9oth the coloni>er and the coloni>ed. +hey
!ound in the la#s o! the coloni>er the seeds o! emanci-ation #hich #ould su--ort those #ith a sur-lus o! -ain and universal deMcits re5uiring rational attention. And 9y so doingC they 9egan the legal -rocess
Oastonishing !or those #ith a cynical cast o! mindQ that gave voice to the harassed and coloni>ed. +his #as the role -layed 9y international la#yers in advising inde-endence movementsC securing ne# la#C holding
9ac; nuclear #arC and en!orcing ne# limits and 9oundaries to secure !reedom and dignity !or -eo-le. +husC they 9egan the tortuous route o! holding individuals lia9le !or #ar crimes and crimes against humanity.
4ut there #as much more. 3nce they dared to use their intellectual toolsC indeedC their livesC to stand #ith and li9erate the coloni>ing classC the moralist international la#yers #ho 9rought the claims o! the
unre-resented and unheard to -u9lic relevance !ound that they #ere engaged in -ro!ound legalC moral and -olitical acts. +his 9and o! reconstructors and emanci-ators are not uto-iansC although they do not
shir; !rom the res-onsi9ility o! -utting !orth -aths and ideas that #ould serve as the !oundation !or a transnational #orld o! coo-eration. +hey sa# a -ath inside the la# o! the status 5uo that could o-en ne#
-ossi9ilities. +hey !ound that their code o! social res-onsi9ilityC lin;ed to -ro!essional ethical res-onsi9ility and com-etenceC could mean that the #orld o! the status 5uo and the SisS did not have to 9e
surrendered to the #orst as-ects o! the Sis.S /ver so slo#lyC #orld consciousness has changed and may 9ecome codiMed into #orld la#C as in the case o! the -rotection o! the environment. +hese activists sought
to -rotect li9eration and the #ill to#ards it 9y shi!ting the ga>eC changing the languageC Mlling old 9ottles #ith the conce-ts o! ne# #ine. +hey !ramedC ever so gentlyC a logic #hich -ointed to o9vious
contradictions 9et#een the idealC as reJected in =( documents and acce-ted international la#C and the concreteC in #hich the coloni>ers -rotestations !or -olitical e5ualityC -ersonal !reedomC and -eaceC not to
mention their actual -er!ormanceC did nothing more than rein!orce the categories and actions o! o--ression. As 2eston -ut itC Consider the -ossi9ility that i! #e can envisage a -eace!ul . . . #orld that is
realistically attaina9leC as surely as #e can and mustC #e can also devise #ays in #hich to ma;e that vision a reality. Great historical change is not the result o! ine0ora9le Z\$27[ -redestined !orces alone Oi! at
allQ. )undamental re!orms come a9out also 9ecause some ins-ired -eo-le are a9le to -erceive and act u-on the need !or change. n1 +hus the emanci-ators engaged the coloni>er #ith the logic o! social
inventionC moral and legal symmetry and shame. Coloni>ers may enIoy irony. 4ut they do not li;e to 9e shamed. And sometimes they are shamed 9y their o#n actions against their rhetoric. +his is #hy Henry
7issinger did not #ant to 9e lectured a9out human rights 9y his am9assador to Chile a!ter su--orting "inochet in his 9loody cou-. n2 Dean Acheson !eared the insta9ility #hich could occur i! -rotest movements
#ere a9le to rationali>e their -ositions according to international la#. His interest #as in ensuring that there #ould 9e -eace and sta9ility among the signatory nations. +his goal #as achieved #ith (A+3C a
military alliance that #as understood to 9e a !orce !or the status 5uo in its various dealings and guisesC es-ecially as it related to the third and !ourth #orld. Acheson de!ended the !aith 9y 9urles5uing scholars o!
international la#C -raying that the SGood %ordC deliver us . . . !rom the =nited (ations Charter as distorted 9y -ro!essors o! international la#.S n Acheson #as de!ending #hite Rhodesia against the 9lac;
A!rican maIority and the emerging hardy 9and o! international la#yers #ho insisted on international la# 9ased in the s-irit o! morality. n4 3! courseC Acheson -atroni>ed those such as the #ise @uincy 2rightC
and even Grenville Clar; and %ouis SohnC !or he ;ne# that i! their ideas caught onC i! their ideas Ium-ed classes to reach and
lin; to the ideas and struggles o! the angry and dis-ossessedC and i! the dis-ossessed #ere to
esca-e the +H8 !rame#or;C la# #ould 9ecome a threat to na;ed -o#er. +he =nited States and the 2est #ould
have 9een inhi9ited in deMning the #orldRs social develo-ment. A!ter allC #hat else are the curious -hrase Snation:9uildingS and the conce-t o! glo9ali>ationC other than
materiali>ations o! an attem-t to deMne the structure o! national cultures #ithout including oneRs o#n in the cruci9le o! interactionC e0ce-t as im-erial guideK 4ut a9stract
language and la# are curious instruments o! #orld historical develo-ment. In the handsC hearts and minds o! -eo-le they can 9ecome 5uite un-redicta9leC es-ecially #hen
aided 9y ne# readings o! the la# #hich have a moral core. 2hat must 9e surely irritating to the coloni>ers is that this
hardy 9and used the rhetorical e0-lanation and rationali>ation o! real-oliti;C as used 9y nation:
statesC as legal Diu Ditsu !or cataly>ing autonomous grou-s to argue !or human rightsC !reedom and even
economic rights. Surely this is #hat Z\$2*[ ha--ened #ith the =niversal Declaration o! Human RightsC n$ and #hat may 9ecome true o! the covenants on -oliticalC economic
and social rights. n& +his Iiu Iitsu #as 9ased on more than legal s;ill. It stemmed !rom those traditions #hich had roots in natural la#C the Declaration o! Inde-endenceC
recognition o! human dignity and -ragmatic -rogress. +he -hiloso-her Richard 8c7eonRs claim that cultural rights #ere !undamental to all other rights n7 hel-ed to Iusti!y
and give sha-e to the changing conte0t !or international la# and -oliticsC one #hich necessarily included di<erent cultures 9eneath and 9eyond the nation:state. In the #ay
arguments are no# made in international la#C the scholar:activists o! #hom I have s-o;en have !orced the recognition o! a transnational consciousness onto the agenda o!
nation:states. +his consciousnessC #hich mani!ests itsel! in ne# rules and codes o! 9ehavior that nation:states may have to acce-t as a result o! -o-ular and non:governmental
-ressuresC could over time lead to a #orld civili>ation o! -lural cultures. 2hether regarding the environmentC nuclearismC #arC
or democracyC this net#or; o! international la#yers Mnds in the -articularities o! the des-erate
those social and -olitical lin;ages #hich are covered 9y universal -rinci-les. +hese are not the
SuniversalS -rinci-les o! 2estern domination. Rather they are #hat the -hysicist Her9ert
4ernstein and I have termed SJu0iomsS::that #hich can 9e 9elievedC used until re9uttedC
9orro#ed !rom every culture and em-loyed in the li9eration o! -eo-le !rom their coloni>ed
statusC #hether in the so:called third #orldC or in the so:called 2est. n* +he 9eginning o! the ne0t generationRs
consciousness does not mean that the uns-ea;a9le remains hidden as residue o! the -ast. International la#yers a!ter the Second 2orld 2ar gave us a name !or such activities::
genocide::and governments ;no# that this is !or9idden. (everthelessC ruling classes #ant to -rotect their -rivilege o! genocideC
or they #ant to ensure that high government o<icials may mas; their criminal activities 9ehind
sovereignty. +here are too many current e0am-les that suggest that the shea! o! -archment or
la# 9oo;s that -roscri9e genocide are a trans-arent shield against the ra-ist and murderer. +he
Cam9odia and +utsi?Hutu mass slaughters and the #ar crimes trials in Geneva concerning individuals accused o! #ar crimes in 4osnia are so9ering statements a9out human
Z\$2.[ -rogress. All trueC 9ut #ithout the -archment #e have nothing and #ithout the international
la#yer moralist #e have la#s #hich de!end the -o#er!ul against the -o#er!ulC rationali>e
violence against violence and #eC es-ecially in the =nited StatesC are led to acce-t the !au0
claims that international human rights is a matter o! convenience. "ro-aganda and
mani-ulation o! the citi>enry can then easily occurC #here governments conveniently stir u-
their res-ective citi>ens to des-iseC dismissC disdain or revile other nations and -eo-les. Ho#everC at
-articular moments in history #hen contradiction 9et#een the SisS and the -ro!essed SoughtS is too greatC #e may e0-ect momentous changeC as #as the case #ith the American civil rights movement o! the
1.&1s and 1.71sC #hich thrust !or#ard the SoughtS and changed the Sis.S 2hat occurred in this caseC as #ith other cases o! humanitarian advancesC #as the vectoring o! -rotest movements #ith those #ho
9ecame re-elled 9y the social role they -er!ormed in the old reality o! the SisCS as #hen SaulC the ta0 collectorC trans!ormed into "aulC the disci-le o! Desus. General conce-ts that seem to have no a--lica9ility to
the 9ehavior o! -eo-leC such as the =niversal Declaration o! Human RightsC n. 9ecome a touchstone re5uiring o9eisance. +hey are then made shar-er so that the conce-ts are universali>ed and a--lied to allC
not merely to a -articular grou-
*2
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
"ncreasing assistance is vital to 1%$% human rights leadershi85ithout 2unding? an3
1%$% commitment to reroductive rights 5ill be hollo5 and 5ill violate
international obligations% "ncreasing 2unding 5ill signal a rene5ed commitment
to human rights globall3 and bolster (GOs eforts to emo5er 5omen%
8elissa 1retiC %egal adviser !or Center !or Re-roductive Rights6 International %egal "rogramC Harlan )is;e Stone
Scholar !or academic e0cellenceC 200). 2omen6s Rights %a# Re-orterC RutgersC E+he im-act o! the EGlo9al Gag
RuleF on 2omen6s Re-roductie Health 2orld#ideCF )all 211C %e0is.
)or e0am-leC the =nited States Agency !or International Develo-mentC =SAIDC -rovides assistance !or voluntary !amily -lanning
and re-roductive healthcareC #hich includes su--ort !or essential services that -ertain to youthC -regnant mothersC childrenC and also involves
-rograms !or the -revention o! HIBC AIDSC and se0ually transmitted in!ections. Ho#everC it is un!ortunate that the =nited StatesR
su--ort !or these des-erately needed -rograms has 9een inconsistentC insu<icientC and mired
#ith 9urdensome and o<ensive restrictions. Z\1.2[ Since 1..$C Congress has signiMcantly
reduced !unds !or international !amily -lanning and re-roductive health -rograms. /ven the high:#ater
mar; o! !unding !or !amily -lanning and re-roductive health in Mscal year 1..$ #as a--allingly deMcient in relation to 9oth the tremendous need !or such services and the si>e
o! the =.S. 9udget as a #hole. In the content o! this discussionC it is -ertinent to note that the )oreign Assistance Act is the central tenet o! the -romotion o! human rights. It
-rovides, +hat the =nited States shallC in accordance #ith its international o9ligations as set !orth in the Charter o! the =nited (ationsC and in ;ee-ing #ith the constitutional
heritage and traditions o! the =nited StatesC -romote and encourage increased res-ect !or human rights and !undamental !reedoms throughout the #orld. AccordinglyC a
-rinci-al goal o! the !oreign -olicy o! the =nited States shall 9e to -romote the increased o9servance o! internationally recogni>ed human rights 9y all countries. +he =nited
States 9egan its !amily -lanning -rogram thirty years agoC and it has contri9uted signiMcantly to increasing the use o! contrace-tive methods !rom under ten -ercent in the
1.&1s to M!ty -ercent today. +he Ium- !rom ten -ercent to M!ty -ercent -ro9a9ly does not mean much on its o#n. It does not really sound li;e muchC 9ut it certainly does mean a
lot #hen you thin; a9out the !act that this increase has hel-ed to reduce the num9er o! high ris; -regnancies and a9ortions and has saved the lives o! hundreds and thousands
o! #omen #orld:#ide. During the 1..1RsC there #ere a series o! con!erences in Cairo and 4eiIingG and at
9oth o! these con!erencesC human rights and re-roductive rights #ere recogni>ed and
rea<irmed. It #as also recogni>ed and agreed that !amily -lanning in!ormation and services are
critical !or 9oth advancing #omenRs human rights and !or -romoting develo-ment. +he =nited States #as among the -artici-ating
nations lin;ing re-roductive rights to a 9roader notion o! human rightsG and the =nited States made commitments o! -olitical #ill
and resources to#ard reali>ing and securing re-roductive rights. At CairoC the international community -romised to
strive !or the !ulMllment o! an agreed target o! 1.7 -ercent o! the gross national -roduct !or overall o<icial develo-ment assistance and -romised to endeavor to increase the
share o! !unding !or -o-ulation and develo-ment -rogramsC commensurate #ith the sco-e and scale o! activities re5uired to achieve the o9Iective and goals o! the -resent
-rogram o! action. +he Cairo -rogram estimated that a--ro0imately seventeen 9illion dollars #ould 9e re5uired in the year 2111 to meet the need !or international !amily
-lanning and re-roductive health services. +his included $.7 9illion dollars !rom donor countries. Reci-ient countries also constituted an amount o! these -rograms. +he
necessary !unding levels !or the ne0t cou-le o! decades are e0-ected to increaseG ho#everC aggregate donor country contri9utions have stagnated around t#o 9illion -er yearC
#hich is signiMcantly 9elo# the donor target level o! $.7 9illion dollars needed to -rovide su<icient resources to lo# and middle income countries in the year 2111. It is very
clear that -romises #ere made. "roIections #ere made. Commitments #ere made. 4ut those -romisesC -roIections and commitments
have not 9een reJected in actions. In the 1..4 International Con!erence on "o-ulation and Develo-ment held in Cairo and in 1..$C the )ourth
2orld Con!erence on 2omen held in 4eiIingC ChinaC and in the Mve:year revie# con!erences as #ellC the international community and the =nited States une5uivocally endorsed
re-roductive rights as human rightsC e0-ressing their commitment to assist lo# income nations. +hey also urged governments to -ledge their Mnancial and technical resources
to lo# income countries. )ormer Secretary o! State 8adeleine Al9rightC #ho #as then the =.S. "ermanent Re-resentative to the =nited (ationsC reiterated the need to
coo-erate and the need !or commitment at the 1..$ 4eiIing con!erence #hen she said 2e thin; #omen and men should 9e a9le to ma;e in!ormed Iudgments as they -lan their
!amilies. 2e have come to 4eiIing to ma;e !urther -rogress to#ard this goalG 9ut real -rogress Z\1.[ #ill de-end not on #hat #e say here 9ut on #hat #e do a!ter #e leave.
+he )ourth 2orld Con!erence is not a9out conversations. It is a9out commitments. It is very clearC there!oreC that the =nited States did -lay a
leadershi- role at the 4eiIing con!erence and su9se5uently has articulated its commitment to
incor-orate the 4eiIing -rinci-les into =.S. !oreign -olicy. 4ut #here is that commitment no#K
+he goals o! the )oreign Assistance Act and all o! the -romises made 9y o<icial =.S. delegates at these international con!erences do Mnd clear and considera9le su--ort in
international la#C 9eginning #ith the =nited (ations CharterC #hich esta9lishes the conce-tual !oundation !or the develo-ment o! international human rights la#C to the
=niversal Declaration o! Human RightsC the Civil and "olitical Rights Covenant and the C/DA2 conventionC as #ell as ChildrenRs Rights Convention. It is clear that #hile the
=.S. commitment to the -rotection and advancement o! #omenRs re-roductive rights has an im-ortant -lace in !oreign -olicyC and the =nited States deMnitely has contri9uted in
a signiMcant #ay to em-o#ering #omen across the #orldG 9ut its contri9ution could have 9een much 9etter. +he =.S. needs to do much more.
Although the =nited States has 9een a leader in !amily -lanning assistance since the 1.&1sC it is
currently !ailing to -rovide its share o! -romised !unding and the level o! !unding never has
9een as 9ad as it is no#. 4ecause o! its si>e and #ealthC the =nited States remains one o! the
largest 9ilateral donors to international !amily -lanning -rograms. +he =nited StatesC ho#everC
ran;s last out o! t#enty:t#o maIor donors in its contri9ution relative to gross national -roduct.
+he amount o! the overseas develo-ment assistance !alls !ar short o! the agreed 1.7 -ercent endorsed 9y the international community. In Mscal year 1...C #hen the =nited
States economy #as doing e0traordinarily #ellC the =nited States -rovided a mere 1.1 -ercent o! its gross national -roduct !or o<icial develo-ment assistanceG and this Mgure
has actually declined since then des-ite the -ledges made at ;ey international con!erences and meetings. I #ould li;e to em-hasi>e that the !unding going to !amily -lanning
-rograms and re-roductive health -rograms is Iust a !raction o! the total amount o! !oreign aidC #hich in turn is !ar 9elo# the agreed 1.7 -ercent. It is clearC des-ite
commitments made 9y the =.S. at international !oraC that the =.S. Congress has im-osed harsh
limits and decreased the availa9ility o! !unds !or the =nited States International )amily
*)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
"lanning Assistance "rogram. (ot only has the =nited States !ailed to meet international
standards regarding the amount it contri9utesC 9ut it has clearly violated its -ledge to increase
!unding !or !amily -lanning and develo-ment. +his #avering in its commitments to voluntary !amily -lanning and re-roductive health has occurred since
1..4. A--ro-riations !or =SAID !amily -lanning assistance -lummeted !rom a high o! $41.& million dollars in 1..$ to $& million in Mscal year 1..&. +he Mve leading =nited
States 9ased research organi>ations have conservatively estimated that this $ -ercent reduction in !undingC aloneC has resulted in 4 million un-lanned -regnanciesC 1.& million
a9ortionsC *C111 maternal deathsC and a 14C111 in!ant deaths due to high ris; 9irths across the #orldC mostly in lo# income countries. So it is clear that =.S. !oreign assistance
e0-enditures as a #hole encom-ass less than one:hal! o! one -ercent o! the total =.S. 9udgetG and !amily -lanning and re-roductive health -rograms com-rise only a small
!raction o! that amount. 7ee-ing that in mindC the !act that there are additional restrictions im-osed u-on this !unding has resulted in a devastating im-act. +he thin;ing 9ehind
the restrictions in !orce today is 9y no means ne#. In 1.7C the )oreign Assistance Act #as amended 9y a -rovision ;no#n as the SHelms AmendmentCS #hich -rohi9its the use
o! !ederal money !or the -er!ormance o! a9ortion as a method o! !amily -lanning or to motivate or coerce any -erson to -ractice a9ortions. +his -rovisions has 9een inter-reted
to -rohi9it =.S. !unding !or all a9ortions overseas e0ce-t those to save the li!e o! a #oman or in cases o! ra-e or incestG ho#everC according to =SAID and !rom my o#n
e0-eriences o! having seen ho# the rule o-erates in real the #orldC the =.S. has not -rovided any !unding !or a9ortions even under these e0ce-tions. In 1.*4C the Reagan
administration im-osed a so:called S8e0ico City "olicyCS also ;no#n as a SGlo9al Gag RuleCS #hich -rohi9ited Z\1.4[ overseas non:governmental organi>ations !rom receiving
=.S. !unds i!C #ith their o#n !unds and in accordance #ith the la#s o! their o#n countriesC they -er!ormed or actively -romoted a9ortion as a method o! !amily -lanning. +he
Reagan administration also issued e0tremely restrictive regulations that inter-reted the -hrase Sa9ortion as a method o! !amily -lanningS to mean all a9ortions e0ce-t #hen
-er!ormed in cases o! ra-eC incestC or #hen the li!eC 9ut not the healthC o! the #oman #ould 9e endangered i! the !etus #ere carried to term. +he Clinton administration ended
the Glo9al Gag Rule in 1..G ho#everC ultraconservative mem9ers o! Congress re!used to allo# the -ayment o! the =.S. governmentRs arrears to the =nited (ations unless the
gag rule #as reinstated. HenceC in 1...C the Glo9al Gag rule #as reim-osed. In 2111C Congress and the Clinton administration eliminated the Glo9al Gag Rule !rom the Mscal
year 2111 a--ro-riations legislationC 9ut #ithheld the release o! international !amily -lanning money until the 1$th o! )e9ruaryC 2111C allo#ing the ne# "residentC #hich turned
out to 9e "resident 4ushC to decide #hether to reim-ose the -olicy or not. 3n the 22nd o! DanuaryC 2111C "resident George 2. 4ush reim-osed the Glo9al Gag Rule. %i;e
the 8e0ico City -olicyC this Glo9al Gag Rule restricts non:governmental organi>ations that
receive =SAID !amily -lanning !unds !rom using their o#n !undsC that isC non:=.S. !undsC to
-rovide legal a9ortion servicesC to lo99y their o#n governments !or a9ortion la# re!ormC or
even to -rovide accurate medical counseling or re!errals !or sa!e a9ortions. As a resultC
organi>ations across the #orld in these lo# income countries
ContinuesG
**
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
ContinuedG
#ho are already constrained must e0-end resources on overseeing that the re5uirements o! the
Glo9al Gag Rule are metC and this has resulted in the !urther diverting o! resources !rom the
actual -ur-oses o! the !undsC #hich is !amily -lanning and re-roductive health services. +here is also
a -ractice o! 9lac;listing organi>ations that !ail to com-ly #ith these -rovisions as #ell. Conse5uentlyC the rule is 9eing im-lemented in such a manner that it has created an
environment o! !earG and the Glo9al Gag Rule thrives on !ear. +o understand the im-act o! the Glo9al Gag RuleC it is necessary to understand certain things a9out the local
content in #hich it o-erates. In lo# income countriesC governments are lo# 9udgetC and they have very limited resources. AlsoC #hile -rioriti>ing e0-endituresC healthC
-articularly #omenRs re-roductive healthC is not really on the to- o! their list. As a resultC (G3s !ulMll a very im-ortant role in -roviding 9asic services to -eo-le that the
government is other#ise res-onsi9le to -rovideG and this very !act alone signiMcantly enhances the -otential !or damage 9y -olicies li;e the Glo9al Gag Rule. It enhances the
-otential !or damage a<ecting a great num9er -eo-leRs livesC 9ecause (G3s are connected to the general -o-ulation in a very s-ecial and critical #ay. Due to limited resourcesC
(G3s do not have the lu0ury o! huge o<ice s-ace and lots o! sta<G and as a resultC they have to use the little money that they have in the most e<ective and !rugal #ay -ossi9le.
As a resultC they usually try to -er!orm and -rovide a num9er o! services #ith !unds they receive !rom one sourceG and the !act that -roIects are usually !or a certain -eriod o!
time leaves them constantly #orrying a9out #here they are going to Mnd their ne0t !unding. +his is #hy securing consistent !unding !rom one relia9le source is so critical. A-art
!rom thatC the nature o! re-roductive health is such that it has several com-onentsG and you cannot
really -rovide one -articular serviceC #hich is !amily -lanningC in com-lete isolation !rom the
range o! other servicesG such asC -renatal careC -ostnatal careC counseling a9out HIBC AIDSC or
counseling a9out !amily -lanningC or even se0 education. +he third -oint #hich I thin; is very im-ortant to understand is that
the nature o! the a9ortion de9ate in most countries across the #orld is very di<erent !rom #hat it is li;e here in the =.S. In many countriesC unsa!e a9ortion is a leading cause
o! death among -regnant #omen. In countries li;e (e-alC =gandaC and "eruC #here unsa!e a9ortion is a leading cause o! deathC the de9ate on a9ortion is com-letely di<erent.
It is less -olitical. It is more a matter o! li!e and deathG and something li;e the Glo9al Gag Rule totally ignores that -articular !act. +he Mrst ty-e o! harm that has 9ecome visi9le
to some e0tent is the harm to #omenRs re-roductive health. 2e live in a #orld #here eighty thousand #omen die annually due to unsa!e a9ortions. (G3sC in countries #here
a9ortion Z\1.$[ is legalC cannot -rovide a9ortions or re!er or counsel on a9ortion. In (e-alC it is estimated that $. #omen die !rom -regnancy:related com-lications !or every
111C111 live 9irths. In the =nited StatesC the maternal mortality rate is 7 -er 111C111 live 9irthsG hal! o! these deaths are due to unsa!e a9ortions. A9ortion #as decriminali>ed
in (e-al in 2112G ho#everC (G3s receiving =SAID !unding !or !amily -lanning -rograms #ill not 9e a9le to -rovide a9ortion counseling or services or ma;e re!errals. +his #ill
have a devastating e<ect on #omen 9ecause the government in its -olicy has clearly stated that the (G3 #ill 9e the main -roviders o! a9ortion services 9ecause the
government does not have enough resources. In 4oliviaC the 8inistry o! HealthC #hich technically is not even covered 9y the Glo9al Gag RuleC has indicated that it #ill no longer
endorse li!esaving care !or #omen su<ering com-lications !rom illegal and unsa!e a9ortions 9ecause o! the Glo9al Gag Rule. +he government also has gone to the e0tent o!
sus-ending e<orts to -ermit distri9ution o! emergency contrace-tion 9ecause o! the Glo9al Gag Rule. +his -oint demonstrates that the Glo9al Gag Rule casts its net very
#idelyG and it does not Iust im-licate a9ortionC 9ut also has a chilling e<ect andC as a resultC a<ects a #hole host o! services. +he Glo9al Gag Rule also limits #omenRs access to
in!ormation. +he Glo9al Gag Rule -rohi9its the distri9ution o! neutralC !actual in!ormation a9out a9ortionC even i! the goal is ma;ing legal a9ortions availa9le or -reventing
#omen !rom -utting their lives at ris; 9y undergoing unsa!e a9ortions. As e0-ressed in the #ords o! one activist !rom SenegalC SI thin; that the Glo9al Gag Rule is shortsightedC
created 9y -eo-le sitting in 2ashington D.C. #ho cannot see the im-lications !or #omen and the rest o! the #orld. I! it 9ecomes ta9oo to tal; a9out a9ortionC a9ortion #ill sli-
even !urther underground #ith disastrous im-lications !or #omen.S
In 4oliviaC #here a9ortion is legalC doctors and healthcare organi>ations cannot even -rovide in!ormation a9out a9ortion to -rotect a #omanRs -hysical health or even -rovide
in!ormation that a9ortion is an o-tion. In South A!ricaC healthcare organi>ations cannot engage in -u9lic education -rograms a9out HIB and AIDS that include the availa9ility o!
sa!e and legal a9ortion as an o-tion !or HIB:in!ected -regnant #omen. +he Glo9al Gag Rule is inherently anti:democratic 9ecause it violates the right to !ree s-eech. 2e
live in a #orld #here *1C111 #omen die !rom unsa!e a9ortions -er year. +his occurs mostly in
countries #here a9ortion is highly restricted or illegal. +he Glo9al Gag Rule -revents overseas
(G3s !rom lo99ying their o#n governments to 9ring a9out la# re!orm andC as a conse5uenceC
to save #omenRs lives. In "eruC the e0ecutive director o! a =.S.:!unded #omenRs rights organi>ation #ho #as invited to 2ashingtonC D.C. to s-ea; #ith the
media and =.S. -olicyma;ers on the negative e<ects o! the Glo9al Gag RuleC declined to discuss the issue o! a9ortion and its im-act on #omen in "eru. She later revealed that
she !eared that -u9licly discussing a9ortion #ould Ieo-ardi>e her =.S. !undingC #hich -rovides lo#:income #omen access to !amily -lanning. (G3s e0-erience Mrsthand the
e<ects o! illegalC unsa!e a9ortionG and they are o!ten called u-on to -artici-ate in de9ates a9out a9ortion la# re!orm. Ho#everC the Glo9al Gag Rule !orces these (G3s to limit
their -artici-ation in a democratic -rocess in order to continue to receive !unding. InterestinglyC the Glo9al Gag Rule does not im-ose any restrictions on anti:choice s-eech.
3nly one vie#-oint is restricted and su--ressedC that o! the (G3s. (G3s that receive !unding !rom the =.S. government have to su--ort and -rovide counseling that advises
#omen not to have a9ortions and they must condemn and demoni>e a9ortions -u9licly. In 4oliviaC !or instanceC .1 #omen -er 111C111 live 9irths die !rom -regnancy:related
com-lications. (G3s that have !ormed a coalition to -ress !or the li9erali>ation o! 4oliviaRs a9ortion la#s and s-read -u9lic health a#areness #ere !orced to curtail their
activities !or !ear o! losing !unding !or s-ea;ing a9out the issue. In RussiaC #here most a9ortions are legalC =.S.:!unded (G3s cannot meet #ith government o<icials to discuss
their concerns regarding the negative health im-act o! a -ro-osed restrictive a9ortion la#. +hese e0am-les reJect on the nature o! the a9ortion de9ate in countries across the
#orldC -articularly lo# income countriesC and demonstrate that the right to Z\1.&[ a9ortion is not Iust a9out choiceC it is a9out saving #omenRs lives. )or millions o! #omen in
lo# incomeC develo-ing countriesC it is a matter o! li!e and death. +he Glo9al Gag Rule also a<ects the a9ility o! =.S.:9ased (G3s to advocate !or sa!er a9ortion services and the
decriminali>ation o! a9ortion #here it is illegal 9y ma;ing it im-ossi9le !or overseas (G3s to colla9orate #ith them. +he Glo9al Gag Rule undermines the sovereignty o! !oreign
governments 9ecause !oreign governments are not a9le to colla9orate on a9ortion:related -roIects #ith (G3s receiving =.S. government !unding in their country. +he Glo9al
Gag Rule -revents (G3s !rom carrying out their governmentsR -u9lic -olicy decisions in countries #here a9ortions are legalC sa!eC and accessi9le.
+he Glo9al Gag Rule not only violates !reedom o! s-eech and #omenRs right to sa!e and legal a9ortionC 9ut it also violates international commitments to #omenRs re-roductive
rights. It is discriminatory and a source o! violence against #omen in so !ar as it com-romises their
-hysical and mental #ell 9eing. +he Rule violates the commitments made at the 1..4 International Con!erence on "o-ulation and Develo-ment
"rogram o! Action in Cairo and the 1..$ 2omenRs Con!erence "lat!orm !or Action in 4eiIingC commitments made to ensure -ost:a9ortion counselingC education and !amily
-lanning services that hel- -revent re-eat a9ortions. It violates the international commitment to reduce recourse to
a9ortion through e0-anded and im-roved !amily -lanning servicesC leading to more un#anted
-regnancies. +he =nited States governmentC through the im-osition o! the Glo9al Gag RuleC has esta9lished a dou9le standard !or #omenC 9ecause the right to
a9ortion is -rotected 9y the =nited States ConstitutionG 9ut overseasC there is a9solutely no res-ect !or the right to !reedom o! s-eech or !or the right o! a #oman to choose
#hether or not to have an a9ortionC even i! it means that she should have to su<er terri9le health conse5uencesC or even die. +he restriction on overseas (G3s #ould 9e totally
unconstitutional i! im-osed on an American (G3C and there is case la# to that e<ect. Some im-ortant reactions to the Glo9al Gag Rule across the #orld include the !ollo#ing,
/uro-ean "arliamentarians have condemned the Glo9al Gag Rule. In 8arch 2111C /uro-ean "arliamentarians !rom t#enty countries signed a landmar; -etition condemning
the Glo9al Gag Rule. In Dune o! 2112C mem9ers o! the DutchC =nited 7ingdomC and Russian "arliamentsC and a mem9er o! /uro-ean "arliament s-o;e 9e!ore the =.S. Congress
on ho# the Glo9al Gag Rule restricts their !oreign aid -rograms and hinders their democracy:9uilding e<orts as #ell. Ro;its;y Ra!ailovochC #ho is a Russian "arliamentarianC
em-hasi>ed that "resident 4ush must reali>e his -olicies are not sim-ly conservative -olitics. His decisions endanger #omenRs livesC ru-ture -olitical relationshi-sC and
demonstrate ho# little his administration is #illing to do !or #omenRs health in this country and a9road. Restrictions on s-eech is #hat my country !aced under the communist
regime and is #hat #e have 9een trying to overcome this -ast decade. In Dune 2111C the Center !or Re-roductive Rights challenged the Glo9al Gag Rule in court 9ecause it
restricts the CenterRs right to !reedom o! s-eech and it im-edes re!orm o! re-roductive health la#s #orld:#ideC including a9ortion la#s. Senator 4ar9ara 4o0er and
Re-resentative 4ar9ara %ee su--orted this la#suitC and the Center also #as a9le to o9tain the su--ort o! a num9er o! human rights organi>ations #ho signed -etitions and
su9mitted a<idavits. =n!ortunatelyC the Courts here in the =.S. did not see the issue the same #ay that #e doG and they dismissed our case 9y ruling that any im-act on =.S.:
*/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
9ased advocates #as caused 9y the inde-endent choice o! !oreign (G3s to ta;e =SAID !unds. +he assum-tion that their choice is Sinde-endentS could not 9e !urther !rom the
truth. +he American 4ar Association has issued a resolution against the Glo9al Gag Rule saying that, +o one see;ing either legal or medical counselC incom-lete advice can 9e
#orse than no advice at allC misleading consumers into 9elieving that they are receiving all o! the in!ormation necessary to ma;e in!ormed choicesC #henC in !actC the advice is
s;e#ed to#ard a -articular vie#-oint. +he -rohi9ition Z1.7[ im-osed u-on the healthcare -ro!essional against su--lying com-lete in!ormation may 9e li!e:threatening. And
this could not 9e closer to the truth. +he American 8edical AssociationC the American College o! 39stetricians and GynecologistsC and the American (ursing Association have
also o--osed the Glo9al Gag Rule 9ecause it directly conJicts #ith the o9ligations o! medical -ractitionersG -unishing communication 9et#een !emale -atients and their
-hysicians is tantamount to e0-orting mal-ractice. 3--onents o! international !amily -lanning and related health
-rograms have gone 9eyond the Glo9al Gag Rule and continue to #or; !or cuts and restrictions
on !unding. +he cuts and restrictions im-osed during recent yearsC and the threats to e0tend
such measures into the !utureC continue to cause a signiMcant increase in un-lanned
-regnanciesC a9ortionsC maternal and in!ant deathsC transmissions o! HIB and other se0ually
transmitted in!ections. +he =.S. governmentRs decision to cut !unding to =()"A is due to
=()"ARs alleged su--ort !or coerced a9ortions in China. In !actC the State De-artment has
su9mitted a re-ort clearly esta9lishing that this is not the truth. At the Asia "aciMc Con!erence
on "o-ulation and Develo-mentC the =nited States delegation tried to #ater do#n #omenRs
rights to health and !amily -lanning signiMcantlyC reducing the decisions on re-roduction rights
to a moral de9ate on a9ortion. Given the nature o! the im-act o! the Glo9al Gag RuleC it is
im-ortant to understand that the Glo9al Gag Rule is not Iust a9out a9ortion. It is a9out so much
more. It is a9out #hat the =nited States stands !or in the eyes o! the #orld and ho# it strives to
-romote human rights and democracyC not Iust #ithin its 9orders 9ut across the #orld . +he =nited
States has a duty not to harm #omenRs health and lives and to -romote #omenRs health activelyC 9oth in the =nited States and overseas. +he reason #hy this administration has
9een a9le to get a#ay #ith this -olicy so !ar is not 9ecause it is !air or Iust 9ut 9ecause it im-acts #omen #ho cannot vote "resident 4ush out o! -o#er. As in the #ords o!
Senator 4ar9ara 4o0erC SHe is not ans#era9le to themC and they cannot hold him accounta9le. HenceC the onus is on the American -eo-le to recogni>e the inIustices o! such
-olicies.S
*0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A"#$ Advantage
Observation &hree' A"#$
&he ne5 5ave o2 !"I in2ection is rimaril3 afecting 5omen and girls8current
revention rograms 5ill 2ail 5ithout a stronger 2ocus on gender and reroductive
rights%
Germain and Woods? 200/ OAdrienne and Noni9elC Society !or International Develo-mentC E2omenRs Se0ual
and Re-roductive Health and Rights, A ;ey to ending HIB?AIDSCF Dec 211$C Bol 4* Issue 4C -g $&Q
)emini>ation o! the -andemic
/very day a--ro0imately 7C111 girls and #omen 9ecome in!ected #ith HIBC hal! o! all ne#
in!ections. In 1..7C #omen #ere 41 -er cent o! -eo-le living #ith HIBC in 2112 the Mgure rose
to almost $1 -er cent O=(AIDSC 2114, 22Q. +oday in su9:Saharan A!rica 7$ -er cent o! young
-eo-le 9et#een the ages o! 1$ and 24 years living #ith HIB?AIDS are !emale. In every region o!
the #orldC rates o! in!ection are rising among girls and #omenC even in countries that are
considered RsuccessR stories. )or e0am-leC in 4ra>ilC #here the e-idemic has sta9ili>ed in the
last & yearsC in 2111:2112C the num9er o! AIDS cases in girls under the age o! 21 years #as si0
times higher than in 9oys. +hree !actors e0-lain this R!emini>ationR o! the -andemic. +he Mrst is
-ersistent discrimination and ine5uality 9et#een men and #omen in all s-heres o! li!eC #hich
leave #omen economically de-endent on their male se0ual -artnersC and render them
vulnera9le to -overtyC violence and se0ual coercion. In this #ayC HIB in!ection rates reJect the
im-act o! discrimination and other violations o! #omenRs human rights. +he second !actor that
has contri9uted to increased in!ection rates among #omen is that -revention e<orts have not
su<iciently !ocused on #omen. +hey have tended to !ocus on so called high:ris; grou-s : men
#ho have se0 #ith menC intravenous drug usersC se0 #or;ers and their clients. +he third !actor
that ma;es girls and #omen vulnera9le is the a9sence o! -rotective technologyC such as
micro9icidesC that is -rimarily or solely under their control. Se0ual and re-roductive rights are
essential address all three o! these !actors driving the !emini>ation o! the e-idemic. 2ithout
se0ual and re-roductive rights #omen and girls cannot -ossi9ly insist on sa!e se0 -ractices or
ma;e in!ormed choices a9out -revention and treatment o-tions. And #ithout #omenRs !ull
engagement at all levels o! the res-onse to HIB?AIDSC the e-idemic #ill continue to gro#.
Conse5uentlyC there needs to 9e a maIor shi!t in current -revention a--roaches to stone#
in!ections among #omen and girls. +o ma;e this shi!t in current -revention strategies it is
im-ortant to e0amine and analyse ho# they have 9een conceivedC designed and im-lemented
#ith res-ect to the circumstances o! #omen and girls. +he analysis in this -a-er involves a
revie# o! elements o! -revention strategies to determine their e<ectiveness in -rotecting
#omen and girls !rom HIB?AIDS. 4ased on the evidence !rom this analysisC the -a-er then
-ro-oses t#o a--roaches, universal access to se0ual and re-roductive health and the -rotection
o! se0ual rights and com-rehensive se0uality education #ith a !ocus on gender e5uality !or
youth in and out o! the !ormal education system. Recogni>ing #omen at ris; Given that glo9ally
un-rotected heterose0ual se0 is the leading means in the transmission o! HIBC -revention e<orts
must !ocus on -roviding #omen #ith se0ual and re-roductive health in!ormation and services
and the -rotection o! their re-roductive and se0ual rights. +he rates o! in!ection !or #omen
#ithin RmonogamousR heterose0ual relationshi-s demonstrate that se0 #ithin marriage or long:
term relationshi- is a ris; !actor !or them. 2ithout economic autonomy #omen can lac; the
-o#er in their relationshi-s to negotiate sa!e se0 #ith their hus9ands or -artners. )orced and
early marriage also increases girlsR vulnera9ility to HIB as their hus9ands are o!ten older and
more li;ely to have 9een e0-osed to the virus through !ormer or current se0ual -artners. 8any
-revention -rogrammes do not recogni>e these realities in #omenRs lives. "revention -rogrammes o!ten ignore
*7
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
a signiMcant grou- that is at ris; : #omen in heterose0ual relationshi-s. In order to reach all high:ris; grou-sC including these
#omenC -revention strategies must identi!y entry -oints that are a--ro-riate. Re-roductive health clinics are a ;ey entry -oint !or
-roviding -revention in!ormation !or all #omen and testing and councelling it is im-ortant that #omen living #ith HIB?AIDS are
a9le to access se0ual and re-roductive health services and e0ercise their re-roductive rights. All countriesC need to address
HIB?AIDS not only 9ut also as an im-ortant re-roductive health issueC come to gri-s #ith !ully im-lementing the 4eiIing and Cairo
agendas and their human rights o9ligations. 3ne o! the most im-ortant and -ain!ul lessons gained !rom all these years o! com9ating
the e-idemic is that countries must act 5uic;ly to address the underlying gender ine5uality that has
resulted in the !emini>ation o! the e-idemic and sto- the human rights violations that continue
to -lace vulnera9le -o-ulations at ris; o! HIB in!ection. 8any e-idemics could !ollo# the same
-atterns as Su9:Saharan A!rica i! the governments and the international community do not
ma;e the necessary investments in se0ual and re-roductive health and education needed to
-revent the s-read o! the e-idemic.
*:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A"#$ Advantage
&he gag rule undermines integrated !"I revention services through 2amil3 lanning
clinics8this undermines access to contracetion and !"I treatment%
Allegra JonesC /ditorC 43S+3( C3%%/G/ +HIRD 23R%D %A2 D3=R(A%C 200*. 4oston College +hird 2orld %a#
DournalC EH/A%I(G +H/ 23=(DS 3) S%AB/RA, CA( "R/S/(+ %/GA% R/8/DI/S C=R/ "AS+ 2R3(GSK, (3+/,
+he S8e0ico City "olicyS and Its /<ects on HIB?AIDS Services in Su9saharan A!ricaCF %e0is (e0is Data9ase.
3<icially called the S8e0ico City "olicyCS this condition on !oreign assistance #as Mrst
announced 9y Reagan administration o<icials at the =nited (ations O=(Q International
Con!erence on "o-ulation in 8e0ico City in 1.*4.
:
+he "olicy is also commonly called the
S glo9al gag rule S 9ecause it limits the advice medical -ro!essionals a9road may give their
-atientsC should their organi>ation acce-t =.S. !unding.
;
In develo-ing countries #ith -oor
health conditions and insu<icient resourcesC !amily -lanning clinics are o!ten the 9estC i! not the
onlyC -laces #here individuals can o9tain medical advice and resources !or -rotecting
themselves against S+Is such as human immunodeMciency virus OHIBQ and ac5uired
immunodeMciency syndrome OAIDSQ.
10
In 2112C more than .1Y o! the 42 million -eo-le living
#ith Z\1.1[ HIB?AIDS glo9ally lived in develo-ing nations.
11
+his -ro-ortion is e0-ected to
increase 9ecause the AIDS virus s-reads ra-idly in develo-ing countries that have inade5uate
resources !or -revention and treatmentC as #ell as -oor health:care systems.
12
2orld#ideC the
region most a<ected 9y AIDS is su9:Saharan A!ricaC #here AIDS is the leading cause o! death
and has ;illed more than 1..4 million -eo-le.
1)
A ne#s editor o! The Namibian, a leading
ne#s-a-er in (ami9iaC #ritesC S#hen it comes to im-lementation o! ZAIDS -revention[ in the
+hird 2orldC !amily -lanning centers literally o<er a li!eline . . . . +he challenge is no#here
greater than in su9:Saharan A!rica::the e-icenter o! the AIDS -andemic.S
1*
In the Mght against
HIB?AIDSC !amily -lanning centers are -articularly vital !or #omenC #ho are at greater ris; !or
contracting HIB or AIDS than men.
1/
In su9:Saharan A!ricaC $*Y o! those living #ith HIB?AIDS
are #omen.
10
2omen and girls are -articularly susce-ti9le 9ecause HIB transmission to #omen
is 9iologically more Se<icientS than transmission to men andC in many circumstancesC #omen
lac; -o#er to negotiate sa!er se0ual -ractices due to gender ine5uality.
17
+hrough educationC
counselingC and condom distri9utionC !amily Z\1.1[ -lanning centers can hel- #omen res-ond
to high:ris; situations and avoid contracting HIB.
1:
As it standsC the 8e0ico City "olicy !orces
the reci-ients o! =.S. !amily -lanning !unding to ma;e value Iudgments a9out the services they
-rovide.
1;
)amily -lanning organi>ations must decide #hether to acce-t =.S. !unding and cease
their a9ortion:related servicesC or to reIect =.S. !unding and thus limit their -otential services
due to constrained 9udgets. 21 8oreoverC regardless o! #hether these grou-s decide to assist
individuals #ith a9ortion:related servicesC the glo9al gag rule !orces organi>ations to -rioriti>e
#hich communities they #ant to serve, #omen see;ing a9ortions or all other #omenC childrenC
and !amilies. 21)urtherC the rule does not allo# -regnant #omen living #ith HIB?AIDSC !or
#hom a9ortion may 9e a legal o-tion domesticallyC !ull access to in!ormation regarding their
medical o-tions. 22 2omen in CameroonC GhanaC %i9eriaC 8aliC R#andaC Nam9iaC and
Nim9a9#e are -ermitted to have a9ortions under certain limited circumstancesC such as to
-rotect their mental or -hysical healthC or on socioeconomic grounds. 2 A re-ort 9y I-asC a
non:-roMt agency !ocusing on #omenRs re-roductive healthC states that S2.$ million o! the 211
million Z\1.2[ #omen #ho 9ecome -regnant each year are HIB:-ositive.S 24 In su9:Saharan
A!ricaC a gro#ing num9er o! #omen are testing -ositive !or HIB at -renatal clinicsC #hich
indicates that their 9a9ies may 9ecome in!ected. 2$ AetC 9ecause o! the 8e0ico City "olicyC
#omen #ho visit many =.S.:!unded clinics #ill not 9e made a#are o! their legal rights. 2& +husC
the 8e0ico City "olicy is not only an a9ortion issueC 9ut is also an HIB?AIDS issue. 27
*;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A"#$ Advantage
1$ 2unding 2or A"#$ rograms in sub9$aharan A2rican 5ill 2ail absent removing the
global gag rule8the gag rule maintains current gender ine.ualities and ma-es
treating A"#$ imossible%
Allegra A% JonesC /ditor o! the 4oston College +hird 2orld %a# DournalC 200*% EHealing the #ounds o! slavery,
can -resent legal remedies cure -ast #rongsKF %e0is.
=ndou9tedlyC this assistance is des-erately neededC -articularly in su9:Saharan A!ricaC #here
one:5uarter o! the regionRs -o-ulation is e0-ected to die !rom AIDS in the ne0t ten years. n11
(everthelessC even as the 4ush administration and Congress increase e<orts to hel- those
in!ected and a<ected 9y this -andemicC the 2111 re:im-osition o! the 8e0ico City "olicy on
!amily -lanning !unding continues to undermine =.S. e<orts to Mght HIB?AIDS. n12
A. Current /<ects on HIB?AIDS Services and "regnant 2omen %iving #ith HIB?AIDS n1
+he 8e0ico City "olicy currently a--lies to S!amily -lanningS !undingC 9ut not to =.S. !unds
designated !or HIB?AIDS. n14 As this (ote has indicatedC ho#everC !amily -lanning clinics in
su9:Saharan A!rica are essential !or -roviding HIB -revention and careC since many !amily
-lanning clients have HIB?AIDSC and health care !acilitiesC -articularly in rural areasC may 9e
scarce. n1$ According to one -rominent commentatorC Sthere is no distinction anymore
9et#een:#hatRs !amily -lanning and #hatRs HIBS 9ecause many S#omen #ho Z\21.[ are
accessing contrace-tion are at ris; o! HIB in!ectionC and #omen #ho are HIB:in!ected may still
9e se0ually active and in need o! -regnancy -revention.S n1& +he integration o! se0ual health
and HIB?AIDS -rograms increases the 5uality and e<ectiveness o! clinics 9y allo#ing -roviders
to share their e0-ertise and learn !rom each other a9out e<ective #ays to #or; #ith clients.
n17 Service integration also -revents the du-lication o! local services in certain areasC there9y
allo#ing more e<icient resource allocation among -o-ulations in need o! !amily -lanning. n1*
4ecause !amily -lanning assistance serves -eo-le #ith HIB?AIDS or others see;ing HIB?AIDS
servicesC them 8e0ico City "olicyRs negative im-act on this -o-ulation must 9e e0-osed in the -olicy and
la#ma;ing arenas. n1. +he 8e0ico City "olicy !ails to address the com-le0ities that HIB?AIDS raises !or -regnant #omen in the re-roductive health decision:ma;ing -rocess 9y e<ectively !oreclosing the o-tion
o! voluntaryC sa!eC legal a9ortion !or many #omen su<ering !rom HIB or AIDS in su9:Saharan A!rica. n141 /nsuring individualsR access to uncensored
in!ormation regarding their !ull range o! re-roductive rights is essential Z\211[ in the
HIB?AIDS conte0t. n141 In su9:Saharan A!ricaC #omen are !re5uently -revented !rom
e0ercising !ull control over their se0ual and re-roductive lives due to gender ine5ualitiesC
societal or s-ousal -ressuresC lac; o! in!ormationC or lac; o! Mnancial means to im-lement their
decisions. n142 HIB:-ositive or AIDS status adds to #omenRs vulnera9ility 9y creating -ressure to conduct
their re-roductive lives in certain #ays 9ase on the stigma and discrimination they -erceive !rom othersC including even health -ro!essionals. n14
(ot only is !ull access to in!ormation and resources necessary !or HIB?AIDS -reventionC it is
also crucial !or -regnant #omen #ho have HIB or AIDS 9ecause they customarily !ace com-le0
decisions regarding #hether and ho# to -roceed #ith their -regnancies. n144 2omen living
#ith HIB?AIDS may #ish to terminate their -regnancies !or a num9er o! HIB?AIDS:related
reasons.
1*/
Some #omen !ear transmission o! HIB to their !etuses or ne#9orns.
1*0
2orld#ideC
more than 2C111 children are in!ected #ith HIB every day.
1*7
Com-ared #ith industriali>ed
nationsC develo-ing countries e0-erience -ro-ortionately higher rates o! mother:to:child
transmission due to inade5uate resources and the -revalence o! 9reast:!eeding.
1*:
In su9:
Saharan A!ricaC u- to 1Y o! -regnant #omen are in!ected #ith HIB and 2$:$Y o! their
children #ill 9e 9orn in!ected .
1*;
8other:to:child transmission in this region is o! -articular concern due to the regionRs high 9irth ratesC high -revalence o! HIBC high rates o!
HIB among #omen o! re-roductive ageC and the si>ea9le -o-ulation o! #omen ca-a9le o! 9earing children.
1/0
A !etus may contract HIB !rom his or her mother at any time during -regnancyC deliveryC or a!ter the
9a9y is 9orn through 9reast:mil;.
1/1
4ased on the #or; o! scientists and health -ro!essionalsC methods !or reducing the chances o! mother:to:child transmission o! HIB and methods !or -rolonging the diseaseRs
-rogression in children are 9eing develo-edC there9y creating ho-e !or the lives o! #omen and children living #ith HIB?AIDS.
1/2
Boluntary HIB?AIDS testingC
counselingC Z\212[ medical treatment -lansC sa!e in!ant !eeding methodsC and elective cesarean
delivery can reduce the li;elihood o! mother:to:child transmissionG ho#everC these services and
drugs are only e<ective i! they are availa9leC accessi9leC and a<orda9le !or mothers. 1$ +here are also moral
and ethical dimensions to the ris; o! mother:to:child transmission.
1/*
3ne HIB:-ositive mother !rom South A!rica #hose 9a9y died o! AIDS #ritesC S+o have a 9a9y die o! AIDS is the most horri9le thing 9ecause
/0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
the child e0-eriences a ;ind o! -ain that no9ody can e0-lain::not even a doctor. 4ut a mother can !eel it in her gut.S
1//
Another HIB:-ositive #oman descri9ed her thoughts #hen !acing the -ossi9ility o! 9eing
-regnantC SItRs -ro!oundlyC dee-ly selMsh to -ut a 9a9y at ris;.S
1/0
3ther -regnant #omen #ith HIB?AIDS in su9:Saharan A!rica may
see; a9ortions or in!ormation a9out a9ortion 9ecause they reali>e that even i! their !etus
esca-es in!ectionC the mother #ill li;ely die 9e!ore the child 9ecomes sel!:su<icient.
1/7
=(
statistics sho# that o! the more than 1.2 million children #ho have 9een or-haned 9y the AIDS
e-idemicC .$Y are !rom su9:Saharan A!rica.
1/:
+he -sychological and emotional trauma on 9oth a mother #ho is dying and her child is immeasura9le. 1$. A
#oman !rom South A!rica #rote, A-art !rom the -ainC an0iety and the !eeling o! death 9eing so near during the time o! my HIB diagnosisC another hurdle and indescri9a9le -ain #as #hen I had to disclose Zmy
status[ to my eldest child. I had never cried in !ront o! anyone to #hom I had told my status. 3n this -articular dayC Z\21[ #hen I tried to e0-lain everything a9out my HIB status to my daughterC the tears ;e-t
Jo#ing do#n. n1&1 Children or-haned 9y AIDS e0-erience trauma that can mani!est itsel! in the !orm o! de-ressionC aggressionC drug a9useC malnutritionC an0iety a9out the !utureC or develo-mental -ro9lems
caused 9y the loss o! consistent nurturing and guidance. n1&1 In addition to the emotional and -sychological tollC the economic
9urden on children a<ected 9y AIDS is signiMcant. n1&2 +he -resence o! AIDS in a household
o!ten causes children to assume res-onsi9ility !or generating income and -roviding !ood !or
their !amiliesC as #ell as caring !or their ill !amily mem9ers. n1& A case study 9y the Doint =nited (ations "rogramme on HIB?AIDS O=(AIDSQ -oints out that Sthe death o! a mother or !atherZ81[
can leave unsettled de9ts #hich im-act negatively on the !uture care and resources le!t !or the remaining children.S n1&4 In Nim9a9#eC #hen a !amilyRs 9read#inner is ill or its income is s-ent on medical
treatment !or HIB?AIDSC children are o!ten !orced to dro- out o! school and #or;. n1&$ In =gandaC 2$Y o! children #hose -arents have HIB?AIDS dro- out o! school. n1&& Children
or-haned 9y AIDS o!ten leave school to care !or -arents or younger si9lings 9ecause they
cannot -ay school !eesC or 9ecause o! discrimination or emotional distress. n1&7 +hese children
are also at greater ris; o! illnessC a9useC and se0ual e0-loitation com-ared to children or-haned
9y other causes. n1&* )urtherC these !actors increase or-haned childrenRs o#n chances o!
contracting HIB. n1&.
/1
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A"#$ Advantage
1nsa2e abortions cause in2ertilit38this is a maDor cause o2 A"#$ sread%
"ndeendent (e5sC $?2?2007. %e0is.
A!ricaRs highest !ertility rate in the #orld is routinely seen as -ro9lematicC yet its in!ertility rateC
also the highest glo9allyC gets scant attention in s-ite o! the huge conse5uent ris; o! HIB
in!ection. +hat #as the message to this #ee;Rs 1.th 2orld Congress on )ertility and SterilityC
held in Dur9anC !rom Dr Sil;e DyerC director o! in!ertility services at Groote Schuur Hos-ital.
Dyer told delegates that studies in Ca-e +o#nC along #ith others in (igeriaC 8o>am9i5ue and
the Gam9iaC highlighted considera9le unha--iness among in!ertile men and #omen.
"racticallyC ho#everC -olygamy is a common conse5uence andC #hether itRs !ormal or in!ormalC
the -ractice e0-oses 9oth -artners to HIB in!ection. Dyer 5uoted a +an>anian study that turned
u- higher HIB -revalence rates among in!ertile #omenC #hen com-ared #ith -regnant #omen.
SIn!ertilityC in many A!rican settingsC is a violation o! the social norm. I! youRre !ertile youRre seen
as moral and enIoy a social sense o! su-eriority. 4ut i! youRre in!ertileC you live #ith guiltC shame
and !eelings o! inade5uacyCS she said. A-art !rom e0treme -sychological distressC other
conse5uences included marital insta9ilityC loss o! social securityC status and gender identityC and
a li!e o! isolation. Re!erring to a (igerian study o! 211 in!ertile #omenC she -ointed to Mndings
that Iust !e#er than hal! o! the -artners had a<airsC one in every three had ta;en a second #i!eC
and 12Y o! -artners said they had considered divorcing their in!ertile s-ouse. A =gandan Aids
study had also -in-ointed in!ertility as a leading cause o! marital insta9ilityC and a leading ris-
2actor !or HIB?Aids. "ro!essor Ian Coo;eC emeritus -ro!essor at the =niversity o! She<ield and
director o! education !or the International )ederation o! )ertility SocietiesC told delegates that
A!rican #omen each gave 9irth to an average o! $.4 children 9et#een the ages o! 1$ and 4.C
com-ared #ith a /uro-ean average o! 1.$. 4ut he cited unsa!e a9ortions as a maIor cause o!
A!ricaRs highest #orld in!ertility rateC and added that su9:Saharan A!rica also notched u- the
highest rate o! se0ually transmitted in!ections glo9ally. In A!ricaC Coo;e saidC one in every !our
a9ortions #as -er!ormed on a teenagerC and in general more than 1Y o! maternal deaths #ere
due to an unsa!e a9ortion. S2ith the !re5uency o! S+Is and unsa!e a9ortions it is 5uite li;ely
thatC #ith no interventionC there #ill 9e a com-ara9le increase in in!ertility statisticsCS he said.
Children #ere highly desired in A!ricaC #ith -arenthood culturally mandatory and childlessness
culturally unacce-ta9leC and the same a--lied in many ethnic grou-s in the industrialised
#orld. /<orts to com9at HIBC Coo;e saidC had e<ectively -ushed !amily -lanning o< the
international agendaC Seven though !amily -lanning has got a huge role to -lay in the Mght
against HIB?AidsS.
/2
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A"#$ Advantage
A"#$ 5ill sread globall3 and cause e<tinction%
Muchiri 2- Z8ichael 7i9aara Sta< 8em9er at 8inistry o! /ducation in (airo9iC E2ill Annan Mnally -ut out
A!rica6s MresKF Da;arta "ostC 8arch &C %([
+he e0ecutive director o! =(AIDSC "eter "iotC estimated that A!rica #ould annually need 9et#een L 1 9illion to L 9illion to com9at the diseaseC 9ut currently receives only L
1&1 million a year in o<icial assistance. 2orld 4an; "resident Dames 2ol!ensohn lamented that A!rica #as losing teachers !aster than they could 9e re-lacedC and that AIDS
#as no# more e<ective than #ar in desta9ili>ing A!rican countries. Statistics sho# that AIDS is the leading ;iller in su9:
Saharan A!ricaC sur-assing -eo-le ;illed in #ar!are. In 1..*C 211C111 -eo-le died !rom armed
conJicts com-ared to 2.2 million !rom AIDS. Some .& million -eo-le have HIB around the
#orldC 71 -ercent o! them in A!ricaC there9y ro99ing countries o! their most -roductive
mem9ers and decimating entire villages. A9out 1 million o! the 1& million -eo-le #ho have
died o! AIDS are in A!ricaC according to the =(. 2hat 9arometer is used to -roclaim a
holocaust i! this num9er is not a sure measureK +here is no dou9t that AIDS is the most serious
threat to human;indC more serious than hurricanesC earth5ua;esC economic crisesC ca-ital
crashes or Joods. It has no cure yet. 2e are #atching a #hole continent degenerate into
ghostly s;eletons that Mnally succum9 to a most e0cruciatingC dehumani>ing death. Gore said that his ne#
initiativeC i! a--roved 9y the =.S. CongressC #ould 9ring =.S. contri9utions to Mghting AIDS and other in!ectious diseases to L 2$ million. Does this mean that the =( Security
Council and the =.S. in -articular have at last decided to remem9er A!ricaK SuddenlyC AIDS #as seen as threat to #orld -eaceC and Gore #ould as; the congress to set u-
millions o! dollars on this case. +he ho-e is that Gore does not intend to ma;e -olitical ca-ital out o! this 9y -ainting the usually disagreea9le Re-u9lican:controlled Congress
as the 9ad guy and ho-e the 9uc; sto-s on the #hole o! current and !uture =.S. governmentsR conscience. 8ay9e there is nothing le!t to salvage in A!rica a!ter all and this tal;
is a9out the A!rican:American vote in (ovem9erRs =.S. -residential vote. Although the =( and the Security Council cannot solve all A!rican -ro9lemsC the AIDS challenge is a
!undamental one in that it threatens to #i-e out man. +he challenge is not one o! a single continent alone 9ecause
A!rica cannot 9e 5uarantined. +he trou9le is that AIDS has no cure :: and thus even the 2est
has sta;es in the AIDS challenge. 3nce su9:Saharan A!rica is #i-ed outC it shall not 9e long
9e!ore another continent is on the 9rin; o! e0tinction. Sure as deathC A!ricaRs time has run outC
signaling the 9eginning o! the end o! the 9lac; race and may9e the human race.
&he 1%$% resonse to A"#$ in A2rica is a model 2or the rest o2 the 5orld%
Morrison? 01 OD. Ste-henC director o! the A!rica -rogram at CSISC +he 2ashington @uarterlyC 2interC E+he
A!rican "andemic Hits 2ashingtonCF htt-,??###.t#5.com?#inter11?morrison.-d!Q
During the ne0t administrationC the e-ic AIDS tragedy no# s#i!tly un!olding #ill resha-e A!rica
and ine0ora9ly dominate =.S. !oreign -olicy to: #ard the continent. (ot since the 9u9onic
-lague has the #orld !aced an in: !ectious disease -andemic o! such s#ee-ing -ro-ortions as
the -resent HIB? AIDS glo9al -andemic'at #hose e-icenter A!rica Mrmly stands. In 1& A!ri:
can countries #here HIB?AIDS no# rages'all 9ut one in southern and east: ern A!rica'
9et#een one:third and t#o:thirds o! young men and #omen #ill eventually die o! AIDS.
/nlarge the a-erture and the vie# on A!rica does not im-rove, 24 o! the #orld6s 2$ most AIDS:
a<ected countries are A!rican. 2e Mnally 9egan to recogni>eC at the end o! the 1..1sC that
HIB?AIDS is not sim-ly another in a string o! crises on a crisis:-rone continent. It is a co:
lossus that in a large segment o! A!rica raced !ar out in !ront 9oth o! most A!rican leaders #ho
#ere in denial as #ell as donors and international orga: ni>ations #ho #ere com-lacent or
disinterested. In this -eriodC countless o--ortunities to act early #ere lost. +he central 5uestion no# is ho# Oor i! it is -ossi9leQ to regain lost ground'to esta9lish
a !oothold #ithin A!rica that e<ectively reverses in!ection rates and -rovides a modicum o! care !or the millions #ho su<er !rom AIDS and related in!ectious diseases. )or the
9al: ance o! this decadeC as the search !or an ans#er to this 5uestion -roceedsC HIB?AIDS #ill increasingly challenge the integrity o! the continent and in: duce changes in =.S.
!oreign -olicy. Ho# -recisely these changes #ill un!old is not yet ;no#n. +oday it is not certain that immediate action 9y the
international com: munity and A!rican counter-arts can stanch the advance o! HIB?AIDS in the
hottest >one or even in several other A!rican countries #here the e-i: demic a--ears -oised to
ta;e o<C such as (igeriaC /thio-iaC GhanaC (ami9iaC and Angola. 2hether the outcome is a
relative successC a9Iect !ailureC or some mi0ed -atternC e0-eriences #ill not only heavily deMne
A!rica6s !uture and im-act im-ortant =.S. interests in mitigating A!rica6s -roli!erating crisesC
-romoting its integration into the glo9al economyC and ensuring relia9le access to increasingly
im-ortant sources o! energyG they #ill also set o5er2ul global recedents% In e<ectC A!rica
/)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
-rovides the -relude to !uture HIB?AIDS:related devel: o-ments in IndiaC ChinaC the Cari99eanC
and countries o! the !ormer Soviet =nionC #here the -andemic may surge in its ne0t -hase.
Ho# #e engage on the so!t glo9al issues stemming !rom HIB?AIDS in A!rica #ill inevita9ly
sha-e our !uture res-onse in other -arts o! the #orld. )or these reasonsC =.S. national interests in com9ating HIB?AIDS in A!rica'
on moralC humanitar: ianC economicC and transnational security grounds'#ill increasingly 9e un: derstood in glo9al terms. HIB?AIDS #ill alter ho# #e -erceive A!ricaG ho#
#e manage A!rica6s multi-leC -roli!erating crisesG and ho# #e situate A!rica glo9ally among =.S. national interests. 2hat these changes #ill 9eC and #hether they contri9ute to
greater ho-e or des-airC #ill de-end on ho# e!: !ectively the international community and A!rican leaders co-e #ith the massive uncertainties at -lay. +his includes the
continent6s vulnera9ility to sudden shoc;s that set 9ac; -rogress and redeMne glo9al -erce-tions o! #hat is -ossi9le in A!rica.
/*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A"#$ Advantage
"ncreasing 2amil3 lanning assistance 5ill ma<imi4e resources and create more
efective distribution sites 2or A"#$ revention rograms%
Dohn Cleland and Steven $inding? %ondon School o! Hygiene P +ro-ical 8edicineC and director:general o! the
International "lanned "arenthood )ederationC 200/. +he %ancetC E2hat #ould 8althus say a9out AIDS in A!ricaKCF
11?2&C academic search -remier.
+hese recommendations must 9e acted on 9ecause !amily:-lanning e<orts in A!rica seem to
have slac;ened in recent years. )or e0am-leC in Ghana there is evidence that HIB?AIDS
activities are diverting attention and !unds !rom !amily -lanningG and this is a country #here
more #omen are thought to die !rom unsa!e a9ortion Oitsel! a reJection o! inade5uate access to
contrace-tionQ than !rom AIDS.1$ Contrace-tive su--lies are already less secure in A!rica
than in other regions and any !urther deterioration #ould have severe conse5uences.1& I! -lacing
a high -riority on the reduction o! 9irth rates is central to the long:term reduction o! -overty in A!ricaC #hat -olicy and -rogramme
o-tions should 9e consideredK 2e suggest a three:-ronged a--roach'one that com9ines a !ocus on !ertility control #ith an
intensMed e<ort to -revent the s-read o! HIB. +his a--roach recognises that the t#o -rogrammes share an essential aimC namely
to 9rea; the lin; 9et#een se0ual intercourse and negative conse5uences, unintended -regnancy and disease.
)irstC !amily:-lanning in!ormation and services must 9e made more #idely availa9le. Countries
such as 4ots#anaC 7enyaC South A!ricaC and Nim9a9#eC #here !amily:-lanning services are
#idely availa9leC have seen reductions in 9irth rates. Greater contrace-tive useC through the reduction o! the
num9er o! un#anted -regnancies in #omen in!ected #ith HIBC might also 9e a more cost:e<ective #ay than drug thera-y to
-revent mother:to:child transmission o! the virus.17 SecondC 9ecause desired !amily si>es are still largeC attention needs to 9e
given to communications e<orts that legitimate smaller !amilies and contrace-tive use. +he e0am-le o! 7enya sho#s ho# such
advocacy can dramatically change re-roductive norms, the stee- !all in desired !amily si>es in the 1.*1s O#e9ta9le 1Q coincided
#ithC and #as -ro9a9ly -artly attri9uta9le toC the activities o! 7enya6s -olitical leadershi- in that decade. %eaders e0-anded !amily
-lanning services and re-eatedly s-o;e in -u9lic o! the need to reduce the ra-id rate o! -o-ulation increase. 7ey sha-ers o! -u9lic
o-inion such as national -olitical leadersC village headmenC and #omen6s grou-s are usually the most e<ective advocates and they
must 9e #on over. +hirdC !amily:-lanning and HIB:-revention -rogrammes should 9e more closely
lin;ed. In the a9sence o! a vaccineC 9ehaviour change'es-ecially delayed se0ual de9utC
reduction in the num9er o! se0ual -artnersC and condom use'is the only #ay to -revent HIB
transmission. (o -u9lic:health s-ecialty has more e0-erience in the -romotion o! 9ehaviour
change in less develo-ed countries than do !amily:-lanning -rogrammes.1* +his e0-ertise
should 9e harnessed to encourage -eo-le to avail themselves o! voluntary HIB counselling and
testing servicesC to avoid ris;y 9ehavioursC and to -ractise dual -rotection against 9oth
un#anted -regnancies and HIB. Integration o! -rogrammes !or HIB -revention and !amily
-lanning could -roduce 9etter outcomes than either endeavour could yield aloneC thusC
-roviding a -romising solution to the -ro9lems o! HIB?AIDSC high 9irth ratesC and -overty that
have a<ected so many A!rican countries.
//
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
2AC #emocrac3 Addon
&he 1$ is a global model 2or governance8the gag rule revents us 2rom e<orting
democratic values%
Center 2or Reroductive RightsC 3cto9er 2002. E/uro-ean "ers-ectives on the Glo9al Gag RuleCF
htt-,??###.re-roductiverights.org?-u9Tid0Tus-olicy.html.
+he =nited States is regarded as a 9astion o! li9erty and democracy. +he glo9al gag rule is
inconsistent #ith international human rights standards and =.S. legal -rinci-lesC including the
rights to !ree s-eechC democratic -artici-ationC and re-roductive autono: my. +he glo9al gag
rule undermines =.S. !oreign -olicy o9Iectives that encourage the 9uilding o! democracyC civil
societyC and #omen6s -artici-ation as e5uals in society. It runs counter to the =.S. commitment
to #omen6s re-roductive rights and health. It #ould 9e unconstitutional i! a--lied directly to
organi>ations in the =nited States that receive !ederal !unding. 3ur -romotion o! democratic
values must e0tend 9eyond our domestic 9orders. I! the =.S. is to maintain its re-utation as a
leader o! democratic -rinci-lesC #e must !ollo# these -rinci-les not only at homeC 9ut around
the #orld. 2e must revo;e the glo9al gag ruleC and allo# the values !or #hich America truly
stands'!reedom o! e0-ressionC e5ual: ityC and !reedom o! choice'to 9e -roudly u-held not only
in the =nited StatesC 9ut as models 2or democrac3 throughout the 5orld. +he Center !or
Re-roductive Rights Ioins our /uro-ean allies in urging Congress and the administration to
eliminate the glo9al gag rule.
#emocrac3 romotion is essential to revent man3 scenarios 2or 5ar and e<tinction%
#iamondC 1;;/ O%arry DiamondC senior !ello# at the Hoover InstitutionC Decem9er 1..$C "romoting Democracy
in the 1..1sC htt-,??##ics.si.edu?su9sites?cc-dc?-u9s?di?1.htmQ
3+H/R +HR/A+S +his hardly e0hausts the lists o! threats to our security and #ell:9eing in the coming years and
decades. In the !ormer Augoslavia nationalist aggression tears at the sta9ility o! /uro-e and could easily s-read. +he
Jo# o! illegal drugs intensiMes through increasingly -o#er!ul international crime syndicates that have made common
cause #ith authoritarian regimes and have utterly corru-ted the institutions o! tenuousC democratic ones. (uclearC
chemicalC and 9iological #ea-ons continue to -roli!erate. +he very source o! li!e on /arthC the
glo9al ecosystemC a--ears increasingly endangered. 8ost o! these ne# and unconventional
threats to security are associated #ith or aggravated 9y the #ea;ness or a9sence o! democracyC
#ith its -rovisions !or legalityC accounta9ilityC -o-ular sovereigntyC and o-enness. %/SS3(S 3)
+H/ +2/(+I/+H C/(+=RA +he e0-erience o! this century o<ers im-ortant lessons. Countries
that govern themselves in a truly democratic !ashion do not go to #ar #ith one another. +hey
do not aggress against their neigh9ors to aggrandi>e themselves or glori!y their leaders.
Democratic governments do not ethnically ScleanseS their o#n -o-ulationsC and they are much
less li;ely to !ace ethnic insurgency. Democracies do not s-onsor terrorism against one another.
+hey do not 9uild #ea-ons o! mass destruction to use on or to threaten one another. Democratic
countries !orm more relia9leC o-enC and enduring trading -artnershi-s. In the long run they
o<er 9etter and more sta9le climates !or investment. +hey are more environmentally
res-onsi9le 9ecause they must ans#er to their o#n citi>ensC #ho organi>e to -rotest the
destruction o! their environments. +hey are 9etter 9ets to honor international treaties since they value legal
o9ligations and 9ecause their o-enness ma;es it much more di<icult to 9reach agreements in secret. "recisely
9ecauseC #ithin their o#n 9ordersC they res-ect com-etitionC civil li9ertiesC -ro-erty rightsC and the rule o! la#C
democracies are the only relia9le !oundation on #hich a ne# #orld order o! international security and -ros-erity can
9e 9uilt.
/0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
2AC #emocrac3 Addon
&he lan is -e3 to 2ostering stable democratic transitions%
Center 2or Reroductive Rights? 200) OE4rea;ing the Silence, +he Glo9al Gag Rule6s Im-act on =nsa!e
A9ortionCF htt-,??###.re-roductiverights.org?-d!?9oTggr.-d!Q
It has long 9een recogni>ed that democratic gov:ernance is a !undamental -rere5uisite !or a
Iust and sta9le #orld.2 According to democracy e0-ertsC a !unctioning democracy Emust
-rovide !or a rule o! la#C and rigorously -rotect the right o! individuals and grou-s to s-ea;C
-u9lishC assem9leC demonstrateC lo99yC and organi>e to -ursue their interests and
-assions.F242ithout a ro9ust and active civil societyC a democratic government cannot res-ond
to its citi>enry.2$ (G3s -lay an invalua9le role in 9uilding a structured dialogue 9et#een
citi>ens and governments. +hey contri9ute in!ormation and ideasC advocate more e<ectively
!or changeC 9ring individuals #ith common interests together to -etition their governmentC and
generally increase government accounta9ility and legitimacy. +he gag ruleC ho#everC
-recludes (G3s !rom using their o#n !unds to access ;ey !orums such as -arliamentsC
e0ecutive 9ranch o<icials and the -u9licC and -revents them !rom addressing the root causes o!
unsa!e a9ortion 9y -utting it on the -olitical and social agenda. /ach o! the !our countries
under study is a young democracy that struggles #ith lo# -u9lic conMdence in the -olitical
-rocessC untested democratic institutionsC sha;y traditions o! o-en and in!ormed de9atesC and
limited legal re!orm. Civil society organi>ations in these emerging democracies re5uire
su--ort !rom outside donorsC such as =SAIDC to !oment o-enC in!ormed de9ates 9et#een
-olitical 9ranches and civil society organi>ations on the !rontlines o! democratic re!orm.
InsteadC the gag rule !or9ids (G3s !rom -artici-ating in their o#n country6s democracy and
also encourages governments to act in an authoritarian manner.
/7
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
2AC $o2t +o5er Addon
"ncreasing 2amil3 lanning 2unding is vital to cementing 1%$% leadershi
internationall3%
Gold2arb? 200) D.D.C #ith a Concentration in International %a#C !rom Cali!ornia 2estern School o! %a#. +o9eyC
Cal. 2. IntRl %.D. 4$C EA9stinence 4reeds Contem-t, 2hy the =.S. "olicy on )oreign Assistance !or )amily "lanning
is Cause !or ConcernFC S-ringC le0is.
2hile a measure o! "residential discretion in the realm o! )oreign A<airs is necessaryC it should not 9e availa9le as an insulated Meld #here -olitical su--orters may go to get
their cam-aign !avors re-aid. +his is es-ecially true #ith regards to a sensitive to-ic li;e a9ortionC #here the domestic Z\&.[ de9ate is hotly contested and largely religious.
+he =.S. is trying to rally su--ort !rom the =.(. and 9uild trust 9et#een nations #ith vastly
diverse cultures and religions. (o# is not the time to insist on the in!usion o! a conservative
ideological agenda into international agreements. +his is not the meaning o! democracy in America. +he mere attachment o! a !oreign
-olicy la9el should not -ermit circumvention o! domestic constitutional restrictions under these circumstances. 2hen made -ursuant to the )AAC !oreign
assistance !or !amily -lanning is a9out develo-ment assistanceC not a9ortion. I! the =nited
States claims to su--ort international coo-eration !or develo-ment and values the -artici-ation
o! (G3RsC then the recent decision to #ithdra# =()"A !unding is illogical and runs contrary to
government -olicy. +he decisionRs hy-ocritical legal rationale 9reeds international contem-t !or
the American -olitical agendaC and sets the stage 2or challenges to 1%$% 2oreign olic3
under (ational and International %a#. +o !ocus so singularly on the a9ortion issue in
international a<airs is short sighted. As the need !or international alliances 9ecomes
increasingly a--arentC the issue o! !oreign assistance !or !amily -lanning should not 9e
overloo;ed. +he legal under-innings o! these !unding decisions and their treatment in =.S.
!oreign -olicy have im-ortant im-lications as reJections o! domestic la# and -oliticsC and as
otential dealma-ers or brea-ers in the international communit3 .
1$ leadershi revents a global nuclear 5ar%
Khalil4adC 1;;/ ONalmayC "olicy Analyst at the RA(D Cor-orationC 2ashington @uarterlyC S-ringC le0isQ
=nder the third o-tionC the =nited States #ould see; to retain glo9al leadershi- and to -reclude
the rise o! a glo9al rival or a return to multi-olarity !or the indeMnite !uture. 3n 9alanceC this is
the 9est long:term guiding -rinci-le and vision. Such a vision is desira9le not as an end in itsel!C
9ut 9ecause a #orld in #hich the =nited States e0ercises leadershi- #ould have tremendous
advantages. )irstC the glo9al environment #ould 9e more o-en and more rece-tive to American
values :: democracyC !ree mar;etsC and the rule o! la#. SecondC such a #orld #ould have a 9etter
chance o! dealing coo-eratively #ith the #orldRs maIor -ro9lemsC such as nuclear -roli!erationC
threats o! regional hegemony 9y renegade statesC and lo#:level conJicts. )inallyC =.S.
leadershi- #ould hel- -reclude the rise o! another hostile glo9al rivalC ena9ling the =nited
States and the #orld to avoid another glo9al cold or hot #ar and all the attendant dangersC
including a glo9al nuclear e0change. =.S. leadershi- #ould there!ore 9e more conducive to
glo9al sta9ility than a 9i-olar or a multi-olar 9alance o! -o#er system.
/:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
2AC "nternational ,a5 Addon
&he gag rule demonstrates the 1$ un5illingness to abide b3 international la5%
Aguilar H St. 8aryRs =niversity School o! %a#C Candidate !or D.D 9 2002 OAvetteC +he Scholar, St. 8ary6s
%a# Revie# on 8inority IssuesC EGagging on a 4ad Rule, +he 8e0ico City "olicy and its e<ect on #omen in develo-ing countriesCF
%e0is (e0is Data9aseQ

As a mem9er o! the =nited (ationsC the =nited States is o9ligated to !ollo# the -rovisions o! the =( charter. Article $$ o! the =nited (ations Charter outlines theories and
-ractices mem9er nations should -romote in an e<ort to create sta9ility and amica9le relations 9et#een nations.
202
+he =( charter states that mem9er nations should -romote
Ssocial -rogress and develo-mentG solutions o! international economicC socialC healthC and related -ro9lems.S
20)
+he charter !urther -rovides that -romotion o! a!orementioned
ideals should 9e done #ithout discriminating on the 9asis o! SraceC se0C languageC or religion.S
20*
+he Global Gag Rule violates Articles $$
and $& o! the =nited (ations Charter. It has a dis-arate im-act on the social and develo-mental
-rogress o! #omen 9y -rohi9iting access to all !orms o! a9ortion in!ormation.
20/
It limits the a9ility o! #omen
in develo-ing countries to 9e Z\&[ thoroughly in!ormed a9out re-roductive choices that may 9e legally and socially acce-ta9le in their res-ective countries.
200
2. =niversal Declaration o! Human Rights
In addition to the =( CharterC the Global Gag Rule is also in conJict #ith the =niversal
Declaration o! Human Rights. +he =nited States and other mem9ers o! the =nited (ations signed the =niversal Declaration o! Human Rights in 1.4*.
207
+his declaration -rovides that Severyone has the right to a standard o! living ade5uate !or the
health and #ell 9eing o! himsel! and his !amilyC including... medical care and necessary social
services.S
20:
Access to !amily -lanning -rograms is a necessary medical and social serviceC as it -romotes the health and #ell 9eing o! #omen in develo-ing countries.
4y eliminating access to !amily -lanning services and in!ormationC the Global Gag Rule denies
#omen in develo-ing countries access to in!ormation.
. +he International Covenant on Civil and "olitical Rights
)inallyC the Global Gag Rule is in direct conJict #ith the International Covenant on Civil and
"olitical Rights. +he =nites States ratiMed this covenant in 1..2.
20;
=nder Article 1. o! the International Covenant on
Civil and "olitical RightsC Severyone shall have the right to !reedom o! e0-ressionG this right
shall include !reedom to see;C receive and im-art in!ormation and ideas o! all ;indsC regardless o!
!rontiersC either orallyC in #riting or in -rintC in the !orm o! artC or through any other media o! his choice.S
210
4y -rohi9iting (G3s !rom disseminating in!ormation a9out Z\&4[
the !ull range o! !amily -lanning alternativesC
211
the Global Gag Rule restricts the right o! #omen in develo-ing
countries to see; or receive in!ormation.
212
+he Global Gag Rule and its chilling e<ect on the
a9ility to see; and receive in!ormation on a9ortion is a clear violation o! the terms o! the treaty.
As a signatory o! the treatyC the =nited States has a duty to !ollo# its terms.
4. +reaties (ot RatiMed 9y the =nited States
+he Global Gag Rule also conJicts #ith several other treaties that have yet to 9e ratiMed 9y
the =nited States. 2hen the 8e0ico City "olicy #as announced at the =nited (ations International Con!erence on "o-ulation in 8e0ico CityC a delegation !rom
the =nited States cited the =nited (ations Declaration o! the Rights o! the Child as su--ort !or the -olicy.
21)
Ho#everC the Declaration o! the Rights o! the Child never states
that the legal -rotections -rovided to children 9e!ore 9irth are at all times su-erior to the rights o! the mother and her re-roductive choice.
21*
)urtherC the =nited (ations has
ado-ted more recent treaties dealing #ith the rights o! childrenC such as the Convention on the Rights o! the Child.
21/
Although the Convention on the Rights o! the Child has
not 9een ratiMed 9y the =nited StatesC it too incor-orates the -rovision o! the Declaration o! the Rights o! the Child cited as su--ort !or the 8e0ico Z\&$[ City "olicy.
210

Continued reliance on this -rovision alone as su--ort o! the Global Gag Rule? ho#everC
ignores several other -rovisions that directly conJict #ith the -ur-ose o! the Global Gag Rule%
217
)inallyC the GGR violates various -rovisions o! the International Covenant on /conomicC
Z\&&[ Social and Cultural Rights
21:
and the Convention on the /limination o! All )orms o!
Discrimination Against 2omen.
21;
Im-osition o! Z\&7[ the GGR ignores im-ortant rights that
are recogni>ed and -rotected 9y these treaties. 4y !ailing to rati!y these treaties and issuing a
-olicy that directly conJicts #ith the rights recogni>ed in themC the =nited States is
undermining its credi9ility in the international community.
Abiding b3 international la5 is critical to international cooeration to solve all global
roblems%
#amrosch and Mullerson? 1;;/ ODamroschC "ro!essor o! %a#C Colum9iaC and 8ullersonC "ro!essor o!
International %a#C 7ing6sC 4eyond Con!rontationC International %a# !or the "ost Cold 2ar /raC 1..$C -. 2:Q
I. "ressures on International %a#, Demands "laced on It and 39stacles to Its /<ectiveness +he contem-orary #orld has an ever
increasing need !or an international legal system that can res-ond to the demands o! our time.
3! the many reasons !or this !actC #e #ill survey only a !e# o! the most salient. )irst and !oremost is the increasing interde-endence o! all -eo-les. /ven as the #orld is riven
/;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
#ith many contradictions and conJictsC it is also 9ecoming more integrated #ith a greater need !or orderlyC -redicta9le conduct. /ventsC and es-ecially natural and social
disastersC even #hen they occur #ithin a single countryC have more noticea9le e<ects on conditions in the #orld at large. +he Cherno9yl accidentC the earth5ua;e in ArmeniaC
and even internal -olitical -rocesses under#ay in the territories o! the !ormer Soviet =nion and /astern /uro-e'these and many other events occurring #ithin se-arate
countries or regions have a glo9al signiMcance a<ecting the destiny o! all -eo-les. +he intert#ining o! the economic li!e o! diverse countries today is even greater than #as the
interde-endence o! di<erent regions #ithin the same state only hal! a century ago. 3rder and -redicta9ility o! the 9ehavior o! actors on the international scene can 9e achieved
Mrst o! all #ith the aid o! social normsC among #hich international la# occu-ies an im-ortant -lace. A second reason !or the gro#th o! the role o! international la# is
ine0trica9ly connected #ith the Mrst. +he threat o! a thermonuclear catastro-heC universal ecological crisisC and
acute economic -ro9lems in develo-ing countries are o! glo9al concern and endanger the very
e0istence o! humanity. Resolution o! these -ro9lems demands coordinated e<orts o! all states
and -eo-lesC #hich #ould 9e im-ossi9le to achieve #ithout the aid o! international normsC
-roceduresC and institutions. A third reason is the 9reathta;ing -olitical trans!ormations o! recent years. +he changes that 9egan in 1.*$ in the !ormer
Soviet =nion and #ere unleashed in /astern /uro-e have radically trans!ormed the ma- o! the #orld. Although it is im-ossi9le to give a Mnal evaluation o! the character and
signiMcance o! these changes at the -resent timeC it is -ossi9le to conclude that the !undamental glo9al contradiction o! the Cold 2ar era'the contradiction 9et#een socialism
and ca-italismC #hich to a great e0tent determined not only the general climate in the #orld 9ut also the role and signiMcance o! international la# in it'has 9een overcome. In
the Charter o! "aris !or a (e# /uro-eC 2 countries o! /uro-eC together #ith the =nited States and CanadaC a<irmed that Ethe era o! con!rontation and division in /uro-e has
ended.F +he end has come not only !or division in /uro-eC 9ut also in the #orld at large. 4ut this !act can hardly lead automatically to a non:contradictoryC sta9leC #orld order.
+he acuteness o! conJicts that are not connected #ith the so:called E!undamental contradiction o! the e-ochF can even intensi!yC as the unleashing o! savage interethnic conJict
in the !ormer Augoslavia and the !ormer Soviet =nion am-ly demonstrates. (onethelessC it is -recisely the coo-eration 9et#een !ormer
ideological and -olitical adversaries that can serve as the -rere5uisite and condition !or the
resolution o! many o! -ro9lems and conJicts. A vivid e0am-le may 9e !ound in the reaction o! #orld society to the aggression o! Ira5
against 7u#ait and the reining in o! the aggressor #ith the aid o! =.(. mechanisms in accordance #ith the =.(. Charter and other norms o! international la#.
00
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
"nherenc38(o Lunding
Amendments to the gag rule onl3 allo5 contracetives? not an increase in 2unding%
Cross5al-.comC 2007. E4ill Could RGutR "olicy Denying Aid to "ro:A9ortion Grou-sFC
htt-,??###.cross#al;.com?ne#s?11$411?.
OC(S(e#s.comQ : A measure a--roved 9y a House o! Re-resentatives -anel #ould S9asically
gutS the =.S. -olicy o! 9anning !oreign aid to grou-s that -rovide or -romote a9ortionsC a
conservative analyst charged on 2ednesday.A li9eral grou- called the 9ill Sa much:needed dose
o! common senseS in the 9attle against HIB?AIDS. +he controversy rises !rom a !unding
measure !or the 211* Mscal year -assed on +uesday 9y the House State and )oreign 3-erations
A--ro-riations Su9committee. Chair#oman (ita %o#ey OD:(.A.Q said the 9ill S-rovides !unding
critical to the #ar on terror and our long:term security at home.S 2hile the L4.24 9illion
9udget increases s-ending 9y L2..$ 9illion over the -revious yearC one section o! the 9ill #ould
-rovide =.S.:donated contrace-tives Sto !amily -lanning organi>ations that have 9een denied
=SAID !undingCS the (e# Aor; DemocratRs statement indicated. S+he 9ill -rovides
contrace-tives only :: not Mnancial assistance :: to clinics and Znon:governmental
organi>ations[CS %o#ey said. She added that the measure ;ee-s intact the 4ush administrationRs
8e0ico City "olicyC #hich -rohi9its !unding to organi>ations that -rovide or -romote a9ortions.
Ho#everC Douglas DohnsonC legislative director o! the (ational Right to %i!e Committee O(R%CQC
told Cy9ercast (e#s Service on 2ednesday that %o#ey :: a !ormer chair#oman o! the House
"ro:Choice Caucus :: is in !act ta;ing direct aim at that -olicy.
6ush lans to cut sending on 2amil3 lanning services%
Leminist #ail3 (e#s 2ireC )e9ruary 2000. 4ush AdministrationRs "ro-osed 4udget Slashes International
)amily "lanning )undsC htt-,??###.!eminist.org?ne#s?ne#s9yte?us#irestory.as-KidW.$24.
Des-ite claims that "resident 4ush 9elieves !amily -lanning services are the 9est #ay to reduce
a9ortionsC his -ro-osed 9udget #ould cut aid !or international !amily -lanning 9y eighteen
-ercent. +his cut #ould reduce the amount o<ered !rom L4& million to L$7 millionC re-orts +he
(e# Aor; +imes. Re-resentative (ita %o#ey OD:(AQC a mem9er o! the House A--ro-riations CommitteeC critici>ed
the -ro-osed cutsC stating to the +imes that SZi[tRs ironic that an administration out#ardly committed to reducing the
incidence o! a9ortion #ould ta;e a#ay valua9le tools !or -reventing un#anted -regnancies.S /d )o0 o! the =nited
States Agency !or International Develo-ment -oints to the -ro-osed 9udgetRs !unds to Mght HIB?AIDSC malariaC and
se0ual violence as -ositive ste-s !or #omenC according to the +imes. Ho#everC %o#ey and other mem9ers o! the
House and Senate A--ro-riations Committees !ear that the cuts in !amily -lanning servicesC com9ined #ith the
Glo9al Gag RuleC could have disastrous results !or #omen in develo-ing countriesC re-orts the +imes. +he gag rule
currently in -laceC or the 8e0ico City "olicyC 9ars !amily -lanning -rograms in countries that receive =S !ederal aid
!rom using se-arateC -rivate monies !or a9ortion counselingC advocacyC and re!errals. +he Reagan Administration
Mrst im-osed the Glo9al Gag Rule in 1.*4. +hough "resident Clinton rescinded the -olicy !or the eight years o! his
-residencyC "resident 4ush issued an e0ecutive order to reinstate the Glo9al Gag Rule during his Mrst o<icial day in
o<ice in Danuary 2111. %ast #ee;C the 4ritish government has announced that it #ill give three million -ounds to the
International "lanned "arenthood )ederationRs ne# Glo9al Sa!e A9ortion "rogramme to assist organi>ations #hose
!unding has 9een cut 9y the 4ush AdministrationRs -olicy.
01
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Reeal Gag Rule (o5
6ush 5ill veto an3 change to the gag rule%
Associated "ress OA+QC &?$?2007. %e0is.
International !amily -lanning grou-s cut o< !rom aid 9ecause o! their -osition on a9ortion could
gain access to =.S.:donated contrace-tives under legislation a--roved 9y a House -anel
+uesday. Re-. (ita %o#eyC D:(.A.C chairman o! the House A--ro-riations su9committee
overseeing the State De-artment and !oreign aidC said the contrace-tive -rovision le!t intact the
Reagan:era -olicy o! 9anning aid to grou-s that -rovide or -romote a9ortions. Re-u9licans
disagreed and cited a letter to Democratic leaders !rom "resident 4ush last month #arning that
he 5ould veto an3 legislation that 5ea-ens current olic3 and la5s on abortion% I! the
measure reaches the 2hite HouseC said Re-. )ran; 2ol! o! BirginiaC to- Re-u9lican on the
-anelC Sthe3 5ill veto the bill.S +he 9illC in another s#i-e at a !avorite administration
-rogramC gives 4ush and !uture -residents the right to #aive current la# that re5uires that
one:third o! =.S. aid !or HIB?AIDS -revention 9e s-ent on a9stinence -rograms.
6ush 5ill veto amendments to the gag rule%
Leminist #ail3 (e#s 2ireC &?22?2007. EHouse A--roves 4ill Giving 4irth Control to )oreign 3rgani>ationsCF
htt-,??###.!eminist.org?ne#s?ne#s9yte?us#irestory.as-KidW117*.
+he House voted yesterday to a--rove a measure that #ould reverse a 9an on donating
contrace-tives to !oreign organi>ations that -er!orm or -romote a9ortion. In a 22:211 voteC
the House added the measure as an amendment to the Mscal year 211* !oreign aid s-ending
9illC #hich also -assed the House yesterday. (e# Aor; Re-resentative (ita %o#ey ODQ authored the amendmentC
saying it #ill Sreduce unintended and high:ris; -regnancies and a9ortions :: and save the lives o!
mothersCS the Seattle +imes re-orts. Shortly a!ter ta;ing o<iceC "resident 4ush reinstated the glo9al gag ruleC
originally ado-ted 9y !ormer "resident Reagan in 1.*4 and removed 9y !ormer "resident Clinton. +he -olicyC also
;no#n as the S8e0ico City "olicyCS 9ars the =S !rom !unding overseas organi>ations that su--ort a9ortion in any #ay
:: including direct servicesC counselingC or lo99ying activities :: even i! the grou-s use their o#n monies !or such
activity. Su--orters o! the recently -assed amendment say that the measure does not conJict
#ith 4ushRs !oreign aid -olicy. StillC 4ush has indicated that he #ould veto any legislation that
#ould a<ect a9ortion:related -olicies and la#sC and conservative la#ma;ers #ill li;ely 9e a9le
to 9loc; a Congressional override o! 4ushRs veto.
6ush 5ill veto amendments to the gag rule%
Dessica Io4elC &?2$?2007. (orth Star 2riters Grou-C E=.S. Hy-ocrisy in 3verseas A9ortion )undingFC
htt-,??###.northstar#riters.com?Iv111.htm.
%ast #ee; the House voted to challenge "resident 4ush6s !oreign -olicy regarding glo9al
#omen6s health 9y reversing a 9an that 9loc;s nongovernmental organi>ations a9road !rom
receiving =.S. dollars i! they -er!orm or disseminate in!ormation a9out a9ortions. +he narro#
voteC although surely headed !or the gro#ing stac; o! 4ush vetoes accumulated since
Democrats too; over the HouseC 9rings the issue o! #omen6s health around the #orld 9ac; into
the -u9lic conscience.
02
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Contracetion =<emtion (o5
6ush 5ill veto the recent democratic e<emtion 2or contracetion aid%
Associated "ress OA+QC &?22?2007. %e0is.
+he House o! Re-resentatives voted narro#ly to reverse a 9an on contrace-tion aid to grou-s
overseas that o<er a9ortionsC challenging a -illar o! "resident George 2. 4ushRs !oreign aid
-olicy. I! the -ro-osal -asses the SenateC 4ush is li;ely to s#i!tly veto it and 9e u-held 9y
conservative la#ma;ersC #ho say no assistance o! any ;ind should 9e given to organi>ations
that -romote or o<er a9ortions.
0)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Court Will Overturn Gag Rule
Courts 5ill uhold the gag rule%
Rachael $eeversC D.D.C 4roo;lyn %a# SchoolC 2000% 4roo;lyn Dournal o! International %a#C E+he "olitics o!
Gagging, +he /<ects o! the Glo9al Gag Rule on Democratic "artici-ation and "olitical Advocacy in "eruCF %e0is.
A. Increase Alternate )unding Sources !or Glo9al )amily "lanning "rograms
+he Gag Rule restricts individual agencies !rom -roviding a9ortion related services. It also
limits demand:driven -olitical advocacy !or increased access to a9ortions. )urthermoreC studies
have sho#n that the Gag Rule is not decreasing the -revalence o! a9ortions and is only ma;ing
the situation !or -regnant #omen more -erilous. 1.1 +hough a total re-eal o! the Glo9al Gag
Rule #ould clearly allo# !or increased advocacy and civil -artici-ation 9y (G3sC this remains a
very remote -ossi9ility. Z\.1[ Re-ealing the Gag Rule through court action a--ears unli;ely.
1.2 +he -olicy has 9een challenged Mve times in =.S. courtsC o!ten 9ased on the restrictions on
!ree s-eech and association su<ered 9y =.S. (G3s #or;ing a9road. 1. /ach timeC the court
has dismissed the case !or lac; o! standing or !ound the restrictions to 9e -ermissi9le. 1.4
AdditionallyC =.S. !oreign -olicy has 9ecome increasingly conservativeC ma;ing success!ul
congressional action even more unli;ely than it has 9een in the -ast. 1.$
0*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8Gender =.ualit3
&he gag rule undermines cultural advances 2or 5omen in A2rican nations%
$an Lrancisco ChronicleC 200/. htt-,??###.s!gate.com?cgi:9in?article.cgiK
!W?c?a?211$?1?17?/DG+1AR"R+1.D+%Ph#Wglo9alXgagXrulePsnW114PscW.&
+he gag rule restricts the sim-lest #ays to im-rove the status o! #omen, !unding 9irth:control
su--lies so they can avoid unintended -regnancies and care !or children they already have. In
/thio-iaC a9ortion is illegal. 4ecause most nongovernmental organi>ations that -rovide !amily
-lanning have re!used to a9ide 9y the gag ruleC the resulting lac; o! =.S. !unds has restricted
the contrace-tive su--lyC #hich means that a9ortion is also very common. 2omen ta;e their lives
into their o#n hands #hen !aced #ith an un-lanned -regnancy. I! they cannot ade5uately care !or another childC they
try to end -regnancies #ith her9sC -oisons or #ire. Com-lications !rom unsa!e a9ortions are the second leading
cause o! death !or #omenC a!ter tu9erculosisC in /thio-ia. As long as the 4ush administration restricts
#omenRs rights 9y 9loc;ing access to contrace-tion #ith the gag ruleC unintended -regnancies
#ill occur. So #ill a9ortion. +he 4ush administrationRs glo9al gag rule and -olitical -osturing
last #ee; only e0acer9ate the situation. 2omen in all countries should have the right to ma;e
res-onsi9le decisions #ithout coercionC discrimination or violence. +hey should have access to
com-rehensive in!ormation and health care. +hey should 9e a9le to o#n -ro-ertyC -ursue an
educationC decide #ho and #hen to marryC and #hether and #hen to have children. +he
situation in /thio-iaC ho#everC is endemic around the #orld. +raditions and la#s ine0trica9ly
lin; se0ual rights to educationC em-loymentC -ro-erty rights and -olitical -artici-ation. +he
rights the =.S. delegation #as lo99ying against last #ee; are the very rights that #ould im-rove
the status o! #omen and their children. Rather than ta;ing into account the harsh realities o!
#omenRs lives and #or;ing to -rovide real solutions !or #omen and girlsC the 4ush
administration is -laying -olitics #ith #omenRs lives.
&he gag rule undermines gains in 5omen7s rights globall38international rights
agreements establish 2amil3 lanning as a basic human right8onl3 increasing 1$
2unding can guarantee 2air access to 2amil3 lanning%
8arIorie Muec-eC "ro!essor in "sychosocial and Community HealthC School o! (ursingG AdIunct "ro!essor in
Anthro-ologyC and Health ServicesG and DirectorC Southeast Asia Center o! the Dac;son School !or International
StudiesC at the =niversity o! 2ashingtonC 2001. E+he SGag RuleS, 2hatRs (ursing Got to Do #ith ItKF "u9lic Health
(ursing 1*.. htt-,??###.9lac;#ell:synergy.com?lin;s?doi?11.114&?I.1$2$:144&.2111.11147.0?!ull?Kcoo;ieSetW1
2hat the gag rule does is deny =.S. ta0-ayer !unding to any -rivate !amily -lanning organi>ation a9road that s-ea;s
out a9out a9ortion la# re!orm or #hose -rogram includes a9ortion counselingC re!erralsC or services. +he denial
a--lies even i! the organi>ation uses non:=.S. !unds !or those -ur-osesC and even i! it is sim-ly e0ercising !ree s-eech
in a country #here the -ractice o! a9ortion is legal. +here are thus t#o -rongs to the gag rule !or;. 3ne -rong
-rohi9its the =.S. !unding o! any -rivate organi>ation a9road that -rovides a9ortion services even i! it uses its o#n
!unds to do so. +he other -rohi9its =.S. !unding o! any such organi>ation that attem-ts to educate the -u9lic a9out
#ays to -revent a9ortion and a9out the needs !or sa!e care o! #omen #ho have had se-tic a9ortions 9ecause they
have not had access to !amily -lanningC or their !amily -lanning method has !ailed themC or 9ecause they #ere made
-regnant against their #ill. +he gag rule -olicy is occurring at a time #hen numerous international
covenant and conventions ensure !amily -lanning as a 9asic human right and #hen #omen
around the #orld are colla9orating in meetings such as last yearRs 4eiIing "lus )ive to assess
the gainsC lossesC and needs to im-lement -rograms o! action on #omenRs standing and rights.
At that meeting 1*1 governments agreed on !our 9asic target actions, closing the gender gain -rimary and
secondary educationG im-roving adult literacy es-ecially !or #omenG creating a gender:sensitive nondiscriminatory
legal environmentG and -roviding universal li!etime access to high 5uality -rimaryC se0ualC and re-roductive health
care O=nited (ations Division !or the Advancement o! 2omenC 2111Q. +his action s-eciMcally included the
right to 9irth -lanning services and contrace-tive devicesC and to AIDS -revention measures.
+he #omenRs movement is gaining momentum a9road #here #omen #or; to achieve class and
0/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
gender e5uity and to include all #omen in the -rinci-les o! human rights. =n!ortunatelyC the
organi>ations a<ected 9y the glo9al gag rule run !amily -lanning -rograms. +his is #here nursing
comes in. In the =nited StatesC nurse -ractitioners sta< !amily -lanning clinics. A9roadC !amily -lanning and -renatal
clinics are the chie! source o! medical careC and they are commonly sta<ed 9y nurses. In these clinicsC nursing
intervention through !amily -lanning is needed and critical to #omenRs healthC child gro#th and
develo-mentC and the integrity o! the !amily. At the -resent timeC a #oman dies in -regnancy or
child9irth every minute OSadi;C 2111G =nited (ations ChildrenRs )undC 1..&Q. Almost all o!
these maternal deaths occur in develo-ing countries 9ecause o! -oor access to health care and
contrace-tionC and conse5uent early and !re5uent child9earing. )amily -lanning could -revent
2$Y o! these #omenRs deaths 9y -reventing high:ris; -regnancies O)ortneyC 1.*7G "o-ulation
Action InternationalC 2111Q. )amily -lanning -revents #omenRs needs !or a9ortionC there9y
s-aring them the moral 5uandary o! considering a9ortionC and the inIuryC illnessC and death that
come #ith se-tic a9ortion. )amily -lanning also reduces se0ually transmitted diseases including
HIBC #hich can lead to deathC in!ertilityC or disa9ility. 2omenRs demand !or !amily -lanningC
ho#everC is unmet 9ecause the !unding !alls !ar short o! need. As a resultC 41 to $1 million
#omen a year resort to a9ortion OInternational "lanned "arenthood )ederation ZI"")[C 2111aQ.
At least 77C111 #omen a yearC all in develo-ing countriesC die !rom com-lications o! unsa!e
a9ortion and many others su<er -ermanent disa9ility !rom se-tic -rocedures OI"")C 21119G
Singh P Hensha#C 1..&Q.
00
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gender =.ualit3 Good8+oulation
Changing se<ual9bias to5ards 5omen is the best 5a3 to curb oulation gro5th8
5omen 5ill choose to have smaller 2amilies 5hen emo5ered%
/vidence !rom develo-ing nations around the #orld indicates that the 9est #ay to cur9
-o-ulation gro#th is to end se0ual 9ias:that isC to give #omen e5ual access to educationC Io9sC
and health care. In his 9oo;C Critical 8asses:+he Glo9al "o-ulation ChallengeC George D.
8o<ett cites a num9er o! studies and e0-erts su--orting the relation 9et#een !emale education
and child9irth. )or instanceC adolescent girls and young #omen #ho are in school delay
marriage andC there!oreC reduce the num9er o! years they can 9ecome -regnant. A health care
o<icial in 4angladesh noted thatC SAs #omen get more -o#er and more educationC they ac5uire
more modern conce-ts o! li!eC including the idea o! small !amilies....S /ducated #omen are
li;ely to act on this desire !or !e#er childrenC see; out !amily -lanning clinicsC and use
contrace-tives. /ducation increases e5uality in a marriage and gives #omen more o! a say as to
ho# many children the cou-le #ill have. )ormal education may 9oost a #omanRs chances o!
Mnding em-loyment in the mar;et-laceC #hichC in turnC reduces the need !or economic
contri9utions on the -art o! children. 2orld 4an; economist /li>a9eth 7ing 9elieves that
S/ducation changes the value o! time !or #omen. It gives them meaning!ul alternative uses o!
time outside motherhood and homema;ing.S Su9:Saharan A!ricaRs !uture:most li;ely the very
survival o! the region:de-ends in large measure on the over:all #ell:9eing o! its #omen. In a
#orld o! social com-le0ityC the relation 9et#een -o-ulation and the status o! !emales in
develo-ing nations is sim-le and straight!or#ard. As Dodi Daco9son o! the Health and
Develo-ment "roIect statedC SAou can never hel- #omen out o! the -o-ulation tra- unless you
hel- them out o! the -overty tra-C and you #ill never hel- them out o! the -overty tra- until you
ta;e ste-s to e5uali>e access to resources.
07
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gender =.ualit3 Good8+oulation
Gender e.ualit3 slo5s oulation gro5th85omen7s emo5erment allo5s them to
choose to have smaller 2amilies%
+oulation ConnectionC S-ring 2007% )amily "lanning Sta9ili>es "o-ulationC
http://www.populationconnection.org/upload/Women's%20Empowerment%20FS%20(web).pd.
Aears o! research have demonstrated that #hen the status o! #omen advancesC -o-ulation
gro#th slo#sC and the 5uality o! li!e im-roves !or everyone. +he lo#er social status o! #omen in
many -laces 9ars them !rom having control over their o#n lives and 9odies. 2hen /dna6s
-arents told her she must leave school to get married #hen she #as Iust 17C o9Iecting did not
even cross her mind. Across the glo9eC societal norms and la#s deny #omen access to
educationC health servicesC -olitical -artici-ationC and economic o--ortunities. I! society limits a
#oman6s o--ortunitiesC -arents #ith inade5uate resources #ill not invest in a daughter6s
!utureC and she #ill have no o-tions 9eyond marriage and child9irth at a young age. In additionC
#omen6s relative -o#erlessness to re!use se0 or negotiate sa!e se0C es-ecially in the conte0t o!
marriageC leaves #omen vulnera9le to se0ually transmitted diseases and un#anted
-regnancies. Access to !amily -lanningC #hich can address these challengesC has 9een removed
!rom the e5uation as a result o! the harm!ul decisions made 9y the 4ush administration. +he
need is so greatC and the results #ould 9e so tremendousC and the Mnancial commitment o! the
=.S. #ould 9e so small. In !actC it #ould cost each American less than L& -er year to -rovide
!amily -lanning !or every #oman #ho needs it. As +horaya 39aidC the =()"A /0ecutive
Director notesC government commitment is necessary to E!ree hundreds o! millions o! -eo-le
!rom -overtyC s-are the lives o! 1 million children and t#o million mothersC and reverse the
s-read o! HIB and AIDS'all in the ne0t decade.F 8ale "artici-ation and /ducation 8en6s
attitudes to#ard !amily si>e and re-roductive healthcare have a signiMcant im-act on the #ell
9eing o! #omen and !amilies. 2hen men #ant more children than their #ivesC #omen o!ten !ace
-ressure or coercion to 9ecome -regnantC es-ecially in a9usive relationshi-s. "ositiveC
su--ortive male attitudes and male -artici-ation in re-roductive decision: ma;ing are Iust as
im-ortant as #omen6s roles in achieving -o-ulation sta9ili>ation. 8en and #omen must #or;
together as e5ual -artners to ma;e in!ormed decisions a9out se0C re-roductive healthcare and
!amily -lanning.
Women7s emo5erment stabili4es oulation gro5th%
+oulation ConnectionC S-ring 2007% )amily "lanning Sta9ili>es "o-ulationC
http://www.populationconnection.org/upload/Women's%20Empowerment%20FS%20(web).pd.
2omen6s /m-o#erment, A E"o-ulationF IssueK Aes'#omen6s em-o#erment and -o-ulation
sta9ili>ation go hand:in:hand. And #e ;no# that #hen #omen are em-o#ered to im-rove their
o#n livesC they tend to have smaller !amiliesC and -o-ulation gro#th slo#s. 2hen -o-ulation
gro#th slo#sC governments and !amilies can more easily invest in o--ortunities !or #omen and
girlsC and #omen can more easily invest in o--ortunities !or themselves and their !amilies. As
Dohn SeagerC the "resident o! "o-ulation ConnectionC saysC EIn addition to the enormous
9eneMts to individual #omen and !amiliesC e<orts to e0-and access to educationC economic
o--ortunity and !amily -lanning -rovide 9road social 9eneMts too. +hat6s #hy it6s so crucial that
governments ma;e a strong commitment and dedicate the necessary resources to the #or; that
remains to 9e done.F
0:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8Overoulation
&he gag rule causes a massive oulation e<losion 5ithin A2rica%
Dim MotavalliC /ditor o! +he /nvironmental 8aga>ineC (ov?Dec 2000. +he /nvironmental 8aga>ineC Bol 17C
Issue &C -gs 2&:2C ESha;ing the 4a9y +ree, I! +hereRs a SDe-o-ulation 4om9CS It Has a Bery %ong )useF "ro5uest.
According to the (airo9i:9ased (ation ne#s-a-erC the main reason !or the 9irth rate stagnation
and increase is Serratic su--ly o! contrace-tivesC -articularly the -illC a!ter donorsC #ho -rovide
over *1 -ercent o! the !undsC decided to channel a su9stantial amount o! their resources to#ard
HIB?AIDS treatment -rograms.S Conse5uentlyC the -ercentage o! #omen using contrace-tives
stagnated at . -ercentC according to the 7enya Demogra-hic and Health Survey. ItRs hardly
sur-rising that contrace-tive access is declining in 7enyaC and thereRs more at #or; than sim-ly
a shi!t in !under -riorities. 3ne o! the 9iggest !amily -lanning donors:the =.S.:is no# -utting
tight strings on contrace-tive aid through the a--lication o! the 4ush AdministrationRs so:called
Glo9al Gag Rule. +he rulesC in -lace under "residents Reagan and 4ushC sus-ended 9y the Clinton AdministrationC then
-rom-tly reinstated 9y George 2. 4ush:9loc; non-roMt grou-s that -rovide a9ortion services !rom receiving =.S. !amily -lanning
!unds. +he Helms amendment to !oreign assistance legislationC -assed in 1.7C already -revented !ederal money !rom -aying !or
a9ortion services. 4ut the Re-u9lican gag order does moreC actually 9loc;ing any !amily -lanning assistance to any clinics that
-rovide a9ortions or a9ortion counselingC even i! those services are !unded inde-endently. +hereRs no evidence that the -olicy has
reduced the incidence o! a9ortion OindeedC 9y denying #omen access to 9irth control it has -ro9a9ly inaeased themQ. +he 2orld
Health 3rgani>ation says that nearly 21 million unsa!e a9ortions occur annuallyC mostly in develo-ing countries. +hose num9ers #ill
clim9 as re-uta9le medical clinics are !orced to choose 9et#een eliminating a9ortion services or ris;ing all o! their =.S. !amily
-lanning aid. "n Ken3a? 1%$% olic3 almost certainl3 contributed to the si-e in the birth
rate . According to the Glo9al Gag Rule Im-act "roIect OGGRI"QC a colla9oration 9et#een
"o-ulation Action InternationalC "lanned "arenthood )ederation and othersC 7enyaRs t#o largest
-roviders Othe )amily "lanning Association o! 7enya and 8arie Slo-es InternationalQ re!used as
a matter o! -rinci-le to sign onto the -olicy #hen it #as reinstated in 2111. In doing soC they
!or!eited a considera9le amount o! =.S. Aid !or International Develo-ment O=SAIDQ !amily
-lanning assistanceC and many clinics #ere !orced to close. 3!tenC these clinics #ere the only source o! health
care !or 7enyaRs rural -oor. GGRI" is #or;ing #ith a 7enyan researcher this !all to ma;e the lin; 9et#een the 7enyan 9irth rate
s-i;e and =.S. -olicy more e0-licit. A9ortion is illegal in 7enya e0ce-t to save the #omanRs li!eC 9ut some 11C111 occur annually
any#ay Oo!ten #ithout medical assistanceQ and contri9ute to the countryRs staggering num9er o! maternal deaths:1C1 !or every
111C111 live 9irths. +odayC hal! o! all 7enyan #omen give 9irth 9e!ore theyRre 21C and nearly hal! o! all 9irths are said to 9e
un#anted or un-lanned. ClearlyC this is a country that #ould Ioin the 9irth dearth trend i! it could. 4ut 7enya had .*
million -eo-le in 211$C and it could have &4 million 9y 21$1 Ou- .2 -ercentQ. A Selective Decline ItRs
hard to overstate the im-act o! "aul /hrlichRs 9oo; +he "o-ulation 4om9 in 1.&*. /hrlich -redictedCS+he 9attle to !eed all o!
humanity is over. In the 1.71s and 1.*1sC hundreds o! millions o! -eo-le #ill starve to death in s-ite o! any crash -rograms
em9ar;ed u-on no#.S +he -o-ulation e0-losion #as a -o-ular to-ic o! conversation in the late 1.&1sC even though the #orld then
had only .$ 9illion -eo-leC slightly more than hal! #hat it has no#. /hrlich today ac;no#ledges that he !ailed to see advances in
!arming that #ould ena9le much higher yields !rom Mnite resourcesC 9ut he a<irms his core -oint. SSince Z1.&*[ #eRve added
another 2.* 9illion:many more than the total -o-ulation Zt#o 9illion[ #hen I #as 9orn in 1.2CS he says. SI! thatRs not a -o-ulation
e0-losionC #hat isK 8y 9asic claimsC and those o! the many scientiMc colleagues #ho revie#ed my #or;C #ere that -o-ulation
gro#th #as a maIor -ro9lem.S 8any -eo-le thin; it still isC though theyRre having a harder time sounding the alarm. Aside !rom
having to dodge charges o! racism as they critici>e the =.S.Rs high immigration levelsC -o-ulation activists are also o!ten re5uired to
e0-lain an increasingly com-licated situation. Instead o! one 9ig e0-losionC ra-id -o-ulation gro#th is occurring in
-oc;ets around the #orldC surrounded 9y a sea o! declining !ertility. 4ut #hen that !act is
com9ined #ith the -henomenon ;no#n as S-o-ulation momentumS Othe tendency !or num9ers
to ;ee- increasingC even #ith lo#er !ertilityC 9ecause -ast 9a9y 9ooms created a very young
-o-ulationQC itRs still enough to add *1 million -eo-le a year to the -lanetRs 9urden. +he =( no#
-roIects a #orld -o-ulation o! ..1 9illion Oas the middle o! three -ossi9le scenariosQ in 21$1.
2here #ill that gro#th come !romK (ot !rom the industriali>ed countriesC #hich are e0-ected
to have 9asically the same -o-ulation they do todayC 1.2 9illion. 4ut in the $1 least:develo-ed
countriesC -o-ulation #ill more than dou9leC !rom 1.* 9illion in 211$ to 1.7 9illion in 21$1.
+here are many (igers and 7enyasC and theyRre still gro#ing ra-idly. +he =( re-orts that
A!ghanistanC 4ur;ina )asoC 4urundiC ChadC the Democratic Re-u9lic o! CongoC the Democratic
Re-u9lic o! +imor:%esteC Guinea:4issauC %i9eriaC 8aliC (iger and =ganda are all e0-ected to
0;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
tri-le m -o-ulation 9y 21$1.
70
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8=liminates Lamil3 +lanning
&he gag rule maintains unsa2e abortion and destro3s 2amil3 lanning services%
Cohen? 200* OSusanC director o! governmental a<airs at the Guttmacher InstituteC E=.S. Glo9al Re-roductive
Health "olicy, Isolationist A--roach In an Interde-endent 2orldFC +he Guttmacher Re-ort on "u9lic "olicyC AugustC
htt-,??###.guttmacher.org?-u9s?tgr?17??gr17117.htmlQ
8any indigenous (G3sC des-erate !or =.S. !undingC have succum9ed to the -olicy. 4ut the -rice !or doing
so has 9een high. In /thio-iaC !or e0am-leC (G3s continue to -rovide =.S.:su--orted !amily -lanning assistance 9ut at the cost o! their a9ility to engage in a discussion'
solicited 9y the /thio-ian (ational 3<ice o! "o-ulation'a9out li9erali>ing /thio-iaRs a9ortion la# in res-onse to the #ides-read occurrence o! se-tic a9ortion. 8aternal
mortality in /thio-ia is among the highest in A!ricaC and unsa!e a9ortion is a maIor contri9utor. Here and else#hereC the gag ruleRs reim-osition has had no e<ect on Sma;Zing[
a9ortion more rareCS the -residentRs stated rationaleC 9ut it has certainly hel-ed to maintain the status 5uo #hen it comes to the -u9lic health tragedy o! unsa!e a9ortion.
3ther (G3s'among themC the develo-ing #orldRs leaders in !amily -lanning services and
health care -rovision generally'resisted. Almost immediatelyC in !actC the gag ruleRs
reim-osition served its unstated 9ut -rimary -ur-ose, to de!und International "lanned
"arenthood )ederation OI"")QC #hich is reviled 9y antia9ortion activists around the #orld 9ut is
also the single largest -rovider o! -rimary health care services internationally through its
a<iliates in over 111 develo-ing countries. 4eyond I"")C the gag rule !orced out 8arie Sto-es
InternationalC a #idely res-ectedC %ondon:9ased (G3 that su--orts contrace-tion and sa!e
a9ortion services in develo-ing countries 9ut also -rovides services such as malaria screening
and treatment and childhood immuni>ations. Another -rominent victim #as 4RACC the largest and most success!ul (G3 in 4angladeshC
#hich at the re5uest o! the 4angladeshi government o<ers a !orm o! very early a9ortion. 4RAC is recogni>ed #orld#ide not only !or its #or; in -roviding !amily -lanning and a
#ide range o! -rimary health care services 9ut also !or its income:generation -roIects aimed at some o! the #orldRs -oorest #omen. In losing these and
other valua9le -artnersC the gag rule is ta;ing its toll on !amily -lanning service deliveryC des-ite the
administrationRs -rotests to the contrary. 2hile =SAIDRs overall contri9ution to !amily -lanning overseas has not
diminished under the glo9al gag ruleC investigations o! the gag ruleRs real:li!e im-act
demonstrate that #omen are the -aying the -rice in lost !amily -lanning and related -rimary
care services in those areas #here the =.S. cuto< !orced clinics to close OSGag Rule Revisited, HIB?AIDS Initiative 3utC
)amily "lanning Still InCS +GRC 3cto9er 211C -age 1Q.
&he gag rule causes closures o2 2amil3 lanning clinics%
Another -ractical e<ect o! the 8e0ico City "olicy has 9een the closure o! !amily -lanning clinics
due to =SAIDRs #ithdra#al o! !undingC nota9ly in su9:Saharan A!rica. n7 Seventeen centers in
=gandaC Mve centers in 7enyaC one outreach -rogram serving -oor communities in /thio-iaC
and several clinics in +an>ania have closed !or this reason. n74 In 7enya aloneC the Mve clinics
that closed served tens o! Z\211[ thousands o! #omen. n7$ +hey -rovided 9asic services that
many -oor #omen could not other#ise a<ord or accessC including #ell:9a9y careC -re: and -ost:
natal o9stetric careC HIB testing and counselingC and contrace-tion. n7& In order to avoid
closing seven more health -osts and one maternal nursing home #hen "resident 4ush im-osed
the glo9al gag ruleC health care -rovider 8arie Sto-es International o! 7enya laid o< one:M!th o!
its sta<C cut the remaining em-loyeesR salariesC reorgani>ed its clinic structureC and increased
client !ees. n77 +he countryRs other leading re-roductive health -roviderC the )amily "lanning
Association o! 7enyaC laid o< nearly one:third o! its sta<C raised -atient !eesC and cut salaries in
order to ;ee- its remaining clinics o-en and running #ithout =.S. !unding. n7*
71
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Gag Rule #oesn7t =liminate Lamil3 +lanning
1$A"# claims about the global gag rule ignore studies and emirical evidence%
Center 2or Reroductive Rights? 0) OE8yths and Realities, De9un;ing =SAID6s Analysis o! the Glo9al
Gag RuleCFC 3cto9erC htt-,??###.i-as.org?-u9lications?en?GGR8A+HT/1Ten.-d!Q
=SAID ac;no#ledges that unsa!e a9ortion is a -u9lic health crisis.2 Aet the agency erroneously
claims on its
#e9site that,
+he 8e0ico City "olicy does not have a maIor im-act on the -rovision o! !amily -lanning
services. Bery
!e# countries #here =SAID #or;s -ermit a9ortion under circumstances 9roader than those
allo#ed under
the 8e0ico City "olicyC and !e# organi>ations have a history o! lo99ying !or change in the legal
status o!
a9ortion.
Re-roductive health and #omen6s rights e0-erts have dis-roved =SAID6s assertions a9out the
im-act o! the gag
rule. )urthermoreC these assertions !ail to ac;no#ledge that the gag rule inter!eres #ith the
agency6s !undamental
goal o! encouraging civil society to -artici-ate in securing a locally res-onsive -u9lic health
agenda.
8A+H, E+he 8e0ico City "olicy does not have a maIor im-act on the -rovision o! !amily
-lanning
services.F
R/A%I+A, Research sho#s that the glo9al gag rule is severely eroding the -rovision o! !amily
-lanning and
related health:care services !or #omen in rural and other underserved areas,
^ 4y 2112C the glo9al gag rule resulted in an end to all shi-ments o! =SAID:donated
contrace-tives to 1&
countriesC and to leading !amily -lanning agencies in another 1 countries.
^ In /thio-ia and %esothoC some (G3s are no longer a9le to o<er com-rehensive and
integrated health:care
services to -atients su<ering !rom HIB?AIDS.
^ In 7enyaC the gag rule !orced t#o leading !amily -lanning (G3s to close Mve clinicsC cut u- to
one:third o!
their sta< and reduce services in remaining clinics. 3ne o! the shuttered clinics had served a
cro#ded slum
neigh9orhood o! (airo9i since 1.*4C -roviding se0ually transmissi9le in!ection OS+IQ screening
and treatmentC
!amily -lanningC -re: and -ost:natal o9stetric servicesC and #ell:9a9y care.
^ In "eruC =SAID o<icials -ressured an organi>ation to #ithdra# !rom a cam-aign su--orting
emergency
contrace-tion O/CQC even though /C hel-s -revent un#anted -regnancies and is not an
a9orti!acient.
^ In =gandaC the glo9al gag rule led to the cancellation o! an /C -rogram as #ell as community
education
-rograms !or -ost:a9ortion care servicesC #hich =SAID has identiMed as a -riority.
^ In Nam9iaC the nation6s leading !amily -lanning organi>ation lost 24Y o! its !unding 9ecause
o! the gag rule
72
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
and had to reduce its -rogramsC clinic:9ased services and community outreach to underserved
rural areas. It
can no longer -rovide much:needed contrace-tive su--lies to smaller (G3s and government
health centers.4
7)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Lamil3 +lanning Good8+oulation
Ioluntar3 2amil3 lanning curbs oulation gro5th%
+oulation ConnectionC S-ring 2007. htt-,??###.-o-ulationconnection.org?u-load?2omenRs
Y21/m-o#ermentY21)SY21O#e9Q.-d!
A ;ey com-onent allo#ing #omen to control their o#n lives is to give them voluntary access to
contrace-tives and other !amily -lanning resources. 2hen #omen are given the resources to
ma;e in!ormedC voluntary decisions a9out the num9er and s-acing o! their childrenC they
usually choose to have smaller !amilies. )or most -eo-le smaller !amilies allo# !or greater
investment in each childC healthier motherland childrenC and 9etter -ros-ects !or the !uture.
4ut a9ove allC the a9ility to -lan -regnancy ma;es it easier !or a #oman to got schoolC #or;C
care !or her !amilyC and con:tri9ute to her community. =n!ortunatelyC millions o! #omen lac;
access to contrace-tive in!ormation and services. A--ro0imately $1 million #omen around the
#orld #ould li;e to delay or avoid having a child 9ut lac; e<ective contrace-tion. In the =.S.C an
estimated 4.-ercent o! -regnancies and $ -ercent o! 9irths are unintended. /asier access to
arrange o! contrace-tive methods #ould greatly reduce these num9ers.
&he gag rule revents efective 2amil3 lanning8this causes overoulation? overt3?
disease? environmental degradation and con@ict%
Winston9$alem JournalC Dune 2$C 2007. %e0is.
+he 9anC li;e 4ushRs o--osition to em9ryonic stem:cell researchC is an e0am-le o! ho# the long
struggle over a9ortion rights has -olari>ed -olitics in this country. +he conservative #ing o! the
Re-u9lican "arty is so adamantly against anything related to a9ortion that it su--orts a 9an
that hurts needy #omen in -oor countries. In the long runC the 9an also #ill 9e 9ad !or the
!uture o! the =nited StatesC and indeedC the #hole #orld. ItRs not Iust that the -o-ulation o! the
#orld is gro#ing at an alarming rate. +he -ro9lem is #orse 9ecause o! #here the gro#th is
ta;ing -lace. In most #ealthy countriesC there are only enough 9irths to re-lace -eo-le #ho
have diedC i! that many. 8ost o! the gro#th in #ealthy countries is !rom immigration : largely
!rom -eo-le coming !rom -oor countries. It is the -oor countries in A!ricaC Asia and %atin
America #here -o-ulation gro#th is 9ooming. Ra-id -o-ulation gro#th in those countries
causes more -overtyC diseaseC misery and environmental degradation. It also contri9utes to
-olitical insta9ility. 2omen in those -oor countries o!ten have little or no access to !amily
-lanning advice and contrace-tion. 8any o! them #ant to 9e a9le to -lan ho# many children
they #ill have and #hen they #ill have themC so that they can -rovide 9etterC healthier lives !or
everyone in their !amily. Contrace-tive devices also hel- Mght the s-read o! AIDSC #hich is
ta;ing such a tollC es-eciallyC in A!rica. +here is no 5uestion o! =.S. money going to -ay !or
a9ortions overseasG all the 9ill #ould -rovide is contrace-tion.
Lamil3 lanning that emhasi4es contracetion is the onl3 5a3 to stem oulation
gro5th%
Knight Ridder +ri9une 4usiness (e#sC 200*.
htt-,??###.the!reeli9rary.com?"o-ulationXe0-losionXstillXaX#orld#ideXconcern:a11124.44$..
+he ans#ers )ornos o<ers are education and !amily -lanning !or #omen in the +hird 2orldC
#hich em-hasi>es contrace-tionC andC he saidC -uts him out o! ste- #ith =.S. -olicy. In the -ast
three yearsC the =nited States has em9ar;ed on a large:scale a9stinence:9ased !amily -lanning
cam-aign the #orld over and undertoo; Sa massive cut9ac; in condom distri9ution in the
#orldCS )ornos said. SIn a #orld #here #omen have no 9asic rights and are 9rutally ravaged 9y
males :: in se0ual or domestic a9use #ithin the !amily :: to -reach a9stinenceC to -reach no use
7*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
o! contrace-tivesC es-ecially condomsC doesnRt ma;e any senseCS he said. SItRs a very serious
Ja# in our !oreign -olicy.S Surveys indicate that $1 million #omen in the -oorest countries
either did not #ant their last child or do not #ant another childC )ornos said. Aet they lac;
methods and tools to control their !ertility.
7/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Reversing the global gag rule 5ill create sustainable oulation gro5th and avoid
environmental destruction and global 5arming8emo5ering and educating
5omen causes them to raise smaller 2amilies%
Green OtionsC 7?11?2007. Denni!er BanceC
htt-,??###.greeno-tions.com?2117?17?11?greenT!amilyTvaluesTse0TandTtheTenvironmentT#orldT-o-ulationTday.
As the century 9eginsC natural resources are under increasing -ressureC threatening -u9lic
health and develo-ment. 2ater shortagesC soil e0haustionC loss o! !orestsC air and #ater
-ollutionC and degradation o! coastlines a_ict many areas. As the #orldRs -o-ulation gro#sC
im-roving living standards #ithout destroying the environment is a glo9al challenge. 8ost
develo-ed economies currently consume resources much !aster than they can regenerate. 8ost
develo-ing countries #ith ra-id -o-ulation gro#th !ace the urgent need to im-rove living
standards. As #e humans e0-loit nature to meet -resent needsC are #e destroying resources
needed !or the !utureK +here are so many issues involving glo9al -o-ulation gro#th and the
controversy surrounding it. "u9lic healthC !ood su--lyC !resh#aterC coastlines and oceansC
9iodiversityC and glo9al climate change are all a<ected 9y our increasing -o-ulation. 2e may
not !eel the e<ects in the =nited States directly yetC 9ut i! #e loo; to develo-ing countries and
the natural resources availa9leC it is easy to 9ecome alarmed. 3! courseC there are those -eo-le
#ho deny this is a -ro9lem and !eel human ingenuity #ill sovle any issue that arises. I! #e #ant
to insure a liva9le !utureC #e must increase our sustaina9ilty -racticesC as #ell as sta9ili>e the
human -o-ulation on /arth. 2ith 1 9illion -eo-le 9eing added to the -lanet every 1 yearsC #e
must slo# this gro#th to ena9le us to address sustaina9ility issues and -reserve a higher
standard o! living !or all -eo-le. Boluntary !amily -lanning in all countries should 9e su--ortedC
including eliminating the Glo9al Gag Rule. /ven though the =nited States -o-ulation gro#s
mostly due to immigrationC there are still large !amilies in this country #ith eight or nine
children. Ho#everC ..Y o! the -o-ulation gro#th does occurs in develo-ing countriesC #here
t#o in three -eo-le lac; clean drin;ing #ater. )amily -lanning education that targets 9oth men
and #omenC as #ell as aid should 9e a -riority as #e loo; to sta9ili>e -o-ulation gro#th. As the
Sierra Clu9 statesC S2hen #omen and men can choose the si>e and s-acing o! their !amiliesC
they tend to have smallerC healthier !amilies. +his has a ri--le e<ect that 9eneMts communities
sociallyC economicallyC and environmentally.S
Condom distribution is crucial to revent overoulation%
+he =conomist? 200* OSe-tem9er 4C 2114C E+en yearsR hard la9ourG Re-roductive healthCF Section H Science and
+echnologyC %e0isQ
+a;e contrace-tionC !or e0am-le. According to the =nited (ationsR "o-ulation )und O=()"AQC
&1Y o! married cou-les no# use contrace-tionC an 11Y increase since 1..4. +his has hel-ed
-ush glo9al -o-ulation gro#th do#n !rom *2m to 7&m -eo-le a year over the -ast decade. 4ut
in some -laces'-articularly in su9:Saharan A!rica and -arts o! Asia'9irth rates remain high
Osee chartQ. +hat has s-urred some governments to o<er incentives to those #ho have !e#er
childrenC and others to inJict -enalties on those #ho do not. SometimesC a high 9irth rate is a
result o! -eo-le #anting large !amilies. 4ut o!ten it is due to a lac; o! a<orda9le contrace-tion.
=()"A estimates that 17m #omen #ho #ant to use contrace-tion cannot o9tain it. As Amare
4edadaC the head o! the )amily Guidance Association o! /thio-iaC -oints outC S2e donRt need to
tell our clients a9out contrace-tion. +hey see their -lots o! land diminishingC and they tell us
they #ant to limit their !amily si>e.S 8aternal health is another area #here much more needs to
9e done. "oor #omen still die in huge num9ers !rom the com-lications o! -regnancy and
child9irth. According to =()"AC .21 #omen die !or every 111C111 live 9irths in su9:Saharan
70
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A!rica. In /uro-eC 9y contrastC the Mgure is 24 Osee the chart on the last -age o! this articleQ.
Ho#everC these num9ers areC at 9estC only rough estimates gleaned !rom hos-ital statistics.
8any #omen go uncounted 9ecause they never reach the health:care system !or treatment in
the Mrst -lace.
77
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Lamil3 lanning rograms are -e3 to oulation reduction%
Global (e5s Wire? 2007 ODune 7Q ODr. Hassan 8ohtashamiC De-uty Re-resentativeC =()"A:=gandaC E )amily
"lanning #ith save mothers and childrenFC le0isQ
)A8I%A -lanning -rogrammes started in develo-ing countries in the 1.&1s. 3riginally the
rationale !or -romoting !amily -lanning #as to reduce ra-id oulation gro#th in order to
match the resources #ith the oulation num9ers. 8any countries ado-ted -olicies and
-rogrammes su--orting contrace-tion. International !unding !or these -rogrammes increased
!rom L1&*m in 1.71 to L$12m in 1.*$. As a resultC the -ro-ortion o! married #omen using a
contrace-tive method rose !rom less than 11Y to a9out &1Y 9et#een 1.&1 and 2111 and the
average num9er o! 9irths -er #oman dro--ed !rom si0 to a9out three. 4ut these Mgures varied
signiMcantly among the regionsC #ith Su9:Saharan A2rica #ith lo#est contrace-tive use O22YQ
and highest !ertility rate O$.$Q in the #orld.
Lamil3 lanning is vital to reducing global oulation rates%
$angerC 2001 OAle0 SangerC A-rilC -resident o! International "lanned "arenthood CouncilC ESe0C %ies and the
Glo9al Gag RuleFC /0cer-t !rom a s-eech 9y 8r. SangerC htt'//555%i25hr%org/ublications/serialMarticleMe%asN
$erial"ssues"#O00>Article"#O110Q
During the t#elve months since I #as last here and s-o;e a9out the threats o! glo9al over-o-ulation and the challenges o!
9alancing -o-ulationC our resources and the environmentC 7* million -eo-le have 9een added to the -lanetC your air-ort has run out
o! room and Cali!ornia has run dangerously lo# on #ater and electricity. I guess I had 9etter give a more com-elling s-eech this
time. I #as struc; during the recent discussions around !ree trade in @ue9ec thatC #hile there #as tal; a9out -reserving the
environmentC there #as no tal; a9out the e<ect that -o-ulation gro#th has on environmental
degradation and the 9eneMts that !amily -lanning can 9ring to 9oth reducing that gro#th and
enhancing the economic develo-ment o! a country #hile reducing the strain on its natural
resources. 3ur country does not deal easily #ith these issues. 4ut I su9mit that -o-ulation
gro#th and the status o! #omen are increasingly relevant to our !utureC to our healthC to the
state o! our environment and to #orld -eace. 2hat should the =nited States 9e doingK )ive
things, su--orting discounted AIDS drugsC child survivalC child9irth servicesC !amily -lanningC
and democracy 9uilding. +he -ro9lem #ith the Mrst three measures is the lac; o! in!rastructure. 2e canRt get the
medicines and services to the mothers and children #ho need them. 2hat #e have 9een a9le to deliver to most
#omen #ho need it is the !ourth thing, !amily -lanning. )amily -lanning #or;s. ItRs chea-C itRs
not high tech'it can get distri9uted. It ena9les #omen to -lan and s-ace their 9irths. Aet des-ite the Cairo Accord in
1..4C #here the =nited States agreed to increase the amount #e s-end on !amily -lanning a9roadC #e have cut our
!oreign aid !or !amily -lanning !rom L$4* million annually to L42$ million. 2e as a nation
should also 9e engaged in democracy 9uilding. 4uilding it through non:governmental
organi>ations and civic grou-s. InsteadC the ne# administration aims to reduce the im-act o!
#omenRs grou-s in society 9y im-osing the Glo9al Gag Rule::the 8e0ico City "olicyC #hich
-rohi9its =.S. Aid reci-ientsC including International "lanned "arenthood a<iliatesC !rom using
money !rom other sources !or either -er!orming legal a9ortions or lo99ying to change their
countryRs a9ortion la#s.
7:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Lamil3 +lanning Good8+oulation8=mo5er Women
Lamil3 lanning emo5ers 5omen and rovides a sustainable method 2or oulation
control%
(ancy +elosi? current s-ea;er o! the houseC 1;;:. Glo9al Issues =SIA /lectronic DournalC Bol. C (o. 2C
Se-tem9er.
Access to !amily -lanning 9uilds healthier !amiliesC em-o#ers #omenC and increases their
economic o--ortunities andC through sta9ili>ing -o-ulation gro#thC im-roves the glo9al
environment. =.S. su--ort !or international !amily -lanning -rograms em-hasi>es voluntary
!amily -lanning as a -art o! an integrated a--roach to -o-ulation and develo-ment that
includes com-lementary activities to -romote healthC the status o! #omenC child survivalC and
strong !amilies. 8ore than $1 million cou-les in the develo-ing #orld use !amily -lanning as a
direct result o! the =.S. Agency !or International Develo-mentRs O=SAIDQ -o-ulation -rogram.
=SAIDRs su--ort !or technical assistanceC trainingC and research activities has !acilitated the
ado-tion o! !amily -lanning measures. +here are no# nearly $C.11 million -eo-le in the #orld.
/very yearC that num9er gro#s 9y an additional *1 million -eo-le. =nited (ations -o-ulation
-roIections !or the middle o! the ne0t century range 9et#een *C111 million and 12C111 million
-eo-le. +hese gro#th levels raise serious 5uestions a9out the a9ility o! the #orldRs resources to
sustain such a large human -o-ulation. 2e ;no# that !amily -lanning #or;s. According to
=SAIDC in countries #hich have received international !amily -lanning !undsC the average
!amily si>e has decreased !rom si0 to !our children. )or every dollar s-ent on !amily -lanningC
governments gain as much as L1& !or health careC educationC and social services. Access to
!amily -lanning allo#s individuals to ma;e in!ormed choices a9out child9earingC healthC and
economic #ell:9eing.
7;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Lamil3 +lanning Good8+oulation8Lunding Ke3
"ncreasing 2unding 2or 2amil3 lanning is the onl3 5a3 to avert e<tinction8current
overoulation 5ill e<acerbate ever3 environmental roblem and cause resource
5ars%
Ste-hen $a5ic-iC /ditor o! +he /nvironmental 8aga>ine and )reelance 2riterC (ovem9er 1;;:. EA(D 4A4A
8A7/S ` +oo 8anyK H over-o-ulationCF /, +he /nvironmental 8aga>ineC
htt-,??Mndarticles.com?-?articles?miTm1$.4?isT&T.?aiT$7.17?-gT1
In CongressC #here the e0treme right #ing has gro#n more outs-o;en and more incendiaryC the
result has 9een a relentless chi--ing:a#ay -rocess::slashing !unding hereC restricting -rograms
there::#hich has ho99led the Clinton administrationRs su--ort !or re-roductive health issuesC
9oth domestically and a9road. 2hatRs moreC the attac;s have gone largely unnoticed 9y a -u9lic
that -redominantly su--orts !amily -lanningC 9ut that seems to have ta;en it !or granted. S2hat
#e are seeing in the =.S. Congress is a concerted attac; on !amily -lanningCS says Dudith 8.
DeSarnoC -resident o! the (ational )amily "lanning and Re-roductive Health Association. SAnd
itRs not only in the =.S.C in -rograms that serve -oor #omenC 9ut -ro9a9ly more so
internationally.S S+he leadershi- in Congress is not listening to the American -eo-leCS #rites
Gloria )eldtC -resident o! the "lanned "arenthood )ederation o! AmericaC in a recent o-:ed
-iece in =SA +oday. S+heyRre listening to !ol;s li;e the Reverend Dames Do9son o! )ocus on the
)amily and Gary 4auer o! the )amily Research Council::religious -olitical e0tremists #ith an
antichoiceC anti:!amily -lanning agenda.S Cro#ding the "lanet Ironically enoughC !amily
-lanning is not a se0y issueG thus its lac; o! headlines. (or does the average citi>en easily ma;e
the mental lea- !rom use o! 9irth control to survival o2 the lanet . Aet it stands as the 9est
solution::and a non:coerciveC virtually -ainless one at that::to a -otential -o-ulation crisis o!
destructive -ro-ortions. "at 2aa;C #ho heads the -o-ulation and ha9itat cam-aign !or the
(ational Audu9on SocietyC is o!ten as;ed #hat a S9ird grou-S li;e hers is doing ;nee:dee- in the
morass o! !amily:-lanning -olitics. 2hy #ould any environmental grou- Ioin the !rayK S2e can
do all the reduction:o!:resource consum-tion -ossi9le in 9uilding sustaina9le communities
around the #orldCS ans#ers 2aa;C S9ut i! -o-ulation gro#th continues in an un-lanned #ayC it
doesnRt ma;e any di<erence, 2e are going to e0haust the resources that are availa9le to usC and
#e #ill get u- against the #allC #here thereRs nothing thatRs su9stituta9le anymore.S Consider
that it too; until the 9eginning o! the 1.th century !or man;ind to reach one 9illion in num9erC
according to the =nited (ations "o-ulation )und. As -u9lic health care im-rovedC -articularly
in develo-ing nationsC -o-ulation has gro#n at a mind:9oggling rateC to the -oint that $.. 9illion
-eo-le today share the /arth. /ven though the -ercentage gro#th rate has slo#ed in recent
yearsC the actual num9er o! -eo-le added each year is 9reathta;ing. )0-erts e0-ect the #orldRs
-o-ulous to 9reach si0 9illion 9y mid:1.... 3ne #orst:case -roIection is that 27 9illion -eo-le
#ill 9e vying !or s-ace::and much more::9y 21$1. I! soC the lac; o! resources #ill 9e unmatched
9y anything short o! our scariest disaster movies. /ven the more li;elyC -ared:do#n estimate o!
11.* 9illion 9y 21$1 has dire im-lications. Birtually every environmental concern society no#
!aces stands to 9e vastly e0acer9ated. "2 5e can go to 5ar over oil? Dust imagine the scene
5hen itAs 5ater thatAs in short sul3. 8ean#hileC Msheries are already in -erilous decline
and could #ell 9ottom out. Ha9itat destruction. /0tinction o! even more s-ecies. "ollution.
Glo9al #arming. S2hat ha--ens #hen IndiaC #ith .4. million -eo-le alreadyC and ChinaC #ith
1.2 9illionC decide that they #ant air conditioningC re!rigeratorsC and more carsKS as;s 2aa;.
InternationallyC -articularly in develo-ing nationsC day:to:day survival o!ten out#eighs 9ig:
-icture concerns li;e the environment. )ood -roduction -er -erson in su9:Saharan A!ricaC !or
e0am-leC has !allen 1& -ercent in 1 yearsC according to "o-ulation Action InternationalC a
2ashingtonC D.C.:9ased advocacy and research organi>ation.
:0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
:1
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' $ocial Changes Must !aen Lirst
Lamil3 lanning bu3s time 2or other solutions to 5or-%
Dose-h $eidel et alC -ro!essor o! 39stetricsC Gynecology P Re-roductive Sciences at the =niversity o! Cali!ornia H
San )ranciscoC 2000. E+he Contri9ution o! )amily "lanning to /nvironmental "reservationF htt-,??###.a--g:
-o-devrh.org.u;?"u9lications?"o-ulationY21Hearings?/vidence?4i09yY21CentreY21evidence.doc.
2e should ;ee- in mind that 9etter re-roductive health care and decreased -o-ulation
-ressures alone #ill not su<ice to -reserve the environment. +here is also an urgent need !or
more e<icient economic systems and ne# technologies that -roduce less #aste and are less
demanding o! our natural resources. Ho#everC achieving these changes is an e0-ensiveC long:
term goalC -articularly #hen com-ared to relative a<orda9ility and !easi9ility o! e<orts to cur9
-o-ulation gro#th. In additionC slo#er -o-ulation gro#th #ill a<ord the time to achieve these
needed systemic changes. +husC increased access to !amily -lanning in develo-ing countriesC
com9ined #ith measures to reduce consum-tion in #ealthier nationsC o<ers a -o#er!ul strategy
!or ensuring environmental sustaina9ility.112 As %ester 4ro#n has noted,
+he gro#th in resource consum-tion in ChinaC no# ecli-sing that o! the =nited StatesC -rovides
convincing ne# reasons !or shi!ting 5uic;ly !rom the !ossil:!uel:9asedC automo9ile:centeredC
thro#a#ay economy to a rene#a9le energy:9asedC diversiMed:trans-ortC reuse:recycle economy.
In this restructuringC time is not on our side. It #ould 9e tem-ting to reset the cloc;C 9ut #e
cannot. (ature is the time;ee-er.11
:2
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Coercive Lamil3 +lanning Ke3
&here is 4ero truth value to the claims o2 oulation controllers8their hilosoh3 is
in2used 5ith a conservative religious 2ear o2 5omen7s se<ualit3 and is the
underl3ing 5orldvie5 that biases their claims%
$ahn? 1;;7 "ro!essor o! la# at the (e# /ngland School o! %a# O/li>a9ethC /nvironmental %a#C 12?22C E)eeling
grounded, a gendered vie# o! -o-ulation controlFC
htt-,??###.the!reeli9rary.com?)eelingXgrounded,XaXgenderedXvie#Xo!X-o-ulationXcontrol.OSym-osiumXon...:
a121$2&.&2Q
So the 5uestion again is #hyK 2hy #ould individual states or multilateral !unding agencies
continue to su--ort narro#ly !ocusedC coercive !emale !ertility control as the central -oint !or
-o-ulation -olicy #hen #e ;no# that educationC economic em-o#ermentC and access to
re-roductive health care a--arently #or; as #ell or 9etter to reduce !emale !ertility rates #ith
less harm to the #omenK I sus-ect that -eo-le accustomed to dominance games Mnd it very
threatening to release their e<orts to control others !or !ear that others #ill turn the ta9les and
try to control them. 4ecause controlistas are so accustomed to thin;ing in terms o! either?or
dichotomiesC they can truly only envision t#o o-tions. 4e the one #ho is in controlC or 9e the
one #ho is controlled. +he conce-t o! a third #ay is sim-ly 9eyond com-rehension. +hus the
(orth?South de9ate on -o-ulation versus consum-tion issuesC #hich Mgured so -rominently at
the /arth Summit in RioCO$1Q sometimes -roceeds #ith each side insisting on the dominance o!
its vision. 3! course it is clear to the rest o! us that #e need a 9alanced a--roach #hich
includes attention to 9oth -o-ulation as #ell as consum-tion -atterns. It is not an either?or
situation. In the conte0t o! dominance games o! -o-ulation controlC ho#everC #e have an
additionalC and I 9elieve signiMcantC varia9le. +he o9Iect o! control in this -articular game is
!emale !ertility::#omenC their re-roductive systemsC and their se0uality. In this #orld vie#C i!
#omen are not controlledC then their se0uality #ill run ram-ant. +he -erceived dangers o! #ildC
uncontrolla9le !emale se0uality are #idely shared 9oth 9y -ro: and anti:natalists.O$1Q 8any
!undamentalist religions share that 9asic vie#. I #ill limit mysel! to one religious e0am-le. Some Islamic
!undamentalists threatened to 9om9 the =nited (ations International Con!erence on "o-ulation and Develo-ment at Cairo on the
grounds that discussing !amily -lanning #as a Scon!erence o! lasciviousnessS in #hich radical #estern les9ians #ould incite #omen
to #orld#ide -romiscuity and adultery.O$2Q In ChinaC there #ere re-orts o! -lainclothes security o<icers !ollo#ing #omen attending
the =nited (ations )ourth 2orld Con!erence on 2omen. +he security o<icers carried large 9lue 9lan;ets to thro# around #omen
9ecause they !eared that a grou- o! #estern radical !eminists -lanned to -rotest 9y stri--ing na;ed and running through
+ienanmen S5uare. In the =nited StatesC discussions a9out controlling the !ertility o! #omen o!ten highlight the -erceived
-romiscuity o! non:Caucasian #omen and teenagers as a method o! dramati>ing the need !or control.O$Q In A!ricaC one reason
given to Iusti!y !emale genital mutilation is that it hel-s to control #ild !emale se0uality and -revent -romiscuity.O$4Q 4oth -ro: and
anti:natalist -o-ulation controllers too o!ten vie# #omen as dirtC as the !ertile Meld to 9e -lo#ed or salted. 2omenRs !ertilityC and
the underlying OdirtyQ !emale se0uality it im-liesC are treated as e0-losiveC untamedC #ildC and in need o! limitingC as i! a good dose
o! as-haltC a nicely manicured la#n and tu9al ligationC #ould solve all the environmental -ro9lems this -lanet !aces. At the
momentC ho#everC things are more than a 9it muddy. In !actC the 4eiIing 2omenRs Con!erence #as inundated #ith rainC leaving the
ground at Huairou a sea o! mud. 2e #ere literally an;le dee- in mudC &1C111 leaders !rom all over the -lanetC slogging our #ay
through the acreageC soa;ed and e0hausted. At nightC #e read the -a-ers or listened to C((C and heard a9out droughts all around
the #orld::A!ricaC the =.S. 8id#estC /uro-e. +here #ere droughts every#here and in 4eiIing #e #ere Io;ing a9out needing snor;els
to survive. Standing in a long line #aiting to use the toilet !acilitiesC one Chinese:s-ea;ing -erson attending the Con!erence as;ed
the ancient Chinese #oman #ho #as there to clean the !acility i! it #as al#ays so rainy in Se-tem9er. S(oC noCS the Chinese #oman
re-liedC sha;ing her head vigorously. S4ut #hat do you e0-ect #ith a these #omen hereK So much yinC o! course it rains.S I #ould
9e remiss in my dutiesC and I ;no# you #ould all 9e greatly disa--ointedC i! I !ailed to ma;e the o9vious radical !eminist -oint here.
It ta;es t#o to tango. +ea !or t#o. Ain needs Aang. Bive la di<erence. In every cultureC #eRve managed to Mgure out that 9a9ies have
!athers too. It is my !erventC although -ro9a9ly uto-ian !eminist dream that -o-ulation -olicy discussions could incor-orate this
-ro!oundC although genderedC insight. Controlistas target #omen as the 9earers o! children as i! #omen #ere solely res-onsi9le
!or their o#n !ertility. Aet in manyC many culturesC #omen have little autonomy in deciding #hether or
#hen to 9ear children.O$$Q +his is -articularly true in the -oorestC least develo-ed culturesC
#here #omen themselves are regarded as having little valueC and !undamentalist -ractices o!
-atriarchal religions o!ten encourage large num9ers o! 9irthsC es-ecially o! sons.O$&Q +al;ing in
terms o! -ersonal !reedom to choose #hether to have children misses the most im-ortant gendered -ers-ective regarding ho#
-o#er is allocated to ma;e actual decisions a9out re-roduction. Bisiting a model !amily -lanning clinic serving a very -oor
:)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
-o-ulation in rural /gy-tC I -ressed the 5uestion regarding #hether !amily -lanning #as Svoluntary.S +he very ;ind and o9viously
dedicated doctor running the clinic assured us that -lanning #as not coercive. I #as told Sthis is a com-letely voluntary -rogram.
(o one #ill !orce the #i!e to use the !amily -lanning #ithout the hus9andRs -ermission.S He assured us thus #ith total sincerity that
SvoluntaryS !amily -lanning meant the hus9and had the Mnal say.O$7Q
:*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8Contracetives
&he gag rule undermines access to contracetives%
Cohen? 2001 OSusanC Alan Guttmacher Institute, +he Guttmacher Re-ort on "u9lic "olicyC Bolume 4C
(um9er C EGlo9al Gag Rule, /0-orting Antia9ortion Ideology at the /0-ense o! American BaluesCF Dune
2111C htt-,??###.guttmacher.org?-u9s?tgr?14??gr14111.htmlQ
Gag rule o--onents maintain that #hile the -olicy is 9eing -romoted as antia9ortionC it also
remains at its core anti:!amily -lanning. I! the overriding goal is the -residentRsC to reduce the
incidence o! a9ortionC the evidence is clearC they sayC that the most e<ective and acce-ta9le #ay
to accom-lish that goal is to !acilitate access to high:5uality contrace-tive services OSA 8essage
to the "resident, A9ortion Can 4e Sa!eC %egal and Still RareCS +GRC )e9ruary 2111Q. 4ut the
-olicy does nothing to !acilitate access to contrace-tionG in !actC it signiMcantly im-edes access
9y -rohi9iting =.S. !amily -lanning assistance !rom going to hos-itals and health clinics in
develo-ing countries that also -rovide a9ortionsC or even a9ortion:related in!ormation.
Con2usion over e<emtions to the gag rule causes organi4ations to overcomensate
and not rovide contracetives8this contributes to A"#$ sread in A2rica%
Women7s (e5s? .?24?200). ERe-ort, Glo9al Gag (e#s S-urring DeathsC DiseaseCF
http://www.womensenews.org/article.cm/d!n/aid/"#$%/conte&t/archi'e.
Condoms -rocured #ith HIB?AIDS !unds are not su9Iect to the ruleC 9ut critics o! the rule say
thatC in -racticeC organi>ations that re!used to sign the rule have not 9een a9le to get !unds
earmar;ed !or HIB?AIDS -revention. SIn -racticeC that is #hat is ha--ening. +hey are getting
9lac;9alledCS said 2endy +urn9ullC legislative -olicy analyst #ith "o-ulation Action
International and one o! the authors o! the re-ort. A state de-artment o<icial said it #as
unclear ho# =SAID determined #hich -rograms 5ualiMed !or HIB?AIDS !unds and #hich #ere
dis5ualiMed as !amily -lanning -rograms not in com-liance #ith the 8e0ico City -olicy. +he
Saint %ucia "lanned "arenthood Association a<iliate #as !orced to cancel -lans to train 21*
S-eer hel-ersS that #ould have reached more than 12C111 -rimary and secondary school
students #ith in!ormation on HIB?AIDSC according to the re-ort. +he Cameroon (ational
Association !or )amily 2el!are closed a youth center that taught young -eo-le a9out
res-onsi9le -arenthood and HIB?AIDS. +hey also eliminated !amily -lanning services in t#o
9ranchesC one in a -rovince #here . -ercent o! the -o-ulation lives #ith HIB?AIDS and another
in a -rovince #here & -ercent o! the -o-ulation is in!ectedC according to the re-ort. +he
International "lanned "arenthood )ederation distri9uted condoms donated 9y =SAID. 4edadaRs
organi>ationC a mem9er o! the !ederationC did not receive enough donated condoms to su--ly
the demand !or nearly a year and has run lo# on other contrace-tives as #ell. S2e are not a9le
to su--ly the youth demand as much as #eRd li;eCS 4edada said. S2e tell them to go to the
government health institutions to get them i! they canC 9ut mostly the -eo-le that #e serve are
in rural areas and they have no#here else to goCS he e0-lained. 2hen they Mnally returned to
the rural areasC they !ound #omen u-set and sus-icious. SIt #as Iust demorali>ing !or them and
!or the communityCS 4edada saidC S+hey thought that #e #ere going to a9andon them.S
"resident Reagan introduced the 8e0ico City -olicy in 1.*4 during a =.(. -o-ulation
con!erence in 8e0ico City. It has remained in e<ect as long as Re-u9licans have held the
-residencyC and #as rescinded 9y then:"resident Clinton in 1.. on the 21th anniversary o! Roe
v. 2ade. In late AugustC "resident 4ush e0tended the 8e0ico City "olicy to cover =.S.
De-artment o! State -o-ulation !unds. A state de-artment o<icial said it #as still unclear #hat
!unds and organi>ations #ould 9e a<ected 9y this rule.
:/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
&he gag rule has cut of sulies o2 condoms to A2rica%
+oulation Action "nternational% )act Sheet. August 2C 2000%
htt-,??&&...1.12*?resources?!actsheets?!actsheetT$.htm
+he gag rule has !orced closures and cut9ac;s 9y leading !amily -lanning grou-s. )amily
-lanning organi>ations that reIect the gag rule have 9een !orced to close clinicsC cut services
and increase !ees. +hey have 9een una9le to o9tain donated contrace-tives on #hich the
#omen and men they serve de-end. In a num9er o! countriesC esta9lished health care re!erral
net#or;s are colla-sing as ;ey !amily -lanning organi>ations do#nsi>e and struggle to co-e
#ith 9udget cuts and ra-idly declining stoc;s o! contrace-tive su--lies. +he gag rule has
adversely a<ected the su--ly o! contrace-tives and condoms. Shortly a!ter the reinstatement o!
the gag ruleC shi-ments o! =.S.:donated condoms and contrace-tives com-letely ceased to 1&
develo-ing countriesC -rimarily in A!rica. %eading !amily -lanning agencies in another 1&
countries H mostly in A!rica H have lost access to much:needed =.S. condoms and contrace-tives
as a result o! their re!usal to acce-t the gag rule restrictions.
:0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Contracetives Good8+oulation
&he Global9Gag rule denies 2unding to 2amil3 lanning services in A2rica that rovide
contracetives85ith the 2ertilit3 rate rising? contracetives are necessar3 to curb
oulation gro5th%
Gemma RichardsonC "lanned "arenthood )ederation o! AmericaC Dan 1C 200/.
htt-,??###.hri.ca?tri9une?3nlineIssue?11T11T211$?Contrace-tiveY21ShortageY21CauseY21!orY21ConcernY21in
Y21A!ricanY21CountriesT11:11:211$.html.
/very year more than $11C111 #omen die !rom com-lications o! -regnancy and child9irthC
almost all in develo-ing countries #here #omen do not have access to vital services and
su--lies. 2ith the current contrace-tive shortage !acing several develo-ing countriesC even
more #omen ris; loosing their lives 9ecause o! -regnancy or child9irth:related com-lications.
"oor #omen in countries such as 7enya are Mnding their -re!erred method o! contrace-tive is
out o! stoc; at clinicsC or even that clinics are reducing services or shutting do#n all together.
A!ter success!ully 9ringing do#n the !ertility rate !rom *.1 in 1.77 to 4.. in 2112C 7enya ris;s
seeing it rise again as #omenKs contrace-tive choices are 9ecoming limited. %ast year the
!ertility rate in the country cre-t u- to $.1C -erha-s a sign o! #hat is to come. At a time #hen
7enyan #omen are e0-ressing considera9le interest in controlling the timing and num9er o!
9irths they haveC as demonstrated in the 211 7enya Health and Demogra-hic surveyC access to
contrace-tives a--ears to 9e more restricted than it #as Iust a !e# years ago. Several other
A!rican countries have also re-orted to 9e out o! contrace-tives. According to the =nited
(ations "o-ulation )und O=()"AQC more than $1 million #omen #orld#ide do not have access
to a choice o! sa!e and e<ective contrace-tive methods. +here are several !actors 9ehind this
contrace-tive shortageC such as diminishing donor su--ortC the 4ush administration6s glo9al
gag ruleC and the gro#ing demand !or contrace-tive servicesC #hich many develo-ing countries
are una9le to -rovide !or. +he Glo9al Gag Rule In 2111C "resident George 2. 4ush introduced
the 8e0ico City "olicy #idely re!erred to as the glo9al gag rule #hich in essence cut o< =SAID
!amily -lanning !unds to many organi>ations that -rovide !amily -lanning services in the
develo-ing #orld. +he glo9al gag rule denies =.S. !amily -lanning !unds to non:governmental
organi>ations that -rovide legal a9ortion servicesC re!er and counsel #omen !or a9ortion
servicesC or that lo99y !or changes to a9ortion la#s. +his a--lies even to organi>ations that are
not using =.S. !unds to -rovide these services.
:7
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Contracetives Good8Gender and +oulation
Lamil3 lanning that romotes contracetion ma-es develoment sustainable and
brea-s do5n gender ine.ualities%
Giuse--e 6enagiano et alC De-artment o! Gynaecological SciencesC "erinatology and Child CareC =niversity Rla
Sa-ien>aRC RomeC 8arch 2007. EContrace-tion, A social revolutionCF /uro-ean Dournal o! Contrace-tion P
Re-roductive Health Care.
Contrace-tion and develo-ment +he glo9al social revolution caused 9y the need to 5uench
-o-ulation gro#th cannot 9y itsel! e0-lain the decline o! !ertility. +his latter #as the
conse5uence o! a num9er o! inJuential !actors such as educationC economic gro#thC im-roved
living conditionsC etc. +he relative contri9utions o! !amily -lanning -rograms and socio:
economic develo-ment to the decline in !ertility have 9een much de9ated2. +he relationshi- is
com-le0. Social and economic develo-mentC and !amily -lanning service -rovision #or;
synergisticallyC 9ut 9oth also reduce !ertility levels on their o#n:$.Satis!ying the unmet need
!or contrace-tive services in develo-ing countries #ould avert annually $2 million unintended
-regnanciesC #hich in turn #ould save more than 1.$ million lives and -revent $1$C111 children
!rom losing their mothers. +he cost o! -roviding contrace-tive services to the 211 million
#omen in develo-ing countries #ith unmet need Othose using traditional methods or no methodQ
#ould 9e L.. 9illion -er year2. Im-roving the social status and condition o! #omen +he 2orld
Health 3rganisation O2H3Q&C7 has recently documented ho# contrace-tionC es-ecially #hen
integrated into com-rehensive se0ual and re-roductive health servicesC can im-rove #omenRs
lives 9y -reventing or correcting eventsC and conditions a<ecting their status in the !amily and
in the community. Avoiding -regnancy during the teens can increase o--ortunities !or a young
#omanRs educationC training and em-loyment andC in the longer termC ensure !uture earning
-o#er and Mnancial security. In additionC 9y controlling their !ertilityC #omen may have a 9etter
chance to contri9ute economically to their householdC #hich in turn may give them more
conMdence and greater role in decision:ma;ing2.
::
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8+oulation8Condoms
&he gag rule revents 2amil3 lanning clinics 2rom romoting condom use8this is
causing a oulation e<losion in A2rica%
+he Otta5a Citi4enC 3cto9er 2C 200*. htt-,??###.ac-d.ca?ac-d.c!m?en?section?ac-dmedia?articleID?2&1.
+here is also a shortage o! condoms in 7enya and other develo-ing countries 9ecause the =.S.C
#hich is -ushing a -ro:a9stinence agenda called A4C Oa9stinenceC 9e !aith!ulC and lastlyC
condom useQ sto--ed sending condoms to organi>ations that didnRt com-ly #ith the gag -olicy.
Demogra-hers at a con!erence in 7enya this summer e0-ressed dee- concern that
inaccessi9ility to !amily -lanning and contrace-tives may increase the -o-ulation. )or more
than 21 yearsC 7enya had e0-erienced one o! the most dramatic declines in total !ertility ever
recordedC !rom *.1 children -er #oman in 1.77 to !our in 2112. %ast yearC the Mrst year that has
seen an increaseC the num9er inched u- to Mve. +his may seem smallC 9ut to demogra-hersC this #ill have a huge
e<ect on a country #ith severe economic -ro9lems. Activists says the results o! the =.S. -olicy are emerging in the
rivers and slums o! 7enya. +he corrugated steel and mud shac; once hummed #ith activity in the heart o! the
8athare BalleyC (airo9iRs oldest slum and home to 11C111 o! the cityRs -oorest -eo-le. )or 11 yearsC local #omenC
9a9ies tied to their 9ac;s or herding large 9roods o! childrenC came here !or inIections o! De-o "rovera and (or-lant
or to have I=Ds inserted. Condoms #ere distri9uted !or !ree. +hey #ere treated !or malaria and ty-hoid and +4. Sic;
children #ere e0amined. +his clinic #as run 9y %ondon:9ased 8arie Sto-es InternationalC #hich re!used to com-ly
#ith the =.S. -olicy. Its 7enyan 9ranch lost L&11C111 =.S. in !unding and 41 -er cent o! its o-erating 9udget. It closed
t#o clinicsC including this one. +he end o! the 8athare Balley clinic leaves the community #ithout health care.
(ear9yC a ragtag mo9 o! children ;ic; a can across the dirt. +#o -rostitutesC no more than 1 or 14 years old slouch
in a door#ay. Aoung girls shu_e -ast #ith 9a9ies on their 9ac;s. S 2e donRt really ;no# #hat ha--ened to the
#omen #ho used to go thereCS says "atricia HindmarshC o! 8arie Sto-es International in %ondon. S2e are s-ea;ing
a9out mostly very young #omen. 2e ;no# that they donRt have the -o#er to negotiate sa!e se0. 2e ;no# this has
meant more un#anted -regnanciesC more a9ortions. 8ore !etuses turning u-.S 8s. Hindmarsh said that 8arie
Sto-es #ould have had to shut more clinics in 7enyaC i! the Dutch government hadnRt o<ered to Mll the Sdecency ga-S
le!t 9y the American -olicy. +he #omen here lead des-erate livesC says Dr. Dose-h RuminIoC a o9stetrician #ho
#or;ed in the gynecology #ard in a (airo9i hos-ital. He remem9ers one #oman in her early 21s #ho a9orted !our
!etuses over a cou-le o! years 9y stic;ing a shar- o9Iect into her #om9. S I sa# her !our times in a very short #hile.
She #as very luc;y she didnRt die. +hey get an in!ectionC it s-reads into the 9loodstream. +hey die. S She didnRt #ant
to 9ecome -regnantC she Iust didnRt ;no# ho# to -revent itCS says Dr. RuminIo. He no# #or;s !or /ngenderHealthC a
=.S.:9ased !amily -lanning organi>ation. In the months 9e!ore the Sgag ruleS too; e<ectC /ngenderHealth had
esta9lished a net#or; o! !amily -lanning services in 7enyaC Ioining #ith )"A7 and 8arie Sto-es International to
su--ort $ clinics across the country. 2hen 9oth 8arie Sto-es and )"A7 re!used to com-ly #ith the American
re5uirementsC the $ clinics and hundreds o! health #or;ers lost =.S. !unding. Some anti:a9ortion activists and
7enya church leaders O1 -er cent o! 7enyans are CatholicQ -romote a9stinenceC 9elieving contrace-tion encourages
young -eo-le to have se0. 4ut Dr. Solomon 3rero says #omen are -o#erless to say no. S 2e have to have com-assion
!or these #omenC #ho are o!ten illiterate and ignorant. +hey have no rightsC and are entitled to no o-inionsCS he said.
S2hat then ha--ens is that #omen #ill 9e -o#erless to do anything to -revent un#anted
-regnancy.S +he Sgag ruleS is also ;no#n as the 8e0ico City -olicy 9ecause it #as introduced 9y
e0:-resident Ronald Reagan in 1.*4 a!ter a -o-ulation con!erence in 8e0ico City. (ine years
laterC e0:-resident 4ill Clinton a9olished the -olicy. 8r. 4ush 9rought it 9ac; and e0tended it.
=.S. -residential candidate Dohn 7erry said last #ee; he #ould revo;e the -olicy and return
!unding to the =nited (ations "o-ulation )und. S 4ush has turned the cloc; #ayC #ay 9ac;CS
says 7atherine 8cDonaldC e0ecutive director o! Action Canada !or "o-ulation and Develo-ment.
SItRs devastating. ItRs ridiculous. 2e ;no# there are more a9ortionsC #e ;no# more #omen are
dying. And there has 9een a chill e<ect. (o one ;no#s #hat they can or cannot say 9ecause
they are a!raid to lose =.S. !unding.
:;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation (o58$ub9$aharan A2rica
&he &hird World is in a oulation e<losion%
Knight Ridder +ri9une 4usiness (e#sC 200*.
htt-,??###.the!reeli9rary.com?"o-ulationXe0-losionXstillXaX#orld#ideXconcern:a11124.44$..
+hird 2orld -o-ulation is in a -o-ulation 9ig 9angC said )ornosC #ho #ill s-ea; at the
=niversity o! 3regon on +hursday. +he #orld gained 7* million ne# human 9eings last yearC and
.7 -ercent o! them live in the #orldRs -oorest countries. Hal! o! the #orldRs -o-ulation is under
the age o! 2$C 9ut &1 -ercent o! residents in the -oorest countries are under 21C said )ornosC
#ho #as named the =nited (ations -o-ulation laureate !or 211. He is -resident o! the
"o-ulation InstituteC a non-roMt advocacy organi>ation 9ased in 2ashingtonC D.C.
A2rican oulation gro5th is s-3roc-eting%
Inter "ress Service O"+$QC *?1.?200*. htt-,??i-sne#s.net?interna.as-Kidne#sW2$14&.
A ne#ly released survey -roIects massive -o-ulation gro#th in the develo-ing #orld over the
ne0t 4$ yearsC due to its dis-ro-ortionately young -o-ulace and higher 9irth rates. 2hile there
has 9een a decline in !ertility rates in -arts o! %atin America and AsiaC gro#th rates in A!rica
and other areas o! Asia are 9ooming at dangerously high levelsC says demogra-her Carl Hau9 o!
the "o-ulation Research 4ureau O"R4QC #hich -roduced the re-ort. SA maIor 5uestion mar; is
ho# to get the *1 -ercent o! rural Indians to have Iust t#o childrenCS Hau9 said in an intervie#
#ith I"S. "R4Rs -roIection o! -o-ulation in 21$1 sho#s India to--ing the list at 1.& 9illion
-eo-leG !ollo#ed 9y ChinaC 1.4 9illionG the =nited StatesC 421 millionG IndonesiaC 1* millionG
and (igeria at 17 million. )orty:!our -ercent o! su9:Saharan A!ricaRs -o-ulation is 9elo# age
1$C com-ared to -ercent in Asia Oless ChinaQC 2 -ercent in %atin America and only 17
-ercent in /uro-eC adds the R2114 2orld "o-ulation Data SheetRC com-iled 9y "R4C a
2ashingtonC DC:9ased non: -roMt organi>ation.
$ub9$aharan A2rica is e<eriencing a oulation e<losion%
Ioice o2 AmericaC 2000. htt-,??###.voane#s.com?english?archive?211&:1?211&:1:17:voa*1.c!mK
C)IDW17&7&$$&4PC)+37/(W$4722*1
)irstC the num9ers, 9y the year 21$1C demogra-hers -redict there #ill 9e 1.7 9illion -eo-le
living in su9:Saharan A!rica. +hatRs u- !rom the current -o-ulation estimate o! 7$2 millionC
according to the "o-ulation Re!erence 4ureau. +hat means in terms o! -ercentagesC the
-o-ulation o! su9:Saharan A!rica is #idely e0-ected to ma;e a staggering lea- !rom Iust over 12
-ercent to a9out 21 -ercent o! the #orldRs total -o-ulation. Dohn 8ay is Senior "o-ulation
S-ecialist #ith the 2orld 4an;. He says des-ite a ne# a#areness and great e<orts 9y A!rican
governmentsC the continent is a latecomer : indeedC the last region in #orld to 9egin to seriously
address over-o-ulation. S4ut it is li;e a runner on a treadmill and they are running very !ast
and !aster and !asterCS he said. S4ut un!ortunatelyC the treadmill is running even !aster than they
are 9ut -o-ulation gro#th is so !ast and so ra-id in many #ays that they cannot Iust co-e #ith
the challenge o! -roviding servicesC es-ecially in educationC health andC alsoC em-loyment to
their -o-ulation.
;0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation (o58$ub9$aharan A2rica
$ub $aharan A2rica 5ill be resonsible 2or the maDorit3 o2 global oulation gro5th8a
massive investment in 2amil3 lanning is vital to reducing 2ertilit3 rates
Ca3o? 07 ODonC Bancouver SunC ERuna#ay 9irthrates im-eril #orldRs -oorest nationsCFC 2?12C
htt-,??###.a--g:-o-devrh.org.u;?"u9lications?"o-ulationY21Hearings?BancouverY21SunY21article.rt!Q
/0-erience in most o! the once:-oor countries that are 9eginning to -ros-er -roves that !ertility
rates dro- dramaticallyC #ithout coercionC i! !amilies sim-ly get the access they #ant to modern
contrace-tionC says the re-ort entitled Return o! the "o-ulation Gro#th )actor, Its Im-act =-on
the 8illennium Develo-ment Goals.
+he scale o! the -ro9lem is hard to imagine in a society li;e oursC #here the demogra-hic
challenge is too !e# young -eo-leC not too many. 4utC #hile the develo-ed #orldRs -o-ulation
stalls and even threatens to shrin;C the #orld as a #hole is undergoing un-recedented gro#th.
In the second hal! o! the 21th centuryC glo9al -o-ulation soared !rom less than three 9illion to
more than si0 9illion. At current !ertility ratesC #hich are lo# to moderate in many -arts o! the
#orld 9ut high in su9saharan A!rica and -arts o! AsiaC it #ill -ea; at a9out 11.$ 9illion around
the end o! this century. (inety:nine -er cent o! this gro#thC the re-ort saysC #ill 9e in
develo-ing countriesC and .1 -er cent #ill 9e in the very -oorest. )or e0am-leC (iger in central
A!rica has 14 million citi>ens today 9ut #illC at its current 9irthrate o! eight 9a9ies -er #omanC
have *1 million 9y 21$1. +his is San unimagina9le scenario in a country already una9le to !eed
itsel!C !acing #ides-read destruction o! local ecosystems through over:gra>ingC continuing mass
-overty and massive de-endence on international aidCS says the %ondon School o! Hygiene and
+ro-ical 8edicine. S/ven i! (igerRs !ertility rate #as to more than halve :: to .& :: it !aces a $1
million -o-ulation 9y 21$1. Currently only !our -er cent o! #omen use modern contrace-tivesC
so #ithout massive investment in !amily -lanning -rogramsC the outloo; is 9lea;.S
$ub $aharan A2rica is overoulated? ris-ing con@ict%
Council on Loreign Relations? 00 O8ore +han Humanitarianism, A Strategic =.S. A--roach +o#ard
A!ricaC Re-ort o! an Inde-endent +as; )orceC
htt-,??###.c!r.org?content?-u9lications?attachments?A!ricaT+as;T)orceT2e9.-d!Q
"o-ulation -rograms must 9e restored to their earlier -riority. Ideological issues and shi!ting o!
attention to HIB?AIDS have led to a diminution o! =.S. leadershi- in this area. Aet the
demogra-hic -roIections in A!rica should give the =nited States serious concern. )amine:-rone
countries li;e /thio-ia and (iger have dou9led their -o-ulation in the -ast t#o decades and the
-roIections suggest !urther shar- increases in the !uture. In -articularC the social and -olitical
im-act o! the gro#ing youth 9ulge should garner more attention to -o-ulation -olicyC as this
9ulge -resages more conJictC unem-loymentC and -otential recruitment !or e0tremist activity.
;1
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Lertilit3 Rates #eclining
$ub9$aharan A2rica 5ill be overoulated desite a decline in 2ertilit3 rates%
Ioice o2 AmericaC 2000. htt-,??###.voane#s.com?english?archive?211&:1?211&:1:17:voa*1.c!mK
C)IDW17&7&$$&4PC)+37/(W$4722*1
He also says massive -o-ulation gro#th -arado0ically assumes there #ill 9e a decline in !ertility
rates in some A!rican nations. 2hen tal;ing a9out over-o-ulationC demogra-hers s-ea; o! this
-henomenon, the so:called Sglo9al demogra-hic transition.S +hat is the trans!ormation o!
-o-ulations !rom short lives and large !amilies to longer lives and smaller !amilies. And this has
not yet ha--ened in A!ricaC a !act that has e0-erts #arning a9out ho# over-o-ulation #ill add
monumental -ressures to countries that are already too -oor to -rovide 9asic services.
6irth rates are too high desite declines in 2ertilit3
Dose-h $eidel et alC -ro!essor o! 39stetricsC Gynecology P Re-roductive Sciences at the =niversity o! Cali!ornia H
San )ranciscoC 2000. E+he Contri9ution o! )amily "lanning to /nvironmental "reservationF htt-,??###.a--g:
-o-devrh.org.u;?"u9lications?"o-ulationY21Hearings?/vidence?4i09yY21CentreY21evidence.doc.
Des-ite -roIected declines in !ertilityC the annual num9er o! 9irths #orld#ide is e0-ected to
remain at more than 11 million !or at least the ne0t 1$ years.21 "reviously high:!ertility rates
have le!t many -oor countries #ith large num9ers o! #omen o! re-roductive ageG #orld#ide
this su9:-o-ulation is -roIected to increase !rom 1.& to 2.1 9illion 9et#een 211$ and 21$1.7 3!
-articular concern is the large num9er o! #omen Iust entering their re-roductive years, in
211$C there #ere nearly $.1 million young #omen aged 11 to 1. years.7 As these #omen have
childrenC the a9solute num9er o! -eo-le #ill increaseC even as !ertility rates declineC a
-henomenon ;no#n as -o-ulation momentum. )or e0am-leC though China6s +)R has !allen
9elo# the re-lacement level o! 2.1C the large num9er o! cou-les o! re-roductive age has ;e-t
the country6s -o-ulation gro#ing 9y a9out eight million annually.17 High:!ertility still -ersists
in much o! the #orld. In 211$C the +)R !or the .. 9illion -eo-le living in less develo-ed
countries outside o! China #as estimated at .$C #ith an annual -o-ulation gro#th rate o! 1.*
-ercent.17 At this rateC the -o-ulation o! these countries #ould dou9le in Iust . years. A
small num9er o! countries are res-onsi9le !or much o! the #orld6s -o-ulation gro#th. +he =(
-roIects that nine countries #ill account !or hal! o! the #orld6s -o-ulation increase 9et#een
211$ and 21$1, IndiaC "a;istanC (igeriaC the Democratic Re-u9lic o! CongoC 4angladeshC
=gandaC the =.S.C /thio-iaC and China Oin order o! their si>e o! contri9ution to -o-ulation
gro#thQ.22 In !our o! these countries'the Democratic Re-u9lic o! CongoC /thio-iaC (igeriaC
and =ganda'the +)R is !ar !rom re-lacement levelC ranging !rom $. in (igeria to 7.1 in
=ganda.7
;2
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' A"#$ is a #eath Chec-
=stimates o2 overoulation account 2or current A"#$ deaths%
Kates? "ro!essor o! "hiloso-hy at Ithaca CollegeC 200*. Carol A. 7atesC ERe-roductive %i9erty and
3ver-o-ulationCF htt-,??###.ithaca.edu?hs?-hilrel?re-li9.-d!
+he =.(.6s revised 2111 -o-ulation -roIection estimated #orld -o-ulation Oa9out &. 9illion in
211QC #ould s#ell to 9et#een 7.. and 11.. 9illion 9y 21$1. +he medium estimate 7 o! ..
9illion 9y 21$1 #as e0-ected to sta9ili>e at a9out 11 9illion 9y the end o! the centuryC orC on the
high estimateC a9out 12 9illion O=("D 2111G 4ongaarts 2112Q. Contrary to the common
-erce-tion that the medium !orecasts are Emore -ro9a9leF than the lo# or high estimatesC a
recent (ational Research Council study concluded that a .$:-ercent -rediction interval !or
#orld -o-ulation in 21$1 #ould e0tend !rom 7.. to 11.. 9illion O(RC 2111,11C1.1Q. * +he
=.(.6s 2112 -o-ulation revision -roIects a #orld -o-ulation o! 7.4 to 11.& 9illion 9y 21$1C #ith
a medium estimate o! *.. 9illion O=("D 211Q. +he estimate reJects the Iudgment o!
demogra-hers assem9led to advise the "o-ulation Division in 8arch 2112C . ta;ing into
account evidence o! a #orsening im-act o! HIB?AIDS and indications that the total !ertility rate
O+)RQ in intermediate:!ertility countries 11 may !all 9elo# re-lacement level 9e!ore 21$1.
Ho#everC at that meetingC Dose-h ChamieC Director o! the "o-ulation DivisionC stressed that
E#orld -o-ulation gro#th is not over...."o-ulation momentum 11 #ill cause #orld -o-ulation
gro#th to continue !or many decades even i! the level o! !ertility in the intermediate:!ertility
countries !alls 9elo# re-lacement 9y 21$1F O=("D 2112,1.Q. Gri<ith )eeneyC con!erence
ra--orteurC -resented an overvie# o! con!erence themes and em-hasi>ed the -oint that , E2e
have not seen the end o! huge -o-ulation gro#th....2e are in the middle o! a century o! ra-id
#orld -o-ulation gro#th. +he end is in sightC 9ut it is still at least $1 years a#ay. +o dismiss
#orld -o-ulation gro#th as a !undamental issue !or the !uture o! humanity is a9surdly short
sighted and could incur a terri9le human costF O=("D2112,21Q.
;)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation 6ad8A2rica #rives Global
A2rican oulation gro5th is driving global overoulation%
Kingston Whig9$tandardC ?1$?2007. Ho# the -o-ulation time 9om9 is tic;ing a#ay in A!ricaC %e0is.
+hat \\\\\\\\ !or a9out hal! o! the antici-ated -o-ulation gro#th in the ne0t 41 yearsC #hich #ill
raise the total num9er o! -eo-le on the -lanet !rom &.$ 9illion to a9out nine 9illion. OIn other
#ordsC #e #ill 9e adding as many e0tra -eo-le as the total -o-ulation o! the #orld 9ac; in
1.$1.Q 4ut the other hal! o! the gro#th comes mainly !rom A!ricaC already the -oorest
continent .+his may e0-lain #hy it 9ecame -olitically incorrect to tal; a9out -o-ulation gro#th
around 2$ years ago. (ine out o! the 11 countries in the #orld #ith the highest 9irth rates are
A!rican Othe other is A!ghanistanQC and it seemed uncom!orta9ly li;e -ointing the Mnger at the
victim. 4ut runa#ay -o-ulation gro#th is a 9ig !actor in ma;ing so many A!ricans victimsC and it
doesnRt hel- to stay silent a9out it. Sometimes the steadily #orsening ratio o! -eo-le to
resources Iust causes dee-ening -overtyC as in the case o! (igeriaC #hose -o-ulation 9y 21$1
#ill reach 11 million. +hat is the same as the current -o-ulation o! the =nited StatesC 9ut
(igeriaC a-art !rom 9eing virtually #ithout industryC does not have one:tenth o! the natural
resources o! the =.S. I! those 11 million -eo-le live at allC they #ill live very 9adly. 3!tenC
ho#everC the gro#ing -ressure o! -eo-le on the land leads indirectly to catastro-hic #ars,
Sierra %eoneC %i9eriaC =gandaC SomaliaC CongoC Angola and 4urundi have all 9een devastated
9y chronicC many:sided civil #arsC and all seven a--ear in the to- 11 9irth:rate list. R#andaC
/thio-ia and 8o>am9i5ueC #hich have su<ered similar ordealsC are Iust out o! the to- 11.
A!ricaC #hich accounted !or only eight -er cent o! the #orldRs -o-ulation #hen most o! its
countries got their inde-endence in the 1.&1sC #ill contain almost a 5uarter o! the #orldRs
Omuch largerQ -o-ulation in 21$1.
;*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation 6ad8A"#$
A2rican overoulation 5ill increase the sread o2 A"#$%
Dr MagashiC 8asters student O"u9lic HealthQ at %ondon School o! Hygiene and +ro-ical 8edicine.
?7?2007. P(igeriaG "o-ulation : Im-lication to Health and Develo-mentCF A!rica (e#sC %e0is.
2ith res-ect to environmentC according to =nited (ations 211& 8DGs Re-ortC S+he -ro-ortion
o! -eo-le using im-roved sanitation in su9:Sahara A!rica OSSAQ in 1..1 and 2114 #ere 2Y and
7Y res-ectively. +he target to reach 9y 211$ is &&Y. SSA is the #orldRs most ra-idly
ur9anising region and almost all o! this gro#th has 9een in slums #here ne# city residents !ace
overcro#dingC inade5uate housing and lac; o! #ater and sanitation.S +he end result to that
#ould 9e the s-read o! communica9le diseases such as tu9erculosis and diarrhoeal diseases
among inha9itantsC #ith children a<ected the more. 2ith ra-id -o-ulation gro#thC there #ill 9e
!e#er s-aces !or education es-ecially !or girls and ra-id ur9an gro#th #ill create concentration
o! unem-loyed youths and that on its o#n is a ris; !actor !or civil conJictsC increased se0ual
activities through -rostitutionC se0ual harassmentC assaultC incest and ra-e. +he end result
#ould 9e s-read o! se0ually:transmitted in!ections including HIB?AIDSC un-lanned -regnanciesC
unsa!e a9ortion and adolescent mothers. All these -ro9lems #ill have direct negative e<ects on
(igeriaRs economyC 5uality o! li!e and sustaina9le develo-ment.
;/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation 6ad8A2rica8,aundr3 ,ist
Overoulation in A2rica cements the overt3 c3cle? increases the sread o2 disease
and causes 5ater and 2ood shortages%
+he &imes 1nionC 2?21?2007. +o save the #orldC sto- having ;idsC %e0is.
"o-ulation gro#th also is aggravating other glo9al -ro9lems, -overtyC air -ollutionC #ater
-ollutionC #ater shortagesC loss o! ara9le landC destruction o! !orestsC the decline o! many -lant
and animal s-ecies and the s-read o! diseases such as choleraC tu9erculosis and AIDS. In much
o! -overty:-lagued A!rica and other less develo-ed areas o! the #orldC many -oor #omen #ho
have minimal schooling and live in male:dominated societies 9ear more children than they
actually #ant and o!ten 9egin having them at an early age. +heir children 9ear more childrenC
continuing the -overty cycle. +he =nited States and other nations should -ut much more
em-hasis on reining in glo9al -o-ulation gro#th. 8ore strong !amily:-lanning -rograms are
needed #orld#ide to reduce the num9er o! un#anted children OandC corres-ondinglyC reduce
the num9er o! a9ortions resulting !rom #omen terminating un#anted -regnanciesQ.
;0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation 6ad8A2rica8Civil War
=nvironmental degradation 5ill increase the ris- o2 civil 5ar
!ummel? 2000 OColonel %aurel D. HummelC 8arch 1$C 211&C E%o#ering +otal )ertility Rates in Develo-ing
States, Security and "olicy Im-lications !or Su9:Saharan A!ricaCF =nited States ArmyC =SA2C S+RA+/GA
R/S/ARCH "R3D/C+ H "roIect Advisor, Ca-tain Donald RootC htt-,??stinet.dtic.mil?cgi:9in?Get+RDocK
ADWA44.112P%ocationW=2PdocWGet+RDoc.-d!Q
/nvironmental degradation is a com-le0 issue #hich incor-orates a host o! environmental
systemsC interactionsC and -otential -ro9lems. +he lin;age 9et#een -o-ulation gro#th and
environmental im-act is routinely de9ated #ithin academeG it is not sur-rising that little
consensus e0ists among -oliticians and -olicyma;ers.2$ Cro-land and !resh #ater are t#o
critical com-onents o! the natural environment #hich are undenia9ly connected to 5uality o!
li!e and are thought to a<ect regional sta9ility. +he most chronic -er ca-ita scarcity o!
cro-land and rene#a9le !resh #ater occur in states dominated 9y deserts and mountains. +he
!ormerC o! courseC descri9es the -redominant climatic conditions o! the northern and southern
tiers o! su9: Saharan A!rica. +he middle s#ath o! su9:Saharan states lies astride a tro-ical
rain!orest 9iome #hichC #hile receiving a9undant rain!allC -ossesses notoriously in!ertile
laterite soils. Regardless o! the soilsC the -resence o! tri-le:cano-y !orest critical to
9iodiversityC o0ygen generationC and car9on recycling ma;e this a -articularly rich ecosystemC
and thus an e0tremely undesira9le -lace !or a trans!ormation to intensive agriculture. 8any
develo-ed countries lac; ade5uate cro-land and?or !resh #ater sourcesC 9ut are a9le to rely on
e0-ort industries to create commodity e0changes #hich alleviate nature6s shortages. 3thersC
through technologyC have 9ecome #ater:e<icient or create usa9le stores through e0-ensive
desalini>ation. 8ost develo-ing states in the su9:Saharan region sho# no -romise o!
attracting the ca-ital re5uired to ra-idly industriali>eC trans!orm land use or #ater -racticesC
or 9ro;er !avora9le trade agreements. "rominent environmental:conJict theorists have concluded that civil dis-utes
over cro-land and !resh #ater have rarely a--eared as the result o! -o-ulation:driven scarcity alone.2& Ho#everC -otentially
e0-losive threats to rural livelihoods such as eviction !rom share: cro--ed !armlandC loss o! access to natural resourcesC and
resultant im-overishment most o!ten emerge in the conte0t o! a Etangled #e9 o! historic ine5uities that collide #ith changes
occurring in the local economicC ecological and -olitical environments.F27 +hese ra-id and destructive changes most o!ten have
9een induced 9y a com9ination o! e0cessive -o-ulation gro#thC land degradationC and destructive or restrictive government
-olicies.2* HistoricallyC -o-ulation: inJuenced natural resource de-rivation is more li;ely to lead to intra:stateC inter:ethnic
dis-utes than dis-utes 9et#een or among states : #hich to date have generally ended in negotiated agreements or regulatory
controls. Ho#everC as the investment -ort!olio managers li;e to sayC -ast -er!ormance is no guarantee o! !uture successC and
inter:state dis-utes are li;ely to intensi!y as -o-ulations continue to 9urgeon #hile the natural
environment !urther degrades. As !or intra:state conJict and the -otential !or state insta9ilityC
the relationshi- is clearG during the 1..1sC states : including develo-ed states : #ith either lo#
-er ca-ita levels o! cro-land or !resh #ater #ere 1.$ times as li;ely to e0-erience an out9rea;
o! civil conJict as those #ith more ade5uate su--lies.2. +he record o! !ragileC develo-ing
states is even more -ro9lematic.
;7
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation 6ad8Water Wars
Overoulation is causing 5ater scarcit38this guarantees an outbrea- o2 5ater 5ars%
+oulation ConnectionC 8arch 200).
htt-,??###.-o-ulationconnection.org?Communications?)actSheets?2ater)SY21211.-d!
3ver the -ast 71 yearsC the #orld6s -o-ulation has tri-led. During that timeC glo9al #ater use
increased 9y si0:!old. 2e have more -eo-leC each using greater and greater amounts o! #ater.
)resh#ater resources have remained more or less constant throughout history H there is almost
as much #ater today as there #as #hen dinosaurs roamed the /arth. Is this su--ly large
enough thoughC i! 9oth -o-ulation and consum-tion continue to s;yroc;etK
^ .7Y o! /arth6s #ater is salt:#aterC unMt !or drin;ing or agriculture
^ 2..7Y is loc;ed u- in ice9ergs and glaciers
^ 3nly .11Y o! all the #ater on /arth is
realistically availa9le !or our use
E+here is enough #ater on our -lanet !or every living -ersonC 9ut it is o!ten at the #rong -lace
at the #rong time.F
::Doel /. CohenC Roc;e!eller =niversity %a9oratory o! "o-ulations
2ater distri9ution is unevenC leaving hundreds o! millions o! -eo-le #ithout ade5uate access to
clean #ater. 8illions o! !amilies do not have the necessary #ater !or coo;ingC sanitationC and
agriculture.
^ $11 million -eo-le su<er !rom #ater stress or serious #ater scarcity
^ 4y 212$C 2? o! the #orld6s -o-ulation may 9e su9Iect to moderate to high #ater stress
^ 2 9illion -eo-le get less than the $1 liters o!#ater a day considered necessary to meet 9asic
drin;ingC sanitationC and coo;ing needs
^ 4y 21$1C 4 9illion -eo-le may have less than $1 liters o! #ater -er day
+his acute #ater shortage is com-ounded 9y -ro9lems o! -ollution. 8ore than hal! o! the
#orld6s maIor rivers are so -olluted that they endanger human health and -oison surrounding
ecosystems
^ 21Y o! the !resh #ater #ells in 4angladesh have high levels o! arsenicC ma;ing the #ater unMt
!or human consum-tion
^ Cali!ornia has lost over .1Y o! its #etlandsH nearly 2? o! the native Msh are e0tinctC
endangeredC threatenedC or in decline
^ In the Southeastern =.S.C 41:$1Y o! !resh#ater snail s-ecies are no# e0tinct or endangered
due to -ollution and the redirecting o! rivers
E (o resourceC including oilC is a shar-er s-ur to conJict than #ater.F
:: Dessica 8atthe#sC 2ashington "ost
As the dis-arity in access to !resh #ater continues to gro#C conJicts over this essential resource
#ill escalateC -otentially eru-ting in 9oth -olitical and violent actions.F 2ater is li;ely to
9ecome a gro#ing source o! tension and Merce com-etition 9et#een nationsC i! -resent trends
continueC 9ut it can also 9e a catalyst !or coo-eration.F
:: 7oi AnnanC =( Secretary General
Water 5ars go nuclear%
WeinerC 1;;0 O+he (e0t 111 AearsC -ro! a "rincetonC - 27Q
I! #e do not destroy ourselves #ith the A:9om9 and the H:9om9C then #e may destroy ourselves #ith the C:9om9C the
Change 4om9. And in a #orld as interlin;ed as oursC one e0-losion may lead to the other. Already in
the 8iddle /astC !rom (orth A!rica to the "ersian Gul! and !rom the (ile to the /u-hratesC tensions over
d#indling #ater su--lies and rising -o-ulations are reaching #hat many e0-erts descri9e as a
Jash-oint. A climate shi!t in that single 9attle:scarred ne0us might trigger international
;:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
tensions that #ill unleash some o! the &1C111 nuclear #arheads the #orld has stoc;-iled since
+rinity.
;;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation 6ad8Lamine
"ncrease in oulation decreases availabilit3 o2 2ood%
,arsen80) ODanet:C Dan. 2C /arth "olicy InstituteC S"o-ulation Gro#th %eading to %and
HungerS htt-,??###.earth:-olicy.org?=-dates?=-date21.htmQ
b)rom the 9eginning o! agriculture until the middle o! the t#entieth centuryC increases in #orld
!ood -roduction have come largely !rom e0-anding agricultural land. 4et#een 1.$1 and 1.*1C
the area in grain e0-anded !rom $*7 million hectares to its historical -ea; o! 72 million
hectares. O1 hectare W 2.47 acres.Q 4y 2111 it had !allen to &$& million hectares. 8ean#hileC
#ith -o-ulation e0-anding !rom 2.$ 9illion in 1.$1 to &.1 9illion in 2111C the cro-land area -er
-erson shran; !rom 1.2 to 1.11 hectares'an area hal! the si>e o! a housing lot in su9ur9an
America. +he #orldRs grain area is unli;ely to e0-and muchC i! at allC during the ne0t hal!:
century. %o# grain -rices in recent years have led some !armers to -ull 9ac; !rom the more
marginal landsC #hile others have a9andoned degraded Melds. In additionC agriculture has lost
millions o! hectares o! !armland that have 9een -aved over or covered 9y ur9an s-ra#l. 2here
there is limited ara9le landC !ast:gro#ing -o-ulations can shrin; cro-land area -er -erson to
the -oint #here countries can no longer !eed themselves. Governments that can a<ord it then
com-ensate 9y im-orting grain'the source o! more than hal! the calories humans consume
directly. 4ut in countries that cannot im-ort grainC -eo-le go hungry. Cro-land scarcity has !orced
some densely -o-ulated Asian countries to im-ort most o! their grain. A!ter several decades o! shrin;ing -er ca-ita
grainlandC !armers in 8alaysia no# cultivate only 1.1 hectares o! grain !or each resident. Da-anC South 7oreaC and
+ai#an each harvest less than 1.12 hectares. +o ma;e u- !or -roduction short!allsC these !our countries currently
im-ort more than 71 -ercent o! the grain they consumeC leaving them vulnera9le to su--ly disru-tions. /gy-t is
!ollo#ing close 9ehind. It harvests 1.14 hectares o! grainland !or each o! its 71 million -eo-le and im-orts over 41
-ercent o! its grain. 2ith the #ater !rom the (ile River no# !ully usedC and #ith /gy-tRs -o-ulation increasing 9y
over 1 million annuallyC this share o! im-orts #ill almost certainly clim9. Hal! o! the #orldRs annual -o-ulation gro#th
o! 77 million -eo-le occurs in Iust si0 countries'IndiaC ChinaC "a;istanC (igeriaC 4angladeshC and Indonesia. /ach o!
these nations !aces a steady shrin;age o! grainland -er -erson and thus ris;s heavy !uture de-endence on grain
im-orts. +his raises t#o im-ortant 5uestions. 2ill these countries 9e a9le to a<ord to im-ort large 5uantities o! grain
as land hunger increasesK And #ill grain mar;ets 9e a9le to meet their additional demandsK In IndiaC #here one out
o! every !our -eo-le is undernourishedC 1& million -eo-le are added to the -o-ulation each year. +he grain area -er
-erson in India has shrun; steadily !or several decades and is no# 9elo# 1.11 hectares'less than hal! that in 1.$1.
OSee data.Q As land holdings are divided !or inheritance #ith each succeeding generationC the 4* million !arms that
averaged 2.7 hectares each in 1.&1 #ere s-lit into 11$ million !arms hal! that si>e in 1..1C #hen IndiaRs grainland
e0-ansion -ea;ed. +he average Indian !amilyC #hich no# has three childrenC #ill 9e hard -ressed to -ass on via9le
-arcels o! land to !uture generations. "a;istanC #ith Mve children -er !amilyC is gro#ing even more ra-idly. In 1.**C
"a;istanRs (ational Commission on Agriculture #as already lin;ing !arm !ragmentation and a rising reliance on
marginal lands to declining !arm -roductivity in some areas. Since thenC the country has gro#n !rom Iust over 111
million to almost 1$1 million. Its -er -erson grain area is no# less than 1.1. hectares. In ChinaC the grain area -er
-erson has also shrun; dramatically to a diminutive 1.17 hectaresC do#n !rom 1.17 hectares in 1.$1. Shi!ting
agricultural -roduction to higher:value cro-sC li;e !ruits and vegeta9lesC and converting !arms to !orest !or
conservation \\\\\\\\ !or some o! the grainland contractionC along #ith losses to non!arm uses such as 9uildings and
roads. +hough the shrin;age o! !armland availa9le -er -erson in China has slo#ed in concert #ith declining !amily
si>eC this country'#hose -o-ulation o! 1. 9illion is as large as the entire #orldRs in 1*$1'is still e0-ected to add
1*7 million -eo-le to its ran;s in the ne0t $1 years. +he ro9ustness o! ChinaRs economy ena9les it to turn to #orld
mar;ets to im-ort grainC 9ut this does not guarantee that those mar;ets can su--ort massive additional demand
#ithout he!ty -rice increases. +he scarcity o! ara9le cro-land in su9:Saharan A!rica hel-s to e0-lain
the regionRs declining -roduction -er -erson in recent decades. (igeriaC !or e0am-leC A!ricaRs
most -o-ulous countryC has seen its -o-ulation 5uadru-le since 1.$1 #hile its grainland area
dou9led'e<ectively halving the grainland -er -erson. In northern (igeriaC -astoralists and
!armers Jeeing the encroaching SaharaC #hich annually claims $1C111 hectares o! land Oa9out
hal! the si>e o! the =.S. state o! Dela#areQC have increased demands on the already scarce land
else#here in the countryC s-ar;ing ethnic tensions.c
100
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
&he imact is World War )%
Calvin in 7;: O2illiamC "ro!essor o! "sychiatry and 4ehavioral Sciences at =niversity o!
2ashingtonC +he Atlantic 8onthlyC E+he Great Climate )li-:)lo-FC DanuaryC Bolume 2*1C Issue 1C
"ro5uestQ
+he -o-ulation:crash scenario is surely the most a--alling. "lummeting cro- yields #ould cause
some -o#er!ul countries to try to ta;e over their neigh9ors or distant lands:i! only 9ecause
their armiesC un-aid and lac;ing !ood, #ould go maraudingC 9oth at home and across the
9orders. +he 9etter:organi>ed countries #ould attem-t to use their armiesC 9e!ore they !ell
a-art entirelyC to ta;e over countries #ith signiMcant remaining resourcesC driving out or
starving their inha9itants i! not using modern #ea-ons to accom-lish the same end, eliminating
com-etitors !or the remaining !ood .
+his #ould 9e a #orld#ide -ro9lem:and could lead to a +hird 2orld 2ar:9ut /uro-eRs
vulnera9ility is -articularly easy to analy>e. +he last a9ru-t coolingC the Aounger DryasC
drastically altered /uro-eRs climate as !ar east as =;raine. "resent:day /uro-e has more than
&$1 million -eo-le. It has e0cellent soilsC and largely gro#s its o#n !ood. It could no longer do
so i! it lost the e0tra #arming !rom the (orth Atlantic.
101
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation 6ad8=nvironment
Overoulation devastates the environment8this ma-es e<tinction inevitable%
+oulation Connection? 3cto9er 2K% "o-ulation and the /nvironmentC
http://www.populationconnection.org/(ommunications/FactSheets/)op%20and%20En'%202002.pd.
3!tenC the lin; 9et#een -o-ulation gro#th and the environment is reduced to an issue o!
num9ers, too many -eo-le and too !e# resources. 4ut the larger -icture is more com-le0.
Interactions 9et#een humans and our natural environment are overla--ing and interde-endent.
3ur coe0istence on this -lanet necessitates res-ecting this delicate 9alance. Ho#everC #ith the
&.1 9illion -eo-le -o-ulating our earth're5uiring more s-aceC more !oodC more airC more #aterC
more natural resources'#e disru-t this 9alanceC 9ringing serious threats to our lanetHand
ourselves.
Overoulation devastates the environment%
Diana 6aborC %%8 in International /nvironmental %a# and International Human RightsC Summer 1;;;.
E"o-ulation gro#th and re-roductive rights in international human rights la#CF Connecticut Dournal o!
International %a#C %e0is.
De!orestationC soil degradationC s-ecies lossC reduced 9iodiversityC desertiMcationC tro-ical
!orest destructionG climate changeC stratos-heric o>one de-letion and acidiMcationG !resh#ater
de-letionC coral ree! destructionC coastal >one threats and overMshingG un-recedented #aste
-roductionC chemical and -esticide damageC to0ic contaminationC loss o! ha9itat and s-ecies
mutationC are some descri-tions o! the ;no#n conse5uences o! increased industrial -roduction
and glo9al -o-ulation e0-ansion over the last century. 2hile each adversely a<ects the delicate
9alance o! the 9ios-hereC 9oth the scale o! damage and its long:term conse5uences have yet to
9e !ully !athomed. +hat e0isting human -o-ulations are causing environmental degradation
#hich #ill com-romise the a9ility o! !uture generations to meet their o#n needs must 9e
underscored 9y the !act that !orthcoming generations #ill 9e !ar more numerous than at any
-revious time in history. +o assure that an ecologically:9alanced environment is availa9le !or all
generationsC glo9al -o-ulation sta9ili>ation is as essential a long:term o9Iective as achieving
sustaina9le consum-tion is vital in the short:term.
102
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation 6ad8#e2orestation
Lamil3 lanning is vital to sustainable 2orestr38reducing overoulation and
emo5ering 5omen is critical to revent de2orestation%
Gardner9Outla5 and =ngelman? 1;;; analysts at "o-ulation Action International O+om and Ro9ertC
)orest )utures, "o-ulationC Consum-tionC and 2ood.
htt-,??###.-o-ulationaction.org?"u9lications?Re-orts?)orestT)utures?)orestT)uturesTte0tTonlyTversion.-d!Q
+he -ur-ose here is not to 9lame those countries #hose -o-ulations are gro#ing the !astest. +he #orld as a #hole has gained more -eo-le in the last hal! century than in all
o! history -rior to 1.$1. +he cumulative gro#th o! #orld -o-ulation multi-lies the high #ood
consum-tion o! the #ealthy as #ell as the survival tactics o! the -oor to the -oint that !orests
are under severe human:induced stress in all -arts o! the -lanet. Rather than attem-t to
assign 9lameC this re-ort considers the enormous -otential !or long:term !orest conservation o!
-oli: cies and -rograms that at Mrst glance seem to have nothing to do #ith trees. +hese
include education o! girls through secondary schoolC e0-ansion o! economic o--ortunities !or #omenC and'es-ecially'universal access to a
variety o! !amily -lanning and related re-roductive health services !or all #ho see; them. Such
-olicies increase the -otential o! #omen and their !ami: lies to 9etter manage the natural
resources their lives de-end onC o!ten including !orests. CriticallyC they also have the side
9eneMt o! signiMcantly slo#ing the gro#th o! -o-ulation' and thus easing and eventually
sta9i: li>ing human -ressures on !orests. Several ;ey -oints emerge !rom this e0amination,
^Analysts and -olicyma;ers o!ten dismiss -o-ulation gro#th as an inevita9le !orce that cannot 9e inJuenced and there!ore must 9e accommodated. Aet the #orld is
undergoing a demogra-hic revo:lutionC and young #omen today desire much smaller !amilies than did their mothers and even older sisters. International
e<orts to im-rove access to !amily -lanning services have already hel-ed slo# the gro#th o!
-o-ulation. Commitment o! governments to sound -o-ulation -olicies could lead to a -ea; in
human -o-ulation in the middle o! the ne0t century. Government indi<erenceC 9y contrastC
could mean the continuation o! -o-ulation gro#th !or many generations to come.
^"o-ulation:related -ressure on !orests is greatest in countries #here the e0isting area o!
!orest cover -er ca-ita is lo#. In develo-ing countriesC increasing rural -o-ulations rely
heavily on !orests and trees outside the !orest !or their daily su9sistence needs in the !orm o!
!uelC !odderC tim9er and !armland. In many such countriesC local institutions lac; the ca-acity
to -revent the overharvesting o! !orest resources.$
^+he !uture #ell:9eing o! the #orld6s !orests is intimately tied to the #ell:9eing o! #omen.
=niversally availa9le re-roductive health -rogramsC im-roved education !or girlsC and
e0-anded economic o--ortunity !or #omen directly im-rove individual and !amily #ell:9eing.
+his not only im-roves the management o! local resourcesC 9ut also hastens the day that
#orld -o-ulation sto-s gro#ing.
#e2orestation -ills biodiversit3%
Roer and Roberts ;;C )orest Conservation Consultant and Senior AdvisorC )orestry and
ConservationC Canadian International Develo-ment Agency @ohnC Ral-hC SDe!orestation,
+ro-ical )orests in DeclineSC CIDA )orestry Advisers (et#or;C Issues in )orestryQ
"ro9a9ly the most serious and most short:sighted conse5uence o! de!orestation is the loss o!
9iodiversity. +he antise-tic -hrase Sloss o! 9iodiversityS mas;s the !act that the annual
destruction o! millions o! hectares o! tro-ical !orests means the e0tinction o! thousands o!
s-ecies and varieties o! -lants and animals. many o! #hich have never 9een catalogued
scientiMcally. Ho# many s-ecies are lost each yearK +he e0act Mgure is not ;no#nC a
conse5uence o! our limited ;no#ledge o! tro-ical !orest ecosystems and our inade5uate
monitoring systems. Some estimates -ut the annual loss at $1.111 se-arate s-ecies 9ut this is
an educated guess at 9est. )ragmented stands o! trees le!t during de!orestation are usually not
large enough to 9e sel!: -er-etuating in terms o! maintaining even an altered 9alance o!
9iodiversity. De!orestation is eroding this -recious resource o! 9iodiversity.
10)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
10*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation 6ad8#e2orestation
&he imact is e<tinction%
David #inerC Dudge Advocate GeneralRs Cor-sC =nited States ArmyC 2interC 1;;* O8ilitary %a#
Revie#C lnQ
+he -rime reason is the #orldRs survival. %i;e all animal li!eC humans live o< o! other s-ecies. At some -ointC
the num9er o! s-ecies could decline to the -oint at #hich the ecosystem !ailsC and then
humans also #ould 9ecome e0tinct. (o one ;no#s ho# many Z\171[ s-ecies the #orld
needs to su--ort human li!eC and to Mnd out :: 9y allo#ing certain s-ecies to 9ecome
e0tinct :: #ould not 9e sound -olicy. In addition to !oodC s-ecies o<er many direct and indirect 9eneMts to man;ind. n&*
2. Ecological Value. :: /cological value is the value that s-ecies have in maintaining the environment. "estC n&. erosionC and Jood control are -rime 9eneMts certain
s-ecies -rovide to man. "lants and animals also -rovide additional ecological services :: -ollution controlC n71 o0ygen -roductionC se#age treatmentC and
9iodegradation. n71
3. Scientifc and Utilitarian Value. :: ScientiMc value is the use o! s-ecies !or research into the -hysical -rocesses o! the #orld. n72 2ithout -lants and animalsC a
large -ortion o! 9asic scientiMc research #ould 9e im-ossi9le. =tilitarian value is the direct utility humans dra# !rom -lants and animals. n7 3nly a !raction o! the
Z\172[ earthRs s-ecies have 9een e0aminedC and man;ind may someday des-erately need the s-ecies that it is e0terminating today.
+o acce-t that the snail darterC hareli- suc;erC or Dismal S#am- southeastern shre# n74 could save man;ind may 9e di<icult !or some. 8anyC i! not mostC s-ecies
are useless to man in a direct utilitarian sense. (onethelessC they may 9e critical in an indirect roleC 9ecause their e0tir-ations could a<ect a directly use!ul s-ecies
negatively. In a closely interconnected ecosystemC the loss o! a s-ecies a<ects other s-ecies de-endent on it. n7$ 8oreoverC as the num9er o! s-ecies declineC the
e<ect o! each ne# e0tinction on the remaining s-ecies increases dramatically. n7&
4. Biological Diverit!. :: +he main -remise o! s-ecies -reservation is that diversity is 9etter than sim-licity. n77 As the current mass
e0tinction has -rogressedC the #orldRs 9iological diversity generally has decreased. +his trend
occurs #ithin ecosystems 9y reducing the num9er o! s-eciesC and #ithin s-ecies 9y reducing the num9er o! individuals. 4oth trends carry serious !uture
im-lications. n7*
Z\17[ 4iologically diverse ecosystems are characteri>ed 9y a large num9er o! s-ecialist
s-eciesC Mlling narro# ecological niches. +hese ecosystems inherently are more sta9le than less diverse systems. S+he more
com-le0 the ecosystemC the more success!ully it can resist a stress . . . . Zl[i;e a netC in #hich each ;not is
connected to others 9y several strandsC such a !a9ric can resist colla-se 9etter than a sim-leC un9ranched circle o! threads :: #hich i! cut any#here 9rea;s do#n as
a #hole.S n7.
4y causing #ides-read e0tinctionsC humans have artiMcially sim-liMed many ecosystems.
As 9iologic sim-licity increasesC so does the ris; o! ecosystem !ailure. +he s-reading Sahara Desert in
A!ricaC and the dust9o#l conditions o! the 1.1s in the =nited States are relatively mild e0am-les o! #hat might 9e e0-ected i! this trend continues. +heoreticallyC
each ne# animal or -lant e0tinctionC #ith all its dimly -erceived and intert#ined a<ectsC
could cause total ecosystem colla-se and human e0tinction. /ach ne# e0tinction
increases the ris; o! disaster. %i;e a mechanic removingC one 9y oneC the rivets !rom an
aircra!tRs #ingsC n*1 man;ind may 9e edging closer to the a9yss.
10/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation 6ad8Warming
Overoulation is the driving 2actor behind global 5arming%
+oulation ConnectionC 2inter 211&?2007% "o-ulation and Glo9al 2armingC
http://www.populationconnection.org/*eports+)ublications/*eports/dl/,-0.
+here is clear evidence that rise in car9on dio0ide levels !ollo#s gro#th in -o-ulation. +he more
-eo-le there areC the more #e consumeC and the more it negatively a<ects the environment.
Des-ite the !act that the =nited States has 9y !ar the highest rate o! teen -regnancy among
#ealthy countriesC the 4ush administration has continued its unrealistic a9stinence:only -olicy.
And the Administration continues to su9vert !amily -lanning -rograms around the #orld.
4ecause glo9al #arming is caused 9y increased amounts o! car9on dio0ide and other
greenhouse gasesC released mainly !rom the 9urning o! !ossil !uelsC the 5orld7s oulation is
the most imortant 2actor in the 5uantity o! !ossil !uels 9urnt each year. 4et#een 1.$1 and
2111C the #orld6s -o-ulation increased roughly 141 -ercentG the rise in !ossil !uel energy
consum-tion during the same -eriod #as almost 411 -ercent. +he Intergovernmental "anel on
Climate Change has estimated that in order to sto- glo9al #arming emissions must !all to &1
-ercent 9elo# 1..1 levels 9e!ore 21$1. Aet over this same -eriodC glo9al -o-ulation is e0-ected
to increase 9y 7 -ercentC and -er:ca-ita G % 3 4 A % 2A R 8 I ( G energy consum-tion #ill
surely rise as 9illions o! -eo-le in AsiaC A!ricaC and South America strive to ascend !rom -overty.
In order to understand the com-le0ity o! glo9al #arming and its develo-ment due to human
activityC #e must have a clear understanding o! its connection to -o-ulation gro#th.
Overoulation is driving global 5arming8reducing gro5th is critical to create
environmental sustainabilit3%
+he "ndeendentC 1?7?2000. htt-,??Mndarticles.com?-?articles?miT5n41$*?isT211&1117?aiTn1$..4712.
Climate change and glo9al -ollution cannot 9e ade5uately tac;led #ithout addressing the
neglected issue o! the #orldRs 9ooming -o-ulationC according to t#o leading scientists.
"ro!essor Chris Ra-leyC director o! the 4ritish Antarctic SurveyC and "ro!essor Dohn Guille9audC
vented their !rustration yesterday at the !act that over-o-ulation had !allen o< the agenda o!
the many organisations dedicated to saving the -lanet. +he scientists said dealing #ith the
9urgeoning human -o-ulation o! the -lanet #as vital i! real -rogress #as to 9e made on the
other enormous -ro9lems !acing the #orld. RIt is the ele-hant in the room that no9ody #ants to
tal; a9outR "ro!essor Guille9aud said. A1nless 5e reduce the human oulation humanel3
through 2amil3 lanning? nature 5ill do it 2or us through violence? eidemics or
starvation.R "ro!essor Guille9aud said he decided to study the Meld o! human re-roduction
more than 41 years ago s-eciMcally 9ecause o! the -ro9lems he envisaged through
over-o-ulation. His concerns #ere echoed 9y "ro!essor Ra-leyC an e0-ert on the e<ects o!
climate change on the AntarcticC #ho -ointed out that this year an e0tra 7& million -eo-le
#ould 9e added to the &.$ 9illion already living on /arthC #hich is t#ice as many as in 1.&1. 4y
the middle o! the centuryC the =nited (ations estimates that the #orld -o-ulation is li;ely to
increase to more than nine 9illionC #hich is e5uivalent to an e0tra 211C111 -eo-le each day.
"ro!essor Ra-ley said the e0tra resources needed to sustain this gro#th in -o-ulation #ould -ut
immense strains on the -lanetRs li!e: su--ort system even i! -ollution emissions -er head could
9e dramatically reduced. RAlthough reducing human emissions to the atmos-here is
undou9tedly o! critical im-ortanceC as are any and all measures to reduce the human
environmental R!oot-rintRC the truth is that the contri9ution o! each individual cannot 9e reduced
to >ero. 3nly the lac; o! the individual can 9ring it do#n to nothingCR "ro!essor Ra-ley says in an
article !or the 44C #e9site. RSo i! #e 9elieve that the si>e o! the human R!oot-rintR is a serious -ro9lem S and there is
much evidence !or this S then a rational vie# #ould 9e that along #ith a ra!t o! measures to reduce the !oot-rint -er
100
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
-ersonC the issue o! -o-ulation management must 9e addressed.R "ro!essor Ra-ley says the e0-losive gro#th in the
human -o-ulation and the concomitant e<ects on the environment have 9een largely ignored 9y many o! those
concerned #ith climate change. RIt is a 9om9shell o! a to-icC #ith -ro!ound and emotive issues o! ethicsC moralityC
e5uity and -ractica9ilityCR he says. RSo controversial is the su9Iect that it has 9ecome the Cinderella o! the great
sustaina9ility de9ate S rarely visi9le in -u9licC or even in -rivate. RIn interdisci-linary meetings addressing ho# the
-lanet !unctions as an integrated #holeC demogra-hers and -o-ulation s-ecialists are usually nota9le 9y their
a9sence.S "ro!essor Guille9audC #ho co:chairs the 3-timum "o-ulation +rustC said it 9ecame -olitically
incorrect a9out 2$ years ago to 9ring u- !amily -lanning in discussing the environmental
-ro9lems o! the develo-ing #orld. +he #orld -o-ulation needed to 9e reduced 9y nearly t#o:
thirds i! climate change #as to 9e -revented and everyone on the -lanet #as to enIoy a li!estyle
similar to that o! /uro-eansC "ro!essor Guille9aud said. An environmental assessment 9y the
conservation charity 22) and the 2orld#atch Institute in 2ashington !ound that humans #ere
no# e0-loiting a9out 21 -er cent more rene#a9le resources than can 9e re-laced each year.
"ro!essor Guille9aud said this meant it #ould re5uire the natural resources e5uivalent to !our
more "lanet /arths to sustain the -roIected 21$1 -o-ulation o! nine 9illion -eo-le. R+he Mgures
demonstrate the !olly o! concentrating e0clusively on li!estyles and technology and ignoring
human num9ers in our attem-ts to com9at glo9al #armingCR he said. R2e need to thin; a9out
climate changers S human 9eings and their num9ers S as #ell as climate change.R
107
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation 6ad8+overt3
Lamil3 lanning is vital to boosting economic develoment%
Ann !5angC medical student at the =niversity o! Cali!orniaC San )ranciscoC and a !ormer intern at the 2orld#atch
InstituteC 2002. 2orld 2atchC E/0-orta9le righteousnessC /0-enda9le 2omenFC Danuary:)e9ruary 2112C -g 24:2C
Academic 3ne )ile.
+he 9eneMts o! !amily -lanning e0tend #ell 9eyond the health e<ects. +here is a strong
correlation 9et#een lo#er !ertility rates and the educational and Mnancial advancement o!
#omen. +his correlation #as 9orne outC !or e0am-leC 9y an 11:year study o! #or;ing #omen in
Ce9u city in the "hili--ines. Researchers !ound that the !e#er children a #oman hadC the
greater the increase in her earnings over that -eriod. Although it is di<icult to distinguish cause
!rom e<ect in such situationsC !e# i! any e0-erts dou9t that !amily -lanning im-roves the social
-osition o! #omen.
At the national levelC reducing -o-ulation gro#th can -romote economic develo-ment. Some
economists argue that !amilies #ith !e#er children save more moneyC a -henomenon called the
Sdemogra-hic 9onus.S Higher savings rates may in turn reduce a countryRs de-endence on
!oreign ca-ital. Decreasing -o-ulation gro#th can also ease the strain on overta0ed natural
resourcesC -articularly those associated #ith su9sistence agriculture. +odayC an estimated 421
million -eo-le live in countries #here the amount o! cro-land -er ca-ita has dro--ed 9elo#
1.17 hectares::the amount generally deemed necessary to sustain a 9are minimum vegetarian
diet. 4y 212$C the num9er o! -eo-le living in such countries #ill -ro9a9ly have reached
9et#een $$1 million and 1 9illion. 4ut the most im-ortant limit is not li;ely to 9e access to landG
itRs li;ely to 9e access to #ater. AlreadyC hal! a 9illion -eo-le are living in areas -rone to severe
#ater shortages. In 2$ yearsC that num9er #ill -ro9a9ly have risen to 9et#een 2.4 and .2
9illion.c
Lamil3 lanning is vital to reducing overt38this is the underl3ing cause o2 terrorism%
6isho? 200* Immigration Attorney !or the Immigration and %a# "roIect at the (C Dustice Center O7aciC 2. (.C.D.
IntRl %. P Com. Reg. $21C E"olitics 4e!ore "olicy, +he 4ush AdministrationC International )amily "lanningC and )oreign
"olicyFC S-ringC le0isQ
Since Se-tem9er 11C 2111C com9ating glo9al terrorism has 9een one o! the most -rimaryC i! not
the most -rimaryC -ieces o! "resident 4ushRs !oreign -olicyC 9ut his actions against international
!amily -lanning -rograms and the #omen #ho 9eneMt !rom these -rograms may hinder his
#or; to -rotect national security. "resident 4ush has said,
De!ending our (ation against its enemies is the Mrst and !undamental commitment o! the
)ederal Government. +odayC that tas; has changed Z\$71[ dramatically. /nemies in the -ast
needed great armies and great industrial ca-a9ilities to endanger America. (o#C shado#y
net#or;s o! individuals can 9ring great chaos and su<ering to our shores !or less than it costs
to -urchase a single tan;. +errorists are organi>ed to -enetrate o-en societies and to turn the
-o#er o! modern technologies against us. +o de!eat this threat #e must ma;e use o! every tool
in our arsenal : military -o#erC 9etter homeland de!ensesC la# en!orcementC intelligenceC and
vigorous e<orts to cut o< terrorist Mnancing.
2;1
4ut it seems that the 4ush Administration is
sa9otaging one o! the tools in its arsenal 9y cutting !unding and su--ort to !amily -lanning
-rograms internationally. S2hile #e may 9e a9le to secure our 9orders militarilyC the =nited
States is neglecting one o! the surestC most cost:e<ective means o! -rotecting our nation,
reducing -overtyC ignoranceC su<eringC and des-air in volatile nations.S
2;2
In 8arch 2112C at
the =nited (ations )inancing !or Develo-ment Con!erenceC many countriesC including the
=nited StatesC lin;ed terrorism to -overtyC
2;)
advocating that S-overty in all its !orms is the
greatest single threat to -eaceC democracyC human rights and the environment... It is a time:
10:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
9om9 against the heart o! li9erty.S
2;*
As discussed a9oveC one o! the #ays to reduce Z\$71[
-overty is through -romoting and -roviding !amily -lanning services.
2;/
+husC it !ollo#s that
one o! the tools in the 4ush AdministrationRs arsenal is to -romote !amily -lanning rather than
set out -olicies that discourage it.
2;0
+here is some dis-uteC ho#everC as to #hether terrorism
does arise out o! -overty. IndeedC the =nited States has 9ac;ed a#ay !rom 9elieving that there
is a direct connection.
2;7
RatherC -overty may 9e a #ay o! recruiting -eo-le to Ioin a terrorist
grou-C 9ut -overty does not cause terrorism.
2;:
8oreoverC some analysts have said not only
that -overty does not cause terrorismC 9ut also that -overty is not a recruitment tool.
2;;

S+errorists dra# their su--ort and their human ammunition not !rom the most im-overishedC
illiterate in their societiesC 9ut !rom the educated and OrelativelyQ #ell:o<.S
)00
4ut #hile these
same analysts do not suggest that reducing -overty #ould necessarily reduce terrorismC they do
suggest that terrorists come !rom countries #here there is Sa lac; o! -olitical !reedomC the
re-ression o! #omenC and a dramatic isolation !rom creative ideas and culture.S
)01
+husC
!ocusing on im-roving the status and rights o! #omen #ould hel- to meet the 4ush
AdministrationRs goal o! com9ating terrorismC and an easy and cost:e<ective method !or doing
so is to !ocus e<orts on !amily -lanning and re-roductive -rograms and services in the
develo-ing #orld.
)02
10;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation 6ad8&errorism
Overoulation causes overt3 5hich is the root cause o2 terrorism8onl3 increased
access to abortion solves%
M$19#etroit College o! ,a5 Revie5C 2002. %a# Revie# o! 8ichigan State =niversity:Detroit College o!
%a#C EIm-osing Se0ual Restraint A9roadF #inter 2112C %e0is.
In !actC an essential -art o! the 9attle against un#anted -regnanciesC and thus a9ortionsC is to
ensure access to contrace-tivesC #hich are already in short su--ly in some -arts o! the #orldC
and #hichC #ithout clear international su--ortC #ill 9ecome even harder to o9tainC due to #hat
undou9tedly #ill 9e the Z\**7[ harsh international anti:a9ortion -olicies ado-ted 9y the 4ush
administration : including most o! all its international gag rule : the su9Iect o! this discussion.
11 +hese conditions cri--le the -ros-ects o! the #omen o! develo-ing countriesC the economies
o! those countriesC andC in !actC the #orld economy generally. 2hat is 9a_ing is thatC although
the disastrous conse5uences o! these -olicies are sel!:evidentC there is still argument over the
legality o! a9ortions. +he #orld -o-ulation S9alloonsS 9y eighty million -eo-le a yearC and most
o! them are millions o! -oor and un#anted children. +his -o-ulation gro#th Scontri9utes
enormously to international -ro9lems ranging !rom glo9al #arming to increasing shortages o!
sa!e #ater su--lies in develo-ing countries.S 12 AndC to the e0tent international la5lessness?
such as the recent terrorist attac-s? is related to overoulation and its resulting
overt3C it adds to the security -ro9lems o! develo-ed countries as #ell.
110
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' +oulation Ke3 to A2rican =conomies
&urn8overoulation -ills A2rican economies%
A2rica (e5sC &?1.?2007. A!ricaG DonRt Cele9rate Aet 3ver ContinentRs /conomiesC %e0is.
+he =nited (ations /conomic Commission !or A!rica says the continentRs annual gro#th rate
#as $.7 -er cent last year. +his reJects a continued u-#ard trend since 1..*. Is A!ricaC o!ten
du99ed the shac;led continentC Mnally ta;ing o<K (ot really. +he !undamentals necessary to
give the economies the traction !or sustained gro#th are not in -lace. A!rica could slide 9ac;
into declineC a -ros-ect that has grave im-lications !or glo9al sustaina9ility and security. High
-o-ulation gro#th rateC deteriorating land resourcesC a -enchant !or violent conJictC a
notoriously varia9le climate and climate change -ose the most intracta9le threat to the
continentRs a9ility to sustain economic gro#th. A!ricaRs -o-ulation is -roIected to increase !rom
*11 million to 1.* 9illion 9y 21$1. A!ricaRs R9ooming economyR has only had minor 9ac;#ard and
!or#ard lin;s #ith agricultureC manu!acturing and service sectorsC limiting its contri9ution to
Io9 creation. A9out 71 -er cent o! the -o-ulation de-ends on land !or a living 9ecause o! lac; o!
em-loyment o--ortunities. =nder the medium -o-ulation -roIectionsC -er ca-ita ara9le land in
eight A!rican countriesC including 7enyaC #ill decline to 1.17 hectares 9y 212$. Soil degradation
constitutes a signiMcant loss o! natural ca-ital estimated 9et#een L1 9illion OSh&7 9illionQ and
L 9illion OSh211 9illionQ a year according to the 2112 Com-rehensive A!rica Agriculture
Develo-ment re-ort. In the (yando river 9asin in #estern 7enyaC soil losses amount to L42.7
million annually 9ased on a conservative value o! L1$ OSh1C1$1Q a tonne o! soil. +his disastrous
haemorrhaging o! natural resources is a threat to economies and livelihoods. +he im-act o!
climate change #ill 9e greater in A!rica. Cro- !ailure #ill result in a L2$ 9illion loss. Close to
&11C111 s5uare ;m o! ara9le land #ill 9e ruined. 8illions o! A!ricans !ace drought and Joods
#ith unrelenting regularityC than;s to the /l (iRo and %a (iRo -henomenonC increasing their
vulnera9ility to hungerC disease and -overty. %ast yearC the /l (iRo triggered out9rea;s o! Ri!t
Balley )everC causing livestoc; deaths and signiMcant economic losses to !ragile -astoral
economies o! 7enyaC Somalia and +an>ania.
Lamil3 lanning is vital to economic gro5th%
6isho? 200* Immigration Attorney !or the Immigration and %a# "roIect at the (C Dustice Center O7aciC 2.
(.C.D. IntRl %. P Com. Reg. $21C E"olitics 4e!ore "olicy, +he 4ush AdministrationC International )amily "lanningC and
)oreign "olicyFC S-ringC le0isQ
2hile there is some#hat o! a chic;en and egg -ro9lemC regarding #hich comes MrstC economic
develo-ment or decreases in !ertilityC 9oth a--roaches #ould li;ely im-act each other. De:
em-hasi>ing the role o! !amily -lanning and other re-roductive health services in develo-ing
countries #ill negatively im-act economic gro#th and sustaina9le develo-ment in these
countries.
212
+he S9irth dearthS theory C #hich is the theory es-oused 9y the 4ush AdministrationC is not valid
!or develo-ing countries.
21)
+his theory im-lies that S-o-ulation gro#th is no longer an im-ortant -olicy concern and
there!ore that !amily -lanning should no longer 9e a -u9lic -olicy -riority.S
21*
4ut this a--roach is 9ased on evidence
!rom the Shighly develo-ed nations ... #here !ertility rates are 9elo# re-lacement level OdeMned
as 2.1 9irths -er cou-leQ.S
21/
In s-ite o! declining !ertility ratesC Sthe #orldRs -o-ulation is still
gro#ingS and it #ill continue to gro# into the ne0t century.
210
+he vast maIority o! this gro#th
#ill occur in the develo-ing #orld, almost one:third o! the #orldRs -o-ulation are -eo-le under age M!teen living in
develo-ing nationsC and as they are heading into their re-roductive yearsC the #orldRs -o-ulation is going to continue to gro# even
i! Sthey average !e#er children -er #oman than their -arentsR generation.S
217
Ho# much gro#th results !rom this ne0t Z\$$*[
generation having children #ill de-end on their access to contrace-tives and !amily -lanning in!ormation.
21:
+husC this
increase in the num9ers o! -eo-le coming into re-roductive age actually increases the demand
!or !amily -lanning services.
21;
Rather than moving a#ay !rom a !ocus on !amily -lanning or cutting !unds to
111
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
international !amily -lanning -rogramsC to 9est accom-lish its stated !oreign -olicy goals o! -romoting economic develo-ment and
advancing #omenRs economic o--ortunitiesC the 4ush Administration should 9e increasing its !unding to these international
-rograms and -romoting e0-anding and im-roving the -rograms that are in -lace.
220
112
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Overoulation8(GOs Ke3
(GO7s are uni.uel3 caable in roviding ublic health in develoing countries%
GathiiC GovernorC "ro!essor o! International Commercial la# at Al9any %a# SchoolC 2000 ODamesC =.C. Davis
Dournal o! International %a# P "olicyC E/0-orting Culture 2arsCF )allC 211&C %e0isQ
(on:Governmental 3rgani>ations O(G3sQ act as a li!eline to citi>ens in develo-ing countries 9y
-roviding a 9road range o! health care services. 1 Stee- reductions in -u9lic s-ending on health
have ho99led -u9lic health Z\&*[ -rovisioningC ma;ing such services even more necessary. 2
)urthermoreC (G3s are o!ten the only -roviders o! the re-roductive health care needs o!
thousands o! -oor #omenC -articularly in rural areas #here acute shortages o! doctors or
medical su--lies !re5uently occur. In additionC unli;e government health care clinicsC (G3s
are ada-ta9le and Je0i9le ma;ing their services much more readily availa9le and accessi9le. 4
(G3s gain even greater signiMcance 9ecause o! the shi!t to#ards channeling donor !unds a#ay
!rom governments and to#ard (G3s. $ Donor !unding also ma;es (G3sR services a<orda9le.
%arge (G3s that o-erate in 9ig third #orld cities o!ten redirect -ayments !rom their city:9ased
clients to rural -o-ulations #hich are o!ten outside the !ormal economy. & All o! these services
are -ut at serious ris; 9y the glo9al gag rule:the -olicy endorsed 9y the =nited StatesC #hich
-rohi9its !unding to (G3s that advocate !or or Z\&.[ counsel a9out a9ortion servicesC even i!
such activities receive !unds !rom sources other than the =.S. 7 =n!ortunatelyC the glo9al gag
rule #ill have its #orst e<ects in develo-ing countries 9ecause o! the signiMcant role that (G3s
-lay in -roviding re-roductive and HIB?AIDS related care in such countries.
11)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8+oulation ,eadershi
&he Me<ico Cit3 +olic3 destro3s 1%$% oulation leadershi in A2rica%
!ummel? 2000 OColonel %aurel D. HummelC 8arch 1$C 211&C E%o#ering +otal )ertility Rates in Develo-ing States,
Security and "olicy Im-lications !or Su9:Saharan A!ricaCF =nited States ArmyC =SA2C S+RA+/GA R/S/ARCH
"R3D/C+ H "roIect Advisor, Ca-tain Donald RootC htt-,??stinet.dtic.mil?cgi:9in?Get+RDocK
AlthoughC as addressed earlierC +he =S (ational Security Strategy e0-licitly addresses A!rica6s enduring conditions o! EdiseaseC #arC and des-erate -overtyCF the com-etition
Eover material resources and -olitical access Z#hich is[ o!ten tragically #aged on the 9asis o! ethnic and religious di<erenceF and the summative tendency to -roduce
Eemerging transnational threatsCF much is le!t unsaidC and there!ore much #ill 9e le!t undone.7 It #ould 9e convenient to !orgive the document its omissionsC since the
"resident6s intent clearly is to set a general tone and direction !or the =nited States6 grand strategyC to a<ect s#ee-ing rhetoricC to -aint #ith a 9road -hiloso-hical 9rush. I!
the (ational Security Strategy #as merely the sca<olding o! the ideologyC and the 9uilding materials to carry out that ideology #ere delineated in another -olicy documentC
this lac; o! address to the critical under-inning issue : the need to curtail the total !ertility rate in su9:Saharan A!rica : #ould 9e 9ut a triJe. 2hen "resident 4ush says that
Eultimately the -ath o! -olitical and economic !reedom -resents the surest route to -rogress in su9:Saharan A!ricaCF it is easy to in!er : i! one is convinced o! the lin;age
9et#een una9ated -o-ulation gro#thC the !our stressors #hich com-rise the security demogra-hicC and the de-lora9le socialC ecologicalC economicC and health conditions that
#holly constrain the develo-ment o! human ca-ital in su9:Saharan A!rica : that M0ing these !oundational !aults is im-liedC i! not e0-licitly voiced. Ho#everC though
the =S has 9een the largest single donor o! international -o-ulation -rogram assistance in the
last !orty or so years Oin terms o! money outlayC certainly not in terms o! -ercent o! Gross
(ational IncomeQC the in!erence o! straight!or#ard commitment to a9atement o! total !ertility
rates is not su--orted 9y other actions o! the 4ush administration.* Argua9lyC the current
administration has ta;en the region !arther !rom solving the e0-loding -o-ulation -ro9lem in
su9:Saharan A!rica than it has 9een since 1.. 9y resurrecting the d8e0ico City6 -olicyC also ;no#n as
the Glo9al Gag Rule. +his -olicyC invo;ed 9y Ronald Reagan and u-held 9y G.H.2. 4ushC #as initially 9ased on the theoretical stance that -o-ulation gro#th is Ean essentially
neutral !orce in economic develo-mentCF and thusC its control #as un#orthy o! =S su--ort.. +he 8e0ico City -olicy denies any =S
international !amily -lanning -rogram su--ort !unding to any !oreign non:governmental
organi>ation that -er!orms or -romotes a9ortion as a method o! !amily -lanningC regardless o! the source o!
that a9ortion su--ort !unding. A!ter a -eriod o! interest and investment during the Clinton Administration #hich included re-eal o! the 8e0ico City -olicy and restoration o!
!unding to the =nited (ations "o-ulation )und O=()"AQ : -reviously discontinued 9ecause o! the agency6s -rogram in ChinaC #here coercive -ractices have 9een used : the
8e0ico City -olicy #as reinstated 9y "resident George 2. 4ush and !unding to =(")A again #as either !ro>enC divertedC or disallo#ed.41 +he curtailment 9y the -resent
4ush administration o! =S !unding o! the =()"AC #hich heavily invests in !amily -lanning -rograms and re-roductive education !or #omenC re-resents a loss o! 9et#een ten
and thirty -ercent o! its annual 9udget. )or Mscal year 211&C 4ush -ro-osed L42$ million !or 9ilateral !amily -lanning -rogramsC and L2$ million !or =()"AC #hich #as to 9e
held in a9eyance and tethered to a Mnding that the =( )und had come into com-liance #ith the 8e0ico City -olicy. Although the =()"A #as !ound not to have com-lied #ith
the 8e0ico City -olicy and !unding #as there!ore not released to themC the issue #as largely mootC as the a--ro-riation #as a >ero sum gameG any monies diverted to =()"A
#ere to have come !rom the -ot !or 9ilateral -rograms. +husC the L42$ million re-resented the total money e0-ended 9y the =S on curtailing glo9al -o-ulation gro#th and
enhancing re-roductive health in )A1&, a si0teen -ercent reduction !rom the -revious year. +he do#n#ard trend seems destined to continue in )A17C as the administration6s
-ro-osed 9udget sent to Congress in )e9ruary 211& earmar;ed si0teen -ercent less : L$7 million total : !or 9ilateral !amily -lanning -rogramsC and again 9y-assed
=()"A.41 2hile it seems li;ely that -olitical -ressure 9rought to 9ear 9y the religious right is 9ehind decisions such as the 8e0ico City -olicyC a !e# critics o! aggressive
-o-ulation -lanning -rograms hold that there is little or no correlation 9et#een ra-id -o-ulation gro#th and a country6s economic develo-ment. +hey argue that increased
num9ers o! -eo-le -rovide increased -roductive ca-acityG there!oreC high -o-ulation gro#th rates actually can contri9ute to a country6s a9ility to increase its standard o!
living. A similar rationale #as es-oused 9y some governments in less develo-ed states in the 1.&1s and 1.71sC #hen ra-id -o-ulation gro#th Mrst gained attentionG that isC
!ertility #ould !all and -o-ulation gro#th #ould slo# as living standards increased via economic develo-ment. In !act an Indian delegate at the =(6s 1.74 2orld "o-ulation
Con!erence echoed a -ervasive sentiment #hen he stated that Edevelo-ment is the 9est contrace-tive.F42 At the very leastC detractors o! the -o-ulation gro#th:economic
develo-ment lin;age 9elieve that current economies o! scale and glo9al trading -atterns insert too many em-irical varia9les and uncertainties into the e5uation to -rove a
direct correlation or cause:e<ect relationshi- 9et#een the t#o.4 +hough these o-inions com-rise a very small minority o! the current 9ody o! thought #ithin academe :
indeedC to most demogra-hers and human geogra-hers these arguments #ould 9e considered s-urious : they may #ell have 9een used as a non:religious 9ased legitimating
rationale !or various administrations6 lac; o! enthusiasm !or the -o-ulation issue.
Changing "olicy Direction Sim-ly -utC -o-ulation gro#th in the develo-ing states must 9e curtailed
9e!ore meaning!ul economic and social develo-ment can ta;e hold and Jourish. +here!oreC
!amily -lanning should 9e among the highest -riorities o! =S develo-ment strategy. "o-ulation
gro#th has long:term and escalating conse5uencesC a<ecting diverse =S interests in
environmental -rotectionC resource conservationC glo9al economic gro#thC immigration
managementC and international sta9ility. Attention to !amily -lanning assistance no# could
o9viateC or at least minimi>eC !uture allocations in other develo-ment and health:related
\\\\\\\\. In order to address the security demogra-hic and hel- to sta9ili>e an increasingly
unsta9le and insecure regionC the =nited States needs to dget serious6 a9out the -ro9lem o!
high !ertility rates in su9:Saharan A!rica. +his #ill not occur #ithout a #holesale change in
thin;ing and shi!ting o! -riorities in the =S !oreign -olicy arenaC as in the mainstream =S
!oreign -olicy community Edemogra-hic varia9les are o!ten -erceived as 9ac;ground !actors o!
marginal relevance.F44
11*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
+oulation ,eadershi8Lunding Ke3
Onl3 increasing overall 2amil3 lanning 2unding can restore oulation leadershi%
Center 2or Reroductive RightsC Dune 200). EInternational )amily "lanning and Re-roductive HealthCF
htt-,??###.re-roductiverights.org?-u9T!acTi!-.html.
=n!ulMlled Commitments
4ecause o! its si>e and #ealthC the =.S. remains one o! the largest 9ilateral donors to
international !amily -lanning -rogramsG ho#everC the =.S. ran;s last out o! 22 maIor donors in
its contri9ution relative to gross national -roduct OG("Q. In Mscal year 1...C the =.S. -rovided a
mere 1.1 -ercent o! its G(" !or o<icial develo-ment assistanceC a Mgure that has actually
declined in recent years des-ite the international -ledges to meet higher goalsC !alling !ar short o! the 1.7
-ercent o! G(" endorsed 9y the international community. A--ro-riations !or =SAID !amily -lanning assistance
-lummeted !rom L$41.& million in Mscal year O)AQ 1..$ to L$& million in )A 1..&. Research organi>ations
conservatively estimated that this $Y reduction in !unding resulted in 4 million un-lanned -regnanciesC 1.& million
a9ortionsC *C111 maternal deathsC and 14C111 in!ant deaths due to increased high:ris; 9irths. Although the !unding
level rose to L44&.$ million in )A 211C the 4ush Administration6s reduced re5uest o! L42$ !or )A 2114 sho# a lac;
o! commitment to !amily -lanning -rograms. +he =.S. has also 9een a leader in !unding the =nited (ations
"o-ulation )und O=()"AQ #hich #or;s in over 141 countries to -rovide crucially needed !unding !or re-roductive
health services. +ragicallyC in 2112C "resident 4ush eliminated !unding !or =()"A due to -ressure !rom e0treme anti:
choice legislators #ho claimed that the -rogram #as involved #ith coercive a9ortion in China. +he -resident cut
=()"A !unding des-ite the !act that a team a--ointed 9y the 2hite House to investigate the allegations !ound no
evidence to su--ort them and recommended that the =nited States continue to !und =()"A. +he -residentRs decision
also Je# in the !ace o! a 9i:-artisan agreement to raise the =.S. !unding level !or =()"A to L4 million Iust #ee;s
9e!ore. +he L4 million !rom the =nited States #ould have allo#ed the agency to -revent 2 million un#anted
-regnancies and more than 77C111 in!ant and child deathsC according to =()"A estimates 2. 8any 8em9ers o!
Congress !rom 9oth -arties have -rotested the -residentRs decision and are currently #or;ing on an agreement to
!ully !und =()"A.
)unding levels !or =SAID )amily "lanningC 1..$:211
)A 1..$ L$41.& million
)A 1..& L$& million
)A 1..7 L*$ million
)A 1..* L*$ million
)A 1... L*$ million
)A 2111 L72.$ million
)A 2111 L42$ million
)A 2112 L44&.$ million
)A 211 L44&.$ million
"resident 4ushRs re5uest !or )A 2114 L42$ million
Conclusion
Cuts and restrictions on !unding #ill continue to cause a signiMcant increase in un-lanned
-regnanciesC a9ortionsC maternal and in!ant deathsC and transmissions o! HIB and other
se0ually transmissi9le in!ections. +he =nited States6 inade.uate rovision o2 2oreign aid 2or
2amil3 lanning C and the e0isting restrictions on such aidC undermine the leadershi role o2
the 1%$% 2e urge Congress to revitali4e 1%$% leadershi in international reroductive
rights through an increase in 2unding H 5ithout undemocratic restrictions H !or !amily
-lanning and re-roductive health assistance.
11/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
"ncreasing 2amil3 lanning 2unding is vital to restoring 1%$% oulation leadershi%
8elissa 1retiC %egal adviser !or Center !or Re-roductive Rights6 International %egal "rogramC Harlan )is;e Stone
Scholar !or academic e0cellenceC 200). 2omen6s Rights %a# Re-orterC RutgersC E+he im-act o! the EGlo9al Gag
RuleF on 2omen6s Re-roductie Health 2orld#ideCF )all 211C %e0is.
+he goals o! the )oreign Assistance Act and all o! the -romises made 9y o<icial =.S. delegates at these international con!erences do
Mnd clear and considera9le su--ort in international la#C 9eginning #ith the =nited (ations CharterC #hich esta9lishes the
conce-tual !oundation !or the develo-ment o! international human rights la#C to the =niversal Declaration o! Human RightsC the
Civil and "olitical Rights Covenant and the C/DA2 conventionC as #ell as ChildrenRs Rights Convention. It is clear that
#hile the =.S. commitment to the -rotection and advancement o! #omenRs re-roductive rights
has an im-ortant -lace in !oreign -olicyC and the =nited States deMnitely has contri9uted in a
signiMcant #ay to em-o#ering #omen across the #orldG 9ut its contri9ution could have 9een
much 9etter. +he =.S. needs to do much more. Although the =nited States has 9een a leader in
!amily -lanning assistance since the 1.&1sC it is currently !ailing to -rovide its share o!
-romised !unding and the level o! !unding never has 9een as 9ad as it is no#. 4ecause o! its si>e
and #ealthC the =nited States remains one o! the largest 9ilateral donors to international !amily
-lanning -rograms. +he =nited StatesC ho#everC ran;s last out o! t#enty:t#o maIor donors in its
contri9ution relative to gross national -roduct. +he amount o! the overseas develo-ment
assistance !alls !ar short o! the agreed 1.7 -ercent endorsed 9y the international community. In
Mscal year 1...C #hen the =nited States economy #as doing e0traordinarily #ellC the =nited
States -rovided a mere 1.1 -ercent o! its gross national -roduct !or o<icial develo-ment
assistanceG and this Mgure has actually declined since then des-ite the -ledges made at ;ey
international con!erences and meetings. I #ould li;e to em-hasi>e that the !unding going to
!amily -lanning -rograms and re-roductive health -rograms is Iust a !raction o! the total
amount o! !oreign aidC #hich in turn is !ar 9elo# the agreed 1.7 -ercent. It is clearC des-ite
commitments made 9y the =.S. at international !oraC that the =.S. Congress has im-osed harsh
limits and decreased the availa9ility o! !unds !or the =nited States International )amily
"lanning Assistance "rogram. (ot only has the =nited States !ailed to meet international
standards regarding the amount it contri9utesC 9ut it has clearly violated its -ledge to increase
!unding !or !amily -lanning and develo-ment. +his #avering in its commitments to voluntary
!amily -lanning and re-roductive health has occurred since 1..4. A--ro-riations !or =SAID
!amily -lanning assistance -lummeted !rom a high o! $41.& million dollars in 1..$ to $&
million in Mscal year 1..&. +he Mve leading =nited States 9ased research organi>ations have
conservatively estimated that this $ -ercent reduction in !undingC aloneC has resulted in 4
million un-lanned -regnanciesC 1.& million a9ortionsC *C111 maternal deathsC and a 14C111
in!ant deaths due to high ris; 9irths across the #orldC mostly in lo# income countries. So it is
clear that =.S. !oreign assistance e0-enditures as a #hole encom-ass less than one:hal! o! one
-ercent o! the total =.S. 9udgetG and !amily -lanning and re-roductive health -rograms
com-rise only a small !raction o! that amount. 7ee-ing that in mindC the !act that there are
additional restrictions im-osed u-on this !unding has resulted in a devastating im-act.
110
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
"ncreasing overall 1$ 2amil3 lanning 2unding is critical to establish oulation
leadershi and encourage other nations to get on board%
Adam $on2eld? Senior "u9lic "olicy Associate at the Guttmacher InstituteC 2inter 2000. E2or;ing to /liminate
the 2orldRs =nmet (eed !or Contrace-tionCF Guttmacher "olicy Revie#C
htt-,??###.guttmacher.org?-u9s?g-r?1.?1?g-r1.1111.html.
SadlyC the donor countries o! the #orld have made scant recent -rogress in hel-ing to -rovide
contrace-tive services to #omen #ho #ant and need them. Although !unding !or re-roductive
health activities more 9roadly has increased this decadeC this over#helmingly reJects ne#
!unding to com9at the HIB?AIDS -andemic. In !actC according to =( MguresC inJation:adIusted
s-ending s-eciMcally !or !amily -lanning has !allen considera9ly since the mid:1..1s. +he
diverging trends in s-ending on !amily -lanning and HIB?AIDS run counter to the synergy
9et#een -reventing unintended -regnancy and -reventing HIB'let alone the synergies #ith
the #orld6s other develo-ment goals. =.S. !unding !or international !amily -lanning is
-articularly inade5uate. Although it has long -rovided the largest share o! glo9al s-ending on
!amily -lanningC the =nited States has consistently lagged !ar 9ehind #hat many /uro-ean
countries contri9ute relative to their #ealth. 3n to- o! this deMcitC the 4ush administration has
-ro-osed a cut to =.S. !unding !or international !amily -lanning !or )A 2117 o! at least 1*Y
9elo# its current level. And unli;e any o! its counter-arts among donor countriesC the =nited
States routinely attaches ideological restrictions on its money that can im-ede the e<orts o!
governments and (G3s to -rovide the services they Iudge to 9e most vital locally or to -rovide
them through the most ca-a9le channels. Reversing the recent =.S. and glo9al trends around
!amily -lanning !unding and actually e0-anding aid to address the unmet need !or contrace-tive
services should 9e regarded as a critical -olicy -riority. Doing so #ould ma;e a signiMcantC
measura9le contri9ution to im-roving #omen6s healthC and may have a similar im-act on the
#orld6s 9roader develo-ment goalsC including the 8DGs. IndeedC it seems dou9t!ul that these
goals can 9e met other#ise and #ithout the =nited States -laying a -rominent leadershi- role.
117
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8Chilling =fect
&he gag rule has a chilling efect on (GOs causing them to over9comensate and never
rovide treatment%
4ecause the conditions satis!ying this scenario are so limitedC =SAID:!unded clinics !ear ris;ing
their 9udgets 9y -roviding any res-onses #hatsoever and are o!ten !orced to turn #omen a#ay.
n$ =SAID re-resentatives Z\1.7[ strictly en!orce the "olicyC and organi>ations such as
International "lanned "arenthood )ederation have lost u- to L 12 million in =SAID grants !or
noncom-liance. n$4 +hese e0ce-tions are virtually meaningless in -ractice, the "olicy has a
chilling e<ect that deters =SAID:!unded clinics !rom treating #omen even in emergency
situations !or !ear o! losing !unding. n$$ At a congressional hearing in 2111C (e# Aor;
Congress#oman (ita %o#ey recounted the story o! a nurse in /gy-t #ho #as a!raid to treat or
re!er a #oman 9leeding !rom a 9otched a9ortion due to the -ossi9le negative conse5uences
!rom the 8e0ico City "olicy. n$& As the accessi9ility o! a !amily -lanning clinic can mean the
di<erence 9et#een li!e and death !or a #oman su<ering !rom an unsa!e a9ortionC it is im-ortant
to evaluate the -ractical e<ects o! =.S. -olicy on !amily -lanning clinics and their services. n$7
Man3 aid reciients over9interret the regulations o2 the gag rule and don7t 2ull3
understand it%
Alyssa Ra3manC "merican #ro$ect #riting !ello#C 2001% E+he Sound o! SilenceCF - A21C )irstSearch.
(o dou9t some =SAID reci-ients are over:inter-reting the restrictions. 4ut the Mne -rint o! the
glo9al gag rule is com-licated and di<icult to translate into even the Mrst language o! many
countriesC much less the thirdC !ourthC and M!th languages s-o;en 9y indigenous health #or;ers
in remote rural areas. And the conse5uences o! a translation mista;e are terri9le. According to
Adrienne GermainC -resident o! the International 2omenRs Health CoalitionC !amily -lanning in
4angladesh is *1 -ercent to .1 -ercent de-endent on =SAID !unding. /lse#hereC tooC Sthere
#ould 9e no9ody to re-lace the !undingS i! American aid #ere #ithdra#n. 2orld#ideC
"o-ulation Action International calculatesC the =nited StatesC des-ite cut9ac;s in recent yearsC
is still the largest single donor o! !amily:-lanning !unds to develo-ing countries. Its L4$1 million
in !amily:-lanning aid this year amounted to more than one:third o! grants #orld#ide.
11:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' =<emtions 2or A"#$ Lunding
&he gag rule has a chilling efect on an3 abortion services8(GOs are unsure o2 5hat is
or isn7t allo5ed and overcomensate%
Center 2or Reroductive RightsC 3cto9er 2K. E+he 4ush Glo9al Gag Rule, A Biolation o! International
Human RightsCF htt-,??###.re-roductiverights.org?-u9Tid0Tus-olicy.html.
+he glo9al gag rule is also li;ely to have a chilling e<ect on legal a9ortion:related activ: ities
that are technically E-ermittedF under the glo9al gag ruleC as occurred #hen the !ormer
8e0ico City "olicy #as in e<ect..1 In other #ordsC #omen see;ing a9ortions that are
e0ce-tions under the glo9al gag rule Oe.g.C i! they have 9een victims o! ra-e or incestC or i! their
li!e is endangered 9y the -regnancyQ may 9e turned a#ay 9ecause o! misinter-retation o! the
glo9al gag rule. In additionC the -rovision o! -ost:a9ortion care'#hich is e0-licitly allo#ed'
such as treatment !or illness or inIury due to unsa!e a9ortionsC is 9eing curtailed 9ecause
entities !ear Ieo-ardi>ing their !unding through any association #ith a9ortion. +he e5ui-ment
!or -roviding -ost:a9ortion care is the same as that used !or early a9ortion servicesC and
organi>ations are a!raid o! having their !unding terminated i! they even have such e5ui-ment
availa9le !or their health care -roviders. Center !or Re-roductive Rights attorneys have heard
re-orts !rom local (G3s that in 4oliviaC the 8inistry o! Health'#hich technically is not even
covered 9y the glo9al gag rule'has indicated that it #ill no longer endorse li!e:saving care !or
#omen su<ering com-lications !rom illegalC unsa!e a9ortions as a direct result o! the glo9al
gag rule..1Health:care -roviders also may 9e reluctant to dis-ense emergency contrace-tion'
#hich acts to -revent -regnancy and is not an a9orti!acient'9ecause o! the glo9al gag rule.
+he 4olivian (G3s re-orted that their government sus-ended e<orts to -ermit distri9ution o!
emergency contrace-tion 9ecause o! the glo9al gag rule..2 +he result o! the glo9al gag rule
#ill 9e increased num9ers o! un#anted -reg: nancies and still more des-erate #omen turning
to illegalC dangerous a9ortions.
11;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8Lree $eech
&he global gag rule constrains 2reedom o2 seech rights 2or (GOs%
Center 2or Reroductive Rights? Duly 0) Ohtt-,??###.re-roductiverights.org?-u9T!acTggr9ush.htmlQ
4y stiJing -u9lic de9ate and the a9ility o! !oreign (G3s to lo99y their governmentsC the Glo9al
Gag Rule undermines (G3sR right to e0ercise !reedom o! s-eech.
\ (e-al has one o! the highest maternal mortality rates in South Asia, $. #omen in 111C111 die !rom -regnancy:
related com-lications Oas com-ared to 7 in 111C111 in the =nited StatesQ. Hal! o! these deaths are caused 9y uns!e
a9ortion. 3n Se-tem9er 2&C 2112C ho#everC the 7ing o! (e-al signed a historic la# that legali>ed
a9ortion on 9road grounds. Des-ite the landmar; re!orm o! the a9ortion la#C sa!e a9ortion
services #ill remain out o! reach !or many #omen in (e-alC -articularly rural and lo#:income
#omen. +he 4ush Administration6s glo9al gag rule #ill -ose an added 9arrier to ensuring
a9ortion access. +he glo9al gag rule #ill -revent the organi>ations that receive =.S. !amily -lanning assistance
!rom -roviding or advocating !or any ao9rtion:related services. +hese organi>ations also #ill not 9e a9le to
-rovide counseling or re!errals !or #omen to o9tain a9ortion services else#here. +o -rovide
sa!e a9ortion servicesC these organi>ations #ould have to ris; 9an;ru-tcy and !orego =.S. !amily
-lanning assistance:the largest source o! such !oreign aid in (e-al.
\ =.S.:!unded (G3s in RussiaC #here most a9ortions are legalC cannot meet #ith governmental
o<icials to e0-ress su--ort !or -olicy changes to ma;e legal a9ortions sa!er. (or can they
discuss their concerns regarding the negative health im-act o! a -ro-osed restrictive a9ortion
la# in Russia. Ho#everC anti:choice grou-s are not gagged and can lo99y their governments to
ma;e a9ortion la#s more severe #hile receiving =.S. aid. 3n an issue that causes so much -olitical
de9ate in the =.S.C the 4ush Administration is arrogant to thin; it is entitled to su--ress that same de9ate in other
countriesC es-ecially in such a one:sided manner.
&he global gag rule undermines 2ree seech and global democrac3%
An estimated 7*C111 #omen die each year all over the #orldC and millions more are inIuredC
!rom unsa!e a9ortions. Such tragedies could 9e virtually eliminated 9y the -rovision o!
a--ro-riate health in!ormation and services and la# re!orm e<orts to ensure access to sa!e and
legal a9ortions. +he glo9al gag rule in!ringes u-on interna: tional human rightsC such as
!reedom o! s-eech and -artici-ation in the national demo: cratic -rocessC as #ell as the rights
to health and re-roductive sel!:determination. +hrough the glo9al gag ruleC the =.S. government
not only stiJes !ree s-eechC 9ut also a<irmatively discriminates against a -articular vie#-oint
that it does not li;eC setting dangerous -recedent. +he glo9al gag rule !orces health care
organi>ations to ma;e an immoral choice, either give u- des-erately needed !unds !or !amily
-lanning and other re-roductive health care servicesC or give u- their right to !ree s-eech and
to -rovide -atients #ith !ull and accurate medical in!ormation.
&he global gag rule decimates 2reedom o2 seech 2or abortion advocates and
constrains 2reedom o2 e<ression 2or 5omen%
+he glo9al gag rule undermines the right to !reedom o! s-eech'a universal human rightC
highly valued and -rotected in the =nited States. +his -olicy violates !reedom o! e0-ression 9y
-reventing overseas re-roductive health and advocacy organi>ations !rom s-ea;ing out and
lo99ying their o#n governments on their o#n countries6 a9ortion la#s or -olicies. +he glo9al
120
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
gag rule censors health:care -ro!essionals in overseas !amily -lanning clinicsC de-riving them
o! the a9ility to -rovide !ull and accurate in!ormation to their -atients.2 It -rohi9its !oreign
(G3s involved in advocacy and?or health ser: vice -rovision !rom communicating #ith their
governments in order to decriminali>e or im-rove the sa!ety o! and access to a9ortionCand
-rohi9its -u9lic education cam: -aigns a9out a9ortion.4 +he glo9al gag rule is the e-itome o!
vie#-oint:9ased discrim: inationC 9ecause it does not constrain organi>ations #or;ing to o--ose legalC sa!e
and accessi9le a9ortion. +he glo9al gag rule also undermines the !ree s-eech rights o! human rights advocates. A.
PUNISHING SPEECH ON ABORTION I! a !oreign re-roductive health organi>ation re!uses to
com-romise its right to !reedom o! e0-ressionC the organi>ation is denied all =.S. !amily
-lanning !unding. In e<ectC the glo9al gag rule holds this 9asic human right hostage 9y
denying organi>ations vital resources !or !amily -lanning and other re-roductive health
services. +he =.S. govern: ment has only directly im-osed this restriction on !oreign organi>ationsC #hich do not
receive -rotection under the =.S. Constitution.$ +here!oreC the glo9al gag rule im-os: es a hy-ocritical dou9le
standard'denying !reedom o! e0-ression to !oreign organi>a: tions #hile ostensi9ly not im-osing those restraints on
=.S. organi>ations.
121
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8Lree $eech
&he gag rule violates 2ree seech rights 2or (GOs%
Leminist MaDorit3 Loundation? 200/ OE+he "olicy6s /<ectsCF http://www.eminist.org/global/content.asp/
0123$44Q
+he glo9al gag rule e<ectively censors certain international organi>ationsC regardless o! the
legality o! a9ortion in the countries they #or; inC and a<ects only -ro:choice grou-s. +hese
grou-s are -revented not only !rom -roviding a9ortion services and counseling 9ut !rom
lo99ying their o#n governments to li9erali>e a9ortion la#sC regardless o! their nation6s la#s on
!ree s-eech. Such restrictions #ould 9e unconstitutional in the =nited StatesC 9ut are 9eing
a--lied to =S:9ased organi>ations overseas. In additionC anti:choice organi>ations and
-rograms are una<ectedC and can #or; to ma;e a9ortion la#s more restrictive #hile still
receiving =nited States !unding. 2hile the Re-u9lican "arty and "resident George 2. 4ush
im-lied that the glo9al gag ruleC also ;no#n as the 8e0ico City "olicyC -revented =S !unds !rom
9eing used !or overseas a9ortionsC a -re:e0isting -olicy already -rohi9its direct =S !unding !or
international a9ortion services. +he Helms AmendmentC named !or anti:choice Senator Desse
Helms OR:(CQC -assed in 1.7C and is the -olicy that -rohi9its the use o! =S !unds directly !or
a9ortion services. +he 8e0ico City "olicyC 9y contrastC -rohi9its a much #ider range o! servicesC
including lo99ying and a9ortion counselingC that are !unded not directly 9y =S dollars 9ut #ith
-rivate monies. )rom the moment 4ush announced the reinstatement o! the glo9al gag ruleC
!eminist and -rogressive organi>ations e0-ressed their outrage. American Civil %i9erties =nion
OAC%=Q Director %aura 2. 8ur-hy statedC EIt is un!ortunate that the House has allo#ed
"resident 4ush to e0-ort an undemocratic -olicy he #ould 9e -rohi9ited !rom im-osing #ithin
the 9orders o! the =nited States.F Re-. (ita 8. %o#ey OD:(AQ echoed those sentiments, EIt6s not
a9out a9ortion. It6s a9out us im-osing on others la#s #e #ouldn6t im-ose on ourselves.F A ne#
re-ort !ound that the 4ush Administration6s glo9al gag rule endangers the lives o! #omen and
children and !amilies in -oor countries around the #orld. According to the re-ortC t#o leading
!amily -lanning organi>ations in 7enya had to close Mve o! their clinics since the glo9al gag rule
#as introduced. +hese clinics o<ered much needed services such as -re: and -ost:natal
o9stetric careC child healthC screening !or cervical cancerC immuni>ationsC and HIB?AIDS
services.
122
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8Women7s Rights
&he gag rule undermines 5omen7s rights globall3%
+hrough !oreign assistanceC the =nited States has hel-ed im-rove the status o! #omenC
including their role as -artici-ants in democratic decision:ma;ing. (umerous -rovi: sions o!
=.S. !oreign assistance legislationC including those #hich set !orth the -rinci-le -ur-ose o!
9ilateral develo-ment assistanceC re5uire the =nited States to su--ort the enhancement o!
#omen6s status and -artici-ation in civil society.$2 In 1.74C =SAID esta9lished the 2omen in
Develo-ment o<ice Eto hel- ensure that #omen -artici-ate !ullyC and 9eneMt e5uallyC !rom =.S.
overseas develo-ment assistance.F$ =SAID announced the 2omen6s %egal Rights Initiative at
the )ourth 2orld Con!erence on 2omen in 4eiIingC ChinaC in 1..$ and em-hasi>ed the need to
ensure #omen6s legal status and -romote their -artici-ation in social and economic li!e.$4 +he
glo9al gag rule dis-ro-ortionately im-acts #omen6s grou-sC many o! #hich receive !unding
!rom =SAID !or -roIects related to re-roductive health careC maternal and child survivalC and
voluntary !amily -lanning. +hese grou-sC as the E!ront lineF o! the #omen6s health movementC
o9serve Mrsthand the e<ects o! illegalC unsa!e a9ortion and are o!ten called u-on to -artici-ate
in their countries6 deli9erations a9out a9ortion la# re!orm. I! the =nited States is committed
to decreasing #omen6s marginali>ationC it should eliminate the glo9al gag ruleC #hich
undermines #omen6s rights to re-roductive sel!:determination and to 5uestion their countries6
a9ortion la#s. +he =nited States cannot have it 9oth #ays'su--orting #omen #ith one hand
and silencing them #ith the other. It is im-erialistic and hy-ocritical !or the =nited StatesC a
country #here #omen have the right to o9tain in!ormation a9out sa!eC legal a9ortion in most
circum: stancesC to EgagF #omen and #omen6s organi>ations a9road.
12)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8!uman Rights
&he gag rule undermines the 1$ commitment to global 2ree seech and international
human rights la5%
)reedom o! s-eech is cherished as one o! the cornerstones o! democracy'a !undamental
li9erty essential to the res-onsi9le e0ercise o! =.S. citi>enshi-. 8oreoverC through its !or: eign
-olicyC the =nited States has a long history o! -rotecting the right o! individuals and grou-s to
s-ea; !reely and to -artici-ate in their countries6 democratic -rocesses. 4y im-osing the
glo9al gag ruleC the =nited States government violates 9asic -rinci-les ensconsed in
international human rights instrumentsC including the =niversal Declaration on Human Rights
and the International Convention on Civil and "olitical RightsC as #ell as various instruments o!
the inter:American system. )reedom o! s-eech and democratic -artici-ation are -rotected in
the )irst Amendment to the =.S. Constitution, Congress shall ma;e no la# res-ecting an
esta9lishment o! religionC or -rohi9iting the !ree e0ercise thereo!G or a9ridging the !reedom o!
s-eechC or o! the -ressG or the right o! the -eo-le -eacea9ly to assem9leC and to -etition the
Government !or a redress o! grievances. 2ith strong leadershi- 9y the =nited StatesC the right
to !ree s-eech is also enshrined in numerousC #idely acce-ted international human rights
instruments.7 )or e0am-leC the =niversal DeclarationC dra!ted in -art 9y =.S. delegate
/leanor Roosevelt and ado-ted 9y the =nited (ations in 1.4*C -roclaims the human right to
!reedom o! s-eech and democ: ratic -artici-ation, Z+[he advent o! a #orld in #hich human
9eings shall enIoy !reedom o! s-eech and 9elie! and !reedom !rom !ear and #ant has 9een
-roclaimed as the highest as-ira: tion o! the common -eo-le...* /veryone has the right to
!reedom o! o-inion and e0-ressionG this right includes !ree: dom to hold o-inions #ithout
inter!erence and to see;C receive and im-art in!or: mation and ideas through any media and
regardless o! !rontiers.. /veryone has the right to ta;e -art in the government o! his countryC
directly or through !reely chosen re-resentatives.41 AdditionallyC the =nited States and 14$
other countriesC have ratiMed the International Covenant on Civil and "olitical Rights OCivil and
"olitical Rights CovenantQ41that says, /veryone shall have the right to hold o-inions #ithout
inter!erence... /veryone shall have the right to !reedom o! e0-ressionG this right shall include
the !reedom to see;C receive and im-art in!ormation and ideas o! all ;indsC regardless o!
!rontiersC either orallyC in #riting or in -rint...42 =nder -articular -ressure !rom the =nited
StatesC the inter:American system has a long history o! -rotecting the right o! individuals and
grou-s to s-ea; !reely and to -artici: -ate in their countries6 democratic -rocesses. +hese
rights have 9een enshrined in human rights instruments such as the American Convention on
Human RightsG4the American Declaration o! the Rights and Duties o! 8anG44and the Inter:
American Declaration o! "rinci-les on )reedom o! /0-ression.4$ +he glo9al gag rule violates
sev: eral 9asic -rinci-les articulated in those documentsC such as the right to see;C receive and
im-art in!ormation and the right to !reedom o! e0-ression.4& During the recent Summit o! the
AmericasC mem9er nations agreed in the Summit6s "lan o! Action to EZc[ontinue to su--ort the
#or; o! the inter:American human rights system in the area o! !reedom o! e0-ression through
the S-ecial Ra--orteur !or )reedom o! /0-ression o! the IACHR ZInter:American Commission
on Human Rights[ ... and see; to ensure that national legislation on !reedom o! e0-ression is
consistent #ith international legal o9ligations.F47 +he =.S. government agreed to this -rinci-le
and should reverse the violations o! !reedom o! e0-ression caused 9y the glo9al gag rule.
"resident 4ush is turning 9ac; the cloc; on #omen and organi>ations -romoting #omen6s
health through restrictions set !orth in the glo9al gag rule. 8r. 4ush is attem-ting to dictate
s-eech on a9ortion la# re!orm in lo#:income countriesC such that the only -ermissi9le
12*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
governmental res-onse to a9ortion is -unishmentC and even incar: ceration. +he glo9al gag
rule violates the letter and s-irit o! vital human rights docu: ments 9y -reventing overseas
organi>ationsC that de-end u-on =.S. !unds to -rovide des-erately needed re-roductive health:
care servicesC !rom e0ercising their internation: ally recogni>ed right to e0-ress o-inions. It
denies re-roductive health organi>ations the right to sim-ly tal; a9out a9ortion to -atients and
to -artici-ate in their nations6 -u9lic -olicy discussionsC including de9ate a9out legal and
-olicy re!orms. +he glo9al gag rule is a clear violation o! the international human right to
!reedom o! e0-ressionC and the =nited States should 9e held accounta9le !or this im-osition o!
censorshi-.
12/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8!uman Rights
&he gag rule undermines 1$ human rights leadershi%
Of Our 6ac-s? 2000. E=ganda and the Glo9al Gag RuleCF
http://indarticles.com/p/articles/mi+5a$4%$/is+20040-/ai+n"-"-3-,2.
+he Glo9al Gag Rule erects 9arriers to the develo-ment o! the democratic -rocess in other
countriesC the -romotion o! civil society and develo-ment o! (G3s a9roadC and the
enhancement o! #omenRs e5uality and -artici-ation in the -olitical -rocess. +hus the Glo9al
Gag Rule severely undermines 9edroc; =.S. !oreign -olicy o9Iectives. It also im-acts
international assistance -rovided 9y other donors::including Canada and the /uro-ean =nion::
#ho #ill not 9e a9le to colla9orate #ith !oreign (G3s on a9ortion:related -roIects i! those
(G3s also receive =SAID !unding. )urthermoreC it ina--ro-riately challenges !oreign
governmentsR sovereignty 9y constraining their im-lementation o! national health:care -olicy
decisions. Barious international instruments::#hich the =.S. has strongly su--orted:esta9lish
re-roductive rights as !undamental human rights. +hese instruments also -rovide that #here
a9ortion is legalC it should 9e !ully integrated into re-roductive health care to ensure that it is
sa!e and accessi9le. +he Glo9al Gag Rule Jies in the !ace o! the =.S.Rs leadershi- on the
-romotion o! re-roductive rights internationally.
120
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8"nternational ,a5
&he gag rule violates international la5s guaranteeing human rights8this undermines
the "CC+R%
+he 8e0ico City "olicy undou9tedly violates the !ree s-eech guarantees o! international human
rights instruments to #hich the =nited States is a -arty. n11 +he =niversal Declaration o!
Human Rights O=DHRQ #as ado-ted #ithout dissent 9y the =( General Assem9ly in 1.4*.
n114 +he -rinci-les e0-ressed in the =DHR include that all men and #omen are entitled to the
right to !reedom o! o-inion and e0-ression. n11$ +hese -rinci-les are legally 9inding on the
=.S. through the International Covenant on Civil and "olitical RightsC #hich states, S/veryone
shall have the right to hold o-inions #ithout inter!erence . . . . /veryone shall have the right to
!reedom o! e0-ressionG this right shall include !reedom to see;C receiveC and im-art in!ormation
and ideas o! all ;indsC Regardless o! !rontiersC either orallyC Z\21&[ in #riting or in -rint . . . .S
n11& +he glo9al gag rule e0-ressly violates the s-irit o! this agreementC as #ell as the e0-licit
rights it see;s to -rotect. n117 As suchC the rule not only im-airs the !reedom o! e0-ression o!
=.S.:!unded !oreign (G3s that #ish to -ursue e0-ressive communications #ith their o#nC
se-arate !undsC it also violates the rights o! -atients and citi>ens see;ing medical advice to 9e
!ully in!ormed. n11* International human rights la#C ho#everC does not -rovide a -articularly
-o#er!ul means !or attac;ing the "olicy 9ecause many international treaties lac; en!orcement
mechanisms and o<er limited !ora !or challenging violations. n11. 3ne human rights la#
scholar -oints out that the e<ectiveness o! a challenge to the 8e0ico City "olicy Sneed not 9e
9ased u-on a Mnal decision o! Zan[ adIudicatory 9ody.S n121 Rather the Smo9ili>ation o! -u9lic
o-inionS is more li;ely to reverse it. n121
127
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Reroductive Rights Good8Overall Women7s Rights
Reroductive rights are critical to overall 5omen7s emo5erment%
Women7s International (et#or; (e5sC #inter 1;;0C 2omen and HealthC %e0ington, 2inter 1..&. Bol.22C Iss.
1G -g. 21C "ro5uest.
+hese measures haveC to some e0tentC ta;en the right to decide to have an a9ortion a#ay !rom
#omenC im-inging u-on their ca-acity to thin; and act as inde-endent and rational -ersons`
A #omanRs control over her o#n !ertility is a ;ey to her right to sel!:determination #henC 9y
virtue o! la#C 9e it customaryC civil or criminalC she is de-rived o! the right to o9tain an a9ortionC
cannot choose to have the num9er o! children she desiresC or cannot engage in se0ual
intercourse #ithout the !ear o! getting -regnant... It is central to a #omanRs li!e to 9e a9le to
determine #hen or #hen not to have a childC #ith #homC or through #hatever means.
Re-roductive sel!:determination lies at the core o2 a 5omanAs basic rights . =nless a #oman
achieves thisC she does not control her o#n li!e.
12:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Women7s Rights Good8=<tinction
Advancing rights rotections 2or gender are vital to trans2orming social norms that
ris- e<tinction%
6unch? 200) /0ecutive Director o! the Center !or 2omenRs Glo9al %eadershi- at Douglass CollegeC RutgersC
OCharlotteC Canadian 2oman Studies 22 n.2C )all?2inter 2112:211C MrstsearchQ
)irstC #hat do #e mean 9y or e0-ect #hen #e tal; a9out -eaceK 8ost #omenRs -eace activism s-rings u- around -articular
conJicts and does not 9egin #ith a -lan !or #orld -eace. 4ut #e must as; #hat are the conditions necessary !or a -ermanent -eace
to 9e achieved. 2e should loo; at the e0isting regional and international structures !or -eace ma;ing and -eace ;ee-ingC li;e the
=(C and at the assum-tions o! the men #ho created them to see i! those assum-tions::li;e the em-hasis on national sovereignty::
are a sound 9asis !or -eace. 2e must as; #hat it #ill ta;e to en:gender these structures and trans!orm them into more e<ective
vehicles in the 5uest !or -eaceC security and human rights !or all. 3ther#iseC #omen #ill al#ays 9e re:acting to -atriarchal
#ars. 2e !ace these 5uestions today in a di<icult conte0tC made more com-le0 9y the events o! Se-tem9er 11 in the =.S. and their
a!termath. 2e have seen the most e0tensive develo-ment o! nuclearC 9iologicalC and other #ea-ons
o! mass destruction in the last hal! century that #ould seem to serve as a su<icient argument
!or #hy glo9al structures to ensure -eace are no# a necessity !or human survival rather than
Iust a desira9le vision. 4ut rather than 9eing more -eace!ulC #e entered the t#enty:Mrst century
#ith many unresolved civil and ethnic conJicts and an increasingly militari>ed daily li!e #here the
lines 9et#een civilians and com9atants seem ever mur;ier. 2e have so-histicated local and glo9al terrorismsC a rise in the -olitical
use o! religious e0tremismC an e0-anding arms trade led 9y the #orldRs one remaining su-er:-o#erC and the structural violence o!
the #idening economic ga- 9et#een haves and have:nots. IndeedC one com-elling argument !or #omen -laying a greater role in
-eace:9uilding and governance today is the -erce-tion that #omen could hardly ma;e a 9igger mess o! the #orld than male
leadershi- has done over the -ast centuries. In this tur9ulent timeC #hat then do #omen ma;e o! -eaceK +he Mrst as-ect o! -eace
is an end to violent?armed conJict::the a9sence o! #ar::or #hat is called S(egative "eace.S 4ut this is not enough to
ensure that armed conJict #ill not arise again nor does it address 5uestions o! #hat is needed
to end all !orms o! violence::militari>ationC the structural violence o! racial and economic
inIusticeC or the ongoing violence against #omen in daily li!e. S"ositive "eaceCS on the other
handC is a term used to descri9e an Salternative visionS that leads to the reduction o! all !orms
o! violence in society and moves to#ard the Sideal o! ho# society should 9eS O2omen 4uilding
"eace Cam-aign o! International Alert cited in "an;hurst and AnderliniQ. It is also concerned
#ith Iustice and the larger dynamic o! domination or -o#er over Sthe otherS as a mode o!
human interaction.
Indicators o! the conditions o! Iustice and e5uity that com-rise -ositive -eace are s-elled out in the =( =niversal Declaration o!
Human Rights O=DHRQC #hose !ramers in 1.4* sa# the -romotion and -rotection o! human rights as critical to -reventing genocide
and #ar in the !uture. +he =DHR s-ells out 9road -rinci-les o! 9oth -olitical?civil rights and socio:economic human rights that
constitute a considera9le commitment to IusticeC develo-ment and e5uality as the 9asis !or -ositive -eace. 2hile #e ;no# these
rights are not the #orld reality and their -ursuit has 9een misusedC neverthelessC movements see;ing Iustice around the glo9e have
continued to utili>e the conce-t o! human rights and the vision em9odied in the =DHR as standards that their governments and the
international community should u-hold.
)eminist -ers-ectives o! -ositive -eace 9uild on the e0-anding #orld o! human rights conce-ts and -ractice. Demanding the
-rotection and -romotion o! the human rights o! all as a central tenet o! -eace:9uilding hel-s to ensure that ine5uities 9e addressed
and that -eace should not 9e -urchased at the -rice o! sim-ly allo#ing the -revailing military
-o#ers to have their #ay. Human rights -rinci-les also demand that the -ursuit o! Iustice not allo# !or the im-unity o!
#ar criminals a!ter a -eace accord is reached. Central to !eminist conce-tuali>ations o! -eace and human
rights is the recognition o! a continuum o! violence against #omenC in #hich all !orms o!
violence are seen as interrelated. +he institutionali>ation o! male dominance is maintained 9y
violence and the threat o! violence leads us to 5uestion #hether the term S-eacetimeS -rovides
an accurate descri-tion o! the lives o! most #omen. As t#o South Asian !eminists noted #hen res-onding to the
5uestion o! #hether !eminism disru-ts R-eace!ulR homesC Sone -ersonRs -eace can 9e anotherRs -oisonS O4hasin and 7hanQ. 2ar and
armed conJict 9ring additional violation to #omenRs livesC 9ut these are lin;ed to the gender:9ased violence and a9use o! #omen in
SnormalS li!e. +husC violence against #omen in #ar 9rings together the su9ordination o! !emales #ith their mem9ershi- in other
targeted grou-sC e0-resses #omenRs status as the -ro-erty o! the men in her communityC and reJec social acce-tance o! violations
o! #omen more generally. )urtherC #hen violence is tolerated in an everyday #ay in the !amily at the core o! societyC children come
to see violence as an inevita9le -art o! conJict and a natural #ay to deal #ith di<erences in all areas o! the social order. +hus
ending the violence o! militarismC #ar and racism is tied to ending violence in the home. +hese are mutually rein!orcing !orms o!
violence that must 9e challenged simultaneously. 2hile it is -rimarily #omen activists and !eminist theorists !rom all regions o! the
#orld #ho have -ioneered #or; on the gendered nature o! #ar and conJict Oe.g. /lise 4ouldingC Dac;lyn Coc;C Cynthia /nloeC Ritu
12;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
8enonC 4etty ReardonC Simona SharoniC Aayori 8atsuiC e!e.QC one SscientiMcS study 9y a male -olitical scientist is o! interest here.
Doshua Goldstein has sought to sho# #hy there is so much cross:cultural consistency in gendered #ar rolesC even #hen there is
great diversity o! cultural !orms o! 9oth #ar and o! gender roles #hen considered se-arately. He concludes #hat many !eminists
have contended that gender and #ar are ine0trica9ly lin;ed,
Gender roles ada-t individuals !or #ar rolesC and #ar roles -rovide the conte0t #ithin #hich
individuals are sociali>ed into gender roles. )or the #ar system to change !undamentallyC or !or
#ar to endC might re5uire -ro!ound changes in gender relations. 4ut the trans!ormation o!
gender roles may de-end on dee- changes in the #ar system. O11:11Q
1)0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
!uman Rights Good8=<tinction
&he imact to diminished human rights out5eighs ever3thing8it leads to 5ar? has
-illed more than all 20
th
centur3 5ars combined? and leads to genocide and
environmental destruction%
$hattuc-? 1;;* ODohn Shattuc;C !ormer Assistant Secretary o! StateC .:12:1..4C )ederal (e#s ServiceC le0isQ
3n the disintegration sideC #e are #itnessing ugly and violent racialC ethnic and religious class
conJict in HaitiC in 4osniaC in Central AsiaC in A!ricaC most horri9ly in R#anda :: all -laces #here I
have traveled in recent months and #itnessed uns-ea;a9le su<ering and a9uses o! the most !undamental rights. +he ne# glo9al
community has yet to develo- an ade5uate res-onse to these horrors. 2e must intensi!y our search !or ne# #ays
o! holding individuals and governments accounta9le !or gross human rights violationsC !or ne#
#ays o! antici-ating and -reventing conJicts 9e!ore they s-iral into uncontrolla9le violence and
re-risalC !or ne# #ays o! mo9ili>ing the international community to address an avalanche o! humanitarian crises. +hese are
daunting tas;s. 2hy then has the Clinton administration made -rotecting human rights and -romoting democracy such a maIor
theme in our !oreign -olicyK +he ans#er I thin; lies not only in our valuesC #hich could 9e reason enoughC 9ut in the strategic
9eneMts to the =nited States o! a -olicy that em-hasi>es our values. 2e ;no# !rom historical e0-erience that democracies are more
li;ely than other !orms o! government to res-ect human rightsC to settle conJicts -eace!ullyC to o9serve international and honor
agreementsC to go to #ar #ith each other #ith great reluctanceC to res-ect rights o! ethnicalC racial and religious minorities living
#ithin their 9ordersC and to -rovide the social and -olitical 9asis !or !ree mar;et economics. In South A!ricaC in the 8iddle /astC
and no# remar;a9ly -erha-s even in (orthern IrelandC the resolution o! conJict and the 9roadening o! -olitical -artici-ation is
releasing great economic and social energies that can -rovide 9etter lives !or all the -eo-le o! these long:su<ering regions. 4y
contrastC the costs to the #orld o! re-ressive governments are -ain!ully clear. In the 21th centuryC
the num9er o! -eo-le ;illed 9y their o#n governments under authoritarian regimes is !our times
the num9er ;illed in all o! this centuryRs #ars com9ined. Re-ression -ushes re!ugees across the
9orders and triggers #ars. =naccounta9le governments are heedless o! environmental
destructionC as #itnessed 9y Cherno9yl and the ecological nightmares o! /astern /uro-e.
1)1
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
!uman Rights ,eadershi8Lunding Ke3
"ncreasing 2amil3 lanning 2unding o2 abortion roviders is vital to sustainable 1%$%
human rights leadershi and romoting abortion la5 re2orm internationall3%
Center 2or Reroductive Rights? 2001 OEInternational )amily "lanning and Re-roductive Health
"rograms, 2hen 2ill the =.S. Government )ulMll Its CommitmentsKFC DulyC
htt-,??###.re-roductiverights.org?-d!?-u9T9-T!amily-lanning.-d!Q
+he current deMciencies and limitations o! !unding !or international !amily -lanning -ro:grams
violate -rinci-al tenets o! =.S. la# governing human rights and !oreign aid. Although Congress and the "resident
have 9road discretion to determine #hether to -rovide !oreign assistance and to #homC this discretion must 9e consistent #ith Section 214OaQO1Q o! the )oreign Assistance
ActC #hich -rovides that the =.S.,
shallC in accordance #ith its international o9ligations as set !orth in the Charter o! the =nited (ations and in ;ee-ing #ith the constitutional heritage and traditions o! the
=nited StatesC -romote and encourage increased res-ect !or human rights and !unda: mental !reedoms throughout the #orld.... AccordinglyC a -rinci-al goal o!
the !oreign -olicy o! the =nited States shall 9e to -romote the increased o9servance o!
internation:ally recogni>ed human rights 9y all countries.*7 Congress also has recogni>ed that -o-ulation -olicies are an
as-ect o! a nation6s human rights record. )or e0am-leC each yearC -ursuant to Section 214O9Q o! the )oreign Assistance ActC the Secretary o! State is re5uired to -re-are a
re-ort evaluating the o9servance o! and res-ect !or internationally recogni>ed human rights in each country -ro-osed as a reci-ient o! security assistance.** +hese re-orts
are re5uired to Einclude in!ormation on -ractices regarding coercion in -o-ulation controlC including coerced a9ortion and involuntary steril:i>ation.F*. Although this -rovision
o! the )oreign Assistance Act does not go !ar enough in recogni>ing the range o! human rights issues im-licated 9y a government6s -rovision o! re-roductive health servicesC
the mandate it articulates is -remised on the vie# that govern:ment actions in this arena dramatically a<ect human rights throughout the #orld..1
I thin; Zhuman rights[ derives !rom our values. It derives !rom the God:given rights that all o! us have. And you can see it in our o#n !ounding documents. So'the rights o!
men and #omen to live in -eaceC to live in !reedomC the rights they enIoy to -ursue their o#n destiny I thin; have to 9e -art o! the essential value system that #e use #ithin
our o#n nation and that #e ta;e to other nations as an e0am-le o! the #ay one should 9ehave and ho# one should treat one6s citi>ens..1
' Secretary o! State Colin "o#ellC conMrming the dedication o! the =.S. govern:ment to the -rotection o! human rights
+he =nited States6 insu<icient !unding and restrictions on !oreign aid !or !amily -lanning not
only contravene a E-rinci-al goal o! the !oreign -olicy o! the =nited StatesCF.2these actions
also severely curtail the a9ility o! lo#:income nations around the #orld to com-ly #ith
international human rights o9ligations. +hese legal o9ligations -romote and -rotect their
citi>ens6 rights to healthC !amily -lanningC and re-roductive sel!:determination . 4y inhi9iting the a9ility o!
these nations to -rotect human rightsC the =nited States government directly contradicts the s-irit o! Section 214OaQO1Q o! the )oreign Assistance ActC #hich see;s to -romote
increased o9servance o! internationally recogni>ed human rights 9y other nations. 3n the other handC an increase in !oreign aid !or !amily
-lanning and re-roductive health care #ould ena9le the =.S. to !ulMll its role'as stated 9y "resident George 2.
4ush'Eone o! the great 9astions o! human rights.F.
III. +he =.S. Has 8ade International Commitments to Re-roductive Rights
Z)[amily -lanning is a vital international health issue. In develo-ing countriesC among #omen o! re-roductive ageC maternity:related com-lications are the leading cause o!
death. As many as one in every !our o! these deaths could 9e -revented through !amily -lanning. Some say this is not our -ro9lemC and that others #ill meet the need i! #e
#al; a#ay. 4ut'#hen #e are at our 9est'Americans don6t #al; a#ay !rom those #ho are in urgent need. And #e certainly should not #al; a#ay !rom the millions o! #omen
around the #orld #ho #ould 9eneMt !rom greater access to !amily -lanning.... 4ecause #hen #omen have the ;no#ledge and -o#er to ma;e their o#n decisionsC #hole
societies 9eneMt..4
' )ormer Secretary o! State 8adeleine Al9rightC 2orld Health Day 2111C a<irming the =nited States6 dedication to international !amily -lanning -rograms.
+he =.S. 9egan its !amily -lanning assistance -rogram over 1 years agoC recogni>ing Ethe interrelationshi- 9et#een... -o-ulation gro#thC and... develo-ment and overall
im-rovement in living standards in develo-ing countries.F.$ In a 9i-artisan e<ortC Congress e0-anded the )oreign Assistance Act to authori>e the "resident to -rovide
Mnancial assistance !or voluntary !amily -lanning and health -rograms..& +he =.S. !amily -lanning assistance -rogram has
contri9uted signiMcantly to increasing the use o! modern contrace-tive methods !rom under 11
-ercent in the 1.&1s to $1 -ercent todayC hel-ing to reduce the num9er o! high:ris;
-regnancies and a9ortions and saving the lives o! hundreds o! thousands o! #omen..7
In su--orting the Cairo and CairoX$ Con!erencesC the =.S and other -artici-ants recogni>ed
the critical role that international assistanceC -articularly su9stantial Mnancial and technical
su--ortC -lays in achieving the -o-ulation and develo-ment goals o! the Cairo "rogramme..* In
-articularC "aragra-h 14.11 -rovides that,
+he international community should strive !or the !ulMllment o! the agreed target o! 1.7 -er cent o! the gross national -roduct !or overall o<icial develo-ment assis:tance and
endeavour to increase the share o! !unding !or -o-ulation and develo-:ment -rogrammes commensurate #ith the sco-e and scale o! activities re5uired to achieve the o9Iective
and goals o! the -resent "rogramme o! Action. A crucially urgent challenge to the international donor community is there!ore the translation o! their commitment to the
o9Iective and 5uantitative goals o! the -resent "rogramme o! Action into commensurate Mnancial contri9utions to -o-ulation -rogrammes in develo-ing countries and
countries #ith economies in transition... +he Cairo "rogramme estimated that a--ro0imately L17 9illion #ould 9e re5uired in the year 2111 to meet the need !or international
!amily -lanning and re-roductive health servicesC including L$.7 9illion !rom donor countries.111 +he necessary !unding levels increase to L1*.$ 9illion in 211$C L21.$ 9illion
in 2111 and L21.7 9illion in 211$.111 Com-ared to the estimated cost o! the B:22 3s-rey military air-lanes -ur:chased 9y the =.S. governmentC e0-ected to cost a--ro0imately
L41 9illionC112these !unding levels should 9e readily attaina9le. Ho#everC aggregate donor:country contri:9utions have stagnated at around L2 9illion -er yearC signiMcantly
9elo# the donor tar:get o! L$.7 9illion needed to -rovide su<icient resources to lo#:and middle:income countries in the year 2111.11 As in CairoC the international
community attending the 4eiIing and 4eiIingX$ Con!erences recogni>ed the need !or !oreign assistance !or lo#:income nations and urged governments to -ledge their
Mnancial and technical resources to lo#:income countriesC -articularly in A!ricaC to im-lement the 4eiIing "lat!orm.114 Also as in CairoC the 4eiIing "lat!orm s-eciMcally urges
industriali>ed nations to commit 1.7 Y o! their gross national -roduct OG("Q !or o<icial develo-ment assistance.11$ Consistent #ith these -rovisionsC at each con!erence the
=nited States -ledged its con:tinued Mnancial su--ort !or re-roductive health careC including voluntary !amily -lan:ning. In 1..4C then =ndersecretary o! State !or Glo9al
A<airs +imothy 2irth stated,
ZA[ determined coo-erative e<ort must 9e launched to ma;e good 5uality voluntary !amily -lanning and the !ull range o! re-roductive health services universally availa9le
early in the ne0t century.... In the (orthC a commitment is necessary to hel- -rovide Mnancial #here#ithal to reali>e an integrated glo9al -o-ulation strat: egy.... In the SouthC
a corres-onding commitment is needed to ma;e !amily -lan: ningC health care and #omen6s em-o#erment among the highest national -riori: ties. /very#here #e must have
and #e must generate the -olitical #ill at the high:est levels o! government to live u- to these res-onsi9ilities.11&
1)2
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
)ormer Secretary o! State 8adeleine Al9rightC then =.S. "ermanent Re-resentative to the =nited (ationsC reiterated the need !or coo-eration and commitment at the 1..$
4eiIing Con!erence,
2e thin; #omen and men should 9e a9le to ma;e in!ormed Iudgments as they -lan their !amilies.... 2e have come to 4eiIing to ma;e !urther -rogress to#ard Zthis goal[. 4ut
real -rogress #ill de-end not on #hat #e say hereC 9ut on #hat #e do a!ter #e leave here. +he )ourth 2orld Con!erence is not a9out conversationsG it is a9out
commitments.117
In a 1... statement to the =nited (ations General Assem9ly during CairoX$C then =ndersecretary o! State )ran; /. %oy stated,
+he =.S. #ill continue to #or; to e0-and access toC and 5uality o!C !amily -lanning and other re-roductive health services. Bital to this o9Iective is insuring that #omen and
men have the #idest -ossi9le choice o! modern contrace-tive methods availa9le to them. 2e #ill also #or; to im-rove !urther the 5uality o! care in re-ro: ductive health
services and to strengthen the lin;ages 9et#een re-roductive health and child survival -rograms.11*
A!ter 4eiIingX$C the =.S. government again gave its -ledge to !ulMll the o9Iectives o! the 4eiIing Con!erence through =SAID,
In Se-tem9er 1..$C the =nited States #as one o! 1*. countries to -artici-ate in the =( )ourth Con!erence on 2omenC held in 4eiIingC ChinaC and to ado-tC unani: mouslyC the
4eiIing Declaration and "lat!orm !or Action.... %i;e many o! the sig: natories to the "lat!orm !or ActionC the =nited States undertoo; dual res-onsi9ili: ties. All countries
-ledged to -ursue to the 9est o! their a9ilities the "lat!orm6s goals in their national la#s and -u9lic -olicies. As a maIor donor country #ith
su9stantial resources to assist the develo-ment o! -oorer countriesC the =nited States also
committed to integrating the o9Iectives o! the 4eiIing consensus into its !oreign assistance
-rograms.11.
ContinuedG
1))
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
!uman Rights ,eadershi8Lunding Ke3
ContinuedG
IB. +he =.S. Has )ailed in its Commitments to Re-roductive Rights
A. I(S=))ICI/(+ )=(DI(G
In recent yearsC the =.S. government has !altered in its commitment to the -rinci-les o!
re-roductive rights 9y !ailing to -rovide su<icient resources !or o<icial develo-ment assistance
and the international -o-ulation assistance -rogram. Although the =.S. has 9een a leader in
!amily -lanning assistance since the 1.&1sC it is currently !ailing to -ro:vide its share o! needed
!unding. 4ecause o! its si>e and #ealthC the =.S. remains one o! the largest 9ilateral donors to international !amily -lanning -rogramsG111 ho#everC the =.S. ran;s last
out o! 22 maIor donors in its contri9ution relative to gross national -roduct.111 +he amount o! the =.S.6s o<icial develo-ment assistance !alls !ar short o! the 1.7 Y o! G("
endorsed 9y the international community. In Mscal year 1...C the =.S. -rovided a mere 1.1 Y o! its G(" !or o<icial develo-ment assistanceC112a Mgure that has actually
declined since then des-ite the a!orementioned international -ledges to meet higher goals. Des-ite commitments made 9y the =.S. at the maIor international !oraC the =.S.
Congress im-osed harsh limits and decreased the availa9ility o! !unds !or the =.S. inter: national !amily -lanning assistance -rogram. (ot only has the =.S. !ailed to meet
international standards regarding the amount it contri9utes in o<icial develo-ment assistanceC 9ut it has violated its -ledge to increase !unding !or !amily -lanning and
develo-ment. +he =nited States has seriously #avered in its commitments to voluntary !amily
-lanning and re-roductive health since 1..4. A--ro-riations !or =SAID !amily -lanning assistance -lummeted !rom a high o! L$41.&
million in Mscal year O)AQ 1..$ to L$& million in )A 1..&. )ive leading =.S. research organi>ations conservatively estimated that this $Y reduction in !unding alone resulted
in 4 million un-lanned -regnanciesC 1.& million a9ortionsC *C111 maternal deathsC and 14C111 in!ant deaths due to increased high:ris; 9irths.11 +he !unding levels !or Mscal
years 1..7:1... increased slightly to L*$ million and again !ell to L72.$ million in )A 2111. +he level rose to L42$ million !or )A 2111C 9ut there are currently indications
that high:level -ersonnel #ithin the Administration #ould li;e to cut !unding once again. In the !ace o! tremen: dous -overty throughout the #orldC the =.S. !oreign assistance
e0-enditures as a #hole encom-ass less than one hal! o! one -ercent o! the total =.S. 9udgetG !amily -lanning and re-roductive health -rograms com-rise only a small !raction
o! that amount. Congress must ta;e the lead in increasing !unding levels.
4. =(D/83CRA+IC R/S+RIC+I3(S
4oth Congress and the Administration have introduced harsh and 9urdensome rules governing the distri9ution o! !amily -lanning assistance !unds since the 1.71s. In 1.7C
the )oreign Assistance Act #as amended 9y a -rovisionC ;no#n as the Helms AmendmentC #hich -rohi9its the use o! !ederal money E!or the -er!ormance o! a9or:tions as a
method o! !amily -lanning or to motivate or coerce any -erson to -ractice a9ortions.F114 +his -rovision has 9een inter-reted to -rohi9it =.S. !unding !or all a9or:tions overseas
e0ce-t those to save the li!e o! a #oman or in cases o! ra-e or incestG ho#everC according to =SAID o<icialsC the =.S. has not -rovided any !unding !or a9or:tionsC even under
those e0ce-tions.11$ In 1.*4C the Reagan Administration im-osed the so:called E8e0ico City "olicyCF also ;no#n as the Eglo9al gag ruleCF #hich -rohi9ited overseas non:
governmental organi>a:tions !rom receiving =.S. !unds i!C #ith their o#n !unds and in accordance #ith the la#s o! their o#n countriesC they E-er!ormZed[F or Eactively
-romoteZd[ a9ortion as a method o! !amily -lanning.F11& )urtherC the Reagan Administration issued e0tremely restrictive regulations that inter-reted the -hrase Ea9ortion as
a method o! !amily -lan: ningF to mean all a9ortionsC e0ce-t #hen -er!ormed in cases o! ra-eC incestC or #hen the li!e O9ut not healthQ o! the #oman #ould 9e endangered i!
the !etus #as carried to term.117 +he Clinton Administration ended the glo9al gag rule in 1.. 9y e0ecutive order.11* Ho#everC =.S. congressional !oes o! !amily -lanning
and a9ortion rights continued to see; #ays to create o9stacles !or =.S. !amily -lanning and re-roductive health -ro: grams. As noted a9oveC in )A 1..&C Congress cut !unds
!or !amily -lanning assistance 9y $ Y and im-osed com-le0 s-ending restrictionsC -ermitting the release o! !unds only in small monthly installments O;no#n as EmeteringFQ.
In )A 1..7C Congress enacted un-recedented and cum9ersome rules governing the release o! =SAID !amily -lanning and re-roductive health !unds. 4e!ore such !unds could
9e releasedC the -resident #as re5uired to ma;e a MndingC and Congress to a--rove itC that delaying a metered release o! !unds until Duly 1..7C rather than releas: ing !unds in
8arch 1..7C #ould have a negative im-act on the -ro-er !unctioning o! the !amily -lanning -rogram.11. "resident Clinton made such a Mnding and issued an accom-anying
re-ort.121 4y a narro# marginC Congress a--roved o! the "resident6s MndingC and !unds #ere released in 8arch rather than Duly 1..7. In )A 1..* and )A 1...C Congress
again delayed release o! !unds through meteringC this time #ithout -ro: visions !or considering -residential Mndings.121 +hese ultra:conservative mem9ers o! Congress
ina--ro-riately held -ayment o! =.S. arrears on its =nited (ations dues hostage to versions o! the glo9al gag rule 9y attach: ing riders to 9ills authori>ing the dues -ayment.
In 1...C through a Eone:year dealCF they tem-orarily re:im-osed a modiMed version o! the restrictionC to #hich "resident Clinton agreed in order to avoid loss o! the =.S. vote
in the =( General Assem9ly. In 2111C Congress and the Clinton Administration eliminated the glo9al gag rule !rom the )A 2111 a--ro-riations legislationC 9ut #ithheld the
release o! international !amily -lanning !unding until )e9ruary 1$C 2111C allo#ing the ne# -resident to decide #hether to re:im-ose the -olicy. 3n Danuary 22C 2111C "resident
George 2. 4ush re:im-osed the glo9al gag rule on the =SAID -o-ulation -rogram. %i;e the E8e0ico City "olicyCF this gag rule restricts non:
governmental organi>ations that receive =SAID !amily -lanning !unds !rom using their o#nC
non:=.S. !unds to -rovide legal a9ortion servicesC lo99y their o#n governments !or a9ortion la#
re!ormC or even -rovide accurate medical counseling or re!errals regarding a9ortion. AdditionallyC
=SAID and re-roductive health organi>ations must no# e0-end resources in overseeing the re5uirements under the glo9al gag ruleC thus even !urther diverting resources
a#ay !rom the -rovision o! !amily -lanning and re-roductive health services. 3--onents o! international !amily -lanning and
related health -rograms continue to #or; !or cuts and restrictions on !unding. +he cuts and
restrictions im-osed during recent yearsC and the threats to e0tend such measures into the
!utureC continue to cause a signiMcant increase in un-lanned -regnanciesC a9ortionsC maternal
and in!ant deathsC transmissions o! HIB and other se0ually transmitted in!ections.122
B. Conclusion
+he =.S. has -layed a dual role in the !ortunes o! re-roductive rights #orld#ide. +hat irony #as articulated 9y Andre# (atsiosC "resident 4ush6s Administrator !or =SAID,
4ecause o! our nation6s e<ortsC #e have ... made great -rogress in addressing !am: ily healthC reducing maternal deaths last year and a9ortions. 8ore than M!ty mil: lion
cou-les in the develo-ing #orld ma;e more educated and in!ormed decisions a9out having children and ta;ing care o! them as a direct result o! =SAID:su-: -orted -rograms.
4ut againC our #or; is !ar !rom com-lete.12
3ne can loo; at the #ords o! o<icials such as 8r. (atsiosC Secretary o! State Colin "o#ellC and "resident 4ushC on the one handC and the -olicies their administration es-ouses
on the otherC and 9e struc; 9y the dis-arity. +he =.S. has -layed a ;ey role in the acce-tance o! re-roductive rights
as -art o! the ru9ric o! 9asic human rights. (o# the 4ush Administration and Congress must
move !rom hy-ocritical rhetoric to con: certed action in !ully su--orting and e0-anding the =.S.
international !amily -lanning and re-roductive health -rograms 9y eliminating 9urdensome
restrictions on those -ro: grams. +o -romote and -rotect the international human rightsC
including the rights to healthC !amily -lanningC and re-roductive sel!:determination o! millions
o! #omen around the #orldC #e urge Congress to revitali>e =.S. leadershi- in international
re-ro:ductive rights through a signiMcant increase in !unding'#ithout 9urdensome restric:
1)*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
tions'!or !amily -lanning and re-roductive health assistance.
1)/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8A"#$
&he gag rule destro3s 2amil3 lanning clinics and cuts of access to contracetion and
!"I/A"#$ treatment%
"lling5orth, )ro6ect 7anager or )lanned )arenthood 8lobal )artners9 2000 (:ets!9 Planned Parenthood Federation of America9 ;<he
8lobal 8ag *ule9= >anuar! 2
nd
9 20049 http://www.plannedparenthood.org/news?articles?press/politics?polic!?issues/international?issues/gag?rule?
"$"0#.htm)
Access Denied, +he Glo9al Gag Rule Im-act "roIectC a Ioint research e<ort 9y "lanned
"arenthood )ederation o! AmericaC "o-ulation Action InternationalC an organi>ation committed
to advancing universal access to !amily -lanning and related health servicesC and I-asC an
international re-roductive health organi>ationC has documented some o! the early e<ects o! the
gag rule on organi>ations that have re!used to sign. %ess contrace-tion is availa9le.
\ In Cete dRIvoireC the Association Ivoirienne -our le 4ien:ftre )amilial OAI4/)Q lost L1*&C111
!or contrace-tive su--liesC eliminating contrace-tive services !rom nearly hal! o! its .2
distri9ution -oints.
\ In /thio-iaC the !amily -lanning association lost close to L$&C111 in contrace-tive su--lies.
\ +he )amily "lanning Association o! =ganda lost LC7. in contrace-tive su--lies.
\ +he "lanned "arenthood Association o! Nam9ia O""ANQ lost L17C1.2 in contrace-tive
su--lies.
Clinics have closed and services have 9een eliminated.
\ In CongoC the Association Congolaise -our le 4ien:ftre )amilial lost L17C111 in =.S.
assistanceC !orcing it to eliminate -rograms that served 1$C7. clients.
\ +he )amily "lanning Association o! 7enyaC #hich received an average o! L$*1C111 -er year
to !und its clinicsC had to close three ur9an clinics serving $&C111 -oor and underserved clients.
+he )amily Guidance Association o! /thio-ia O)GA/Q o-erates 1* clinicsC 24 youth service
centersC &71 community:9ased re-roductive health care sitesC and hundreds o! other health
care !acilities. +he glo9al gag rule has cost it more than L$11C111C even though a9ortion is
illegal in /thio-ia and the )GA/ doesnRt -rovide a9ortion services. It doesC ho#everC see; to
educate local -olicyma;ers a9out the role that unsa!e a9ortion -lays in /thio-iaRs staggering
maternal mortality rate. +he result is a loss o! services to 11C1$4 #omen and 22.C.47 men in
ur9an areas.
HIB?AIDS services are a<ected.
\ In CameroonC loss o! =.S. assistance !orced the !amily -lanning association to close a youth
center that taught young -eo-le a9out res-onsi9le -arenthood and se0ually transmitted
in!ectionsC including HIB?AIDS.
\ +he &.7C111 clients o! "lanned "arenthood Association o! Ghana #ill lose access not only to
!amily -lanning servicesC 9ut also to voluntary counseling and testingC other counseling
servicesC and HIB?AIDS -revention education.
\ +he St. %ucia "lanned "arenthood Association #as !orced to cancel -lans to train 21* S-eer
hel-ersS !rom eight secondary schools and one -rimary school. +his -rogram #ould have
reached 12C111 school:aged children #ith in!ormation a9out HIB -revention and se0ual and
re-roductive health.
1)0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8A"#$
&he gag rule harms A"#$ revention eforts%
+he gag rule negatively im-acts HIB?AIDS -revention e<orts. )amily -lanning -roviders have
develo-ed the e0-ertiseC services and in!ormation to counsel individuals a9out sa!er se0C hel-
-eo-le avoid high:ris; 9ehaviorsC and screen !or and treat se0ually transmitted in!ections OS+IsQ
that increase susce-ti9ility to HIB in!ection. Although it a--lies only to !amily -lanning !undsC
the gag rule -revents the =nited States !rom #or;ing #ith some o! the most e<ective !ront:line
-artners serving t#o o! the -o-ulations at greatest ris; o! S+IsC including HIB?AIDS H #omen
and youth.
&he gag rule revents all other !"I revention eforts in A2rica 2rom being efective%
Raleigh (e5s > ObserverC Duly 22C 2000.. So:Called RGlo9al Gag RuleR Has 8ade HIB?AIDSC "regnancy
"revention 8ore Di<icult !or 2omen 2orld#ideC 3-inion "iece Says.
htt-,??###.medicalne#stoday.com?articles?2*17.-h-.
Some =S -oliciesC such as the so:called Sglo9al gag ruleCS have Smade it harder !or #omen in
A!rica and else#here to -revent HIB?AIDS and un#anted -regnanciesCS /li>a9eth 8aguireC
-resident o! the nongovernmental organi>ation... I-as and !ormer director o! =SAIDRs 3<ice o!
"o-ulationC #rites in a Raleigh (e#s P 39server o-inion -iece O8aguireC Raleigh (e#s P
39serverC 7?22Q. +he Sglo9al gag ruleCS #hich also is ;no#n as the 8e0ico City -olicyC 9ars =.S.
money !rom going to international grou-s that su--ort a9ortion through direct servicesC
counseling or lo99ying activities O7aiser Daily HIB?AIDS Re-ortC &?14?14Q. =.S.:!unded clinics
#orld#ide -rovide ScrucialS re-roductive health:related servicesC including HIB?AIDS
-revention in!ormationC -renatal care and contrace-tionC 9ut the Snarro# ideological agenda o!
the religious right distortsS these e<ortsC 8aguire says. I! =.S. assistance over the -ast 1 years
had 9een used to im-rove access to contrace-tion and a9ortion careC the =.S. :: #hich is Sthe
#orldRs largest develo-ment donorS :: could have hel-ed save the lives o! more than 211C111
#omenC she #ritesC adding that instead Sthey are casualties o! =.S. domestic -olitical 9attles.S
/ven i! access to contrace-tion im-rovesC Smillions o! #omen #ill still have unintended
-regnancies and 9e e0-osed to HIB?AIDSCS #hich is S-articularly tragic 9ecause it is
-reventa9leCS 8aguire saysC concludingC SI! this administration truly cares a9out #omenC it
must -lace #omenRs lives a9ove domestic -olitical interestsC 9eginning #ith the re-eal o! the
glo9al gag rule.F
&he gag rule increases the sread o2 !"I%
Dr. /unice 6roo-man:AmissahC !ormer 8inister o! Health and Am9assador !or the Re-u9lic o! Ghana. Decem9er
$C 200/. htt-,??###.e!c.org.u;?)oryoung-eo-le?)actsa9outa9ortion?+heGlo9alGagRule
8any organisations dedicated to -roviding contrace-tive health careC running HIB -revention
-rogrammes and caring !or -regnant #omen and mothers have had their !unding cut as a result
o! this -olicy. +hey say the conse5uences o! the Glo9al Gag Rule have 9een devastating : they
re-ort, )e#er re-roductive health care clinics and services availa9le. %ess use o!
contrace-tion.%ess understanding o! sa!er se0 methods. An increase in unintended -regnancies.
An increase in Se0ually +ransmitted In!ections OS+IsQC including HIB?AIDS. A se-aration o!
a9ortion services !rom contrace-tive services so that #omen having a9ortions are not receiving
contrace-tive advice and treatment to -revent !uture -regnancies. )e#er health a#areness
-roIects to give out in!ormationC advice and contrace-tives. An increase in inIury and in!ection
1)7
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
!rom unsa!e a9ortion. An increase in the incidence o! maternal mortality Odeaths o! -regnant
#omen and mothersQ. Rather than -reventing a9ortionC some critics say it has achieved
-recisely the o--osite, dContrary to its stated intentionsC the 8e0ico City "olicy results in more
un#anted -regnanciesC more unsa!e a9ortionsC and more deaths o! #omen and girls.6
1):
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8A"#$8Women7s Rights
&he gag rule undermines the legal rights o2 A2rican 5omen8reversing this trend is
critical to revent !"I sread%
+he 8e0ico City "olicy undermines the legal rights o! #omen #ith HIB?AIDS and their -artners
to 9e res-ected and su--orted #hen see;ing to learn a9out and e0ercise their !ull range o!
re-roductive o-tions. n172 In Nim9a9#eC !or e0am-leC the 1.77 +ermination o! "regnancy Act
-rovides that a9ortion may 9e legally -er!ormed #hen the -regnancy re-resents a serious
threat to the #omanRs -hysical health. n17 +his language #ould -erha-s -ermit a9ortion
9ased on the -ro9a9le health ris;s that a #oman #ith HIB?AIDS #ould e0-erience #ith
-regnancy. n174 Aet the a--lication o! the 8e0ico City "olicy to clinics that #ould other#ise
-rovide these services de-rives #omen o! the a9ility to e0ercise their rights under the 1.77 Act
and control their re-roductive health decisions. n17$ +he 8e0ico City "olicy admittedly does
not inter!ere #ith a #omanRs a<irmative decision to 9ear children. n17& HIB:-ositive #omen in
countries including 7enya and South A!rica have cited various reasons Z\21$[ !or deciding to
9ear childrenC such as #anting to e0-erience motherhoodC #anting to 9e considered truly
SadultS in societyC #anting to leave something o! themselves 9ehindC and ;no#ing that their
children #ill Mnd care once they die. n177 In addition to su--orting these decisions and
hel-ing such mothers -revent transmission to their childrenC ho#everC rotecting a 5omanAs
legal right not to bear children is ivotal 2or reventing the sread o2 !"I/A"#$ and
contri9uting to HIB?AIDS develo-ment in su9:Saharan A!rica. n17*
&he gag rule rein2orces atriarchal values globall3 and increases the sread o2 A"#$ b3
decreasing education and access to contracetives%
Dessica Io4el. O#riter !or north star #riting grou- on current -olitical issuesQ. Dune 2$C 2007. =.S. Hy-ocrisy in
3verseas A9ortion )unding. htt-,??###.northstar#riters.com?Iv111.htm.
+he 9an is not only -atriarchal and detrimental to -u9lic health 9ut also ma;es little sense in
the scheme o! #hat 4ush and other conservative la#ma;ers are trying to accom-lish in the Mrst
-lace. "rimarilyC =.S. donations have 9een in the !orm o! contrace-tive aidC either 9y -roviding
contrace-tives themselves or !unds used to advocate and distri9ute them. 4utC according to
Reagan6s 9anC any grou- that advocates a9ortion along #ith contrace-tives cannot receive aid
o! any ;ind. SoC essentiallyC in order to reduce the num9er o! a9ortions 9eing -er!ormedC the
=.S. government restricts -u9lic access to contrace-tives. According to House Re-u9licans in
o--osition to the reversal set !orth this #ee;C o<ering contrace-tive aid to grou-s that -er!orm
or advocate a9ortion services #ould !ree u- !unding that #ould allo# !or more a9ortions to 9e
-er!ormed. In many casesC ho#everC it is contrace-tive !unding that is cut to allo# !or essential
re-roductive health -rograms that save #omen6s lives in areas #here -u9lic health systems are
!ailing or none0istent. Contrace-tives are the single most via9le #ea-on against un#anted
-regnancy and a9ortionC yet they are -recisely #hat conservative la#ma;ers are ta;ing a#ayC and #ith dire
conse5uences that go 9eyond un-lanned -regnancies and a9ortion. In case a!ter heart9rea;ing case H in /thio-iaC
=gandaC Nam9iaC 7enya and Ghana H a loss o! =.S. !unding !orced #omen6s clinics and centers that educate the
-u9lic a9out HIB?AIDS to close their doors. +he health o! 9oth se0es around the glo9e is in Ieo-ardy 9ecause o! an
ideological agenda that -laces the value o! -otential human li!e over that o! e0isting human li!e. In the case o! the
Glo9al Gag Rule and other -olicies regarding re-roductive health #orld#ideC -olitics are trum-ing reason time and
time again. Common sense dictates that i! you ta;e a#ay contrace-tive aidC !e#er -eo-le #ill have access to themC
and more -regnancies and a9ortions #ill resultC even #here a9ortion is illegal. It is not accurate to assume
that #ithout contrace-tivesC se0ual activity #ill cease. A9stinence education !ails here in the
=nited StatesC yet la#ma;ers e0-ect it to 9e taught in +hird 2orld countries as the solution to
1);
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
un#anted -regnancies and the HIB?AIDS e-idemic. Although I su--ort the legality o! a9ortion
in the =nited StatesC it seems hy-ocritical that #e as a nation allo# them to 9e -er!ormedC yet
dictate to other countries #hether or not they shall receive !unding 9ased on their a9ortion
stance. It is as i! la#ma;ers in the =nited States reali>e that Roe v. 2ade is here to stayC and
thus must e0tend their -atriarchal reach to countries #here democracy is !ragile at 9est. I!
anythingC access to sa!e a9ortion should 9e more im-ortant in +hird 2orld countriesC #here a ne# 9a9y can mean
having to stretch already scarce 5uantities o! !oods even !urtherC sometimes resulting in undernourishment and death
o! e0isting !amily mem9ers. In many o! these countriesC ho#everC a9ortion is illegalC and is li;ely to stay that #ay
9ecause organi>ations there can6t even s-ea; out a9out a9ortion in !ear o! losing essential !unding !rom the =nited
States. Democrats deserve credit !or 9ringing this issue to the -olitical !ore!rontC even i! the measure they -ut
!or#ard never ma;es it -ast the -resident. All too o!tenC #omen6s re-roductive health is a 9ac;9urner issue #hen it
comes to !oreign -olicyC es-ecially #hen ideological issues are involved. It6s time !or changeC and the #orld can6t
a<ord to #ait until 211* !or that shi!t to 9egin.
1*0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8A"#$8Women7s Rights
"ncreasing e.ualit3 2or 5omen is critical to stem the sread o2 A"#$%
Gollub 00 visiting -ro!essor o! e-idemiologyC Institut de Santg "u9li5ueC d6h-idgmiologie et de Dgvelo--ementC
4ordeau0C )rance. O/ricaC International )amily "lanning "ers-ectivesC EChoice Is /m-o#ering, Getting Strategic
A9out "reventing HIB In!ection in 2omenFC Bolume 2C (um9er 4C Decem9er 211&C
htt-,??###.guttmacher.org?-u9s?Iournals?221.1&.htmlQ
Since the late 1.*1s and early 1..1sC #e have come a considera9le distance in recogni>ing that
success!ul HIB -revention #or; among #omen means the ado-tion o! a #oman:centered
-aradigmC one that is grounded in #omenRs realities and ac;no#ledges gender roles and gender:9ased -o#er di<erentials as
critical !actors in #omenRs a9ility to ma;e and e<ect decisions regarding their health and #el!are. 2e have learned that most
#omen around the #orld cannot control male condom useC and #e have 9egun to understand that #omenRs attitudes to#ard and
use o! -rotective methods are 9ased on -ersonalC relationalC sociocultural and structural !actorsC #ith a di<erent mi0 !or each
#oman. HIB -revention has re5uired us to #or; on t#o levels, to achieve long:termC structural
change in #omenRs statusC and to -rovide #omen #ith tools !or -rotection over the short term.1
2e have no# recogni>ed the limits o! a sole de-endence on the male condom. Although this device is
highly e<ective against se0ually transmitted -athogens #hen used correctly and consistentlyC male control over the male condom
undermines its real:#orld im-act. As a resultC large:scale male condom cam-aigns over the Mrst t#o decades o! the HIB e-idemic
have 9een inade5uate as a -u9lic health strategy. Recent studies o! =.S. #omen at high HIB ris; sho# that
the -ro-ortion o! -rotected se0 acts rarely e0ceeds 1$YC a statistic that has not changed over
the -ast decade.2 2omen in develo-ing countries are o!ten not -rotected at all. /ven i! a
#omanRs -artner agrees to use male condomsC decades o! e0-erience !rom the Meld o! !amily
-lanning have demonstrated the need !or multi-le o-tions. 2e have 9een o-erating under the
collective illusion that in the case o! HIB -reventionC this #ould not 9e the case. 3ur stu99orn
insistence on -resenting the male condom as a S111Y methodS has -layed right into the hands
o! those #ho argue that advocating male condom use to -revent HIB in!ection underserves
#omen 9ecause it e0-oses them to OoccasionalQ !ailures and does not ma;e the most o! #omenRs
S-o#erS in saying no to se0. 2e have seen the credi9ility o! the male condom damaged over the
-ast several years 9y disin!ormation cam-aignsC and the language o! re-roductive rights
t#isted to disem-o#er #omen. "recious resources that could have 9een used !or -revention are
no# 9eing #asted in countering these attac;s. )uture HIB -revention e<orts should !ocus on
the -otential !or a given methodC -rogram or -olicy to increase a #omanRs a9ility to control her
re-roductive healthC rather than on -roduct e<icacy values that a--ly to a narro# set o! users
under highly mani-ulated conditions.
1*1
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8A"#$8Mother to Child &ransmission
Lamil3 lanning is vital to reducing mother to child !"I transmission%
+rata? 00 "ro!essor o! "u9lic Health at the =niversity o! Cali!ornia H 4er;eleyC #ith 11 years o! clinical -ractice in
Angola O(dolaC E"o-ulation Gro#th and its Im-act on 8aternal HealthCF htt-,??###.a--g:
-o-devrh.org.u;?"u9lications?"o-ulationY21Hearings?/vidence?=niY21o!Y21CalY21evidence.docQ
0n 200# the @AB01S estimated that "-.# million women were li'ing with C0D (one million more than in 200$). <went!?i'e
percent o them ha'e unmet need or contraception9 representing roughl! ,., million C0DE women in need o contraception.
Famil! planning is one the most cost?eecti'e wa!s o pre'enting mother?to?child transmission . (learl!9 a womanFs abilit! to
plan how man! children she wants and when she wants them is central to the 5ualit! o her lie. <he abilit! to control ertilit! can
be gi'en through amil! planning programs that ha'e an eect on both population siGe and maternal and child health.
1*2
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
&he gag rule revents access to contracetion8this guarantees the sread o2 A"#$ in
sub9$aharan A2rica%
$t% +etersburg &imesC 200)% htt-,??###.actu-ny.org?re-orts?glo9algagrule.html
+here is nothing magical a9out the #ay to sto- a se0ually transmitted ;iller. I! a -o-ulation is
not going to a9stain !rom se0 : and even many Catholic -riests canRt seem to accom-lish that
!eat : then -rotection against transmission is the 9est de!ense. 4ut su9:Saharan A!ricaC home to
1:million o! the #orldRs 41:million HIB?AIDS su<erersC is suddenly !acing a condom shortage.
)amily -lanning clinics !rom /thio-ia to S#a>iland have had their American:donated su--lies
shar-ly reduced or cut o<G and #e can than; our -resident and his religious right -olitics !or
this. "resident 4ush reinstated the 8e0ico City "olicyC also ;no#n as the glo9al gag ruleC as one
o! his Mrst o<icial acts. It #as also one o! his meanest. +he -olicy 9ars organi>ations that
receive =.S. international !amily -lanning !unds !rom having anything to do #ith a9ortionG even
uttering the #ord in counseling is ver9oten. Ronald Reagan gets the credit !or this -olitical
stro;eC announced at the 1.*4 8e0ico City Con!erence on "o-ulation. It #as a #ay to s-read an
antia9ortion agenda around the #orld : delighting the religious right : #ithout doing much
-olitical damage at home. Americans notoriously have little interest in #hat our government
does relative to the develo-ing #orld. 4ill Clinton retracted the -olicy and 4ush resurrected it.
+hin; o! it as our culture #ars e0-orted. So ho# has 4ushRs 8e0ico City -olicy 9een im-acting
#omen in A!ricaK A ne# re-ort titled SAccess DeniedCS -ut out 9y "o-ulation Action
International and a !e# other s-onsoring organi>ationsC lays out the harms. In 7enyaC Mve
esta9lished clinics have closedG some #ere the only a<orda9le re-roductive health services in
the area. 3ne #as located in 7isumuC a to#n #ith the highest HIB -revalance rates in the
country. In %esothoC #here one in every !our #omen su<ers !rom HIB?AIDSC the %esotho
"lanned "arenthood Association no longer receives any donated condoms !rom =SAIDC the =.S.
government agency that doles out !amily -lanning money and su--lies. During the years 1..*
to 2111C the %esotho grou- had received 42&C111 donated condoms. In shortC than;s to the
closure o! medical clinics and reductions in su--lies #rought 9y the -olicyC more A!ricans #ill
contract HIBC more mothers #ill transmit it to their 9a9ies and more o! the -o-ulation #ill die.
+hose tend to 9e the calculations in -laces li;e %esotho #hen a li!eline gets snatched 9ac;.
&he gag rule is reventing A2rican countries 2rom accessing condoms that are -e3 to
revent the sread o2 !"I8onl3 increasing 2unding solves%
$t% +etersburg &imes? 200)% htt-,??###.actu-ny.org?re-orts?glo9algagrule.html
=SAID is the single largest donor o! condoms in the develo-ing #orldC -roviding L7$:million
#orth annuallyC or a9out a third o! all donations. AetC according to the "AI re-ortC 1& -oor
countries in A!ricaC Asia and the 8iddle /ast have 9een cut o< !rom =SAID condom shi-ments
9ecause their !amily -lanning grou-s are associated #ith the International "lanned "arenthood
)ederationC #hich re!uses to sign the antia9ortion -ledge. In another 1 countriesC including
/thio-ia and Nam9iaC the nationsR leading -roviders o! re-roductive health services also no
longer receive =SAID condom su--lies. S+his Ogag ruleQ is an antia9ortion -olicy : #hy is it
a<ecting !amily -lanning su--liesKS as;s 2endy +urn9ullC legislative -olicy analyst #ith
"o-ulation Action International and an author o! the re-ort. SOCondomsQ canRt 9e used to
-romote a9ortionC theyRre trying to hel- #omen avoid a9ortion.S +hat is the sad t#ist in all this.
4ush claims to care a9out stemming the AIDS -andemic in A!rica. He #as in A!rica this
summerC eyes #elling as AIDS or-hans sang America the 4eauti!ulC -ledging 9illions in
assistance. And he is certainly antia9ortion. +his is the man #ho held 9ac; the most -romising
1*)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
area o! medical science #ith his nutty stem cell s;ittishness. 4ut sto--ing the su--ly o!
condoms to organi>ations that counsel clients on all legal re-roductive health o-tions is leading
ine0ora9ly to HIBRs s-read and a rise in un#anted -regnancies and a9ortions. Hillary )y!eC
chair o! the )amily %i!e 8ovement o! Nam9iaC #hich counsels young -eo-le on a9stinenceC
re-roductive issues and HIB -revention in nine -rovincesC says the !unding cuts have 9een
devastating. +here is not a donated condom to 9e had in the regionCScom-letely nothingCS she
saysC and S#hen the Oyoung #omenQ !all -regnant they have no -lace to go. +hey ta;e a ;nitting
needle and -ush it do#n or they go in the 9ush and dig u- a -oisonous root and -ush it do#n.
Hal! the time they die.S
1**
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
&he gag rule inhibits condom distribution at 2amil3 lanning centers%
!ernande49&ru3olC 8a9ie P %evin "ro!essor o! %a#C 2000 O4erta /s-eran>aC =.C. Davis Dournal o!
International %a# P "olicyC E3n Dis-osa9le "eo-le and Human 2ell:4eing, HealthC 8oney and "o#erCF )allC 211&C
%e0isQ

+here are clear and intricate lin;ages 9et#een e0istence and delivery o! re-roductive health
services and diseaseC s-eciMcally HIB?AIDS. (onethelessC although the -olicy does not a--ly to
se-arate HIB?AIDS !undsC the loss o! !unding due to the Glo9al Gag Rule has a<ected not only
the e0istence o! locales !or the delivery o! re-roductive health services and educationC #hich
include instruction on HIB transmission and its -reventionC 9ut also o! su--lies such as
condoms #hich -lay a signiMcant role in HIB transmission -revention. +husC even i! -erha-s
unintentionallyC the gag rule has also -ut =SAID:su--orted !amily -lanning (G3s in the
di<icult -osition o! having to deny their clients the -rovision o! contrace-tive and disease
-revention services to #hich they are legally entitled and that the ruleC in theory and intentC is
not meant to reach. 1$1 )rom an international la# -ers-ective the rule also e<ects an
im-erialistic move that undercuts statesR sovereignty. Countries and their Z\&1[ agentsC that
are de-endent u-on !oreign !unding assistance !or the attainment o! im-ortant domestic goalsC
may 9ecome una9le to -ursue them 9ecause o! the gag ruleRs restrictions. 3rgani>ations that
re!use to sign the Standard Clause acce-ting the limitation on the use o! !unding are -recluded
!rom o<ering the su--ort needed to train and e5ui- -roviders o! sa!eC legal a9ortion care.
8oreoverC they lose access to =.S. donated contrace-tivesC including condoms. 8odern
contrace-tives ena9le #omen and men to -revent un#anted -regnancyC to -rotect themselves
against HIB?AIDSC and to avoid unsa!e a9ortions : a leading cause o! maternal inIuryC illnessC
and death in the develo-ing #orld. +he =SAID and =( "o-ulation )und are the largest donors
o! contrace-tivesC including condomsC to the develo-ing #orld. 1$1 +he =SAIDC the most
im-ortant single donorC 9et#een its -rocuring and delivering !unctionsC \\\\\\\\ !or more than
one:third o! all donated su--lies. Such contri9utions translate to a--ro0imately L 7$ million =S
-er year. 1$2 In 2111C donors -rovided Iust over .$1 million condoms. +his amounts to less than
one:eighth o! the num9er necessary to attain the level o! access re5uired to signiMcantly reduce
9oth HIB in!ection and -revalence rates in develo-ing countries and /astern /uro-e. 1$ 8ost
#omen in develo-ing states e0ist at a level o! -overty in #hich they lac; the economic means to
have relia9le access to contrace-tives. Some -o-ulations are es-ecially vulnera9le to the lac; o!
accessC including adolescentsC re!ugeesC victims o! se0ual coercion or violenceC and those
su<ering !rom acute or chronic diseases such as HIB?AIDS. 1$4 +o 9e sureC although the gag
rule does not technically a--ly to HIB?AIDS !unds !rom the =SAIDC it nevertheless ham-ers HIB
-revention e<orts. 1$$ 2hen !amily -lanning organi>ations re!use to acce-t the terms o! the
gag ruleC the se0ually transmitted in!ection -revention services Oincluding HIB -revention
servicesQ as #ell as the condom su--lies that those organi>ations #ould routinely -rovide are
either undermined or no longer availa9le. 1$&
1*/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Contracetives Good8A"#$
Contracetion surs resonsible se<ual behaviors and revents the sread o2 disease%
Giuse--e 6enagiano et alC De-artment o! Gynaecological SciencesC "erinatology and Child CareC =niversity Rla
Sa-ien>aRC RomeC 8arch 2007. EContrace-tion, A social revolutionCF /uro-ean Dournal o! Contrace-tion P
Re-roductive Health Care.
Another im-ortant area is that o! se0ually:transmitted in!ections OS+IsQ. Contrace-tion can 9e a
very use!ul tool in educating adolescents and young -eo-le to ado-t more res-onsi9le se0ual
9ehaviors. IndeedC it has 9een -ointed out that the concerns and motivations underlying
contrace-tive 9ehaviors in young #omen di<er de-ending on the ty-e o! -artner. 2omen #ith
one main -artner -erceive a lo# ris; !or S+Is and they use condoms mosdy to avoid -regnancyC
#hile young #omen #ith a casual -artner more o!ten re-ort com9ined use o! condoms and
hormonal contrace-tives42. )or this reasonC the =S De-artment o! Health and Human
Services4 recommends that se0ually active adolescents use 9oth condoms and hormonal
contrace-tives to -revent -regnancy and S+Is. +his has come to 9e ;no#n as the Rdual methodR.
Access to contracetion is essential to revent the sread o2 A"#$%
!uman Rights (e5s. Danuary 27C 2007. htt-,??hr#.org?english?docs?211&?11?1&?usdom14&27.htm O-age 1Q.
Condoms are the single most e<ective technology to -rotect against se0ual transmission o!
HIB?AIDSC a disease that ;illed u- to .$ million -eo-le in 211 alone and in!ected u- to $.*
million others.2 =nsa!e se0ual -ractices remain the dominant mode o! HIB transmission in most
regions o! the #orld. In AsiaC #here an estimated 7.2 million adults and children are living #ith
HIBC lo# condom use among se0 #or;ers and their clients \\\\\\\\ !or a su9stantial -ro-ortion
o! ne# HIB in!ections. 2ides-read and consistent condom use has 9een sho#n to reduce the
num9er o! -eo-le in!ected #ith HIB enough to slo# the s-read o! AIDS.4 8ultilateral
organi>ations such as the 2orld Health 3rgani>ation and the Doint =nited (ations "rogramme
on HIB?AIDS O=(AIDSQ recommend condoms as an essential intervention against HIB. Relative
to their e<ectiveness at -reventing HIBC ho#everC condoms are a scarce and restricted
commodity. +he 2orld Health 3rgani>ation estimated in August 211 that 9illions o! condoms
#ere needed to -revent the escalation o! the AIDS e-idemic in AsiaC including more than 1
9illion condoms in China alone.$ Glo9allyC the ga- 9et#een the num9er o! condoms needed !or
HIB -revention and the num9er availa9le #as estimated in 2111 at any#here !rom 1$ to 1*
9illion condoms.& In develo-ing countriesC many o! #hich rely -rinci-ally on international
donors !or condom su--liesC only .$1 million o! the estimated * 9illion condoms needed to
achieve a EsigniMcant reductionF in HIB in!ection'less than one eighth o! those needed'#ere
donated in 2111.7 +he average international -rice o! a male late0 condom is =.S.L1.1 Othree
centsQC including the costs o! sam-lingC testing and shi--ing.*c In 2112C =nited (ations
"o-ulation )und /0ecutive Director +horaya 39aid #arned that EZi[n all o! the ZHIB?AIDS[:
a<ected countriesC the su--ly o! condoms is !ar short o! #hat is needed.F. Such su--ly ga-s are
accom-anied 9y an e5ually dire scarcity o! in!ormation. In its 2112 glo9al AIDS re-ortC =(AIDS
stated that EZa[lmost every#hereC se0ually active young -eo-le Oes-ecially young #omenQ are
denied in!ormation a9out condoms.F11 Condom shortages stem not only !rom resource
constraintsC 9ut also !rom deli9erate government -olicies that restrict condom manu!actureC
-rocurementC distri9utionC and in!ormation on their use. Such -olicies may limit distri9ution o!
condoms in -u9lic -lacesC censor in!ormation a9out condoms in schoolsC regulate im-ort o!
condoms manu!actured a9roadC or invest -u9lic !unds in -rograms that ma;e !alse or
misleading claims a9out condoms.11 8any governments !ail to streamline administrative
re5uirements regarding condom storageC logistics and -urchasingC creating the -otential !or
1*0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
#astage and inJated -rices. )e# have a national strategy or #or;ing grou- on re-roductive
health su--lies that #ould ensure e5ual access to condomsC -articularly among high:ris; grou-s
and -eo-le living in rural areas. +oo o!tenC governments !ail to -romote condoms and im-art
necessary s;ills and ;no#ledge !or !ear that doing so #ill -romote se0ual activity or 9irth
control.
1*7
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Condoms "ncrease A"#$
Condoms revent the sread o2 A"#$8all studies to the contrar3 ignore science%
!uman Rights (e5s. Danuary 27C 2007. htt-,??hr#.org?english?docs?211&?11?1&?usdom14&27.htm O-age 1Q.
Although condoms are not 111 -ercent e<ectiveC 9road o9Iections to condoms as an HIB
-revention strategy Mnd no basis in science . %a9oratory tests sho# that no S+D -athogenC
including HIBC can -ermeate an intact late0 condom.7 4oth the 2H3 and =(AIDS recommend
the use o! condoms against HIBC stating in August 2111 that EZt[he consistent use o! male late0
condoms signiMcantly reduces the ris; o! HIB in!ection in men and #omen.F74 +his statement
!ollo#ed an e0tensive revie# o! condom e<ectiveness convened 9y the =.S. (ational Institutes
o! Health O(IHQ in 2111C in #hich the com9ined analysis o! several studies sho#ed an *$
-ercent decrease in ris; o! HIB transmission among consistent condom users versus non:
users.7$ Studies o! sero:discordant cou-lesC in #hich one -artner is in!ected #ith HIB and the
other is notC sho# thatC #ith consistent condom useC the HIB in!ection rate among unin!ected
-artners is less than 1 -ercent -er year.7& Condoms can also have some e<ect against H"B 9y
hastening the regression o! lesions in the cervi0 and on the -enis and 9y s-eeding u- clearance
o! the virusC according to t#o Dutch studies -u9lished in the International Dournal o! Cancer in
Decem9er 211.77 A 211 =(AIDS:s-onsored study estimated that !actors such as 9rea;ageC
sli--age and im-ro-er use lead to condom ine<ectiveness in a--ro0imately 11 -ercent o!
cases.7*
&he usage o2 condoms revents the sread o2 !"I/A"#$%
$tone? et al : )ello# !or %a# and the "u9licRs Health at the Center !or %a# and the "u9licRs Health at
Georgeto#n and Dohns Ho-;ins =niversitiesC 211 H 200* O%esleyC 12 8ich. St. D. IntRl %. 2$ CE2hen the Right to
Health and the Right to Religion ConJict, A Human Rights AnalysisCF Hein 3nline Data9aseQ
2ith the AIDS -andemic continuing to un!oldC the #orld has sought to Mnd e<ective #ays to
stem the tide o! the disease. 3ne measure -roven to com9at the transmission o! AIDS is condom
usage.2K1 ScientiMc evidence has demonstrated une5uivocally that condoms can im-ede the
transmission o! se0ually transmitted in!ections and the virus that causes AIDS. In 2111C a
num9er o! =.S. !ederal agencies s-on: sored a #or;sho- to e0amine the evidence on the
e<ectiveness o! late0 male condom usage !or the -revention o! transmission o! in!ection during
intercourse.2R +he 2or;sho- e0amined a num9er o! -u9lished studiesC and issued a summary
re-ort. +he re-ort concluded that Scon: doms are highly e<ective 9arriers to virus -assage #ith
a very small chance o! lea;ageSR2 and that SZi[ntact condoms . . . are essentially im-ermea9le
to -articles the si>e o! S+D -athogens Oincluding the smallest se0ually transmitted virusC
he-atitis 4Q.RR2 +a9le A sho#s the relative ris; o! e0-osure to semen #ith late0 condom usage.
1*:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' 1ganda +roves Abstinence $olves
&he gag rule7s 2ocus on abstinence increases the sread o2 A"#$8increasing education
about contracetives is critical%
!uman Rights (e5s. Danuary 27C 2007. htt-,??hr#.org?english?docs?211&?11?1&?usdom14&27.htm O-age Q.
+he -otential e0-ortation o! a9stinence:only -rograms to the develo-ing #orld has caused
considera9le an0iety among AIDS service -rovidersC -articularly those associated #ith !amily
-lanning.$& A recent =SAID solicitation !or !unding -ro-osals states that E-rograms Zthat[ #ish
to include in!ormation a9out condoms in their -rograms may do so.F$7 Aet these guidelines
ma;e no mention o! condom u-ta;e as an indication o! -rogram outcome or -er!ormance andC
rather than ta;ing ste-s to ensure accurate in!ormation a9out condomsC state that Ea--licants
#ill not 9e re5uired . . . to endorseC utili>e or -artici-ate in a -revention method to #hich the
organi>ation has a religious or moral o9Iection.F$* Statements 9y =SAID o<icials minimi>ing
the role o! condoms in =ganda6s success!ul HIB -revention cam-aign in the 1..1s suggest that
=SAID is !ocused -rimarily on the EAF and E4F o! A4C.$. In August 211C the cancellation o! a
multimillion:dollar contract !or condom social mar;eting&1 in 4ra>il added to gro#ing !ears o! a
shi!t in =SAID -olicy a#ay !rom condom -romotion and to#ard strategies 9ased on se0ual
a9stinence.&1 "ro:a9stinence HIB?AIDS -olicy in the =nited States has evolved in a climate o!
increasing misin!ormation a9out condoms and o<icial mani-ulation o! scientiMc evidence.&2 In
2112C a !act sheet on the e<ectiveness o! condoms #as removed !rom the #e9site o! the =.S.
Centers !or Disease Control and "revention OCDCQ and re-laced 9y a ne# !act sheet #hichC
#hile !actually accurateC eliminated instructions on ho# to use a condom -ro-erly and evidence
indicating that condom education does not encourage se0 in young -eo-le.&In!ormation on
condom e<ectiveness #as similarly altered on the #e9site o! =SAID.&4 +he =.S. glo9al AIDS 9ill
cited a9ove com-els the -resident to re-ort on the Eim-act that condom usage has u-on the
s-read o! H"B Zhuman -a-illomavirus[ in Su9:Saharan A!ricaCF a mandate that is clearly
intended to undermine conMdence in the use o! condoms against HIB.&$ Su--orters o!
Ea9stinence until marriageF -rovisionsC including =.S. Glo9al AIDS Coordinator Randall +o9iasC
have relied on a misreading o! success!ul HIB -revention e<orts in =gandaC sim-listically
attri9uting decreases in HIB -revalence there to increased a9stinence and Mdelity. && Since
ta;ing o<ice in 2111C "resident 4ush has a--ointed as high:level HIB?AIDS advisers -hysicians
#ho deny the e<ectiveness condomsC such as !ormer =.S. Re-resentative +om Co9urn and Doe S.
8cIlhaneyC Dr.C -resident o! the -ro:Ea9stinence:onlyF 8edical Institute !or Se0ual Health in
+e0as.
c
Such overt anti:condom -olicies threaten to #orsen #hat is already a strain on condom
su--lies as a result o! restrictive =.S. international !amily -lanning -olicies. +he 8e0ico City
"olicy or Eglo9al gag ruleCF #hich 9ars any reci-ient o! =.S. international !amily -lanning !unds
!rom using even -rivate money to -er!ormC counselC or lo99y !or a9ortionC has re-ortedly led
=SAID to cancel or reduce condom shi-ments to grantees in u- to t#enty:nine develo-ing
countries.&* )rom Duly 2112 until late 211C the =nited States re!used to authori>e !unding !or
=()"A 9ased on un!ounded allegations that the agency su--orted coercive a9ortion -olicies in
China.&. In Danuary 211C a =()"A o<icial announced that the sus-ension o! =.S. !unding had
resulted in a #orsening o! the Asian condom shortage.71
1*;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8"ntegration
Reealing the gag rule allo5s the integration o2 !"I treatment 5ith 2amil3 lanning%
Morrison and Lleischman? 00 OD. Ste-henC /0ecutive Director o! the CSIS A!rica "rogramC and DanetC !ello#
at CSISC EIntegrating Re-roductive Health and HIB?AIDS "rograms Strategic 3--ortunities !or "/")ARCF DulyC
htt-,??###.csis.org?media?csis?-u9s?1&1712Thivaids.-d!Q
+his is an im-ortant area #here adIustments in =.S. -olicy a--roaches #ill 9e necessary to
allo# "/")AR teams to -romote e<ective integration strategies. Sensi9le e0ce-tions to these
-olicy restrictions #ould go a long #ay to#ard !urthering RH:HIB integration 9y creating
s-ace !or grou-s #ith di<erent areas o! e0-ertise to come together and create more e<ective
AIDS -rograms. +he 8e0ico City -olicy112 -revents any !oreign nongovernmental organi>ation
O(G3Q !rom receiving =.S. !amily -lanning !unds i! it -er!orms or advocates !or a9ortion. In
August 211C a -residential memorandum #as issued clari!ying that HIB?AIDS assistance #as
e0em-t !rom these restrictions. AccordinglyC i! a !oreign (G3 is receiving =.S. !amily -lanning
assistanceC it has to com-ly #ith the 8e0ico City -olicyG i! the organi>ation is receiving only
HIB?AIDS !undingC it is not su9Iect to these restrictions. +his -olicy has serious im-lications
!or RH:HIB integrationC since it o!ten -recludes organi>ations #ith years o! e0-erience in
re-roductive health !rom 9ringing their e0-ertise into an integrated -rogram a--roach.11
2hile such grou-s could #or; on the HIB side o! a -roIectC they cannot #or; on the RH:)"
-iece. Given the im-ortant overla- 9et#een the t#o MeldsC there are serious concerns that this
-olicy is contri9uting to a #ea;ening o! re-roductive health systems in HIB:a<ected countriesC
#hich are vital avenues !or reaching #omen and girls . 8ar; Dy9ulC thenHde-uty =.S. glo9al AIDS coordinatorC
addressed this issue in a letter to I""), EZI[n an integrated -rogramC di<erent organi>ations may 9e res-onsi9le !or di<erent ty-es
o! activitiesC as not all organi>ations necessarily do 9oth voluntary !amily -lanning and HIB?AIDS activities. Any -artner that
receives !unds solely !or HIB?AIDS is thus not su9Iect to the 8e0ico City "olicy.F In late 211$C the "/")AR team and =SAID in
7enya issued an integrated re5uest !or a--lication OR)AQ !or a Mve:yearC L1.:million -rogram called "o-ulation and Health
Integrated Assistance OA"HIA IIQ.114 According to the R)AC the activities are e0-ected to im-rove and e0-and !acility: and
community:9ased HIB?AIDSC re-roductive healthC11$ and !amily -lanning -rogramsC and selected maternal and child health
services. HIB?AIDS services and activities are the -rimary com-onentC 9ut integrating these services #ith +4C RH?)"C and maternal
and child health services is re5uired. =n!ortunatelyC due a--arently to the mista;es o! a contract o<icerC the R)A incorrectly stated
that all -artici-ating organi>ations #ould have to com-ly #ith the 8e0ico City -olicyC causing the R)A to 9e #ithdra#n and
reissued. (everthelessC the R)A signaled an im-ortant recognition that HIB should 9e lin;ed to RH?)". HIB?AIDS !unding is
su9Iect to a di<erent restriction'the -rostitution -ledge. In 211C Congress re5uired that !oreign (G3s see;ing =.S. HIB?AIDS
!unds must -ledge that they do not su--ort Ethe legali>ation or the -ractice o! -rostitution.F +his re5uires organi>ations receiving
=.S. !unds to -ledge their o--osition to -rostitution and se0 tra<ic;ing in order to continue their HIB #or;. In 211$C the 4ush
administration e0-anded this to a--ly to =.S. organi>ations as #ell. =nder this re5uirementC reci-ients o! =.S. !unds are !orced to
adhere to o<icial =.S. -olicy even in their -rivately !unded s-eech regarding the most e<ective #ays to engage high:ris; grou-s in
HIB -revention. +he -ledge re5uirement also acts as a constraint on integrationC since many organi>ations #or;ing closely #ith
se0 #or;ers are reluctant to sign out o! concern a9out increasing their stigma and isolationC #hich in turn could increase 9arriers
to accessing HIB services.11&
&he gag rule destro3s integrated reroductive health and !"I revention services
CohenC Director o! Government A<airs at the Guttmacher InstituteC 2001 OSarahC +he Guttmacher Re-ort on
"u9lic "olicyC EGlo9al Gag Rule, /0-orting Antia9ortion Ideology at the /0-ense o! American BaluesFC Dune 2111C
Bolume 4C (um9er C +he Guttmacher InstituteC htt-,??###.guttmacher.org?-u9s?tgr?14??gr14111.htmlQ
)inallyC since the 1.*1sC the HIB?AIDS -andemic has ta;en holdC es-ecially in southern A!ricaC
#here $$Y o! ne# in!ections occur among #omen and #here the disease is s-reading most
ra-idly among the young. In countries such as South A!ricaC #here HIB?AIDS -revention and
!amily -lanning assistance are -rogrammed in an integrated #ay to ma0imi>e their a9ility to
-revent the s-read o! HIB?AIDS and other se0ually transmitted diseases and unintended
-regnancy Oo!ten among those #ho are already HIB:-ositiveQC the gag rule inevita9ly #ill
undermine 9oth e<orts. "lanned "arenthood Association o! South A!rica O""ASAQC !or e0am-leC
stands to lose one:5uarter o! its !undingC merely 9ecause it o<ers counseling and re!erral !or
1/0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
legal a9ortion. S2e give -eo-le Zin!ormation a9out their[ choicesCS says ""ASA head 8otsomi
Au9rey SenneG S3ne o! those choices is a9ortion.S
1/1
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
"ntegration Good8A"#$
Reroductive health needs to be integrated 5ith 2amil3 lanning%
Morrison and Lleischman? 00 OD. Ste-henC /0ecutive Director o! the CSIS A!rica "rogramC and DanetC
!ello# at CSISC EIntegrating Re-roductive Health and HIB?AIDS "rograms Strategic 3--ortunities !or "/")ARCF
DulyC htt-,??###.csis.org?media?csis?-u9s?1&1712Thivaids.-d!Q
+#enty:Mve years into the AIDS e-idemic and hal!#ay through the initial Mve:year -hase o! the
=.S. "resident6s /mergency "lan !or AIDS Relie! O"/")ARQC1 there is increasing international
consensusC including #ithin the =.S. governmentC a9out the im-erative to target #omen and
girls. 2ith #omen no# constituting &1 -ercent o! those living #ith HIB?AIDS in su9:Saharan
A!ricaC and young #omen accounting !or three: 5uarters o! 1$: to 24:year olds living #ith the
virusC this is an urgent agenda.2 "/")AR is #ell -ositioned to 9uild on this consensus and
ma;e integration o! re-roductive health ORHQC !amily -lanning O)"QC and HIB?AIDS services a
maIor ne# -riority. RH:HIB integration -resents im-ortant o--ortunities !or "/")AR to
e0-and its im-act and to im-rove its -ros-ects !or achieving its -reventionC careC and
treatment goals. It is also a ne# #ay o! thin;ing in larger terms a9out ho# to enhance the
sustaina9ility o! "/")AR and to overcome the 9arriers to 9roader access !or HIB?AIDS
services. +his is an es-ecially critical moment !or "/")AR to e0-and -revention -rogramsC
#hich are necessary to ensure the long:term success o! glo9al AIDS e<orts. Integration is a
!easi9le means to achieve multi-le ;ey goals, -revent ne# HIB in!ections among #omen and
girlsG reduce HIB transmission !rom mother to child O-revention o! mother: to:child
transmission Z"8+C+[QG -revent more AIDS or-hansG and su--ort HIB:-ositive #omen6s
re-roductive rights and !ertility choices. Re-roductive health and HIB services have generally
9een !unded se-arately and o-erated verticallyC #hich means that clients see a di<erent
-rovider !or each health service. Aet #ith over *1 -ercent o! HIB in!ections se0ually
transmittedC4 addressing re-roductive health and HIB together #ould 9etter serve the needs o!
clients and health care -roviders in a more com-rehensiveC cost: e<ectiveC and e<icient
manner.$
,in-ing A"#$ and reroductive health olicies is vital to ma<imi4ing resources 2or
both%
Integrating HIB and re-roductive health has the -otential to -roduce im-ortant HIB: related
outcomes. IndeedC recent international consensus statements have urged strengthening these
lin;ages.& As Dr. (dugga 8agg#a !rom )amily Health International O)HIQ in 7enya -ut it,
E2hen #e thin; a9out HIB and re-roductive health issuesC it 9oils do#n to one thing'-eo-le
have to have se0 i! they6re going to get HIBC S+IsC un-lanned -regnancy. +hey have to have
un-rotected se0'it6s the common denominator.F He continued 9y e0-laining the -ro9lems #ith
creating vertical -rograms, EA IointC integrated a--roach #ould get more mileage.... +he
5uestion is ho# to 9uild 9ridges 9et#een the t#o ;inds o! -rograms so they mutually rein!orce
each other.F7 Integration o! services does !ace many challengesC nota9ly, the lac; o! trained
health -ro!essionalsG reductions in donor !unding !or RH and )"C as #ell as se-arate !unding
streams !or RH and HIBG issues o! -rovider 9iasC es-ecially against HIB:-ositive #omen #ho are
se0ually activeG =.S. congressional and -olicy restrictions -ertaining to 9oth RH and HIB
!unding and activitiesG and the lac; o! -olitical conviction u- to no# 9y donors and national
governments ali;e to ma;e RH:HIB integration a -olicy -riority. In additionC RH?)" -rograms
have 9een #ea;ened #hen the res-onse to the AIDS crisis has dra#n health -ro!essionals and
1/2
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
resources a#ay !rom RH -rograms. "romoting lin;ages 9et#een AIDS -rograms and
re-roductive health services !or #omen is an im-ortant #ay !or#ardC and one that can hel- to
ca-itali>e on the ne# resources availa9le !or HIB?AIDS and the limited !unding !or
re-roductive health services. Although RH:HIB integration is a logical ste- !or "/")AR to
reach its goalsC it has only recently 9egun to emerge as an im-ortant issue. At this stageC a !e#
"/")AR country -rograms have 9egun -romising innovations that integrate re-roductive
health or !amily -lanning #ith HIB -rograms. 8ost -rograms do not yet ac;no#ledge the
im-ortance o! lin;ing re-roductive health and HIB?AIDS. Aet this re-ort sho#s that these
issues are gaining -rominence in AIDS -rograms and that there are relevant e0am-les o!
integrated RH:HIB -rograms !unded 9y "/")AR. 3ne critical ne0t ste- is !or 3GAC to
-roactively su--ort !unding !or integrated RH:HIB -rograms and to -romote e<orts to
o-erationali>e strategies to#ard that end.
1/)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8#emocrac3
&he gag rule undermines democrac3 romotion8ensuring 2ree seech rights 2or (GOs
is the 2oundation 2or stable democratic transitions%
+he glo9al gag rule conJicts #ith -rimary =.S. !oreign -olicy goals'the -romotion o!
democratic -artici-ationC the 9uilding o! civil societyC and the enhancement o! the sta: tus o!
#omen #ithin democracies. A -rinci-al o9Iective o! =.S. !oreign -olicy is to assist Edevelo-ing
countries in their e<orts to ac5uire the ;no#ledge and resources essential to develo-ment and
to 9uild the economicC -oliticalC and social institutionsC #hich #ill im-rove the 5uality o! their
lives.F4* A num9er o! legislative initiatives have s-eciMcally !urthered this goal. +hese includeC
in -articularC legislative -rovisions in #hich Congress has e0-ressed its -re!erence !or the
!urtherance o! develo-ment goals through the -rivate sector4.and through Eactivities -lanned
and carried out 9y -rivate and voluntary organi>ations and coo-eratives.F$1 As =SAID has
articulated in im-lementing this congressional mandateC the Ecreation and involvement o!
indigenous (G3s'intermediary organi>ations that enhance -o-u: lar -artici-ation that dee-en
the 9eneMts to societyC and #hose very e0istence can -ro: mote -eace!ul changeCF is essential
to the resolution o! develo-ment -ro9lems and the creation o! sel!:sustainingC civic societies.$1
+husC em-o#ering overseas (G3s to -ar: tici-ate !reely in their societies to !oster democracy
is clearly a central tenet o! =.S. !or: eign -olicy. Ho#everC the glo9al gag rule Mnancially
-enali>es (G3s that -artici-ate in the democratic -rocess #ith their o#n !unds on issues
related to a9ortion. In the =nited StatesC a9ortion s-ar;s a great deal o! -olitical de9ate.
Ho#everC "resident 4ush is arrogantly re-ressing -u9lic discourse on a9ortion in other coun:
tries'9latantly -romoting only one side o! the de9ate. 3n other issuesC the =nited States
encourages citi>ens o! other countries to engage in -u9lic de9ate and to resolve their
di<erences through the democratic -olitical -rocess. It is un#ise to reverse this !oreign -olicy
o! encouraging democratic -artici-ation and to -rohi9it citi>ens !rom utili>ing the -u9lic !orum
to resolve such divisive issues.
&he gag rule undermines democrac3 romotion%
+he (e5 $tatesmanC Dan. 2.C 2007. %e0is.
+he rule is thus !undamentally undemocraticC and also im-erialist : a!ter allC in countries #here
a9ortion is legalC it overrules national sovereignty. As %aura 7at>ive o! the (e# Aor;:9ased
Centre !or Re-roductive Rights notes, S+his is a -olicy that #ould 9e unconstitutional i! a--lied
to =S citi>ensC 9ecause itRs a condition on !ree s-eech. In the =nited StatesC you canRt say Ryou
can e0-ress an ideaC 9utC i! you doC #eRll #ithhold !undingRC so itRs a--lying a dou9le standard to
(G3s overseas. +hatRs shoc;ingC -articularly in the conte0t o! a !oreign -olicy #hich is meant to
-romote democracy.S
&he gag rule undermines 1$ democrac3 romotion and hinders democratic movements
globall3%
"lling5orth? "roIect 8anager !or "lanned "arenthood Glo9al "artnersC 2000 O4etsyC #lanned #arenthood
%ederation o& "mericaC E+he Glo9al Gag RuleCF Danuary 2
nd
C 211&C http://www.plannedparenthood.org/news?articles?press/politics?
polic!?issues/international?issues/gag?rule?"$"0#.htmQ
+his #ee; mar;s the anniversary o! the glo9al gag ruleC the Reagan:era -olicy reinstated 9y
"resident 4ush on his Mrst day in o<iceC Mve years ago. +he glo9al gag rule states that
nongovernmental organi>ations O(G3sQ that acce-t =.S. -o-ulation assistance have to agree
1/*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
not to -rovide a9ortions. +hey also may not re!er -atients to other a9ortion -rovidersC counsel
-atients on the o-tion o! a9ortionC or even lo99y !or a9ortion legali>ation or re!orm in their
countries. +hey may not -artici-ate in any o! these activitiesC even i! they do so #ith their o#n
!unds. Re-roductive health (G3s are !orced to ma;e a choice, acce-t the =.S. !unding 9ut
agree to terms that may endanger the health o! their -atientsC or reIect the !unding and 9e
!orced to cut -rograms ' also endangering their -atientsR health. +he glo9al gag rule is anti:
democratic at a time #hen the 4ush administration claims to 9e s-reading democracy around
the glo9e. It also com-romises the integrity o! health care and limits access to !amily -lanning
and other 9asic re-roductive health services. In many countries around the #orldC a9ortion is
illegalC or legal only in certain circumstances. (G3s in these countries are committed to
educating their -olicyma;ers and !ello# citi>ens a9out the dangers o! unsa!e a9ortion and
lo99ying !or change. +he =nited States should 9e encouraging this advocacy #or; as an
essential ste- in -romoting democracy and a -olitically active civil society. InsteadC the glo9al
gag rule is hindering democratic movements around the #orld.
1//
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8#emocrac3
&he gag rule undermines democratic movements globall3%
"riscilla $mithC acting director o! CR%"6s Domestic "rogram and an attorney !or -lainti<s in CR%" v. 4ushC Summer
2002. Human Rights 8aga>ineC Bol.2.C Iss. G -g. 12C 4 -gs. htt-,??###.a9anet.org?irr?hr?summer12?smith.html.
+he glo9al gag rule erects 9arriers to the develo-ment o! the democratic -rocess in other
countriesC the -romotion o! civil society and develo-ment o! )(G3s a9roadC and the
enhancement o! #omenRs e5uality and -artici-ation in the -olitical -rocess. +he )oreign
Assistance Act O)AAQC 22 =.S.C.A. 214OaQO1QC states that Sa -rinci-al goal o! the =nited StatesS
is to S-romote the increased o9servance o! internationally recogni>ed human rights 9y all
countries.S Surely this includes the !undamental rights to !ree s-eech and democratic
-artici-ationC internationally -rotected human rights cham-ioned 9y the =nited States. Des-ite
the ro9ust -u9lic de9ate on a9ortion in our o#n countryC the 4ush administration is re-ressing
-u9lic discourse on a9ortion in other countries. +his amounts to undercutting the 9edroc;
!oreign -olicy -rinci-les o! encouraging democratic -artici-ation and the use o! the -u9lic
!orum to resolve divisive issues. =nited States develo-ment assistance has long su--orted the
involvement o! )(G3s to resolve develo-ment challenges and hel- create sel!:sustaining
societies. In -articularC the )AA re5uires the =nited States to su--ort the enhancement o!
#omenRs status and democratic -artici-ation in civil society. +he glo9al gag rule
dis-ro-ortionately im-acts #omen and #omenRs grou-sC many o! #hich receive !unding !rom
=SAID !or -roIects related to re-roductive healthcareC maternal and child survivalC and
voluntary !amily -lanning. +hese grou-sC as the S!ront lineS o! the #omenRs health movementC
o9serve Mrsthand the e<ects o! illegalC unsa!e a9ortion and are o!ten called on to -artici-ate in
their countriesR deli9erations a9out a9ortion la# re!orm. +he =nited States cannot have it 9oth
#ays:su--orting #omen #ith one hand and silencing them #ith the other.
1/0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad81$ ,eadershi
&he gag rule undermines 1$ leadershi on reroductive rights and undermines the
efectiveness o2 other nation7s aid%
Center 2or Reroductive Rights? Duly 0) Ohtt-,??###.re-roductiverights.org?-u9T!acTggr9ush.htmlQ
+he Glo9al Gag Rule erects 9arriers to the develo-ment o! the democratic -rocess in other
countriesC the -romotion o! civil society and develo-ment o! (G3s a9roadC and the
enhancement o! #omenRs e5uality and -artici-ation in the -olitical -rocess. +hus the Glo9al
Gag Rule severely undermines 9edroc; =.S. !oreign -olicy o9Iectives. It also im-acts
international assistance -rovided 9y other donors::including Canada and the /uro-ean =nion::
#ho #ill not 9e a9le to colla9orate #ith !oreign (G3s on a9ortion:related -roIects i! those
(G3s also receive =SAID !unding. )urthermoreC it ina--ro-riately challenges !oreign
governmentsR sovereignty 9y constraining their im-lementation o! national health:care -olicy
decisions. Barious international instruments::#hich the =.S. has strongly su--orted:esta9lish
re-roductive rights as !undamental human rights. +hese instruments also -rovide that #here
a9ortion is legalC it should 9e !ully integrated into re-roductive health care to ensure that it is
sa!e and accessi9le. +he Glo9al Gag Rule Jies in the !ace o! the =.S.Rs leadershi- on the
-romotion o! re-roductive rights internationally.
&he gag rule undermines overall 1$ leadershi%
+he glo9al gag rule causes !oreign (G3sC and othersC in !oreign countries to scorn the =nited
States !or im-osing restrictions on their right to democratic -artici-ationC !ree s-eech and
re-roductive sel!:determination.$* )oreign #omen6s grou-s are ostraci>ing !oreign (G3s #ho
cave in to =SAID6s glo9al gag rule re5uirement in order to o9tain !unding. +he glo9al gag rule
only serves to 2oster anti9American sentimentsC -articular: ly related to =.S. !oreign
assistance -rograms around the #orld. A heightened anti:=.S. climate around the #orld only
hamers the abilit3 o2 the 1%$% government to maintain its leadershi role in
international settings.
1/7
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad81$ ,eadershi8!ealth #ilomac3
&he gag rule destro3s overall 1%$% health dilomac3%
Motlu-? 11?.?200* OAlisonC (e# ScientistC EA healthy strategy !or #hom e0actlyKFC 11?.C academic search
-remierQ
+he im-act o! the 8e0ico City -olicy has had conse5uences more !ar:reaching ' and more
-erverse ' than -erha-s anyone had antici-ated. )or #hile the =S gives more money in !oreign
aid than any other countryC much o! #hich goes to#ards im-roving human healthC its 9lan;et
re!usal to !und any agency that so much as 9reathes the #ord Sa9ortionS is undermining its
entire glo9al strategy !or health. )or many #omen and children in A!ricaC !amily -lanning
clinics are the sole contact #ith healthcare -ro!essionals. In some casesC the same clinic that
o<ers a9ortion counselling also -rovides -renatal careC childhood immunisations and -rotection
against malaria. 2hen clinics close or are scaled do#nC itRs not Iust a9ortions that !all 9y the
#ayside. "u9lic health su<ers too. SIt undermines the #hole health in!rastructureCS says 2endy
+urn9ull o! "o-ulation Action International O"AIQC an (G3 9ased in 2ashington DC. /very one
o! the glo9al health goals articulated 9y the =S Agency !or International Develo-ment O=SAIDQ
has 9een ham-ered 9y !allout !rom the 8e0ico City -olicy. +o- o! =SAIDRs list is the desire to reduce
unintended and mistimed -regnancies ' o! #hich there are an estimated &1 million every yearC according to the Alan
Guttmacher Institute in (e# Aor;C #hich -romotes education and research in se0ual and re-roductive health. )or
(G3s that reIected the =S ultimatum there have 9een cuts and shortages across the 9oardC according to an audit
this year 9y "AI. In 7enyaC !or instanceC cuts in =SAID !unds have !orced t#o o! the leading !amily -lanning
organisations to lay o< 1 -er cent o! their sta< and shut do#n Mve clinics. 3ne o! those shut #as the 8athare Balley
clinicC #hich served 11C111 -eo-le in a (airo9i slum. +he )amily Guidance Association o! /thio-iaC head5uartered
in Addis A9a9aC has lost &1 -er cent o! its annual 9udget as a result o! =SAID cutsC #hich has a<ected not only
sta<ing 9ut also su--lies. 3ne rural clinic has nearly run out o! the contrace-tive De-o:"roveraC used 9y 71 -er cent
o! the #omen #ho attend it. +he =S #as the single most im-ortant donor o! contrace-tivesC -roviding more than one:
third o! those su--lied to develo-ing countriesC says Adrienne GermainC -resident o! the International 2omenRs
Health Coalition in (e# Aor;. SI! you are closing do#n !amily -lanning clinics and denying contrace-tives to #omenC
youRve got to 9e having increases in un#anted -regnanciesCS says Balerie De)illi-oC director o! e0ternal a<airs at the
I""). +his not only th#arts =SAIDRs Mrst goalC 9ut Ieo-ardises t#o others as #ell, reducing child9irth:related
maternal death and im-roving child health and survival. 2hen -regnancies are un#anted it is usually !or good
reason. 3!ten they come on the heels o! a -revious 9irthC or the mother is un#ellC so the health o! mother and child
are at ris;. +hey also mean that the ne# childC and older si9lingsC are li;ely to !ace a more economically uncertain
!uture. 3ver hal! a million #omen a year die !rom com-lications related to -regnancyC a9out one every minute. In
many countriesC this is a leading cause o! -remature death among #omen. =SAID has also made a -riority o!
Mghting in!ectious diseases. A9out hal! the =S money s-ent on re-roductive health last year
#ent on tac;ling HIB and AIDSC 9ut many o! the clinics #here -eo-le #ere tested and treated
!or the diseaseC or got condoms to -rotect themselvesC no longer o<er these services 9ecause o!
cuts in =S aid. S=SAID:donated condoms have 9een cut o< to 2. o! the most HIB:a<ected
countriesCS Germain says. S+hat is a disaster in those countries.S In 211C "resident 4ush staged
a -artial retreat and 9egan allo#ing some !unds to Mght HIB and AIDS to 9e Mltered through
other#ise 9lac;listed agencies.
1/:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8$3stemic #eaths
&he gag rule -ills 0:?000 5omen ever3 3ear%
According to estimatesC 9et#een 1. and 21 million unsa!e a9ortions are -er!ormed #orld#ide
each yearC .7 -er cent o! them in develo-ing countries. AnnuallyC this ;ills roughly &*C111
#omen. +hatRs eight #omen an hourC or a -laneload -er day : 9e!ore you start #eighing the toll
o! maiming and mutilationC in!ections and lost !ertilityC that a<ect many millions more each
year. As 4eth )redric; o! the International 2omenRs Health Coalition -oints outC #hen it comes
to those &*C111 deathsC the =S government Shas 9lood on its handsS. 4ut the destructiveness o!
the gag rule s-reads much !urther. +hose organisations that !all !oul o! it also run !amily:
-lanning -rogrammes that -rovide a huge range o! services : !rom distri9uting contrace-tives
to giving se0ual health advice to -roviding in!ormation on maternal nutrition and 9reast!eeding.
3rganisations that re!use to acce-t the ruleRs restrictionsC and su9se5uently lose their !undingC
can 9e le!t #ith no o-tion 9ut to close clinics that serve some o! the #orldRs most vulnera9le
-eo-le. OIt is estimatedC !or instanceC that only 11 -er cent o! the A!rican -o-ulation has ready
access to contrace-tives.
1/;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad8Russian #emocrac3
&he gag rule undermines democratic re2orm in Russia8it sends a signal that it is
legitimate 2or the government to regulate seech8this ensures bac-sliding
to5ards authoritarianism%
Russian (G3sC !or e0am-leC receive =.S. !amily -lanning assistance and are thus direct: ly
a<ected 9y the glo9al gag rule. Dr. 8i;ael Ro;its;iC a mem9er o! the Russian State DumaC
e0-ressed shoc; that the =.S. #ould im-ose such restrictions on !ree s-eech and democratic
-artici-ation !or Russian (G3s 9y reinstating the glo9al gag rule, 2e usually regard the
=nited States as a model o! -rinci-les o! !reedom o! s-eech' as a cradle o! democracy and o!
democratic re!orms. 2e are also a#are'and #e do a--reciate'that the =.S. ensured !unding
!or Russian democratic re!orms. 2e also ;no# that the State De-artment has al#ays !ocused
on !reedom o! s-eechC on !reedom o! the -ress and !reedom o! choice. And against this 9ac;:
groundC it is strange !or us to see that the =nited States is !ollo#ing the 8e0ico City "olicyC or
the Sglo9al gagS -olicy. )or my countryC RussiaC this -olicy and this -ro9lem has may9e more
im-ortance than !or any other countryC 9ecause I can see t#o as-ects o! this -ro9lem'9oth a
-olitical as-ect and a medical as-ect o! the -ro9lem. +he -olitical as-ect is related to the !act
that the =nited States government re!uses to -ro: vide !unding to (G3s that #ant to ma;e
a9or: tions sa!eC legal and a<orda9le. +hus the =nited States government demonstrates to our
government and to our -eo-le that one can restrict !reedom o! s-eech and !reedom o! choice i!
these #ords and these choices are di!: !erent !rom the stand ta;en 9y the government. +he
=nited States has a long history o! -rotecting the right o! individuals and grou-s to s-ea;
!reely and to -artici-ate in their countries6 democratic -rocesses. +he =.S. hel-ed a9olish
authoritarian rule in the !ormer Soviet =nion 9ut the im-osi: tion o! the glo9al gag rule on
-ost:Communist Russia more than a decade later ironically -ro: motes #hat the =.S. once
hel-ed Russians de!eat. Dr. Ro;its;i continued, It is #ith 9itter !eelings that I must tell youC
hereC that the 8e0ico City "olicy reminds me o! the -rohi9ition o! any dissent under the
communist regime. It #as #ith these -rohi9itions that #e have 9een Mghting in the -ast
decadeC and #e #on a victory. And you should not set an e0am-le that -ulls us 9ac; into the
-ast... 2e have great res-ect !or the democratic -rinci-les -roclaimed in the =.S. ConstitutionC
#hich are e5ualityC !reedom o! s-eech and !reedom o! choice. 2e #ould only #ish that the =.S.
government #ould !ollo# and develo- these -rinci: -les not only at home on American soilC 9ut
all over the #orld.
100
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Gag Rule 6ad81$9=1 Relations
&he =1 has demanded that 6ush reeal the gag rule%
3n 8arch 1.C 2111C 2 -arliamentarians released a landmar; -etition condemning the glo9al
gag rule -olicy. According to 8s. Sand9i;C #ho is the vice:-resident o! the /0ecutive
Committee o! the Inter:/uro-ean "arliamentary )orum on "o-ulation and Develo-ment #hich
released the -etitionC it #as signed 9y -arliamentarians !rom 21 di!: !erent countries and
received the largest num9er o! signatures o! any -etition o! its ;ind. +he document states that
the signatories are, ^ A--alled to learn that one o! the Mrst actions o! the ne#ly elected
"resident 4ush #ould 9e to renege on the =nited States6 commitment to the Cairo "rogramme
o! Action into #hich it entered into in good !aithG ^ Concerned that "resident 4ush6s aim o!
reducing a9ortion 9y cutting !unds to organi>ations #hich -rovide or mention a9ortion services
#ill in !act leave thou: sandsC i! not millions o! #omen #ithout choicesC and !orced into see;ing
unsa!e?illegal and 9ac;:street a9ortions thus am-li!ying the -ro9lemC not dimin: ishing itG ^
2orried that the cut in !unds !rom the =nited States )oreign Aid 9udget #ill have damaging
e<ects not only in the -rovision o! !amily:-lanning services #orld: #ideC 9ut #ill !urther
aggravate the HIB?AIDS -andemic and #orsen the chance o! many o! the #orld6s -oor to Mnally
e0tricate themselves !rom -overty.* +his over#helming res-onse !rom -arliamentarians in 21
/uro-ean countries sho#s the e0treme nature o! the 4ush Administration6s -osition on
international !amily -lanning assistance and highlights the need !or the =nited States to listen
to its allies !rom around the #orld.
101
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' #octor $hortages Kill $olvenc3
Midlevel healthcare ersonnel solve the doctor ga%
OtseaC 200*. 7arenC %ives #orth saving, A9ortion care in su9:Saharan A!rica since IC"D.A -rogress re-ort.
Cha-el HillC(CCI-as. /d, Ral-h Hardy and 8arty DarrellC
htt-,??###.i-as.org?-u9lications?en?IC"DT14?A4A)RIC"DT/14.-d!.
Ho#everCthe use o! shar- curettage -ersistsCeven in countries such as 7enya and (igeria #ith
si>ea9le and long:lived "AC training and service:delivery -rograms.2hile a re-resenta: tive
national survey in (igeria !ound that three:5uarters o! -hysician a9ortion -roviders use 8BA
and over hal! o! -roviders #ho treat a9ortion com-lications use 8BA OHensha#Cet al.C 1..*QCa
se-arate study in northern (igeria !ound that t#ice as many -rocedures #ere still -er!ormed
#ith DPC than #ith 8BA O)etters and DolayemiC2112Q.And in 7enyaCa recent study in t#o
-rovinces !ound that #hile 8BA is the -re!erred technology at -u9lic:sector !acilities o<ering
"ACCit is not as -revalent in -rivate or mission:a<iliated !acilities O3nyango et al.C211Q.3ther
!actors a<ecting the use o! 8BA in 9oth 7enya and (igeria include the a9sence o! su--lies at
health:care !acilities and a sense 9y -roviders that their training in 8BA #as not su<icient
O)etters and DolayemiC2112G3nyango et al.C211Q. /na9ling midlevel -roviders to o<er
-osta9ortion care Glo9allyCtraining in a9ortion care'including "AC'and the authori>ation to
-rovide this care have !ocused -rimarily on -hysicians. In A!ricaC other ty-es o! health
-ro!essionals are 9oth more numerous and more geogra-hically dis-ersed than -hysicians.In
many settingsCa maIority o! health servicesC -articularly those o<ered outside o! maIor ur9an
centresC are delivered 9y other cadres o! -roviders'!or e0am-leC mid#ivesC clinical o<icers
and -hysician assistants. +he sheer num9ers o! these midlevel -rovidersC as #ell as their
-ro0imity to 9roader commu: nities and their e0-erience in delivering -rimary:health servicesC
suggest they are #ell:-laced and sometimes already #ell:s;illed to o<er critical a9ortion
services.
102
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Abortions 6ad #A
Abortion is inevitable8the gag rule 2orces 5omen to use unsa2e abortions%
Access to !amily -lanning hel-s reduce reliance on a9ortion and deaths caused 9y unsa!e
a9ortion. Regardless o! #hether a9ortions are legalC #omen in des-erate situations still see;
them out. As a resultC a9ortions -er!ormed under unsa!e conditions remain a maIor -u9lic
health concern. A9out 71C111 #omen die each year !rom se-tic and incom-lete a9ortionC many
o! them leaving young children 9ehind. 8any more su<er serious illness or inIury. Im-roving
access to !amily -lanning can hel- -revent un#anted -regnancies and reduce such tragedies.
&urn8the gag rule causes an increase in illegal abortions%
Cutbac-s in 2amil3 lanning services are li-el3 to contribute to an increase in
abortions. Research !rom several countries reveals a lo#er reliance on a9ortion in areas #here
contrace-tive use is higherC reJecting greater access to !amily -lanning services. +he gag rule
restricts o-en communication 9et#een #omen and their trusted health care -roviders.
"rohi9iting organi>ations !rom counseling and?or -roviding re!errals on a9ortion hurts their
a9ility to -rovide com-rehensive health care needed or re5uested 9y their clients. +he
-rinci-les o! in!ormed consent demand that health care -roviders not #ithhold in!ormation on
services that are availa9le and?or legal in that countryC or that could -revent inIury or even save
#omen6s lives.
Global gag rule 2ails H it increases the amount o2 abortions%
IronicallyC it is li;ely that the -olicy may have increased rates o2 abortion. 2hen clinics closeC
S#omen donRt get other se0ual health in!ormation or contrace-tionSC -oints out %ouise Hutch
ins o! the =7 grou- A9ortion RightsC Sso theyRre more li;ely to 9ecome -regnant again and
su<er !rom se0ually transmitted diseasesS.
Reealing the global gag rule could revent millions o2 regnancies%
A"#$ Wee-l3 P %a#C Duly 12C 2007. %e0is.
S2e live in a #orld #here a #oman dies o! a -regnancy:related com-lication every minute and
someone gets HIB every si0 and a hal! seconds 9ecause they canRt access contrace-tion and
health care in!ormationCS said 7athy 7neerC ""AC -resident. S+his vote is a signiMcant ste-
!or#ard in the Mght to im-rove the health and sa!ety o! #omen and !amilies around the #orld.
(o# they #ill have access to the in!ormation and tools they need to -lan their !amilies and
-rotect their health.S Disease -revention and re-roductive health are among the most -ressing
international health issues. 8ore than 211 million #omen in develo-ing countries #ant to ta;e
control o! their !ertility and their !utures 9ut lac; access to modern contrace-tives. AdditionallyC
nearly 41 million -eo-le #orld#ide are in!ected #ith HIB?AIDSC and millions moreC es-ecially
#omen and young -eo-leC are at ris;. Im-roved access to contrace-tive methodsC li;e condomsC
could -revent $2 million unintended -regnanciesC 22 million induced a9ortionsC 1.4 million
in!ant deathsC and 142C111 -regnancy:related deaths -er yearC as #ell as -revent the s-read o!
HIB?AIDSC thus saving millions o! lives. CurrentlyC the Glo9al Gag Rule -rohi9its sending =SAID
10)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
!amily -lanning !undsC technical assistance and contrace-tive su--lies to international !amily
-lanning agencies that -rovide a9ortion servicesC counsel and?or re!er -atients !or a9ortion
servicesC or advocate !or legali>ing a9ortion in their o#n countries. +he SContrace-tives and
Condoms /0em-tionS greatly im-roves access to contrace-tives 9y allo#ing those agencies that
have not signed on to the Glo9al Gag Rule to receive =.S. government:donated contrace-tives
and condoms.
10*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Abortions 6ad #A
&urn8the lac- o2 contracetives ma-e illegal abortions are inevitable%
Linancial &imes &?.?2007. %e0is.
/very dayC 2ard 1D o! 7enyatta (ational Hos-ital receives 9et#een si0 and eight cases o!
9otched a9ortions. In a monthC the #ard deals #ith an average o! 2$1 cases o! !ailed a9ortions
involving #omen #ho are rushed to the hos-ital a!ter attem-ts to end -regnancies 9ac;Mre.
+he national statistics are more startling. A9out 1&C$&1 a9ortions occur in the country
annually. 3ut o! theseC an estimated 21C*. #omen are hos-italised #ith a9ortion:related
com-lications. Des-ite general outrage over the -racticeC thousands o! #omen in the country
still ris; their lives to end un-lanned or un#anted -regnancies. According to a recent re-ort 9y
I-asC an international re-roductive health organisation #or;ing in conIunction #ith the 8inistry
o! HealthC 7enya 8edical Association and )ida:7enyaC a9ortion is increasingly 9ecoming a
maIor challenge to the -rovision o! re-roductive health services Religious leaders Although
religious leaders and moralists have condemned the actC it continues #ith im-unity. SIt is a
-ro9lem that cannot 9e #ished a#ay. (o matter ho# much -u9lic outcry there is against
a9ortionC the !act is that many #omen continue -rocuring it in the 9ac; streets and #e are le!t
to clean:u- the mess o! 5uac;s #hich most o! the time may 9e too lateCS says "ro! Dose-h 7aranIaC an
o9stetrician gynaecologist and lecturer at the =niversity o! (airo9i. "ro! 7aranIa as;s 7enyans to sto- 9urying their
heads in the sand and s5uarely !ace the -revailing Sa9ortion crisisS. S2e should deal #ith the issue o! a9ortion the
same #ay #e are dealing #ith HIB?Aids. (ecessary mechanisms SIn the 9eginning Aids #as highly stigmatised. 4ut
no# -eo-le are tal;ing a9out it o-enly and the necessary mechanisms have 9een -ut in -lace. S2e have seen a
change. 2hy then canRt #e rise a9ove the stigma on a9ortion in the same #ayKS as;ed the lecturer. SA9ortion a<ects
all in society including the richC -oorC educatedC youngC old and even the clergy. 2e should have a so9er a--roach on
this issue.S RecentlyC Health assistant minister /noch 7i9unguchyC himsel! a gynaecologistC declared having sa!ely
-rocured a9ortions and called !or sanity in the a9ortion de9ate. SI told a !orum o! gynaecologists in (yeri recently
that as a doctorC I have -er!ormed a9ortions and so have many o! the doctors in attendance. I said Rmay the Mrst
innocent doctor #ho has not done it cast the Mrst stoneR and they concurred 9ecause they understand ho# des-erate
the situation is. It is time that #e loo;ed at a9ortion so9erlyCS said Dr 7i9unguchy. +he high cost o!
contrace-tives and -oor access !uelled 9y religious leadersR condemnation o! their useC has le!t
many se0ually:active #omen in a dilemma on ho# to deal #ith un#anted -regnancies.
&urn82amil3 lanning decreases abortion%
Ann !5ang? medical student at the =niversity o! Cali!orniaC San )ranciscoC Dan?)e9 2002. 2orld 2atchC 1$.1C
"ro5uest.
4y -reventing un#anted -regnanciesC !amily -lanning can decrease the incidence o! a9ortion.
Research has conMrmed the o9vious, in country a!ter countryC as contrace-tive use has
increasedC a9ortion rates have declined. 4ut the need !or a9ortion never com-letely vanishes.
(o contrace-tive method #or;s -er!ectlyG ra-e and incest occur in every society.
10/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' $ending
Lamil3 lanning saves mone3 overall%
6isho? 200* Immigration Attorney !or the Immigration and %a# "roIect at the (C Dustice Center O7aciC 2.
(.C.D. IntRl %. P Com. Reg. $21C E"olitics 4e!ore "olicy, +he 4ush AdministrationC International )amily "lanningC and
)oreign "olicyFC S-ringC le0isQ
/ven assumingC ho#everC that the 4ush Administration #ould 9e e<ective in meeting its goal o!
economic develo-mentC shi!ting a#ay !rom !amily -lanning -rograms does not ma;e sense !or
at least t#o reasons. )irstC the cost o! -roviding !amily -lanning services is lo# com-ared to its
9eneMts.
221
3n averageC !amily -lanning -rograms in develo-ing countries cost S9et#een =SL 1
and L 1.2$ annually -er ca-ita ... or a9out =SL 11:21 -er contrace-tive user -er year.S
222
"lusC
S!amily -lanning -rograms save money.S
22)
SStudies in several countries sho# that !or every
dollar invested in !amily -lanningC governments save as much as L 1& in reduced e0-enditures
in healthC educationC and social services.S
22*
SecondC there are other reasons to continue and
even Z\$$.[ e0-and u-on !amily -lanning -rograms. )or e0am-leC such -rograms -ositively
im-act the health and #ell:9eing o! #omenC childrenC and !amilies.
22/
100
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Malthus
Lamil3 lanning is essential to create long9term oulation stabilit3%
Ann !5ang? medical student at the =niversity o! Cali!orniaC San )ranciscoC Dan?)e9 2002. 2orld 2atchC 1$.1C
"ro5uest.

At the national levelC reducing -o-ulation gro#th can -romote economic develo-ment. Some
economists argue that !amilies #ith !e#er children save more moneyC a -henomenon called the
Sdemogra-hic 9onus.S Higher savings rates may in turn reduce a countryRs de-endence on
!oreign ca-ital. Decreasing -o-ulation gro#th can also ease the strain on overta0ed natural
resourcesC -articularly those associated #ith su9sistence agriculture. +odayC an estimated 421
million -eo-le live in countries #here the amount o! cro-land -er ca-ita has dro--ed 9elo#
1.17 hectares:the amount generally deemed necessary to sustain a 9are minimum vegetarian
diet. 4y 212$C the num9er o! -eo-le living in such countries #ill -ro9a9ly have reached
9et#een $$1 million and 1 9illion. 4ut the most im-ortant limit is not li;ely to 9e access to landG
itRs li;ely to 9e access to #ater. AlreadyC hal! a 9illion -eo-le are living in areas -rone to severe
#ater shortages. In 2$ yearsC that num9er #ill -ro9a9ly have risen to 9et#een 2.4 and .2
9illion. Such Mgures suggest the im-ortance o! !amily -lanning as a glo9al enter-rise. 4y 21$1C
the #orldRs -o-ulation is li;ely to a--roach . 9illion:almost a $1 -ercent increase !rom its
current level o! &.1 9illion. (early all o! that increase #ill come in the develo-ing #orld and at
this -ointC most o! it is -ro9a9ly inevita9le. +hatRs 9ecause record num9ers o! young -eo-le are
no# coming into their -ea; re-roductive years O9et#een the ages o! 1$ and 24Q. /ven i! the
glo9al !ertility rate Othe average num9er o! children -er #omanQ #ere to !all overnight !rom its
current level o! 2.* to the longterm Sre-lacement levelS o! 2.1C more than three:5uarters o! the
gro#th -roIected !or the ne0t hal! century #ould still occurC 9ecause o! the enormous
demogra-hic 9ulge o! young adults. +his -o-ulation e0-ansion #ill create -ro!ound challenges
to develo-ment in many #ays:: -oliticalC technicalC and moral. )amily -lanning is going to 9e
essential !or managing those challenges. 3n this 9road demogra-hic levelC !amily -lanning
could 9e said to serve t#o -ur-oses, incremental reduction o! -o-ulation gro#th over the
relatively near termC and over the long term? insuring that the gro5th actuall3 stos
some5here around that ; billion mar-.
107
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' ,i2t the Gag Rule C+
Just reealing the gag rule 5ould cause a decrease in 2amil3 lanning assistance%
Aguirre? 2001 "ro!essor o! /conomics and 4usiness at the Catholic =niversity o! America O8ariaC Committee on
d9nameW117TsenateThearingsPdocidW!,7$&14.#aisQ
In addition to thatC #e have to ;ee- in mind that article *.2$ says clearlyC and I am 5uotingC
UUIn no case should a9ortion 9e -romoted as a method o! !amily -lanning.RR So #hen #e tal;
a9out !amily -lanningC ;ee- that in mind. +he second -oint is regarding the concern that this
might signal a decrease in the =.S. commitment to glo9al !amily -lanning e<orts. I #ould li;e
to -oint out that #hile the overall !unding o! =SAID to !amily -lanning increased steadily
9et#een 1.*7 to 1..$::and during that timeC the 8e0ico City "olicy #as interru-ted::the
!unding allocated to this activity started to decline !rom 1..& to 2111C 9e!ore the 8e0ico City
"olicy #as re:enacted. ReasonsC other than this -olicy should e0-lain the decline in !unding
then. S-ending goes u- #hen there is a 9roader consensus and #here -o-ulation assistance is
!unding a9ortionist there is no consensus.
Reealing the gag rule 5ont increase overall 2unding%
"u9lic "olicyC EGlo9al Gag Rule, /0-orting Antia9ortion Ideology at the /0-ense o! American BaluesFC Dune 2111C
Bolume 4C (um9er C +he Guttmacher InstituteC htt-,??###.guttmacher.org?-u9s?tgr?14??gr14111.htmlQ
Gag rule -ro-onents counter that since the =.S. #ill s-end the same overall amount on
international !amily -lanning aid in )A 2111'L42$ million #ith or #ithout the gag rule'the
-olicy cannot 9e considered harm!ul to !amily -lanning e<orts. 4ut as its most vocal -ro-onentC
Re-. Chris Smith OR:(DQC himsel! saysC S#ho #e su9sidi>eC not Iust #hat...has -ro!ound
conse5uences.S IndeedC #ithout the gag ruleC S#ho #e su9sidi>eS is determined Mrst and
!oremost 9y ho# e<ectively and e<iciently an organi>ation !urthers the goals o! the =.S.
-rogramC including its demonstrated a9ility to reduce a9ortion. =nder the gag ruleC the Mrst
consideration is #hether that organi>ation meets an antia9ortion -olitical litmus test.
Onl3 li2ting the gag rule 5ill cause conservatives to cut 2amil3 lanning across the
board%
"u9lic "olicyC EAnalysis Says 4oost in 3verseas )amily "lanning Aid 2ould Aield Im-roved HealthC )e#er A9ortionsF
August 2111C Bolume C (um9er 4C +he Guttmacher InstituteC
htt-,??###.guttmacher.org?-u9s?tgr?1?4?gr1141..htmlQ
=.S. su--ort !or !amily -lanning assistance in develo-ing countries -ea;ed in 1..4C coinciding
#ith the =nited (ations International Con!erence on "o-ulation and Develo-ment in Cairo.
2hen social conservatives too; control o! Congress only a !e# months a!ter the con!erenceC
ho#everC the =.S. Agency !or International Develo-mentRs O=SAIDRsQ -o-ulation assistance
-rogram immediately 9ecame a target o! 9oth -olicy assaults and !unding cuts. And #hile the
9attle over the Sglo9al gag ruleS has raged over these last si0 yearsC conservatives largel3 5on
on the 2unding 2ront right at the outset. In 1..$ O!or )A 1..&QC the a--ro-riation !or the -rogram #as slashed
almost L211 million'!rom L$42 to L$& millionG moreoverC !unding #as delayed until #ell into the Mscal yearC and #hen releasedC it
#as doled out in monthly installments. +hese actions #ere intended to -unish the -rogram and to -ressure its advocates and the
administration to acce-t the gag ruleC restricting #hat overseas organi>ations can do #ith their o#n !unds relating to a9ortion
services and advocacy. )or )A 1..7C !unding #as allo#ed to rise slightly to L*$ millionC the level at #hich it has remained ever
sinceC although the delays and the monthly SmeteringS did not end com-letely until )A 2111 Osee chartQ. +he -rogram has 9een
!urther -enali>ed in )A 2111C ho#ever, Congress insisted that its !unding 9e reduced to L72.$ million i! the -resident e0ercised his
10:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
authority to -artially #aive im-osition o! the glo9al gag ruleC #hich he did OSGlo9al Gag Rule +hreatens International )amily
"lanning "rogramsCS +GRC )e9ruary 2111C -age 1Q. 2ith a--ro-riations still at only t#o:thirds the level
attained at the time o! the Cairo con!erenceC the administration has made !ully restoring
Mnancial su--ort !or international -o-ulation assistance a -riority !or its Mnal year in o<ice. Aet
the -ros-ects !or any !unding increase are tied to the -olitics over the !ate o! the gag rule -olicy
languageC andC as has 9een the case every year since 1..$C the outcome on 9oth li;ely #ill not
9e ;no#n until the Mnal days o! this congressional session.
10;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' ,i2t the Gag Rule C+
Lamil3 lanning 5ill onl3 succeed 5ith increased 2unding%
1(L+A -ress release. A-ril C 2000. htt-,??###.un!-a.org?ne#s?ne#s.c!mKIDW7&$.
=(I+/D (A+I3(SC (e# Aor; ' 8ore !unding !or international !amily -lanning is needed
urgently to ena9le 211 million #omen in develo-ing countries to e0ercise their human right to
determine the si>e o! their !amilies. 2ithout these servicesC the num9ers o! un#anted
-regnancies and a9ortions #ill continue rising and the lives o! #omen and children as #ell as
the 8illennium Develo-ment Goals #ould 9e -ut at ris;C according to +horaya Ahmed 39aidC
/0ecutive Director o! =()"AC the =nited (ations "o-ulation )und. S-ea;ing today at the
=nited (ations Commission on "o-ulation and Develo-mentC 8s. 39aid said thatC even though
donor assistance to -o-ulation issues has dou9led in the -ast Mve yearsC E!unding !or
international !amily -lanning has dro--ed !rom more than hal! o! all s-ending on -o-ulation
assistance to less than 11 -er cent.F +his slide occurred 9et#een 1..$ and 2114. Des-ite the
general increase in overall -o-ulation assistanceC 8s. 39aid #arned that its current level #as
insu<icient !or today6s needs. AlsoC the maIority o! resources are mo9ili>ed 9y a !e# maIor
donorsC #ith a -ronounced shi!t to#ards !unding !or HIB?AIDS at the e0-ense o! other vital
-o-ulation #or;C such as !amily -lanning. )inancing !or -o-ulation issues a<ects international
migration Jo#sC said 8s. 39aid. E+odayC the highest unmet need !or !amily -lanning is in su9:
Saharan A!ricaC #here one in !our married #omen #ants to use !amily -lanningC 9ut has no
access to these services.F +heseC she notedC Eare the same countries #ith the highest rates o!
-overty and -o-ulation gro#thC !actors that o!ten lead -eo-le to migrateF. 2omen com-rise
almost hal! o! the #orld6s international migrantsC said 8s. 39aidC and many o! them ris; gender
discriminationC violenceC and a9useC orC in the #orst casesC !all victims o! ruthless tra<ic;ers.
+his creates Ean urgent need to integrate gender and human rights into migration -olicies and
!or nations to #or; together to cur9 tra<ic;ing and 9ring tra<ic;ers to Iustice.F 8s. 39aid also
noted the severe shortage in many countries o! health #or;ers #ho have migrated to
industriali>ed nationsC #hich is E-articularly devastating !or countries most a<ected 9y
HIB?AIDS.F Receiving countries can hel- 9y directing -arts o! their develo-ment assistance
to#ards education and training in generalC and health sector #or;ers in -articularC in countries
!rom #hich they dra# migrants. =()"AC the =nited (ations "o-ulation )undC is an
international develo-ment agency that -romotes the right o! every #omanC man and child to
enIoy a li!e o! health and e5ual o--ortunity. =()"A su--orts countries in using -o-ulation data
!or -olicies and -rogrammes to reduce -overty and to ensure that every -regnancy is #antedC
every 9irth is sa!eC every young -erson is !ree o! HIB?AIDSC and every girl and #oman is treated
#ith dignity and res-ect.
Just reealing the gag rule isn7t enough8increasing 2unding 2or 2amil3 lanning is
critical%
&hird World (et5or-C Decem9er 2000. htt-,??###.t#nside.org.sg?title2?health.in!o?t#nin!ohealth1$..htm
)amily -lanning is a -o#er!ul tool !or 9oosting develo-mentC 9ut !unding has dro--ed 9y 1Y in
recent years and is Sdes-erately under!undedSC said Sinding. Current !unding levels are less
than hal! #hat the 17. countries committed to at the 1..4 Cairo con!erence on "o-ulation and
Develo-ment. As a result there has 9een no -rogress in 21 yearsC he said, SItRs still $11C111
#omen dying every year Iust as it #as in 1..4.S 4et#een 1..$ and 211C donor su--ort !or
!amily -lanning commodities and service delivery !ell !rom L$&1 million to L4&1 million. )amily
-lanning -rogrammes in A!rica alone are -roIected to cost more than L271 million in 211& and
nearly L$11 million in 211$. And the availa9le !unding !or 211& #ill 9e at least L71 million less
170
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
than needed. S2ithout maIor increases in !undingC there is no ho-e o! im-rovementCS said
Sinding.
171
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' "nternational Actor C+
&he gag rule revents other international actors 2rom 2unding 2amil3 lanning8other
(GOs 5ill be deterred 2rom acceting international 2unding%
+he glo9al gag rule also im-acts international assistance -rovided 9y other donor coun: tries
Oe.g.C the /uro-ean =nion countriesC many o! #hich have -u9licly o--osed the glo9al gag
rule$$QC =( agenciesC and !oundations and other -rivate !unders. )or e0am: -leC !oreign (G3s
may 9e deterred !rom underta;ing -rograms to -rovide legal a9or: tion services or to lo99y
their governments to ma;e legal a9ortions sa!er'-rograms that #ould have 9een s-onsored 9y
such !unders'so that the (G3s do not Ieo-ardi>e their =SAID !amily -lanning !unding.
)urthermoreC =.S.:9ased (G3s that receive =SAID !unding !or international !amily -lanning
and #or; #ith !oreign (G3s may have -ro9: lems see;ing matching !unds !rom other donors
!or these -rogramsC as those donors may resist having their grants E!ederali>edCF i.e.C
su9IectedC in e<ectC to the glo9al gagrule.
&he global gag rule revents other nations 2rom giving 2amil3 lanning assistance
efectivel38no international actor can solve absent a reversal o2 the 1$ gag rule%
Christina Qamas? International "rogram o! the Center o! Re-roductive Rights %egal Advisor )or /uro-eC 2002.
ChristinaC E/uro-ean "arliamentaries S-ea; outC 4ush A9ortion "olicy Hinders 3ther (ation6s )unding to Develo-ing
CountriesCF Dune $C 2112C htt-,??###.re-roductiverights.org?-rT12T1&1$>am-asggr.html.
SAesterdayC mem9ers o! the DutchC =nited 7ingdom and Russian -arliamentsC and a mem9er o!
the /uro-ean "arliament !rom Denmar;C traveled to 2ashington D.C. to tell mem9ers o!
Congress that the glo9al gag rule restricts their !oreign aid -rograms and hinders their
democracy:9uilding e<orts. +he glo9al gag ruleC reinstated 9y "resident 4ush on his second day
in o<iceC limits !oreign non:governmental organi>ations O(G3sQ !rom using their o#n non:=.S.
!unds !or a9ortion servicesC lo99yingC re!errals and re!orm. Ho#everC its im-act is much
9roader. +he /uro-ean -arliamentarians testiMed that their nation6s !unding to develo-ing
countries is hindered 9y the 4ush gag rule. 3ur o#n allies cannot -artner #ith !oreign
organi>ations on -roIects thatC !or e0am-leC reduce the num9er o! #omen dying !rom unsa!e
a9ortions i! those organi>ations receive =SAID !unds. +he gag rule severely curtails the
e<ectiveness o! already limited develo-ment relie! in the area o! !amily -lanning and
re-roductive health.
172
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' China C+
Chinese coercion revents it 2rom e<ercising 2amil3 lanning leadershi%
Hannah A. $aona? DanuaryC 200* O"aciMc Rim %a# P "olicy DournalC C388/(+, +H/ "R3+/C+I3( 3)
R/"R3D=C+IB/ RIGH+S =(D/R I(+/R(A+I3(A% %A2, +H/ 4=SH AD8I(IS+RA+I3(RS "3%ICA SHI)+ A(D
CHI(ARS )A8I%A "%A((I(G "RAC+IC/SC %e0isQ
As a signatory to the ICC"R since 1..*C
200
the "RC is 9ound to re!rain !rom acts that #ould
violate the o9Iect and -ur-ose o! the treaty.
201
3ne o! the main o9Iectives o! the ICC"R is to
recogni>e human rights and the o9ligations that states have to res-ect those rightsC including
re-roductive rights.
202
At Mrst glance it may a--ear that the "RC com-lies #ith the ICC"R 9y
ensuring that individuals have access to !amily -lanning in!ormationC 9ut the "RC uses coercive
-ractices to en!orce the national one:child -er !amily -olicy. +hrough its coercive -racticesC the
"RC violates the -rovisions o! the ICC"R -rotecting individual li9erty and the right to !ound a
!amilyC there9y acting in o--osition to the treatyRs -ur-ose.
20)
+he right to Z\2$4[ choose #hen
and ho# many children an individual is going to have is ta;en a#ay 9y the "RCRs one:child -er
!amily -olicy.
20*
+he decision is instead -laced in the hands o! government o<icials.
20/
+hose
living in the "RC do not have the right to !ound a !amily 9ecause they are allo#ed to have only
one child and they are told #hen they may do so.
200
Although it recently ratiMed the IC/SCRC the "RCRs one:child -er !amily -olicy de-rives its
citi>ens o! the right to a high standard o! -hysical and mental health.
207
+he "RC may argue
thatC through the one:child -er !amily -olicyC it com-lies #ith the IC/SCR 9ecause a lo#er rate
o! -o-ulation gro#th means more resources are availa9le !or those in need. +hough more
resources may 9e availa9leC the "RC continues to use !orced a9ortionsC !orced sterili>ations and
the !orced use o! 9irth control as tools to control -o-ulation gro#th o! the nation in violation o!
the IC/SCR.
20:
(ot only does this -ut the -hysical health o! #omen at ris;C 9ut #omenRs mental
health is also a<ected #hen the right to !ound a !amily is ta;en !rom them involuntarily.
As re5uired 9y its 1.*1 ratiMcation o! C/DA2C
20;
the "RC ma;es access to in!ormation
regarding !amily -lanning readily availa9le at government !amily -lanning clinicsC
210
9ut its
-olicies !ail to ensure the advancement o! #omen that is e0-licitly re5uired 9y C/DA2.
211

Instead o! allo#ing a #oman to !reely decide the num9er and s-acing o! her children as
re5uired under C/DA2C the coercive !amily -lanning -olicy o! the "RC decides !or the #oman
that she #ill have one childC unless she Mts into one o! the e0ce-tions under #hich she may 9e
allo#ed to have t#o children.
212
+he "RC -olicy also removes the choice o! #hether
sterili>ation or a9ortion is a necessary or desira9le o-tion : 9oth may 9e !orced onto a #oman
9y the government.
21)
4y ta;ing these decisions a#ay !rom the #omanC the "RC -olicy
o--resses #omen instead o! #or;ing to#ards their advancement.
+he "RCRs !amily -lanning -olicies also violate international -ledges and -olicies on
re-roductive rights made at various =.(. con!erences. +hese -rinci-les include the -rotection o!
a -ersonRs right to re-roductive !reedom Z\2$$[ regarding the si>e o! his?her !amilyC the
s-acing 9et#een each childC
21*
and the -rohi9ition o! the use o! coercion in im-lementing
!amily -lanning services and -rograms.
21/
In contrastC the "RC uses coercion to en!orce its
!amily -lanning -olicy. In most casesC !amilies are still 9ound to have Iust one child : the 9irth o!
a second child is deemed a crime -unisha9le 9y Mne.
210
Although e0-ressly discouraged at the
=.(. con!erencesC the "RC still im-oses -ositive and negative incentives to encourage
com-liance and -unish non:com-liance.
217
+he "RC continues to violate international treaty
la# and international re-roductive rights -olicy through the a--lication o! these coercive !amily
-lanning -olicies.
17)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
1$ Ke38&echnical =<ertise
1%$% 2amil3 lanning aid is vital H onl3 the 1%$% has the necessar3 technical resources
and s-ills on the ground that is brought 2rom decades o2 e<erience
2endy &urnbull? Senior "olicy and Research Analyst at "o-ulation Action InternationalC 1;;0. /ndangered, =.S.
aid !or !amily -lanning overseasC htt-,??Mndarticles.com?-?articles?miTm17D7?isT1..&TDanT1?aiTn1*&1721?-gT4.
CurrentlyC a9out three:5uarters o! the roughly L4 9illion s-ent to -rovide !amily -lanning
services in develo-ing countries is 9orne 9y the countriesR o#n governments and 9y the #omen
and men #ho use these services. +he remainder is contri9uted 9y develo-ed countries.
)inancial su--ort !rom develo-ed country governments::9oth to other governments directly and
to indigenous nongovernmental organi>ations O(G3sQ #or;ing in those countries clearly -lays a
-ivotal role in meeting the ra-idly increasing contrace-tive needs o! cou-les in the develo-ing
#orld. AndC it is no e0aggeration to say that the =.S. -rogram is the anchor o! the glo9al !amily
-lanning e<ort on #hich other countriesR contri9utions de-end !or sta9ility and direction.
Should =.S. su--ort !or international !amily -lanning continue to erodeC it is unrealistic to
e0-ect that other donor countries #ill::or could::ma;e u- !or the loss o! =.S. government !unds.
(o other countryC nor international organi>ation !or that matterC has the e0tensive Meld
-resence nor the vast array o! technical resources and e0-erience that the =.S. !amily -lanning
e<ort has develo-ed over the decades. 8oreoverC American leadershi- has 9een crucial to
!orging alliances among governments and the -rivate sector so that !amily -lanning and related
social services are -rovided in a more integrated manner.
Onl3 1$A"# has the caabilit3 to 2und global 2amil3 lanning%
)or those !oreign organi>ations that re!use to com-ly #ith the gag ruleC the rice is not Dust
monetar3 . In addition to !or!eiting Mnancial assistance !rom the =nited States Agency !or
International Develo-ment O=SAIDQC these organi>ations lose valua9le technical assistance and
=.S.:donated contrace-tivesC including condoms H t#o critical as-ects o! the =SAID !amily
-lanning -rogram. (o other 9ilateral donor has the ca-acity and e0-ertise to easily Mll the void
le!t 9y the #ithdra#al o! =.S. assistance. =.S. !amily -lanning assistance !unds !amily -lanningC
not a9ortion. =.S. la# and -olicy already ensure that =.S. !unds do not -ay !or a9ortions
overseas. Since 1.7C the Helms amendment to the )oreign Assistance Act has -rohi9ited the
use o! =.S. !unds !or a9ortion servicesG using =.S. !unds !or 9iomedical research and lo99ying on
a9ortion has 9een -rohi9ited since 1.*1. In 1 yearsC no violations have 9een re-orted.
1$A"# e<ertise is vital8it is the onl3 donor that has enough e<erience 5ith 2amil3
lanning in A2rica
Dames Rosen and Shanti Conl3, analysts with Population Action InternationalC 1;;:. EA)RICA6S "3"=%A+I3(
CHA%%/(G/, ACC/%/RA+I(G "R3GR/SS I( R/"R3D=C+IB/ H/A%+HFC
htt-,??###.-o-ulationaction.org?"u9lications?Re-orts?A!ricasT"o-ulationTChallenge?+heTCom-leteTRe-ort.-d!.
+he =nited States has 9een the most im-ortant source o! donor !unding !or -o-ulation
-rograms in A!rica. =.S. 9ilateral -o-ulation assistanceC managed through the =.S. Agency !or
International Develo-ment O=SAIDQ and its net#or; o! -rivate technical assistance agenciesC
\\\\\\\\ !or roughly hal! o! all -o-ulation aid to A!ricaG 9et#een 1.*. and 1..&C =.S. !unding
!or !amily -lanning activities in the region rose !rom L72 million to L127 million. In a num9er
o! A!rican countriesC the =nited States has -rovided consistently high levels o! su--ort. =.S.
-o-ulation assistance to 7enyaC !or e0am-leC averaged L1& million a year 9et#een 1..1 and
17*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
1..&. +he =nited States has sho#n signiM: cant levels o! commitment in (igeria OL12 million
a yearQ and Ghana OL7 million a yearQ. )i!teen o! 21 =SAID country o<ices !und maIor
-o-ulation and health -rogramsG 14 su--ort HIB? AIDS -revention activities. 4eyond its
Mnancial im-ortanceC =SAID ' through its net#or; o! technical agencies ' has 9een the onl3
donor #ith the 9readth and de-th o! e0-ertise to -rovide hands:on assistance to all ;ey
elements o! national !amily -lanning -rograms. It has 9een res-onsi9le !or much o! the
-rogress in A!rican countries to date. Aet =.S. leadershi- on -o-ulation issues in the region is
in danger o! sli--ing.
8aIor cuts in overall =.S. -o-ulation !unding threaten to harm e<orts in A!ricaC as #ell as
else#here. Glo9al =.S. !amily -lanning !unding #as cut 9y $ -ercent 9et#een 1..$ and
1..&G 1..7 9udgets rose slightlyC 9ut are still 1 -ercent 9elo# 1..$ levels.
17/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
1$ Ke38Coercive Lamil3 +lanning 6ad
1$ action is essential8no other donor has the Eeld resence or e<ertise and 1$
leadershi is critical to revent coercive 2amil3 lanning%
Susan CohenC analyst at the Guttmacher InstituteC 1;;7. EISS=/S I( 4RI/), A Res-onse to Concerns a9out
"o-ulation AssistanceCF htt-,??###.guttmacher.org?-u9s?i91$.html.
"ut another #ayC the !ederal government s-ent L$$4 million in )A 1..4 in res-onse to the
needs o! some 1$ million American #omen !or su9sidi>ed !amily -lanning services. +hat same
yearC the =nited States allocated only L4& million to#ard !amily -lanning -rograms overseas in
an e<ort to res-ond to the 21 million #omen in the develo-ing #orld #ho need services.
)or this small -riceC the =.S. -o-ulation aid -rogram over three decades has ac5uired a uni5ue
role and vast ca-acity that cannot 9e easily trans!erred or re-licated 9y any o! the e0isting
donors 5ithout losing valuable time and e<ertise . +he =nited States has esta9lished an
e0tensive Meld -resenceC and it is the only donor that #or;s #idely 9oth #ith the -u9lic and
-rivate sectors and #ith non-roMt as #ell as !or:-roMt entities'all o! #hich are integral to the
success and ultimate sel!:sustaina9ility o! local -rograms. +he =.S. Agency !or International
Develo-ment O=SAIDQC #hich administers the -o-ulation -rogramC is #idely recogni>ed !or its
high level o! technical e0-ertise u-on #hich other countries rely. SimilarlyC the =nited States is
the only donor country that conducts research on ne# contrace-tives and -rogram o-erationsC
#hich not only are essential in guiding an e<ective !amily -lanning services -rogram 9ut also
sometimes directly 9eneMt American #omen. It #as =SAID:!unded researchC !or e0am-leC that
led to the t#o most recently a--roved maIor methods o! 9irth control in the =nited States,
(or-lant and De-o:"rovera. )inallyC to the e0tent that =.S. -olicyma;ers #ish to have any real
-olicy inJuence on the #orld#ide e<ort to sta9ili>e -o-ulation gro#th ratesC the =nited States
must remain a maIor Mnancial -layer. Issues o! s-ecial concern to the =nited States include the
5uality o! !amily -lanning servicesC the availa9ility o! a #ide range o! method choices Oincluding
natural !amily -lanningQ accom-anied 9y !ull and accurate in!ormationC an em-hasis on
-reventing unintended -regnancy and an insistence that -rograms are truly voluntary and !ree
o! coercion.
Concerns About Coercion
Coercion and cultural im-erialism are real and serious concerns that arise in connection #ith
!amily -lanning -rogramsG to -rotect against them re5uires ongoing vigilance. (ot only are
9oth anathema !rom an individual rights -ers-ectiveC 9ut e0-erience has demonstrated that the
most success!ul -rograms are -urely voluntaryC -romote ma0imum choice o! !amily -lanning
methods and are -rovided in a culturally sensitive manner in res-onse to #hat #omen say they
#ant. Coercive !amily -lanning -ractices are e0-ressly -rohi9ited 9y =.S. la# under 9oth the
domestic and the international -rograms. +his is not to say that coercion has not occurred or
#ill not occur in the !utureC either here or else#hereC 9ut it is condemne d as a matter o! -olicy.
As #ith any la#C constant attention is re5uired to assure com-liance. +his is es-ecially true
since coercion can mani!est itsel! directly as #ell as indirectly. ChinaRs one:child:-er:!amily
-olicyC !or e0am-leC has 9een associated #ith instances o! !orced sterili>ation and a9ortion that
have #arranted #orld#ide o--ro9rium. %imiting the range o! availa9le contrace-tivesC #hich
occurs in some !amily -lanning -rogramsC is a more su9tle !orm o! coercion. /nsuring !ull and
in!ormed consent and true choice in the decision on #hether to use !amily -lanning services is
neither easy nor sim-leC 9ut is necessary and o! the highest -riority !rom 9oth the =.S. and the
international -ers-ectives. As !or the s-ecter o! cultural im-erialismC -reventive voluntar!
!amily -lanning -rograms are s-eciMcally designed #ith the !ull in-ut and -artici-ation o!
indigenous grou-sC #omen in -articular. +he charge that these #omen are availing themselves
o! contrace-tive services as a result o! the im-osition o! 2estern values is 9elied 9y #orld#ide
170
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
survey data. IndeedC #omen in develo-ing countries are see;ing out !amily -lanning services
and having !e#er children 9ecause the! #ant smaller !amilies. 3ver the -ast 1 yearsC #hat
-eo-le consider ideal !amily si>e has declined steadilyC according to e0tensive surveys o!
married #omen o! re-roductive age. 7enyan #omen in the 1.*1sC !or e0am-leC said they
#anted a9out seven childrenC 9ut today they say they #ant no more than !our. +he same
do#n#ard trend is evident in every region o! the #orldC regardless o! religion and cultureC and
in such diverse -laces as SenegalC /gy-tC 8oroccoC 4angladeshC Colom9ia and "eru. 2hile
overall !ertility rates have also !allen over the same -eriodC large ga-s remain 9et#een the
num9er o! children #omen say they #ant and the num9er they actually have. %arge -ro-ortions
o! #omen throughout the #orld re-ort that their most recent 9irth #as un-lanned'either
un#anted or mistimed, 2$41Y in much o! AsiaC (orth A!rica and the 8iddle /astC and $1&$Y in
some %atin American countries. +he same -henomenon is also evident in several areas o! Su9:
Saharan A!ricaC even though #omen there generally #ant larger !amilies than in other -arts o!
the #orld.
177
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
1$ Ke38=mirics
1$ oulation assistance is emiricall3 success2ul8increasing our monetar3
commitment is critical to revitali4e our oulation leadershi%
+oulation Action "nternational? 2001% E2hy the =S Should Su--ort )amily "lanning
3verseasFC
htt-,??###.-o-ulationaction.org?"u9lications?)actTSheets?)S1&?Summary.shtml.
1$ oulation assistance is highl3 efective% =S:!unded -rograms have had a -ractical
!ocus on e0-anding and im-roving !amily -lanning services. =S !oreign aid has su--orted
contrace-tive services -rovided 9y 9oth governments and the -rivate sectorG su--lied
contrace-tivesG hel-ed train health #or;ers and managersG and introduced creative ne#
a--roaches to educating -eo-le a9out !amily -lanning and reaching them #ith services. +ens o!
millions o! cou-les use !amily -lanning as a direct result o! =S assistance. 8any millions more
have 9eneMted indirectly !rom im-rovements in services resulting !rom American advice and
innovations.
Countries receiving 1$ assistance have e<erienced remar-able increases in
contracetive use and declines in birth rates% In the 2* most -o-ulous countries receiving
=S !undsC the average num9er o! children -er !amily has dro--ed !rom &.1 in the 1.&1s to 4.2
today. In Colom9iaC Indonesia and 8e0ico' all countries #hich have received e0tensive =S
assistance'average !amily si>e is no# three children. +ai#an and +hailandC #hich #ere early
reci-ients o! =S assistanceC no# have an average !amily si>e o! t#o children and no longer
re5uire =S assistance.
1$9assisted rograms are voluntar3 and do not suort abortion% =.S. assistance is 9ased
on the !ree and in!ormed choice and consent o! individuals. =S:!unded -rograms see; to
em-o#er cou-les to ma;e their o#n decisionsC !or e0am-leC 9y #or;ing to e0-and the num9er
o! contrace-tive methods availa9le and training sta< in -ro-er counseling techni5ues. 4y la#C
=S !unds cannot su--ort -rograms that use coercion or incentives to encourage use o! !amily
-lanning and cannot 9e used to -er!orm a9ortions. Im-roving access to contrace-tion is also
the 9est #ay to reduce reliance on a9ortion.
1$ Lunds Crucial? Cost er Citi4en $mall
&he cost o2 1$ oulation assistance to each American is negligible% In 1..$C 9e!ore the
1Y 9udget cut im-osed 9y CongressC =S !amily -lanning aid o! L$77 million amounted to little
more than L2 !or each American. Americans contri9ute less -er -erson than the DanesC DutchC
Germans and (or#egians. ODanes and (or#egians contri9ute the mostC a9out L11 each.Q
1$ 2unds are vital to global 2amil3 lanning eforts% As the industriali>ed nation #ith the
largest -o-ulation and economyC the =nited States remains the 9iggest donor in the Meld. +he
=S contri9ution currently re-resents more than a third o! all grant aid !or !amily -lanningC 9ut
#ith =S encouragementC other donors are ta;ing u- more o! the Mnancial 9urden. 8oreoverC
governments and consumers in develo-ing countries continue to -ay most o! the costs'a9out
*1 -ercent o! current glo9al s-ending on !amily -lanning. +otal donor assistance !rom all
sources is currently only a9out one:third o! total estimated need.
A #eEning Moment
&he decisions 5e ma-e no5 5ill ma-e a diference to the 2uture o2 our lanet and to
our children and grandchildren% In an interconnected #orldC Americans stand to 9eneMt
directly !rom e<orts to slo# -o-ulation gro#th #ith its negative im-acts on the glo9al economy
and environment. +he -ros-ects !or -eace and economic develo-ment in the t#enty:Mrst
century #ill de-endC among other thingsC on slo#ing -o-ulation gro#th and meeting human
needs. 2ithout continued commitmentC there is no guarantee that -o-ulation trends #ill
continue to move ra-idly in their current -ositive direction.
17:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
&he 1$ must not 2alter no5 in its eforts to e<and 5orld5ide access to 2amil3
lanning% )or many yearsC the =nited States and its Congress set an e0am-le to other
governments. Ho#everC =S leadershi- has 9een undermined 9y recent !unding cuts and
restrictions on !amily -lanning assistanceC #hich can only lead to more un#anted -regnancies
and a9ortions. Congress must restore !unds and avoid ne# restrictions on !amily -lanning aidC i!
the =nited States is to live u- to the res-onsi9ility that comes #ith its #ealth and role as a
#orld leader.
17;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
1$ Ke38Condoms
1$A"# e<ertise is vital to contracetion sulies%
Dames Rosen and Shanti Conl3, analysts with Population Action InternationalC 1;;:. EA)RICA6S "3"=%A+I3(
CHA%%/(G/, ACC/%/RA+I(G "R3GR/SS I( R/"R3D=C+IB/ H/A%+HFC
htt-,??###.-o-ulationaction.org?"u9lications?Re-orts?A!ricasT"o-ulationTChallenge?+heTCom-leteTRe-ort.-d!.
Donor Mnancial su--ort has 9een cru:cial in the -urchase and management o! contrace-tive
su--lies !or use in !amily -lanning and S+D -revention -rograms in A!rica. +he -otential !or
domestic -roduction o! contrace-tives is e0tremely limitedC and most A!rican countries cannot
a<ord to -ay !or im-orted contrace-tives. /0ternal technical assistance has also -layed an
im-ortant role in strengthening contrace-tive distri9ution systems. Ho#everC donors a--ear to
9e losing interest in su--lying contrace-:tives. S#eden has sought to shi!t its longstanding
Mnancial su--ort !or oral contrace-tives in 7enya to other re-roductive health activities.
=SAID6s role in contrace-tive su--ly has 9een crucial ' it has 9een the maIor source o!
technical e0-ertise in strengthening overall su--ly management systemsC and has a central
-rocurement system #ith a strong trac; record o! -roviding ade5uate su--lies o!
contrace-tives to countries in a timely manner. =SAID6s -ull9ac; in several 2est A!rican coun:
tries has re-ortedly le!t contrace-tive su--ly systems in disarray ' Iust #hen contrace-tive
-revalence is starting to rise in some o! these countries.
1:0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
1$ Ke38Modeling
A2rican governments model 1%$% restrictions on 2amil3 lanning 2unding8even i2 the3
imlement 2amil3 lanning? it 5ill be coercive and 5on7t resect 5omen7s rights%
)rederic; $ai? Advisor to the "resident on Re-roductive HealthC HIB?AIDSC in GhanaC 200*. EInternational
Commitments and Guidance on =nsa!e A9ortionCF A!rican Dournal o! Re-roductive HealthC Bol. *C (o. 1C A-rilC 2114
--. 1$:2*C Data9ase, 4ioline International.
)inallyC #e must ta;e into consideration the =S governmentRs continued reversal on
re-roductive health -olicies. At the 1.*4 2orld "o-ulation Con!erence in 8e0ico CityC the =S
government announced that it #ould #ithdra# !unding !rom any organi>ation that -rovided
a9ortion servicesC even #ith !unds !rom non:=S sources. +his -olicy 9ecame ;no#n as the
8e0ico City "olicy or SGlo9al Gag Rule.S (early a decade laterC in 1..C then "resident Clinton
reversed the 8e0ico City "olicy. Ho#everC in 2111C a mere t#o days a!ter ta;ing o<iceC
"resident 4ush reinstated the 8e0ico City "olicy. 3ver the -ast t#o yearsC the current =S
administration has #ithdra#n !rom -reviously made commitments concerning se0ual and
re-roductive rights. 8ost recentlyC the 4ush administration has announced its intention to
e0tend the SGlo9al Gag RuleCS #hich has a--lied only to !amily -lanning !undingC to also include
=S government !unds given !or maternal and child health and !or HIB?AIDS -rogrammes. +hese
4ush administration -oliciesC #hich amount to the e0-ort o! domestic de9ates and -oliciesC also
have the e<ect o! undermining international consensus9building rocesses such as IC"D.
4y #ithdra#ing !romC and Ji-:Jo--ing onC -reviously agreed u-on international agreementsC
they lessen the hard #on e<ects o! these -rocesses and rovide A2rican and other
governments 5ith an e<cuse to also not resect them . +hese -olicies also endanger the
health and lives o! #omen across A!ricaC and a study e0amining its e<ects is !orthcoming !rom
I-as and "o-ulation Action International.
1:1
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
1$ Ke38Modeling
&he 1$ rovides a global model 2or 5omen7s rights%
=rnst? 200*. Dulia /rnstC %aura 7at>iveC and /rica Smoc;C la#yersC Center !or Re-roductive RightsC +he %egacy 3!
RoeC & =. "a. D. Const. %. 7$2C le0isC AG.
As discussed in -revious sectionsC although the glo9al trend is a movement to#ard increasing human rights !or #omenC including
re-roductive rightsC there is a small 9ut gro#ing countertrend 9ent on dismantling these rights. +his international countercurrent
has 9een signiMcantly strengthened 9y the reinvigorated anti:choice agenda es-oused 9y the current =.S. government : not only
through its !oreign -olicy agendaC 9ut also through international e0-osure o! the assaults on a9ortion rights in the =.S. 1.2
+here!oreC in addition to the direct im-act o! =.S. !oreign -olicy restrictionsC such as the glo9al gag
ruleC the 4ush administrationRs high -roMle condemnation o! a9ortion in its domestic -olicy and -ositions ta;en at international
!ora may also 9e having an e<ect on national:level cam-aigns to li9erali>e a9ortion in countries
#here it is illegal. +he =nited States government has given ammunition to conservative !orces in
other countries #ho couch o--osition to a9ortion in moral : and even misguided health:related : termsC
9ased u-on their inter-retation o! =.S. a9ortion -olicies. )or e0am-leC in 8aliC a #omenRs rights activist s-o;e
o! a common assum-tion that i! the =nited States ta;es a -osition on an issueC it has done so !ollo#ing evaluation o! concreteC
scientiMc evidence. 1. In additionC the =nited StatesR #illingness to #ithhold !unding as -unishment !or
su--ort : or -erceived su--ort : o! a9ortion has led to a !ear in some countries that a9ortion la#
re!orm may result in a loss o! =.S. Mnancial assistance . )or e0am-leC -rior to the li9erali>ation o! a9ortion in (e-alC there #ere
!ears among those a#are o! the de:!unding o! =()"A that a9ortion la# re!orm #ould lead to a similar re-risal against the government o! (e-al. 1.4 2hile these !ears
ultimately did not -revent re!orm in that countryC they may have a more signiMcant chilling e<ect in other countries. +he 4ush administration and anti:choice mem9ers o!
Congress have ignored the !act that #omenRs rights advocates in every nation #here a9ortion remains restricted continue to Mght !or sa!eC legal a9ortion 9ecause they see it :
as the maIority o! #omen in the =.S. do : as integral to their a9ility to control their !ertilityC -reserve their health and #ell:9eingC and -artici-ate as e5uals in their societies.
Z\7.[ 2omen in these countries #ant #hat #omen in the =.S. have come to ta;e !or granted : access to sa!e a9ortion services as -art o! their re-roductive health care. In
res-onseC the 4ush administration is Ioining !orces #ith its !undamentalist counter-arts at the =nited
(ations and in regional venuesC there9y giving strength to emerging !ar right religious movements
#orld#ide. 1.$ +he =.S. governmentRs rene#ed !undamentalism raises 5uestions a9out !urther
conse5uencesC es-ecially #hen considered in the conte0t o! #omenRs struggles to achieve !ulMllment o! their 9roader
re-roductive rights. )or e0am-leC is the !undamentalism and traditionalism that the =nited States e0-orts
to other countries hel-ing to !oster the climate in #hich the Batican launches a cam-aign against
li!e:saving condoms in the midst o! a #orld#ide HIB?AIDS crisisK 1.& In #hich the government o! Iran can
contem-late -romoting Stem-orary marriagesS to allo# men to -urchase the se0ual services o!
#omen : #ho are o!ten young and !orced into -rostitution 9y a9usive !amilies or hus9andsC a -ractice de!ended as -ermissi9le
under the Shiite 9ranch o! IslamK 1.7 In #hich -regnant #omen needing emergency o9stetric care in
A!ghanistan are still inhi9ited !rom seeing a doctor 9y religious clerics stating that their
situation is SAllahRs #illSK 1.* According to a -ress release !rom the Alan Guttmacher Institute concerning the 4ush
administrationRs string o! anti:choice initiativesC Sthe 4ush administration has sided #ith the BaticanC as #ell
as Sa0is o! evilR countries Iran and Ira5 and others not ;no#n !or their Z\7.4[ su--ort o! #omenRs rightsC including
%i9yaC Sudan and Syria.S 1.. +he -ress release 5uoted Adrienne GermainC -resident o! the International 2omenRs Health CoalitionC
as stating that Sthis alliance sho#s the de-ths o! -erversity o! the Z=.S.[ -osition. 3n the one hand #eRre -resuma9ly 9laming these
countries !or uns-ea;a9le acts o! terrorismC and at the same time #e are allying ourselves #ith them in the
o--ression o! #omen.S 211 As noted in the conclusionC -ro:choice -olicy ma;ers must vocally o--ose all !orms o!
re-roductive rights a9uses against #omenC #hich are e0acer9ated glo9ally 9y the =nited States
through #hat has 9een descri9ed as "resident 4ushRs S#ar against #omen.S 211 Conclusion In 1.7C
Roe v. 2ade contri9uted to an emerging glo9al understanding o! #omenRs re-roductive autonomy as a 9asic human right. +odayC in
contrastC the glo9al -ro:choice movement is #or;ing to counter =.S. -olicies that deny #omen needed re-roductive health care
services. It should 9e increasingly clear to #omen in the =.S. that their o#n re-roductive rights are not invulnera9le. )or this
reasonC and 9ecause -ro:choice advocates overseas have little -o#er to inJuence the decisions o!
American -oliticiansC attac;s on re-roductive rights a9road should engender resistance and -rotest at home. %i;e#iseC -ro:choice -olicy ma;ers in the =.S.
need to connect the dots among the assaults on choice 9y the 4ush administrationC Congress and the !ederal Iudiciary. 2hile each o! these initiatives carries im-lications !or the
#omen directly a<ected 9y itC its threat to 9asic !reedoms !or the larger -ro:choice -u9lic might not 9e immediately evident. +his Sdivide:and:con5uerS tactic incrementally
ta;es a#ay access to a9ortion !rom discrete grou-s in the =.S. and a9roadC #hile seemingly leaving a s;eleton o! the Sright to chooseS in -lace. 2hen regarded togetherC as a
uniMedC coordinated -lan to dismantle the -rotections a<orded #omen 9y the =.S. Constitution and human rights instrumentsC these individual ste-s -aint a more ominous
-icture. "iecemeal attem-ts to slo# these anti:choice assaults have met #ith uneven success. "ro:choice -olicy ma;ers in the =.S. need to
res-ond to their o--onents in ;indC 9y -resenting an alternativeC com-rehensiveC -ositive vision o!
#omenRs re-roductive rights and healthC Z\7.$[ including not only access to sa!e and legal
1:2
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
a9ortionC 9ut also to com-rehensive re-roductive health care servicesC educationC and
in!ormation. History has sho#n thatC !or 9etter or !or #orseC the 1%$% can have tremendous in@uence
on the reroductive rights? health? and 5ell9being o2 millions o2 5omen across the
globe . (o# it is time !or =.S. leaders to listen to voices o! #omen #orld#ide #ho ;no# !ar too #ell
#hat it means to live #ithout choice. +he rights o! all #omen may de-end on it.
1:)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
1$ Ke38Modeling
&he 1$ is the global model 2or abortion la5%
=rnst? 200*. Dulia /rnstC %aura 7at>iveC and /rica Smoc;C la#yersC Center !or Re-roductive RightsC +he %egacy 3!
RoeC & =. "a. D. Const. %. 7$2C le0isC AG
Dust as Roe v. 2adeRs -ositive rever9erations #ere !elt #orld#ide in the decades that !ollo#edC =.S. 9ac;-edaling
on re-roductive choice has had negative im-lications around the #orld. +he mounting assault
on #omenRs re-roductive rights in other countries through e0-licit =.S. !oreign -olicy directed at
undermining those rights is -ain!ully Z\7*7[ a--arent. Ho#everC all too o!ten the -olicy ma;ers in 2ashingtonC D.C.C do not
ma;e the connection 9et#een their actions and the signiMcant im-act those actions have u-on the healthC #ell:9eingC andC indeedC
the very lives o! #omen living in remote areas o! the glo9e. It is much easier !or o--onents o! choice to convince =.S. la#ma;ers to
im-ose restrictions on the re-roductive rights o! #omen in other countries than on the rights o! #omen in the =.S. )or one thingC
the -rotections o! a9ortion rights guaranteed to American #omen under the =.S. Constitution do not a--ly 9eyond the 9orders o!
the =nited States. 172 AdditionallyC #omen in other countries have little inJuence over =.S. -olitics. As one #riter o9served, Given
that a9ortions are legal in the =nited States and are re5uired to 9e medically soundC #hy #ould an American -resident see; to deny
that standard o! healthcare -rotection to the rest o! the #orldK HereRs #hy, 2omen in other countries canRt vote in =.S. electionsC
9ut the mem9ers o! the (ational Right to %i!e Committee not only vote 9ut also donate to candidates and -olitical action
committees. 17 =.S. -olicy ma;ers can -lacate a conservative constituency 9y im-osing severe a9ortion restrictions on #omen in
other countries andC at the same timeC turning a 9lind eye to the im-act o! those -olicies. 8oreoverC =.S. -olicy ma;ers and
the general -u9lic are also largely una#are o! the signiMcant im-act that the domestic a9ortion de9ate
#ithin the =.S. has u-on the issue o! a9ortion in other countries. )oreign governments and
nongovernmental organi>ations #ho de-end u-on =.S. assistance !or survival have every incentive to
im-lement -olicies #ithin their o#n countries that #ill not o<end the =.S. government and Ieo-ardi>e
their !unding. 2hen anti:choice rhetoric surrounding domestic -olitics in the =nited States increasesC it
has a rile efect u-on -u9lic res-onse to a9ortion in other countries. +his section 9rieJy e0amines the
im-act that the anti:choice =.S. !oreign and domestic -olicies have u-on #omenRs access to a9ortion around the #orld. Z\7**[ A.
Direct Im-act o! Anti:Choice =.S. )oreign "olicy +he =.S. !oreign -olicy decisions made in 2ashingtonC D.C.C 9ased on anti:choice
-olitical considerationsC have drastic conse5uences u-on the lives o! #omen throughout the #orldC es-ecially in im-overished
countries. An estimated !orty to M!ty million a9ortions ta;e -lace annuallyC and at least t#enty
million are -er!ormed under unsa!eC illegal conditions. 174 =- to hal! o! #omen undergoing unsa!e a9ortions
re5uire -ost:a9ortion care !or com-lications. 8illions o! #omen su<er -ermanent -hysical inIuriesC and at least 71C111
#omen die each year. 17$ 8ost o! these deaths and inIuries are -reventa9leC and occur in countries #here a9ortion is
either illegal altogether or highly restricted. Although the restrictions on #omenRs right to choose im-osed u-on #omen #ithin the
=nited States are considera9le and gro#ingC as discussed in the -revious sectionsC the restrictions that the =.S. government
im-oses u-on #omen in other countries have much more severe conse5uences. 2ithin the =nited StatesC almost no deaths or
inIuries result !rom unsa!e a9ortionC and the maternal mortality rate is relatively lo# at seven deaths -er 111C111 live 9irths. 17& 4y
#ay o! contrastC in 7enyaC #here a9ortion is !or9idden e0ce-t to save the li!e o! a -regnant #omanC the maternal mortality rate is
$.1 deaths -er 111C111 live 9irthsC and $Y are due to unsa!e a9ortions. 4et#een 1Y and &1Y o! all admissions to gynecology
#ards in 7enya are #omen needing medical care !or -ost:a9ortion com-lications. 177 Aet the =nited States is e0-orting
-olicies that ensure that the legal status 5uo #ill remain in -lace in countries such as 7enyaC
and that #omen #ill not have access to sa!e a9ortion services. 2here Z\7*.[ a9ortion is restrictedC the
legal constraints on #omenRs decisions #ill not end a9ortionsC 9ut #ill inevita9ly lead to higher
health ris;sC es-ecially !or indigent #omen. It is e0tremely di<icult to determine the !ull e0tent o! the harm to
#omen caused 9y the glo9al gag ruleC 17* in large -art 9ecause the restriction SgagsS organi>ations !rom discussing a9ortion.
(onethelessC some re-orts o! its im-act have emerged. 17. +he government o! 4olivia has re-ortedly indicated thatC
as a direct result o! the =.S. -olicyC it #ill no longer endorse li!e:saving care !or #omen su<ering
com-lications !rom illegalC unsa!e a9ortions. 1*1 4olivian organi>ations also re-ort that 9ecause o! the
glo9al gag ruleC their government has sus-ended e<orts to -ermit distri9ution o! emergency
contrace-tionC #hich -revents -regnancy and there9y reduces a9ortions. 1*1 In Nim9a9#eC the
director o! a health care organi>ation has -rivately indicated su--ort !or li9erali>ation o! Nim9a9#eRs stringent
a9ortion la# to reduce the num9er o! #omen dying !rom a9ortion. Since his organi>ation is su9Iect to the glo9al
gag ruleC ho#everC he stated in an intervie# !or a ne#s-a-er article that his organi>ation did not su--ort the
legali>ation o! a9ortion. 1*2 At the time "resident 4ush reinstated the glo9al gag rule in 2111C in (e-al over $11 #omen
#ere dying !rom -regnancy:related com-lications !or every 111C111 live 9irths Ocom-ared #ith seven maternal deaths -er 111C111
9irths in the =nited StatesQ : hal! as a result o! illegalC unsa!e a9ortion. 1* +he glo9al gag rule !orced several organi>ations in
1:*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
(e-al to choose 9et#een giving u- their des-erately needed =.S. assistance or giving u- their e<orts to re!orm the a9ortion la#
Othat allo#ed no e0ce-tionsC even i! a #oman #ould die as a result o! a -regnancyQ under #hich 21Y o! #omen in -rison #ere
incarcerated !or the crime o! a9ortion. 1*4 In 7enyaC the glo9al gag rule !orced a vital health care Z\7.1[ organi>ation to shut the
doors o! three o! its health care clinics in rural areas o! the country. 1*$
1:/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
1$ Ke38Modeling8Global ,iberali4ation o2 Abortion ,a5s
&he gag rule emo5ers ultraconservative 2actions in countries around the 5orld8this
revents global liberali4ation o2 abortion la5s%
2ith increasing international recognition o! #omen6s re-roductive rightsC draconian
-rohi9itions on a9ortion have given #ay in many countries to more humane la#s and
regulations -ermitting a9ortion in cases o! ra-eC incestC or endangerment o! the li!e or health
o! the #omanC and on 9road socioeconomic grounds. In countries that are home to or
re-resenting &2Y o! the #orld6s -o-ulationC72#omen are legally -ermitted to have an a9ortion
in most circumstances. Since 1.*$C numerous countries that receive =.S. international !amily
-lanning assistance have chosen to li9erali>e their a9ortion la#sC including Al9aniaC 4ots#anaC
Cam9odiaC GhanaC (e-alC RomaniaC and South A!rica.7 &he global gag rule7s restriction
on lobb3ing and advocac3 has a signiEcant negative imact on abortion la5 re2orm
movements in countries that receive 1$A"# assistance. 8ovements to ease restrictive
a9ortion la#s may 9e curtailed 9y the gag ruleC as med: ical care -rovidersC advocates and
their -otential coalition -artners !all silent on a9or: tion in order to maintain !unding !or
re-roductive health services. 4y tying the hands o! a9ortion:rights su--ortersC the gag rule
9olsters ultraconservativeC anti:choice move: ments #or;ing to restrict the more li9eral
a9ortion la#s already esta9lished in some countries. In /l Salvador in 1..*C right:#ing
la#ma;ers succeeded in eliminating all grounds !or a9ortion'even #here -regnancy may
cause a #omen to die as a result' and -assing a damaging constitutional amendment.74 In
the !ollo#ing =SAID:reci-ient countriesC a9ortion has recently 9een or may 9ecome the su9Iect
o! legislative activity. In many casesC the -ro-onents o! re!orm are re-ro: ductive health
-roviders !rom the medical community'one o! the sectors most li;ely to 9e a<ected 9y the gag
rule. +he =nited StatesC through the glo9al gag ruleC restricts =.S.:!unded -roviders !rom
-artici-ating in -u9lic discussions a9out their governments6 a9ortion -olicies. +his -rohi9ition
on !oreign (G3s6 -artici-ation in their countries6 democratic -rocess is antithetical to =.S.
e<orts to -romote democracy and !ree s-eech #orld#ide.
1:0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' +rovide Contracetion C+
Contracetion alone 2ails85omen need access to abortion%
!ord and Wol2? 200* Director o! the "olicy Division o! I-as and mem9er o! I-asC a #omen6s (G3 OCharlotte
and 8errillC E4rea;ing the Cycle o! =nsa!e A9ortion in A!ricaCF A!rican Dournal o! Re-roductive HealthC Bol. *C (o. 1C
A-rilC 2114 --. 2.:&C Data9ase, 4ioline InternationalQ
=nmarried adolescents are -articularly li;ely to 9e re!used contrace-tive methods either 9y
dint o! health system or !acility -olicyC or sim-ly 9ecause health #or;ers #ho serve as
gate;ee-ers disa--rove o! se0ual activity 9y young -eo-le. In additionC !ailure to integrate
!amily -lanning counselling and service delivery #ith -ost:a9ortion care creates a missed
o--ortunity to hel- #omen #ho are o9viously vulnera9le to un#anted -regnancy avoid
re-eating the e0-erience. /0-erience sho#s that -roviding contrace-tive counselling to #omen
!ollo#ing a9ortion care is very e<ective in increasing contrace-tive use rates andC more
im-ortantlyC reducing re-eat un#anted -regnancies. Health care -ro!essionals have a
res-onsi9ility to e0tend contrace-tive services and counselling to all -eo-le including
unmarried adolescents. 8a;ing emergency contrace-tion #idely availa9le is es-ecially
im-ortant and is 9ecoming a challenge in some countriesC #here anti:a9ortion activists
incorrectlyclaim it is a !orm o! a9ortion. 4ut #hile it is critically im-ortant to e0-and the
availa9ility and accessi9ility o! e<ective contrace-tion in A!ricaC #e must also remem9er that
even #ith universal access to modern contrace-tionC unintended and un#anted -regnancies #ill
still occur as a result o! contrace-tive !ailureC ra-e and incest. 2omenRs lac; o! autonomy in
matters related to se0 also contri9utes to un#anted -regnancyC given many #omenRs ina9ility to
ma;e their o#n decisions a9out using contrace-tives and the -revalence o! se0ual coercion and
violence. Girls as young as .:11 years old have 9een ;no#n to 9ecome -regnant through ra-e.
AccordinglyC health systems also need to 9e -re-ared to meet #omenRs need !or li!e:saving -ost:
a9ortion care !or com:-lications o! unsa!e a9ortion and !or sa!e -regnancy terminationC !or
legally a--roved circumstances. (ota9lyC every A!rican country legally -ermits a9ortion in at
least some circumstancesC 9ut continent:#ide even #here legally -ermittedC sa!e a9ortion is
scarcely availa9le or accessi9le to #omen.
1:7
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Lund Abstinence/Religious (GOs C+
Catholic (GOs sread A"#$ b3 arguing against condom usage%
$toneC et al : )ello# !or %a# and the "u9licRs Health at the Center !or %a# and the "u9licRs Health at Georgeto#n
and Dohns Ho-;ins =niversitiesC 211 H 200* O%esleyC 12 8ich. St. D. IntRl %. 2$ CE2hen the Right to Health and the
Right to Religion ConJict, A Human Rights AnalysisCF Hein 3nline Data9aseQ
+here are many more #ays in #hich religious ideation -romotes -u9lic health. Ho#everC there
are also several instances in #hich religious teachings can have a detrimental im-act on the
health o! the adherents o! a -articular religionC or those #ith #hom they come into contact.
+hese situations o!ten concern norms related to se0uality and -rocreationG rites o! -assageG and
the -rescri9ed gender roles #ithin a religious culture. 3ne -ractice that has received
considera9le attention recently is the Catholic ChurchRs categorical -roscri-tion o! 9irth
controlC even in the !ace o! the AIDS -andemic. According to the Catechism o! the Catholic
ChurchC SRZ/[very action #hichC #hether in antici-ation o! the conIugal actC or in its
accom-lishmentC or in the develo-ment o! its natural conse5uencesC -ro-osesC #hether as an
ends or as a meansC to render -rocreation im-ossi9leR is intrinsically evil.SC4R Adherence to this
-olicy has health im-lications !or the s-read o! se0ually transmitted in!ections OS+IsQC including
AIDSC since scientiMc evidence clearly esta: 9lishes that condomsC #hen used correctlyC reduce
signiMcantly the s-read o! S+Is.42 Aggravating the danger o! this -olicy to the health o!
!ollo#ersC and those #ho are intimate #ith themC some o<icials o! the Catholic Church have
engaged in a cam-aign o! misin!ormation that -romotes the idea that condoms are not e<ective
in -reventing the s-read o! AIDS.4
Religious (GOs 5ithhold comlete in2ormation about contracetion8this sreads
A"#$%
2hile the right to religion -rotects the right o! the Church hierarchyC and all o! its !ollo#ersC to
9elieve that a9stinence is the -re!erred method !or avoiding AIDSC the right isC and should 9e
madeC su9Iect to limitations that are necessary !or -u9lic health. 2ithholding in!orma: tion
a9out the e<ectiveness o! the correct use o! condoms as a -rotec: tion !rom HIB?AIDSC and
tolerating #ides-read misin!ormationC violates the -u9licRs right to the highest attaina9le
standard o! -hysical and mental health. Restricting in!ormation a9out condoms also violates
s-eciMc norms that are incor-orated in the right to healthC namelyC availa9ilityC accessi9ilityC and
5uality.2S Restrictions on in!ormation inter!ere #ith availa9ility and accessi9ility 9ecause they
result in an overall reduced availa9ility o! condomsC as #ell as in!ormation a9out their -ro-er
use. In additionC restrictions result in a lo#er 5uality o! health care since the -u9lic is denied
accurate and timely in!ormation on the e<ectiveness o! a -roven intervention. Such -olicies
also inter!ere #ith the !ull reali>ation o! other human rights. )or e0am-leC the IC/SCR
recogni>es a right to an education that is directed to the !ull develo-ment o! the human
-ersonality and her sense o! dignity.22* )ailing to -rovide ade5uate in!ormation on the over:
#helming e<ectiveness o! condoms in -reventing se0ually transmitted in!ections denies the
-u9lic ;no#ledge that #ould allo# them to ta;e e<ective ste-s to maintain their health. In
additionC !ailing to -u9lici>e the e<ectiveness o! condom usage in com9ating H1B?AIDS
inter!eres #ith the right to enIoy the 9eneMts o! scientiMc -rogress and its a--licationsC as
-rovided in Article 1$ o! the IC/SCR. It denies -eo-le access to the scientiMc ;no#ledge
discovered through the testing o! condom e<ectiveness against HIB?AIDSC as #ell as access to
an e<ective invention. Given the gravity o! the AIDS -andemicC governments have an
1::
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
o9ligation to ensure that their actions reduce the 9urden o! the diseaseC not add to it. In
addition to 9eing 9ad -u9lic health -olicyC government restrictions on access to condomsC or the
restriction o! or !ailure to -rovide accurate in!ormation a9out their e<ective useC violates
human rights. +o 9e consistent #ith their o9ligations under international la#C governments
should -romote the use o! condoms not#ithstanding any -articular religionRs -osition on the
su9Iect.
1:;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Lund Abstinence/Religious (GOs C+
Catholic (GOs sread A"#$ b3 discouraging condom use8the3 are scientiEcall3 roven
to reduce transmission o2 !"I%
+husC condoms have 9een scientiMcally -roven to aid in the -reven: tion o! viral in!ectionsC
including HIBC #hich s-read as a result o! se0ual activity.21$ Governments that -romote
condom usage have seen 9eneMcial results. )or e0am-leC HIB -revalence is receding in =gandaC
#here government o<icials -romote #hat is called the SA4CS cam-aign2K& !or SA9stinenceC
4eing !aith!ulC and Condom usage.SR217 2. Religiously:9ased 39Iections to Condom "romotion
and its /<ects. Condom -romotion -rogramsC ho#everC have come into direct con: Jict #ith the
teachings o! the Catholic Church. +he Church has a long history o! -rohi9iting the use o!
artiMcial 9irth control. +his -rohi9ition includes a 9an on the use o! condoms. In !actC Catholic
doctrine esche#s the use o! condoms !or any reason.21* According to the Cate: chism o! the
Catholic ChurchC21. SRZ/[very action #hichC #hether in antici-ation o! the conIugal actC or in its
accom-lishmentC or in the develo-ment o! its natural conse5uencesC -ro-osesC #hether as an
end or as a meansC to render -rocreation im-ossi9leR is intrinsically evil.S211 Interru-ting
-rocreation is considered evil !or a num9er o! reasons. It is 9elieved that such actions inter!ere
#ith GodRs design !or the norm o! marriage. +he Church also !ears that use o! artiMcial 9irth
control #ould So-en #ide the #ay !or marital inMdelity and a general lo#ering o! moral
standards.S It is thought to 9e San evil thing to ma;e it easy !or Z-eo-le[ to 9rea; Zthe moral[
la#.S )inallyC the Church !ears that 9irth control may reduce #omen to 9eing mere instruments
!or the satis!action o! men.21R +he ChurchRs -roscri-tion against condom usage remains in
-lace even in the !ace o! AIDS. Church guidelines !or education #ithin the !amily state that
S-arents must also reIect the -romotion o! so:called Rsa!e se0R or Rsa!er se0CR a dangerous and
immoral -olicy 9ased on the deluded theory that the condom can -rovide ade5uate -rotection
against AIDS.S212 +he Catholic 4isho-s o! South A!ricaC 4ots#anaC and S#a>iland have stated
that they Sregard the #ides-read and indis: criminate -romotion o! condoms as an immoral and
misguided #ea-on in our 9attle against HIB?AIDSS and that SZc[ondoms may even 9e one o! the
main reasons !or the s-read o! HIB?AIDSS 9ecause they could 9e !aultyC #rongly usedC and
contri9ute to the 9rea;do#n o! sel!:control and mutual res-ect 9et#een se0ual -artners.21
8ore recentlyC Cardinal Al!onso %o-e> +ruIilloC "resident o! the BaticanRs "ontiMcal Council !or
the )amilyC stated on a 44C -rogram that SZt[he AIDS virus is roughly 4$1 times smaller than
the s-ermato: >oon .... +he s-ermato>oon can easily -ass through the RnetR that is !ormed 9y the
condom.SC214 He later #ent onC sayingC SI -ro-ose that the ministries o! health re5uire the
inclusion in condom -ac;ages and advertisements and in the a--aratus or shelves #here they
are dis-layed a #arning that the condom is not sa!e.C21$ +his is in contravention to the
scientiMc understandings regarding condom usage and the -ositive e<ect o! condom usage on
controlling the s-read o! HIB?AIDS. 4ecause o! the -rominence o! the Catholic ChurchC its
statements on condom usage have had an e<ect on the AIDS -olicy o! several nations. In a
num9er o! statesC the religious -rohi9ition on condom usage has inJuenced government AIDS
-revention -olicies 9y #ea;ening the -u9lic health message that condoms save lives. +he
-osition o! the Church has caused governments to condone the s-read o! misin!orma: tionC and
in several cases it has caused governments to discuss the e<ectiveness o! condom usage less
o-enlyC ham-ering the e<ectiveness o! a -roven -u9lic health intervention. In some instancesC
the Church has created o9stacles to accessing condoms or caused governments to cur9 -ro:
condom educational messages. )or e0am-leC in 7enyaC21& #here some -riests claimed the
1;0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
contrace-tives #ere Slaced #ith HIB?AIDSCS the ChurchRs -osition led an AIDS teaching center
to sto- distri9uting condoms.217 In "eruC21* the government 9anned si0teen 9rands o!
condoms containing the s-ermi: cide nono0ynol:.C #arning o! the danger2. 9ut ma;ing no
e<ort to e0-lain the ris;s or recommend other ty-es o! condoms.22R Re-ortedlyC the 8inister o!
Health too; these ste-s as a result o! his Catholic 9elie!s./2l In 8e0icoC222 a!ter the Church
critici>ed )irst %ady 8arta Sahagun !or advocating condom use as -rotection against AIDSC
"resi: dent )o0Rs -olitical -arty dro--ed the #ord ScondomS !rom its -lat!orm !or legislative
action.22 In Nam9iaC224 health o<icials #ithdre# an anti: AIDS cam-aign that advocated 9oth
sa!e se0 and condom use a!ter receiving com-laints !rom the Church that the cam-aign
-romoted -romiscuity.22$ +husC it is evident that some leaders are censoring -u9lic sa!ety
measures in order to con!orm more closely to the teachings o! Church o<icials.22&
1;1
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
&oicalit38Abortion is +ublic !ealth
&he gag rule hinders ublic health
JacobsonC 11:2:200/ O Dodi Daco9sonC e0ecutive director o! the 2ashington:9ased Center !or Health and
Gender /5uityC E=SA?A!rica, Glo9al Gag Rule /0-andsFC htt-,??###.a!rica!ocus.org?docs1$?gag1$11.-h-Q
\ +he term SGlo9al Gag RuleS derives !rom the !act that the restriction is #idely seen as
violation o! the constitutional right to !ree s-eech in the =nited States and soC to dateC has not
9een a--lied to =.S.:9ased grou-s. +he gag rule is #idely seen as a !undamental challenge to
im-roving -u9lic health, 4ecause it denies !unding to those organi>ations most e<ective in
reducing unintended -regnancies:and hence the need !or a9ortion:it actually contri9utes to the
-ro9lems it -ur-orts to solve.
1nsa2e abortion access is a ublic health roblem
$eevers :: D.D.C 4roo;lyn %a# SchoolH 2000 ORachael /.C 4roo;lyn Dournal o! International %a#C E+he "olitics o!
Gagging, +he /<ects o! the Glo9al Gag Rule on Democratic "artici-ation and "olitical Advocacy in "eruCF %e0isQ
Glo9allyC an estimated 1 -ercent o! all maternal deaths are attri9uted to unsa!e a9ortion
-rocedures. 11 +his is the e5uivalent o! a large air-lane Z\.12[ crashing every si0 hoursC day
and night. 12 As a resultC nations at the Cairo International Con!erence on "o-ulation and
Develo-ment OIC"DQ identiMed illegal or clandestine a9ortion as a maIor -u9lic health -ro9lem.
1
1;2
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' "merialism Criti.ue
&urn8the gag rule imoses imerialist Western values onto the rest o2 the 5orld8this
-ills thousands%
+he (e5 $tatesmenC 1?2.?2007. %e0is.
In Danuary 2111C on his Mrst day in o<iceC "resident George 2 4ush issued an e0ecutive order that had lain dormant throughout most o! the Clinton administration. +he 8e0ico
City "olicyC more commonly and descri-tively du99ed Sthe glo9al gag ruleSC had 9een instituted 9y Ronald Reagan in 1.*4C and re-resented a tightening o! the Helms
Amendment 1.7C #hich had made it unla#!ul !or non:governmental organisations to use any !unds granted 9y the =S Agency !or International Develo-ment O=saidQ either to
-rovide sa!e a9ortion Oin countries #here it is legalQ or to lo99y !or it Oin countries #here it is notQ. +he glo9al gag rule allo#ed the =S to use
its huge Mnancial clout Oit currently -rovides 41 -er cent o! the glo9al aid 9udget !or -o-ulation
-rogrammesQ to ta;e its anti:a9ortion stance much !urther. )rom the moment it #as signedC
(G3s receiving any hel- at all !rom =said : acce-ting su--lies o! condomsC !or e0am-le : #ere
e0-licitly -rohi9ited !rom using any o! their other !unding to -rovide sa!e a9ortion or lo99y !or
it. +he -rohi9ition goes so !ar that (G3s #hich #ant to ;ee- their =said !unding arenRt
-ermitted to cite statistics on unsa!e a9ortion. /ven telling the stories o! #omen #ho have 9een maimed 9y unsa!e -rocedures could 9e
inter-reted as lo99ying : hence the shyness o! that 7enyan health #or;er. As suchC in areas #here organisations acce-t the gagC the
a9ortion de9ate is s;e#edC entirely dominated 9y anti:a9ortion voices : Iust as 4ush intended. OIn areas #here
organisations have re!used the gagC the e<ect is o!ten e0actly the sameC since loss o! !unds can !orce them to close.Q +he rule is thus !undamentally
undemocraticC and also im-erialist : a!ter allC in countries #here a9ortion is legalC it overrules
national sovereignty. As %aura 7at>ive o! the (e# Aor;:9ased Centre !or Re-roductive Rights
notes, S+his is a -olicy that #ould 9e unconstitutional i! a--lied to =S citi>ensC 9ecause itRs a
condition on !ree s-eech. In the =nited StatesC you canRt say Ryou can e0-ress an ideaC 9utC i!
you doC #eRll #ithhold !undingRC so itRs a--lying a dou9le standard to (G3s overseas. +hatRs
shoc;ingC -articularly in the conte0t o! a !oreign -olicy #hich is meant to -romote democracy.S
According to estimatesC 9et#een 1. and 21 million unsa!e a9ortions are -er!ormed #orld#ide
each yearC .7 -er cent o! them in develo-ing countries. AnnuallyC this ;ills roughly &*C111
#omen. &hatAs eight 5omen an hour? or a laneload er da3 : 9e!ore you start #eighing
the toll o! maiming and mutilationC in!ections and lost !ertilityC that a<ect many millions more
each year. As 4eth )redric; o! the International 2om enRs Health Coalition -oints outC #hen it comes to those &*C111 deathsC the =S government
Shas 9lood on its handsS. 4ut the destructiveness o! the gag rule s-reads much !urther. +hose
organisations that !all !oul o! it also run !amily:-lanning -rogrammes that -rovide a huge range
o! services : !rom distri9uting contrace-tives to giving se0ual health advice to -roviding
in!ormation on maternal nutrition and 9reast!eeding. 3rganisations that re!use to acce-t the
ruleRs restrictionsC and su9se5uently lose their !undingC can 9e le!t #ith no o-tion 9ut to close
clinics that serve some o! the #orldRs most vulnera9le -eo-le . OIt is estimatedC !or instanceC that only 11 -er cent o! the
A!rican -o-ulation has ready access to contrace-tives.Q bstrongc+he rule #rea;s havoc b?strongc+o give a !e# e0am-les o! the havoc this has #rea;edC in 211 "lanned
"arenthood o! Ghana #as !orced to close do#n a -rogramme that had 9een distri9uting contrace-tives and -roviding advice on HIB?Aids to an estimated 2.2 million Ghanaians.
+he )amily Guidance Association o! /thio-ia #as !orced to close a huge range o! outreach -rogrammes a!ter losing more than 1 -er cent o! its e0ternal !undsC cutting sta< and
reducing volunteer num9ers !rom 1C111 to .1. Si0teen develo-ing countries have lost their #hole =said su--ly o!
9irth controlC 9ecause the International "lanned "arenthood )ederationC the leading (G3 in
this MeldC re!used to acce-t a gag. 39viouslyC it is im-ossi9le to calculate the -recise e<ect o!
the rule on the s-read o! HIB?AidsC 9ut it is sa!e to surmise that it has 9een devastating : there
seems a good chance that the resulting death toll #ill !ar e0ceed that caused 9y unsa!e
a9ortion. And once these clinics closeC they canRt easily 9e re9uiltC even i! an (G3 secures ne#
!unding !rom another source. As )redric; notes, S+he e0-ertise and in!rastructure usually ta;e
so long to -ut togetherC and many health systems are so !ragileC that #hen you lose a clinic itRs
hard to regain that strengthC or even that ca-acity.S IronicallyC it is li;ely that the -olicy may
have increased rates o! a9ortion. 2hen clinics closeC S#omen donRt get other se0ual health
in!ormation or contrace-tionSC -oints out %ouise Hutchins o! the =7 grou- A9ortion RightsC Sso
theyRre more li;ely to 9ecome -regnant again and su<er !rom se0ually transmitted diseasesS.
+he more you read a9out Sthe glo9al gag ruleSC the more hideous it seems. +his is a la# o! -oli
tical convenienceC #hich sacriMces some o! the #orldRs -oorest #omen OandC indeedC menQ to
1;)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
a--ease the anti:a9ortion !ervour o! the religious right in the =S. It seems no coincidence that the Helms Amendment
#as enacted in 1.7. +hat #as the very year #hen a9ortion 9ecame legal in the =SC and the American right a--ears to have 9een determined to redress the 9alance 9y using
the countryRs Mnancial advantage to undermine sa!e a9ortion a9road. As the glo9al gag rule standsC it is clearly at odds #ith =S
la# and the vie#s o! the maIority o! AmericansC #ho su--ort sa!e a9ortion. As 8arcel Be;emansC senior medical adviser to the
International "lanned "arenthood )ederationC says, SItRs a case o!C Rdo #hat I sayC not #hat I doR.S 7no#ing ho# di<icult it #ould 9e to overturn Roe v 2ade in his o#n countryC
4ush has instead e0-orted his -ersonal convictionsC and those o! his closest su--ortersC #orld#ide. As %aura 7at>ive notes, SI! Americans #ere more a#are o! the -olicyC
there #ould -ro9a9ly 9e more o9Iections to itC 9utC 9ecause it doesnRt a<ect our interests directlyC it has 9een allo#ed to stay in -lace.S 4eth )redric; concurs. S+hey #ere very
calculated in -utting !or#ard the glo9al gag rule . . . a!ter allC no #oman in a 7enyan slum is ever going to 9e called on to vote !or "resident 4ush or any o! his croniesC are
theyKS Since last (ovem9erRs =S midterm elections : #ith that signiMcant s#ing to#ards the Democrats : there has 9een s-eculation that it may no# 9e -ossi9le to overturn the
rule. +his #as last attem-ted 9ac; in 211$C #hen Senator 4ar9ara 4o0er s-onsored an amendment to an a--ro-riations 9ill that #as s#i!tly -assed in the Senate. At that stageC
ho#everC 4ush threatened a vetoC and the attem-t !altered. Des-ite the ne# distri9ution o! -o#erC 4ush still holds that vetoC so it is -ro9a9ly too soon !or o-timism, the activists
I s-o;e to are holding out instead !or a Democratic -resident in 211*. %ast yearC the =7 made a small dent in the situation 9y -ledging jm to organisations that had 9een
denied =S !unding as a result o! the gag rule. In Mnancial termsC o! courseC thatRs minimalC 9ut it sho#ed the =7 9oldly : and unusually : o--osing =S !oreign -olicy and ma;ing
a strongC clear case !or the need !or sa!e a9ortion services #orld#ide. As )redric; saysC the rule denies #omen in develo-ing countries
Stheir humanity. ItRs dis res-ect!ul and undigniMed and itRs 9ased on an idea that #omen are
something other than !ull human 9eings.S 2hile the gag rule standsC 4ushRs hands Iust get
9loodier.
1;*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' "merialism Criti.ue
Lamil3 lanning assistance isn7t cultural imerialism85omen 2rom develoing
countries e<ressl3 demanded it at 5orld oulation con2erences%
"u9lic "olicyC EA9ortion "olitics and =.S. "o-ulation Aid, Co-ing #ith a Com-le0 (e# %a#F Bolume 2&C (um9er C
Se-tem9er 2111C +he Guttmacher InstituteC htt-,??###.guttmacher.org?-u9s?Iournals?2&1711.htmlQ
De!enders o! the glo9al gag rule have invo;ed the charge o! cultural im-erialismC arguing that
the SreligiousC cultural and legal traditions Zo! =SAID:assisted countries[ are under assaultS
!rom =.S.:su9sidi>ed grou-s thatC in this caseC are -ressuring countries to change their a9ortion
la#s.. IndeedC this is sim-ly an e0tension o! the longstanding assertion that donor assistance
!or !amily -lanning is 9y deMnition im-osed on #omen in countries receiving aid !rom =SAID.
Aet in Cairo at the IC"DC in 4eiIing at the )ourth 2orld Con!erence on 2omen in 1..$C and at
the Cairo and 4eiIing Mve:year revie# -rocesses in 1... and 2111C it #as the #omen !rom these
very countries #ho made it clear that they #ant the same access to 5uality !amily -lanning and
re-roductive health services that #omen in the industriali>ed #orld have. +hey also #ant the
same right to -artici-ate in a democratic -rocessC to voice their o-inions a9out their o#n la#s'
and to -rovide legal medical services #ith their o#n !unds.
1;/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Leminism Criti.ue
&he gag rule is a 2orm o2 state inscrition o2 imerialism and atriarch3 H legal re2orm
is the onl3 5a3 to challenge this
Dames GathiiC GovernorC "ro!essor o! International Commercial la# at Al9any %a# SchoolC 2000. =.C. Davis
Dournal o! International %a# P "olicyC E/0-orting Culture 2arsCF )allC 211&C %e0is.
+he !oregoing reversals on !unding !or re-roductive health care and !or HIB?AIDS #or; largely results !rom the ideological commitments and goals o! the (e# Right. &1 As a
result o! the Roe v. 2ade decisionC &2 as #ell as other inJuencesC including the rise o! !eminism in the 1.71Rs and the increase in #omen entering the la9or !orceC the (e# Right
came to regard the structure o! the traditional !amily as 9eing in crisis. & In additionC !or a variety o! other reasonsC the (e# RightRs -ro:li!e?anti:a9ortionC -ro:!amily?anti:
#el!are movement gained strength. &4 Some o! the ;ey elements o! this (e# Right movement are as !ollo#s. +he Mrst element involves dismantling the #el!are state and
reasserting the traditional male:headed !amily. &$ +he -remise here #as that the traditional !amily !orms the S!undamental 9uilding 9loc; and the 9asic unit o! the society.S &&
+husC the (e# Right 9elieves that reconstructing the !amily along these lines #ould save it !rom the li9eral ta;eover o! the !amily 9y the #el!are state and its -ro-onents.
Im-licit in this ideology is the -ers-ective that a #omanRs -rimary role is as a mother : a -ro-osition a--lied in #ays that are antithetical to the goal o! gaining increased access
to services related to #omenRs re-roductive rights. A #oman #ho -lansC limitsC and controls Z\7&[ the si>e o! her
!amily in order to -ursue an occu-ation does not con!orm to the (e# RightRs limited vie# o! her
role. In !actC she is su--osed to reduce her reliance on #el!are -rograms that the (e# Right so a9hors. SecondC although committed to a vie# o! individual rightsC the (e#
Right did not su--ort the /5ual Rights AmendmentC #hich it -erceived as an un#anted state inter!erence #ith the -rivate s-here o! the !amily. &7 +husC the (e# Right #asC
and continues to 9eC committed to an Sideology o! e5ual o--ortunity and individual !reedom cou-led #ith a structural reality o! economicC se0ualC and racial ine5uality.S &* +he
(e# Right asserted Sthat contrace-tion is a S-rivate goodRS and thatC there!oreC -olicies that increase access to contrace-tion are outside the realm o! -ro-er governance. &.
+hirdC the (e# Right su--orted a reduction o! ta0es and relie! !or married cou-les 9ecause men #ould 9ring more money home to su--ort and -rotect their !amilies. 71 In
turnC #omen #ould -ursue their SnaturalS duties o! nurturing and caring !or their !amilies. 71 +hese vie#s are contrary to the goals o! su--orters o! re-roductive rightsC as
such rights encourageC rather than discourage #omenRs economic inde-endence !rom men. 72 )ourthC reassertion o! the traditional heterose0ual marriage #ouldC according to
the (e# RightC control the dangerous se0ual -assions and !reedoms that -ose a threat to the Smoral M9er o! society.S 7 +he a9stinence:only -olicy o! the 4ush administration is
stri;ingly similar in its vie#s o! !emale se0uality as that o! the (e# Right. 74 =.S. !oreign aid -olicies reJect these ideologies. +he
(e# Right su--orts the commitment o! =.S. !oreign aid to s-read the moral agenda o!
conservative !amily valuesC even at the e0-ense o! ma;ing re-roductive health care #idely
availa9le. )inallyC the movementRs ideologies are reJected in this countryRs commitment to#ards the -rotection o! -harmaceutical -atents at all costsC even in the !ace o!
enormous dis-arities Z\77[ in access to essential drugs. 7$
III. Im-lications o! the (e# RightRs Bie# o! )amily and Se0
+he state S-artici-atess in the se0ual -olitics o! male dominance 9y en!orcing its e-istemology
through la#.S 7& 2hen the =.S. e0-orts and im-oses -olicies reJecting its culture #ars on
develo-ing countriesC this amounts to a !orm o! Scultural im-erialism.S 77 +his assertion -roceeds !rom the vie# that
international relations are com-osed o! the Srelations 9et#een -eo-le OS#omenR and SmenRQC 9et#een -eo-le and statesC and 9et#een organi>ations and economiesCS and not
sim-ly relations 9et#een states. 7*
A. A Critical Bie# o! /0-orting the =.S.Rs Culture 2ars
In this sectionC I analy>e the glo9al gag rule in -art through the lens o! li9eral !eminism #hose contem-orary roots are sometimes traced to the -u9lication o! 4etty )reidanRs
9oo;C +he )eminist 8ysti5ue 7. as #ell as through critical -ers-ectives that do not assume that #estern !eminism should necessarily assume a Smaster discourseR outside the
2est #ithout ac;no#ledging that is relatively #ell Ssu--orted 9y a high level o! material #ell:9eingC intellectual !reedom and -ersonal mo9ility.S *1 )rom these dis-arate
-ers-ectivesC the -olitics o! the (e# Right are a reJection o! the -atriarchal under-innings o! a male
dominated systemC as #ell as the -rivate order o! mar;et relations that structures -atriarchy. *1
Z\7*[ +husC the (e# Right misleadingly argues that love and devotion govern traditional !amily relations. )urtherC the movementRs assault on the #el!are state re-roduces
hierarchical se0ual and economic relations 9et#een men and #omen. *2 +he (e# Right agenda does thisC in -artC 9y reIecting se0ual and la9or e5uality 9et#een men and
#omen and instead see;ing to reassert -atriarchal authorityC 9oth #ithin the traditional !amily as #ell as in se0ual relations 9et#een men and #omen. * +he (e# RightRs
traditional !amily agenda regards se0ual ine5uality as the necessary outcome o! 9iological di<erences. *4 Se0ual !reedom and e5uality #ouldC according to the (e# RightC
erode and endanger -rocreationC there9y threatening the !uture o! the traditional !amily. *$ +husC the (e# RightRs central mission considers Sho# se0uality is managedC
su9limatedC e0-ressedC denied and -ro-agated.S *& IndeedC the very se0ual constitution o! -atriarchy is a ;ey insight under-inning o! the (e# Right ideology. In e<ectC the (e#
Right em9races the idea that ending -atriarchy #ould undermine the -rivileged status and authority o! men and that the 9est #ay to avoid this is the control o! #omenRs 9odies.
+o this endC the (e# Right see;s to legislate issues o! se0uality 9y dra#ing 9oundaries 9et#een se0 and love and 9y outla#ing se0ual choice and !reedom #ith a vie# to
cur9ing the e0cesses o! li9eral !eminism and se0ual egalitarianism. *7
+he (e# Right em-hasi>es that se0ual di<erences 9et#een men and #omen someho# Iusti!y une5ual economic and social circumstances 9et#een individuals. ** +here!oreC
the (e# Right considers inter!erence #ith Z\7.[ o-en com-etition through -rograms li;e a<irmative action and aid to the -oor : -articularly to #omen o! color on #el!are : to
9e illegitimate. *. +he e<ect o! the -rograms that are su--orted 9y the (e# Right is to -romote the
economic de-endence o! #omen . .1 +hat is also true o! the 2orld 4an;Rs vision o! mar;et:centered e5uality. .1 +he glo9al gag rule encom-asses
these ideologies 9oth e0-licitly as #ell as through its -ractical e<ect : that is to ma;e re-roductive rights less accessi9le to #omenC and there9y im-acting #omenRs
o--ortunities. Access to re-roductive rightsC including access to !amily -lanning methodsC health careC and #here legalC access to a9ortionC increases #omenRs access to e5ual
o--ortunities #ith men. .2
4. "ostcolonial and 3ther Bie#s o! the Glo9al Gag Rule
+he (e# RightRs ideologiesC as im-osed 9y the glo9al gag ruleC im-licate more than a domestic culture #ar. In this sectionC I e0amine the glo9al gag rule !rom critical
-ers-ectives including -ost:-ostmodern . and -ost:colonial !eminist criti5ues. .4 3ne critical -ragmatist states that Z\*1[ S-atriarchy o-erates #ithin
and across Zother realms o! di<erentiationC such as raceC classC and ethnicity[ to disadvantage
#omen !urther.S .$ Such critical theorists sho# that in addition to the cultural traditions and histories that !oster ine5ualitiesC other !orces o! inJuenceC !rom
legal institutions and !rom other dominant state actorsC interact #ith culture to create and
maintain dis-arities. .& +he glo9al gag rule does more than reJect the -atriarchal discourses o! the (e# Right. 4y e0-orting its
conservative vie#s o! !amily and se0C it -resu--oses that #omen in develo-ing countries are -o#erless victims
.7 in need o! the 2estRs 9enevolence. .* )rom this -ers-ectiveC the goals and -olicies o! the glo9al gag rule are 9oth -aternalistic and
condescending. It -resumes the ina9ility o! #omen in develo-ing countries to -ursue choices and o--ortunities consistent #ith their o#n goals and values. +he (e# RightRs
discourse on se0uality also overla-s #ith the =.S.Rs glo9al economic agenda. A!ter allC Sthe -roduction and disci-lining o! se0uality is central to the economics o! OreQ-roduction
at the level o! the S!amilyR Oin all its variationsQC and at the level o! the nation:stateS ..
1;0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Z\*1[ +he glo9al gag rule see;s to universali>e a culturally:s-eciMc vie# o! #omen. As suchC
the gag rule de-arts !rom the li9eral agenda o! international human rights #hich Sas-ires to 9e
a set o! universalist norms deMned in contrast to culturally s-eciMc normsCS 111 that are
su--osedly !ound in non:#estern societies. In other #ordsC #hile the =.S. asserts a commitment
to universal human rightsC the glo9al gag rule e0-orts -rograms inconsistent #ith sorely
needed re-roductive health services !or #omen #ho cannot a<ord them. Contrary to the
9enevolent -retensions o! =.S. aid -rogramsC the glo9al gag rule legitimi>es and encourages
-ractices harm!ul to #omen. =ltimatelyC through the glo9al gag rule Sgender identities Zare[
9eing continually reconstituted through social -rocessesCS 111 that rein!orce and com-ound the
-atriarchy.
1;7
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
$tatus Ruo $olves
&he house assed a bill to allo5 2oreign aid 2or contracetives8this solves their A"#$
advantage%
+he Washington +ostC Dune 22C 2007. %e0is.
House Democrats narro#ly -assed a measure yesterday to -rovide contrace-tives to overseas
organi>ations that had 9een 9anned !rom receiving !oreign aid 9ecause they -rovided or
-romoted a9ortion. +he amendment to an im-ortant antia9ortion measure in the House !oreign
aid s-ending 9ill #as a re9u;e to "resident 4ushC #ho has strictly o--osed -roviding any
assistance to grou-s that -romote a9ortion. +he Reagan:era measureC ;no#n as the 8e0ico City
-olicyC #as Mercely -rotected 9y 4ushC #ho has issued t#o veto threats over the !oreign aid 9ill
should Democrats attem-t to alter any o! the antia9ortion measures it contains. +he change to
the measure may -rove to 9e the House DemocratsR only signiMcant challenge to the
antia9ortion riders that have 9een added to a range o! annual s-ending 9ills 9y a9ortion
o--onents over three decades.
1;:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Overoulation8#eclining (o5
Global 2ertilit3 is declining no58this 5ill stabili4e oulation gro5th%
Dedediah +urd3C Assistant "ro!essor o! %a# at Du;eC 2000. 4righam Aoung =niversity %a# Revie#. E+he (e#
4io-olotics, AutonomyC Demogra-hyC and (ationahood.F
)or several decades in the last centuryC many 9elieved that glo9al -o-ulation trends -ointed
inelucta9ly u-#ard and that the social and ecological -ro9lems o! over-o-ulation #ere among
the most signiMcant !acing the s-ecies. 17 At the 9eginning o! the ne# millenniumC the !acts
9egan to change ra-idly. Glo9al !ertilityC #hich in 1.$1:$$ stood at a9out $ children -er #omanC
has !allen to 2.&$. 1* In 21$1 it is -roIected to 9e 2.1$ children -er #omanC slightly 9elo# the
re-lacement rate o! 2.1. 1. According to the "o-ulation Division o! the =nited (ations
De-artment o! /conomic and Social A<airsC this trend #ould lead to a glo9al -o-ulation o! ..1
9illion 9y 21$1C at #hich time gro#th rates #ould have slo#ed considera9ly and -o-ulation
#ould 9e close to leveling o<. 21 /stimates -remised on a !aster decline in !ertility rates sho#
Z\*.*[ -o-ulation sta9ili>ing 9e!ore 2141 at under * 9illion and 9eginning to decline 9y 21$1.
21
Lamil3 lanning is obsolete8oulation rates have declined%
Gillesie? 200* ODu< G. Gilles-ie.C senior scholarC 4ill and 8elinda Gates InstituteC Dohns Ho-;ins =niversity
4loom9erg School o! "u9lic HealthC 4altimoreC 8DC =SA. International )amily "lanning "ers-ectivesC Bol. 1C 2114C
E2hatever Ha--ened to )amily "lanning andC !or +hat 8atter Re-roductive HealthKF @uestiaQ
3ne o! the most remar;a9le develo-ments o! the 21th century #as the dramatic #orld#ide
decline in !ertility. In 1.&$C the average #oman could e0-ect to have Mve children during her
li!etimeG no# she can e0-ect to have a9out three. O*Q +he =nited (ations -redicts that #e #ill
reach near:re-lacement:level !ertility::2.17 9irths -er #oman::9y 21$1. O.Q 4y that yearC many
develo-ed countries #ill have e0-erienced decades o! -o-ulation decline. 2hile many !actors
contri9ute to this massive change in 9ehaviorC !amily -lanning -rograms -lay a critical -art in
the glo9al decline. +he s-ectacular dro- in !ertility has led #idely read -unditsC li;e 4en
2atten9ergC to as; i! #e should not eliminate !amily -lanning -rograms and start #orrying
a9out the declining and graying o! -o-ulationsC -henomena not e0-erienced in modern times.
O11Q +he notion that the Io9 o! !amily -lanning -rograms is largely com-leted is gaining
acce-tance in the -u9lic health communityC as evidenced 9y a 2112 2orld Health 3rgani>ation
statement that S#hile some ris;s to health have diminishedC the very successes o! the -ast !e#
decades in in!ectious disease control and reduced !ertility are ine0ora9ly generating a
Rdemogra-hic transitionR !rom traditional societies #here almost everyone is young to societies
#ith ra-idly increasing num9ers o! middle aged and elderly -eo-le.S O11Q /ven #ell:;no#n
demogra-hersC instrumental in ma;ing the case !or !amily -lanning -rogramsC no# 9elieve that
organi>ed !amily -lanning -rograms have 9egunC inesca-a9lyC to #ither a#ay and #ill largely
disa--ear 9y 21$1. O12Q
1;;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Overoulation8(o "mact
+oulation gro5th is sustainable8technolog3 and rene5able energ3 5ill e<and to
ofset the efect o2 higher oulations%
Catholic Lamil3 > !uman Rights "nstituteC 2001. htt-,??###.euthanasia.com?-o-myth.html
+he most common argument against -o-ulation gro#th is that the earth has a Scarrying
ca-acityCS a threshold num9er o! humans 9eyond #hich civili>ation #ill descend into chronic
!amineC diseaseC -overty and civil stri!e. According to the re-ortC ho#everC S3ver the -eriod
1.&1:1..*C #orld -er ca-ita !ood availa9le !or direct human consum-tion increased 9y 24 -er
centC and there is enough 9eing -roduced !or everyone on the -lanet to 9e ade5uately
nourished.S AlsoC general advances in technology and industry have resulted in a dramatic
gro#th in average material #ell:9eing : S)rom 1.11 to 2111C #orld -o-ulation gre# !rom 1.&
9illion -ersons to &.1 9illion. Ho#everC #hile #orld -o-ulation increased close to 4 timesC #orld
real gross domestic -roduct increased 21 to 41 timesC allo#ing the #orld to not only sustain a
!our:!old -o-ulation increaseC 9ut also to do so at vastly higher standards o! living.S +he re-ort
sho#s guarded o-timism that these trends #ill continueC and that !ood -roduction #ill continue
to gro# along #ith the -o-ulation. "o-ulation control advocates also argue that gro#th #ill
stri- the #orld o! nonrene#a9le resources li;e oil and mineralsC there9y thro#ing economies
into disarray. 4utC the "o-ulation Division re-ort saysC SDuring recent decades ne# reserves
have 9een discoveredC -roducing the seeming -arado0 that even though consum-tion o! many
minerals has risenC so has the estimated amount o! the resource as yet unta--ed.S
(o imact8oulation gro5th 5ont hurt the environment or cause 5arming%
+he latest argument concerns the environmental e<ects o! -o-ulation gro#thC including
-ollutionC ha9itat destruction and the e0tinction o! s-ecies. +he re-ort contends that -o-ulation
gro#th may contri9ute to some o! these -ro9lemsC es-ecially Msheries de-letion and #ater
contaminationC 9ut SIn generalC -o-ulation gro#th a--ears to 9e much less im-ortant as a
driving !orce o! such -ro9lems than is economic gro#th and technology.S /ven glo9al #arming
#ill 9e S.mainly due to modes o! -roductionC not to the si>eC gro#th and distri9ution o!
-o-ulation.S Consum-tion -atterns among develo-ed countries #ith declining -o-ulations also
have a detrimental im-act on the environment.
200
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Sour Catholic "nstitute =vidence is 6iased
Our evidence cites a non9biased reort%
+he re-ort advances no s-eciMc -olicy initiativesC 9ut it em-hasi>es that -o-ulation is only one
o! a num9er o! com-le0C interrelated issues a<ecting the environment and human develo-ment.
2hen !amine occursC !or instanceC it can 9e 9ecause S"eo-le have inade5uate -hysical and?or
economic access to !ood as a result o! -overtyC -olitical insta9ilityC economic ine<iciency and
social ine5uityCS not sim-ly 9ecause there are too many -eo-le. +he re-ort 9rings into 5uestion
the ever:constant =( goal o! decreasing 9irth rates #orld#ide. &he +oulation #ivision?
5hich ma-es all 1( redictions about oulation gro5th? is seen as mostl3 non9
ideological.
201
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Warming "mact
A2rican overoulation 5ont afect global 5arming8the3 don7t use enough resources%
Kingston Whig9$tandardC ?1$?2007. Ho# the -o-ulation time 9om9 is tic;ing a#ay in A!ricaC %e0is.
+his #ill have remar;a9ly little im-act on climate changeC since most A!ricans #ill still 9e very
-oor and have a very small environmental S!oot-rint.S +hey #ill 9e very -oor mainly 9ecause
their -o-ulations are gro#ing three times !aster than the average in the rest o! the #orldC and
you cannot say that this is no9odyRs !ault. It is a !ailure o! government.
Overoulation not rimar3 cause o2 global 5arming%
+he ,ancetC 2000 %ondon. Bol. &*C Iss. .$4.G -g. 1*11C 1* -gs. "ro5uestC (ov 1*:(ov 24C 211&.

Rich nations #ith lo# -o-ulation gro#th are mainly accounta9le !or unsustaina9le e0-loitation
o! the -lanetRs resources and !or threats to the glo9al environment. "oor countries #ith high
rates o! -o-ulation gro#th have contri9uted rather little to car9on dio0ide and other !orms o!
emission.7 (everthelessC -o-ulation gro#th also threatens the environment. "ast gro#th has had a direct e<ect
on increasing the !raction o! laud area devoted to !ood -roductionC #ith inevita9le loss o! natural ha9itats and
9iodiversity. %ittle !urther sco-e e0ists !or incor-oration o! !ertile land into agricultural -roduction. +husC !urther
-o-ulation risesC -articularly in -oor agrarian countriesC #ill -ut !ragile marginal land under -ressure !rom
overcro--ing and overgra>ingC #ith -otentially severe outcomes in terms o! loss o! vegetation coverC soil !ertility
de-letionC and soil erosion. +hese dangers are es-ecially acute in A!ricaC #here the ratio o! ara9le land to -o-ulation
engaged in agriculture has already !allen stee-ly and #here rural -o-ulations #ill continue to e0-and !or decades.*
202
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Overoulation8$ocial Lactors =ncourage ,arge
Lamilies
(o solvenc382amil3 lanning can7t overcome cultural 2actors that create incentives 2or
eole to have large 2amilies%
Abrams? Associate "ro!essorC (orth#estern School o! %a# o! %e#is P Clar; CollegeC 1;;0 O%auraC Cornell
International %a# DournalC EReservations A9out 2omen, "o-ulation "olicy and Re-roductive RightsFC 2. Cornell IntRl
%.D. 1Q
SocialC religiousC economicC and -olitical !actors signiMcantly inJuence a countryRs 9irth rate.
)*

+hroughout most o! historyC religiousC -oliticalC and cultural institutions valued high 9irth rates
and their -olicies reJected this valuation.
)/
A StateRs shi!t to -olicies indended to reduce 9irth
rates is Iust as -olitically signiMcant. Regardless o! #hether the governmental -olicy is anti:natalist or -ro:natalistC
o-timal -o-ulation si>e is -erceived as a critical element o! state -o#er and there!ore a legitimate regulatory interest. State
regulation o! -o-ulation varia9les there!ore o!ten occurs #ithout consideration !or the individuals regulated. High !ertility is
encouragedC or commandedC 9y many religions.
)0
4irths are considered a divine 9lessing.
)7

Religious and cultural !actors may also !unction to limit 9irths.
):
2here a religious sanction o!
high 9irth rates is accom-anied 9y strong discrimination against #omenC 9irth rates are
-articularly high.
);
HistoricallyC large -o-ulations #ere -erceived as a necessary com-onent o!
economic and -olitical strength.
*0
High status and economic -rivileges #ere 9esto#ed 9y the
state on large !amilies.
*1
/arly marriage #asC and still is in many countriesC sanctioned as a
means o! increasing -o-ulation.
*2
It #as not until the end o! the eighteenth centuryC #hen 8althus argued that
-o-ulation increases !aster than sustenanceC that theorists and -oliticians 9egan to contem-late the -otential o! e0cess
-o-ulation. %arge !amilies remain economic necessities in many societies #here children are
essential #or;ers.
*)
High rates o! in!ant mortality -rovide incentive !or cou-les to have large
!amilies to assure economic survival and security.
**
In some culturesC land is -o#er and the
amount o! land allocated to a !amily is determined 9y !amily si>e.
*/
Industriali>ed societiesC in contrastC
em-hasi>e accumulation o! ca-ital rather than landC and large !amilies de-lete ca-ital #ithout increasing -roductivity.
20)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' !uman Rights8(o $illover
Giving 5omen the right to reroductive health is not enough to emo5er them %
Aguirre'Associate "ro!essor o! /conomics at the Catholic =niversity o! America and !adle3'graduate
student at the Catholic =niversity o! America'200/ O8aria So-hia and CeciliaC International Dournal o! Social
/conomicsC EHindered gro#th, the ideology and im-lications o! -o-ulation assistanceF Bolume 2C Issue.C -g 7*Q
2omenRs em-o#erment is 9ased on much more than a #omanRs a9ility to regulate her !ertilityG
it re5uires the develo-ment o! the #hole -erson. +he right o! #omen to marry and to 9ear
children as #ell as to educationC accesses to health servicesC to means o! -roduction and to
-artici-ate in civil li!eC to mention !e#C are also an integral element o! #omenRs humanity. 4y
em-hasi>ing only the right to regulate !ertility rather than to develo- the #hole -erson o! a
#omanC radical !eminist -olicy has aligned nicely #ith that o! -o-ulation control : #ith
detrimental e<ects on the em-o#erment o! develo-ing countriesR #omen.c
20*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' A"#$8$tatus Ruo $olves
&he status .uo solves8Congress has created an e<emtion allo5ing 2amil3 lanning
organi4ations to distribute contracetion8this revents the sread o2 A"#$%
/rin KiernonC Andrea Hagelgans O#riters !or the "lanned "arenthood Association o! AmericaQ. Dune 22C 2007.
"lanned "arenthood A--lauds House Bote to Su--ort International )amily "lanning.
htt-,??###.commondreams.org?ne#s2117?1&22:11.html
2ASHI(G+3( : D=(/ 22 : "lanned "arenthood )ederation o! America O"")AQ today a--lauds
the vote 9y the House o! Re-resentatives to dramatically im-rove access to !amily -lanning
su--lies as -art o! the )A211* State:)oreign 3-erations A--ro-riations 9ill OHR 27&4Q. "")A
also a--reciates House mem9ers !or reIecting attem-ts 9y !amily -lanning o--onentsC Re-.
Chris Smith OR:(DQ and Re-. 4art Stu-a; OD:8IQC and Re-. Doe "itts OR:"AQC to stri- !rom the 9ill
t#o ;ey glo9al !amily -lanning -rovisions that e0-and access to 9irth control services and
in!ormation. +hese -rovisions are the EContrace-tives and Condoms /0em-tionF !rom the
Glo9al Gag RuleC and the EA9stinence:=ntil:8arriageF /armar; 2aiver in theC the "resident6s
/mergency "lan !or AIDS Relie! O"/")ARQ E2e live in a #orld #here a #oman dies o! a
-regnancy:related com-lication every minute and someone gets HIB every si0 and a hal!
seconds ' due -rimarily to the limited availa9ility o! contrace-tion and the in!ormation
necessary to ma;e res-onsi9le health care decisionsCS said "")A "resident Cecile Richards.
E+his vote is a signiMcant ste- !or#ard in the Mght to im-rove the health and sa!ety o! #omen
and !amilies around the #orld. +hrough this e0em-tion and #aiverC #omenC menC and young
-eo-le #ill have access to the in!ormation and tools they need to -lan their !amilies and -rotect
their health.S Disease -revention and re-roductive health are among the most -ressing
international health issues. 8ore than 211 million #omen in develo-ing countries #ant to delay
or end child9earing 9ut lac; access to modern contrace-tives. AdditionallyC nearly 41 million
-eo-le #orld#ide are in!ected #ith HIB?AIDSC and millions moreC es-ecially #omen and young
-eo-leC are at ris;. Im-roved access to contrace-tive methodsC li;e condomsC could -revent $2
million unintended -regnanciesC 22 million induced a9ortionsC 1.4 million in!ant deathsC and
142C111 -regnancy:related deaths -er yearC as #ell as -revent the s-read o! HIB?AIDSC thus
saving millions o! lives. CurrentlyC the Glo9al Gag Rule -rohi9its international !amily -lanning
agencies that -rovide a9ortion servicesC counsel -atients on the o-tion o! a9ortionC re!er
-atients to other a9ortion -rovidersC or advocate !or a9ortion legali>ation in their o#n countries
!rom receiving =SAID !amily -lanning !undsC technical assistanceC and vitally needed
contrace-tive su--lies. +he SContrace-tives and Condoms /0em-tionS greatly im-roves access
to contrace-tives 9y allo#ing those agencies that have not signed on to the Glo9al Gag Rule to
receive =.S. government:donated contrace-tives and condoms.
20/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' A"#$8Gag Rule #oesn7t +revent Lunding
&he gag rule doesn7t inter2ere 5ith A"#$ revention8the overall amount o2 resources
the 1%$% rovides over5helms
!utchinson'=S Senator !rom Ar;ansas'2001 O+imC Committee on )oreign RelationsC E8/VIC3 CI+A "3%ICA,
/))/C+S 3) R/S+RIC+I3(S 3( I(+/R(A+I3(A% )A8I%A "%A((I(G )=(DI(GFC Duly 1.C 2111C
htt-,??!r#e9gate.access.g-o.gov?cgi:9in?getdoc.cgiKd9nameW117TsenateThearingsPdocidW!,7$&14.#aisQ

)inallyC -erha-s the most outrageous claim that has 9een made 9y o--onents o! the 8e0ico City
"olicy is that it #ill someho# inter!ere #ith e<orts to address the HIB?AIDS e-idemic. +his
claim is sim-ly !alse. )or one thingC the =nited States currently s-ends over a hal! a 9illion
dollars -er year on Mghting AIDSC -lus many millions that go to 2H3 and =(D" and many
other (G3s and international organi>ations. +his moneyC -lus the ne# money -romised 9y the
4ush administrationC and the signiMcant increase today in the Hyde:%antos Glo9al Access to
HIB?AIDS "revention and +reatment 9illC #hich I am a very strong su--orter o! and actually
o<ered a strengthening amendment in the area o! hos-ice careC #as recently a--roved 9y the
House International Relations Committee. And I thin; that does demonstrate our realC tangi9le
commitment to the victims o! AIDS.
200
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' A"#$8+eole Wont Clinics
Girls 5on7t use !"I or 2amil3 lanning services
Aoung #omen ma;e u- three:5uarters o! 1$: to 24:year olds living #ith HIB in su9: Saharan
A!ricaC and their num9ers are increasing in every region o! the #orld. RH?)" services o<er an
im-ortant entry -oint to reach adolescent girls #ith HIB in!ormationC counselingC and services.
+ime and againC girls re-ort that they do not #ant to go to clinics out o! !ear o! seeing their
relatives and 9eing chastised 9y the nurses. +o reach themC alternative delivery -oints should
9e e0-loredC including -harmacies. As 8ichelle )olsom o! "A+H in South A!rica noted, EGirls
#ant to avoid 9eing stigmati>edC to avoid #earing the scarlet d!amily -lanning6 or dAR+.6F74
207
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' "ntegration $olves A"#$
"ntegrating 2amil3 lanning and $&" services 2ails because each service targets a
diferent grou o2 eole%
Dohn C. Cald5ellC emeritus -ro!essor o! demogra-hy and "at Cald5ellC Health +ransition Centre visitorC
Australian (ational =niversityC Can9erraC Australia. 2002. htt-,??###.guttmacher.org?-u9s?Iournals?2*11*12.html
+he central -ro9lem is that !amily -lanning and AIDS -rograms serve t#o di<erent
constituencies and needs in A!rica. )amily -lanning -rograms #or; mostly through clinics that
serve married #omenC the maIority o! #hom re5uest only hormonal contrace-tives. Clients #ho
-ractice commercial se0 are mostly involved in -art:time relationshi-s to !eed their !amily and
educate their children. +hey ;no# the ris;s and are #illing to ta;e them to avoid destitution.
)urthermoreC they are unli;ely to 9e a9le to -ersuade hus9ands or semicommercialC
semi-ermanent -artners to use condoms andC i! given them 9y clinicsC might #ell 9e -unished
!or having them. CertainlyC many married #omen are HIB:-ositiveC 9ut some have entered
marriage in that state and not all the remainder #ere in!ected 9y their hus9ands. +he maIor
!ocus o! AIDS -rograms in A!rica is men and unmarried young -ersons o! 9oth se0es. +hese
individuals need to 9e -rotected in se0ual relations that are rarely intended to cause -regnancy.
Ho#everC these grou-s are almost never !ound at !amily -lanning clinics. In additionC most AIDS
educators and condom su--liers are males. +hey have to s-ea; a very di<erent language !rom
!amily -lanning clinic -roviders, +heir main audience is young adult menC #ho can 9e assertive
and intimidate many !emale !amily -lanning #or;ers.
#onor nations shouldn7t change current 2amil3 lanning and !"I/A"#$ rograms as
the3 become inefective%
Dohn C. Cald5ellC emeritus -ro!essor o! demogra-hy and "at Cald5ellC Health +ransition Centre visitorC
Australian (ational =niversityC Can9erraC Australia. 2002. htt-,??###.guttmacher.org?-u9s?Iournals?2*11*12.html
Su9:Saharan A!rican !amily -lanning and AIDS -rograms have di<erent structuresC em-loy
di<erent ;inds o! sta< and have distinct motivations and histories. +hey should not 9e sacriMced
to con!orm to international donorsR ideologies and unrealistic e0-ectations o! greater e<iciency
and cost savings. Richer countries may 9e a9le to integrate the t#o -rograms into
com-rehensive health services o! a ;ind that most A!rican countries cannot yet a<ord. In richer
countriesC tooC the situation o! -oor #omen #ould not 9e so des-erate and 9eyond their o#n
control. In the endC the -ursuit o! integrated services in A!rica is li;ely to do more harm than
goodC and the cost #ill 9e measured in lives and un#anted -regnanciesC as #ell as money.
20:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Lree $eech Advantage
&here7s no loss in 2ree seech8the gag rule doesn7t revent advocac3? it Dust 5on7t
2und it%
Aguirre? 2001 "ro!essor o! /conomics and 4usiness at the Catholic =niversity o! America O8ariaC Committee on
d9nameW117TsenateThearingsPdocidW!,7$&14.#aisQ
Dr. Aguirre. In additionC a9ortion is not only illegal in these last countriesC 9ut also
unconstitutional 9ecause the constitution in many o! these countries u-holds the -rotection o!
li!e since the moment o! conce-tion. +here!ore the 8e0ico City "olicy then is consistent #ith
the desire o! most o! these countries and #ith the e<ort that many countries around the #orld
are ma;ing to decrease the num9er o! a9ortions. )urthermoreC it is consistent #ith the desire
o! the maIority o! the -o-ulation o! these countries #ho in recent years have over#helmingly
o--osed any intent::and I s-ea; es-ecially a9out #omen in the South American countriesC 9y a
minority #ithin those countriesC to legali>e a9ortion. +he 8e0ico City "olicy im-oses a
reasona9le restriction 9ecause it is a Io9 restriction rather than a violation o! the !reedom o!
s-eechC and it is res-ect!ul o! it as it is consistent #ith the decision o! the -o-ulation o! these
countries to u-hold the right to li!e o! the un9orn child. 4esideC the !act that some grou-s in
these countries #ant a9ortionC it doesnRt mean that #e have some o9ligation to !und it as the
-revious re-resentation have claimed. (othing in the 8C" !or9ids these grou-s !rom
advocacy. It sim-ly does not !und them.
20;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
(o $olvenc38=conomic Lactors Over5helm
=conomic 2actors restrict 5omen7s abilit3 to have abortions even 5here it is legal%
Women7s International (et#or; (e5sC #inter 1;;0C 2omen and HealthC %e0ington, 2inter 1..&. Bol.22C Iss.
1G -g. 21C "ro5uest.
SIt is estimated thatC #orld#ideC there are more than 21 million a9ortions -er!ormed each yearC
many o! #hich are done under unsa!e medical conditionsC thus resulting in the death o! at least
71C111 #omen. )or hal! a million #omen every yearC the com-lications o! -regnancy or delivery
-rove to 9e !atal. +he conse5uences o! illegally:-er!ormed or medically:unsa!e a9ortions
account !or a large share o! overall maternal mortality and mor9idityC and those #ho survive
may su<er !rom a large variety o! -ermanent -athological conse5uences. 4ut legali>ing
a9ortion does not automatically ma;e it availa9le to many #omen !or many reasons. 2hile
some countries have enlightened a9ortion la#s and -olicies that -otentially -rotect a #omanRs
right to a9ortionC cultural and economic 2actors also la3 a role. +he availa9ility o!
a--ro-riate health care delivery systems is crucialC and having an illegal a9ortion -er!ormed 9y
an untrained -erson in unhygienic surroundings may 9e a #omanRs only o-tion... 2omenRs
health may not -rogress to the desired e0tentC unless they are given the means to control their
!ertility 9y -reventing a -regnancy or sa!ely terminating itC #hen considered necessary...
210
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
(o $olvenc38$ocial Lactors Over5helm
$ocietal 2actors 5ill over5helm the lan and restrict abortion%
Jacobsen? 1;;* ODodi %C Director o! the Health and Develo-ment "olicy "roIectC EA9ortion and the Glo9al Crisis in
2omen6s HealthF in Be!ond the Number' " (eader on #o$ulation, )onum$tion, and the Environment /dited 9y
%aurie Ann 8a>urC "gs 17*:17.Q
Some la#s allo# a9ortions in case o! ra-e or incest. 3thers consider ris;s to -hysical and
mental health. Still others -ermit a9ortion o! a severely im-aired !etus. Some societies allo#
a9ortion !or #hat are ;no#n as SsocialS reasonsC as #hen -arents determine an additional child
#ill 9ring undue 9urdens to an e0isting !amily. +he 9roadest category is recogni>ing
contrace-tive !ailure as a sound 9asis !or a9ortionC or allo#ing -rocedures on re5uest Ousually
#ithin the Mrst trimesterQ. %i9erali>ation o! a9ortion la#s 9egan in the 1.$1sC as recognition o!
the need to reduce maternal mortality and increase re-roductive choices 9ecame #ides-read.
%i9erali>ed a9ortion la#s have achieved many o! Rthese goals. )ranceC +unisiaC the =nited
7ingdomC and the =.S. are a !e# +ri-les o! countries #here the relative num9er o! 9irths due to
unintended -regnancies and deaths due to illegal a9ortion !ell !ollo#ing li9erali>ation. )or
instanceC a9ortion:related mortality among =.S. #omen R!el !rom 1 -er 111C111 live 9irths in
1.71 to Mve -er 111C111 in 1.7&.* In.theoryC a9out 41 -ercent o! the #orldRs #omen no# have
access to nduced a9ortion on re5uest.. +he ;ey -hrase hereC ho#everC is Sin theory.kR, Changes
in la#s are a necessary 9ut !ar !rom su<icient condition to create universal access to sa!eC
a<orda9le a9ortion services. 4ecause social am9ivalence a9out a9ortion is #ides-readC #hat
ha--ens in -ractice o!ten does not reJect the la#s on the 9oo;s. S In many countries #omen
Mnd it di<icult to e0ercise their legal rights to o9tain a9ortion. +he reasons !or this di<iculty
include stringent medical regulationsC 9urdensome administrative re5uirementsC lac; o!
in!ormation or re!erral net#or;sC lac; o! trained -rovidersC e0treme centrali>ation o! servicesC
and local o--osition or reluctance to en!orce national la#s. 3ther varia9les include the 9arriers
-osed 9y lac; o! -ersonal resourcesC -articularly money. +hese conditions e0ert an e5ual and
sometimes more im-or: tant inJuence on #omenRs access to a9ortion than do la#s.
211
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
(o $olvenc38!ealth +ro2essional $hortage Over5helms
$hortages o2 health ro2essional contribute to unsa2e abortions%
!ord and Wol2? 200* Director o! the "olicy Division o! I-as and mem9er o! I-asC a #omen6s (G3 OCharlotte
and 8errillC E4rea;ing the Cycle o! =nsa!e A9ortion in A!ricaCF A!rican Dournal o! Re-roductive HealthC Bol. *C (o. 1C
A-rilC 2114 --. 2.:&C Data9ase, 4ioline InternationalQ
/nsuring that -ost:a9ortion care and legal a9ortionC to the !ull e0tent o! the la#C are accessi9le
re5uires training and e5ui--ing a range o! health care -roviders to -er!orm u-:to:date uterine
evacuation methods. Shortages o! trainedC e5ui--ed -roviders at every level o! the health
system lead many #omen to uns;illed -ersonnel #ho o!ten -ractice in su9standard conditions
orC in determined des-erationC to ta;e matters into their o#n hands 9y trying a variety o!
methods to sel!:induce a9ortion. +he root causes o! such shortages include medical education
institutionsR !ailure to -rovide health care -ro!essionals #ith ade5uate o--ortunities to 9e
trained in uterine evacuation and other relevant s;illsC as #ell as -olicies and la#s that restrict
#ho can -er!orm uterine evacuation. /ither 9y la# or customC many health systems -ermit only
doctors to -er!orm this sim-le -rocedure des-ite a gro#ing 9ody o! evidence that #ith -ro-er
training and su-ervisionC nursesC mid#ives and other health #or;ers can -rovide sa!e and
e<ective a9ortion care.C1C14
212
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
+olitics86ush Won7t +ush
6ush 5on7t ush the lan8he re2uses to suort 2unding 2or abortion%
Susan Cohen? director o! governmental a<airs at the Guttmacher InstituteC August 200*. E=.S. Glo9al
Re-roductive Health "olicy, Isolationist A--roach In an Interde-endent 2orldFC +he Guttmacher Re-ort on "u9lic
"olicyC htt-,??###.guttmacher.org?-u9s?tgr?17??gr17117.html.
3ver the course o! his Mrst termC "resident 4ush'#ith the tacit a--roval o! Congress'has
moved to isolate the =nited States ever more shar-ly !rom the glo9al consensus on critical
matters o! se0ual and re-roductive health -olicy. 3n day one o! his -residencyC he reim-osed an
antia9ortion gag rule on reci-ients o! =.S. !amily -lanning assistance overseas as the Mrst salvo
in his administrationRs cam-aign to e0-ort its antia9ortion agenda to the rest o! the #orld. )or
the last three yearsC he has re!used on ideological grounds to authori>e a contri9ution to the
=nited (ations "o-ulation )und O=()"AQC rendering the =nited States the only donor country
to deny !unding to =()"A !or non9udgetary reasons. And #hile'to his credit'he has made
addressing the glo9al HIB?AIDS -andemic a high =.S. -riorityC -u9lic health e0-erts !rom
around the #orld condemn his administrationRs overem-hasis on morality:9ased a--roaches to
HIB?AIDS -revention cou-led #ith constant 5uestioning a9out the e<ectiveness o! condom use.
21)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
+olitics8Ieto ,in-
A% 6ush 5ill veto an3 change to the gag rule8the lan has to Eat a veto override%
Associated "ress OA+QC &?$?2007. %e0is.
International !amily -lanning grou-s cut o< !rom aid 9ecause o! their -osition on a9ortion could
gain access to =.S.:donated contrace-tives under legislation a--roved 9y a House -anel
+uesday. Re-. (ita %o#eyC D:(.A.C chairman o! the House A--ro-riations su9committee
overseeing the State De-artment and !oreign aidC said the contrace-tive -rovision le!t intact the
Reagan:era -olicy o! 9anning aid to grou-s that -rovide or -romote a9ortions. Re-u9licans
disagreed and cited a letter to Democratic leaders !rom "resident 4ush last month #arning that
he 5ould veto an3 legislation that 5ea-ens current olic3 and la5s on abortion% I! the
measure reaches the 2hite HouseC said Re-. )ran; 2ol! o! BirginiaC to- Re-u9lican on the
-anelC Sthe3 5ill veto the bill.S +he 9illC in another s#i-e at a !avorite administration
-rogramC gives 4ush and !uture -residents the right to #aive current la# that re5uires that
one:third o! =.S. aid !or HIB?AIDS -revention 9e s-ent on a9stinence -rograms.
6% 1sing a veto tan-s the residents olitical caital and destro3s biartisanshi in
Congress%
Ro9ert $it4erC "ro!essor o! "olitical Science at the State =niversity o! (e# Aor;C 1;;).
"resident and Congress, /0ecutive Hegemony at the Crossroads o! American GovernmentC -.
72:.
+he veto -oses a ;ey -arado0 !or "residents #ho contem-late its use. 2ith the e0ce-tion o!
vetoes o! -rivate 9ills in the t#entieth centuryC !re5uent veto use 9y "residents tends to erode
their reservoir o2 olitical resources. +his occurs 9ecause Congress invariabl3 becomes
more resent2ul and con2rontational #hen its measures are reIected too !re5uently. In
additionC des-ite the !act that the !ounders vie#ed the veto as a creativeC -ositive tool Oit #as
o!ten called the Erevisionary -o#erFQ that could 9e used to mold 9etter legislation in concert
#ith CongressC the -redominant modern im-ression o! the veto is that it is sim-ly a negative
-o#er used 9y "residents to !rustrate and 9loc;. A "resident #ho ac5uires a negative image
stemming !rom heavy veto use 2aces a signiEcant olitical obstacle in dealing 5ith
Congress. IndeedC #hen the veto is used o!tenC it usually means that the "resident has not
succeeded in esta9lishing a -attern o! -ositive leadershi- 9ased on the -residential legislative
-rogram. "residents #ho esta9lish such leadershi- are usually a9le to avoid numerous vetoes
9y #inning -assage o! their im-ortant -rograms or o9taining a !avora9le com-romise #ith
congressional leaders. +husC "residents #ho most need the veto are those #ho lac; other -o#er
resources. +he "residents #ith the least need o! the veto are those #ho e0ert greater inJuence
over Congress and #ho have more am-le -o#er resourcesC such as a high standing in the eyes
o! the -u9lic.
21*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
+olitics8+olitical Caital ,in-
&he gag rule is a massivel3 controversial issue in Congress H it emiricall3 trades of
5ith other legislation%
(ational Council o2 Je5ish Women? 2001 O8oshen9ergC Sammie. (CD2 Dournal. (e# Aor;, Dul 1C
2111. Bol.24C Iss. 2G -g. 7C E)ighting the Glo9al Gag Rule, A Re-ort !rom the 4attleMeldCF "R3@=/S+Q
Aou can count on it :: every year Congress #ill ta;e u- the glo9al gag rule. /arly onC it #as
called the S8e0ico City "olicyS a!ter the site o! the international -o-ulation con!erence #here
the Reagan Administration Mrst announced this rule. SoonC it 9ecame ;no#n !or #hat it #as ::
the glo9al gag rule :: a gag order im-osed 9y the very nation that cham-ions the democratic
-rinci-le o! !ree s-eech #orld#ide. Since thenC this rule has been subDect to Eerce
congressional debate? even to the e<tent o2 dela3ing assage o2 maDor 2oreign olic3
legislation. 4oth "residents Clinton and George 2. 4ush understood the im-ortance o! this
issue to their constituencies. 4oth men issued /0ecutive 3rders on the glo9al gag rule #ithin
days o! their inaugurations. A!ter "resident Clinton overturned the ruleC anti:choice !orces led
9y Re-. Chris Smith OR:(DQ essentially declared #arC #or;ing to add the rule to almost every
!oreign -olicy 9ill. "resident 4ush -ic;ed the anniversary o! Roe v. 2ade to reinstate the rule 9y
/0ecutive 3rderC setting o< a ne# e<ort 9y (CD2 and its coalition -artners to overturn the gag
rule legislatively.
&he lan costs olitical caital8emiricall3 controversial%
$an Antonio =<ress? 200) ODuly 1.C 211C ESadlyC gag order still stands G Although the Senate tried to
override a restriction on !amily -lanning !undsC the House did not go along.F /ditorial H 3ur turnC -g 114Q
=n!ortunatelyC the =.S. House voted this #ee; to sustain the 4ush administrationRs misguided
-olicy o! #ithholding !ederal !unds !rom !amily -lanning clinics around the #orld i! they so
much as mention a9ortion. 4ush issued the glo9al gag rule on his Mrst day in o<ice. As a
resultC clinics that include a9ortion in a range o! o-tions last year did not receive any o! the
L4$1 million that the =nited States contri9uted to international !amily -rograms. %ast #ee;C
there #as ho-e that the ruleC #hich inter!eres #ith the doctor:-atient relationshi- and -enali>es
the #omen o! -oor nationsC might 9e li!ted. +he Senate voted $:4 to remove the glo9al gag
ruleC even in the !ace o! a veto threat 9y the 4ush administration. (o#C !amily -lanning clinics
around the #orld still #ill not receive money i! they violate the order. "oor #omen #ill
continue to 9e denied health care 9ecause o! this oliticall3 divisive debate in the =nited
States.
&he global gag rule is oliticall3 controversial%
can -resent legal remedies cure -ast #rongsKCF %e0is.
Recogni>ing that uncontrolled -o-ulation gro#th and -oor -u9lic health undermines economic
sta9ility and living standards in develo-ing countriesC the =nited States has contri9uted to
international !amily -lanning and voluntary -o-ulation control -rograms since the 1.&1s. n1 In
generalC !amily -lanning clinics -rovide -renatal careC contrace-tionC Z\1**[ counselingC
medical servicesC and in!ormation a9out 9irth s-acingC !ertilityC and se0ually transmitted
in!ections OS+IsQ. n2 +hese clinics are crucial !or ensuring individualsR and cou-lesR access to
se0ual and re-roductive health careC -articularly in develo-ing countries #here high maternal
and child mortality rates continue to diminish the 5uality o! li!e. n "oliticallyC ho#everC
international !amily -lanning has 9een controversial in the =nited States 9ecause it o!ten
includes a9ortion counselingC re!erralsC and related medical care. n4 3n Danuary 22C 2111C
21/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
"resident George 2. 4ush issued an e0ecutive memorandum 9loc;ing =.S. !amily -lanning
!unding to any !oreign nongovernmental organi>ation O(G3Q that su--orts a9ortionC even #ith
its o#n non:=.S. !unds. n$ =nder this -olicyC in order to receive =.S. !undingC (G3s that
-rovide !amily -lanning services must cease to Z\1*.[ -er!orm and Sactively -romoteS
a9ortion:related services. n& S-eciMcallyC (G3s must not -artici-ate in -u9lic education
cam-aigns a9out re-roductive choiceC -rovide -atient re!errals to !acilities #here a9ortion may
9e o9tainedC counsel on a9ortion as a medical o-tionC or lo99y !or government re!orm regarding
the li9erali>ation o! a9ortion la#s. n7
210
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
+olitics8GO+ 6ac-lash ,in-
Conservatives 5ill bac-lash against reealing the gag rule%
+he LrontrunnerC Dune * 2007. %e0is.
+he 2all Street Dournal O&?*C Har#oodC 2.148Q re-orts in its S2ashington 2ireS columnC
SDemocrats aim to undo conservative strictures on !oreign aid. Sen. )einstein o! Cali!ornia
-ro-oses li!ting re5uirement that one:third o! AIDS:-revention grants -romote se0ual
a9stinence in develo-ing countriesG Re-. %o#ey o! (e# Aor; see;s to loosen Rglo9al gag ruleR
9arring =.S. aid to agencies counseling a9ortion. 4ut American De#ish 2orld Service advocacy
director Dodi Daco9son -redicts Eerce oosition 2rom the right.S
Conservative 6ase $uorts the Gag Order Rule
JacobsonC 11:2:200/ O Dodi Daco9sonC e0ecutive director o! the 2ashington:9ased Center !or Health and Gender
/5uityC E=SA?A!rica, Glo9al Gag Rule /0-andsFC htt-,??###.a!rica!ocus.org?docs1$?gag1$11.-h-Q
=nder severe -ressure !rom the e0treme right in the Re-u9lican "arty and its !undamentalist
Christian 9ase in the =nited StatesC the AdministrationRs glo9al AIDS -olicy already includes
numerous -olicy shi!ts and !unding constraints that undermine e<ective -revention e<orts.
)irstC there is an e0cessive em-hasis on a9stinence:only -rograms to the e0clusion o!
com-rehensive a--roaches that integrate a9stinence:9ased -rogramming #ith sa!er se0
education. +odayC nearly &1 -ercent o! !unding !or -revention o! se0ual transmission:the single
greatest !actor in HIB transmission:goes to a9stinence -rograms in "/")AR !ocus countries.
SecondC the Administration has dramatically cut !unding !or condom social mar;eting and has
severely limited condom distri9ution to grou-s at greatest ris; o! in!ection. )inallyC "/")AR
-rovides virtually no !unding !or !emale condomsC !or increasing #omenRs a9ility to negotiate
sa!er se0C !or e<orts to stem violence and se0ual coercion as a !actor in transmission o! HIBC or
!or other -rograms critical to #omen. S2hat #e are doing is ta;ing an already su9:-ar e<ort
and ma;ing it #orseCS stated Daco9son.
217
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
+olitics8Catholic ,obb3 ,in-
&he Catholic lobb3 hates international 2amil3 lanning8the3 have huge clout in
Congress%
"redicta9lyC the Roman Catholic Church has also 9een a maIor o--onent o! !amily -lanning.
+hree decades have no# -assed since "o-e "aul BIRs !amous Humanae Bitae reiterated the
ChurchRs stance against contrace-tion. Catholic #omenC mean#hileC are among the to- users o!
9irth control #orld#ide. O(early &1 -ercent o! all Catholic #omen in the =.S. use some !orm o!
contrace-tionC com-ared to three -ercent #ho use natural !amily -lanningC according to a 1..1
study. +he num9ers are similarly over#helming in Catholic strongholds li;e IrelandC Italy and
%atin America.Q +he Catholic -ers-ective #as e0ceedingly clear at the international Cairo
con!erence. 4e!orehandC the Batican #ent so !ar as to accuse the =.S. and other #estern nations
o! S9iological colonialismS !or their e<orts to 9ring contrace-tion to the +hird 2orld. And
though lac;ing the legislative muscle o! the Christian CoalitionC the Church has one o2 the
best9run lobbies in America . Its o--osition to =.S. !unding o! international !amily -lanning
has 9een -al-a9le.
21:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
+olitics8Lamil3 +lanning 1noular
Loreign aid 2or 2amil3 lanning is unoular in Congress%
!5angC medical student at the =niversity o! Cali!orniaC San )ranciscoC and a !ormer intern at the 2orld#atch
InstituteC 2002. AnnC 2orld 2atchC E/0-orta9le righteousnessC /0-enda9le 2omenFC Danuary:)e9ruary 2112C -g 24:
2C Academic 3ne )ile.
/ven a!ter 4ill Clinton re-ealed the gag ruleC Congress continued to use its -o#er over the
9udget to chi- a#ay at !amily -lanning e0-enditures. OSee gra-hC -age 2&.Q )rom its -ea; o!
L$42 million in Mscal year 1..$C Congress cut =SAID !unding !or !amily -lanning 9y $ -ercent
!or the ne0t Mscal year:a su9stantially greater loss than the 21 -ercent cut inJicted on !oreign
aid as a #hole. +he !amily -lanning 9udget regained some ground in the !ollo#ing year 9ut in
1...C Clinton struc; a deal #ith congressional conservatives, in e0change !or an agreement to
-ay 9ac; dues o#ed to the =nited (ationsC Clinton signed a more lenient version o! the gag
ruleC #hich cut =SAID !unding 9y L12.$ million. %ate in his -residencyC Clinton negotiated a
2111 9udget #ith 3stensi9ly more !avora9le terms. )amily -lanning !unding #ould 9e increased
to L42$ million and the gag rule #ithdra#n::9ut conservatives insisted on one im-ortant
condition, no !unds could 9e dis9ursed until a!ter )e9ruary 1$C 2111. +hus the !ate o! the rul e
hinged on #hat turned out to 9e one o! the most unusual -residential elections in American
history.
21;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
+olitics8Religious Right ,in-
6ush uses the gag rule to gain oularit3 5ith right95ing Christians%
World Watch? 200*. Don HinrichsenC E%adiesC Aou Have (o Choice, Ho# /0tremists +oo; 3ver )amily "lanning
"olicyF -. 17C )irstSearch.
2hy is the 4ush administration so unres-onsive to such MndingsK 3ne ans#er is o<ered 9y
Ronald GreenC chairman o! the De-artment o! Religion at Dartmouth College in (e#
Ham-shireC and a mem9er o! the 211 delegation. S+he 4ush Administration has made =()"A
a sacriMcial lam9 !or the religious right in AmericaCS says Green. SItRs crass election -olitics.
+hese grou-s not only o--ose a9ortionC they are against !amily -lanning and re-roductive
health in general. +heir -ositions...have no 9asis in reality.S
6ush uses the gag rule to shore u his 2undamentalist base%
JacobsonC 11:2:200/. Dodi Daco9sonC e0ecutive director o! the 2ashington:9ased Center !or Health and Gender
/5uityC E=SA?A!rica, Glo9al Gag Rule /0-andsFC htt-,??###.a!rica!ocus.org?docs1$?gag1$11.-h-
S/0-ansion o! the Glo9al Gag Rule to HIB !unding comes at a time #hen -olitical su--ort !or
the 4ush Administration is #aningC and #hen the Administration is see;ing to shore u- its
R!undamentalist 9aseCRS noted Daco9son. SIt is -erha-s no sur-riseCS noted Daco9sonC S9ut this
decision sho#s Iust ho# !ar this Administration #ill go to -lay -olitics #ith #omenRs lives.S
220
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
+olitics8=<ecutive Order ,in-s
Reealing the global gag rule is oliticall3 imossible%
An e0ecutive memorandum rescinding the entire 8e0ico City "olicy #ould 9e the most e<ective
strategy !or allo#ing !amily -lanning clinics to serve their HIB?AIDS clients in accordance #ith
localC regionalC and national health standards. n214 Aet such an order is unli;ely under the
current administrationG each -ost:Reagan Re-u9lican -resident has im-lemented the "olicy and
the current administration has consistently advanced -olicies o--osing a9ortion. n21$
8oreoverC Z\221[ "resident 4ush e0-anded the 8e0ico City "olicy in August o! 211 9y
e0tending it to State De-artment grants to !oreign (G3s !or !amily -lanning -rograms. n21&
+husC la#ma;ers have e0-lored more -ro9a9le and -ragmatic remedies. n217
221
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
+olitics8+oularit3 ,in-
Reealing the gag rule is oular 5ith the ublic%
As the glo9al gag rule standsC it is clearly at odds #ith =S la# and the vie5s o2 the maDorit3
o2 Americans C #ho su--ort sa!e a9ortion. As 8arcel Be;emansC senior medical adviser to the
International "lanned "arenthood )ederationC says, SItRs a case o!C Rdo #hat I sayC not #hat I
doR.S 7no#ing ho# di<icult it #ould 9e to overturn Roe v 2ade in his o#n countryC 4ush has
instead e0-orted his -ersonal convictionsC and those o! his closest su--ortersC #orld#ide.
&he ublic suorts 2amil3 lanning%
In the =.S.C !amily -lanning has #ides-read su--ort. In 1..$C &4 -ercent o! American #omenC
ages 1$ to 44C used contrace-tionC u- !rom $& -ercent in 1.*2C according to the Alan Guttmacher InstituteC a
(e# Aor;:9ased thin; tan; !or re-roductive issues. StillC nearly hal! o! the nationRs &. million -regnancies each year
are unintended. +eenagersC mean#hileC are res-onsi9le !or 1 -ercent o! all 9irths in this country. +eens under#ent
2*.C111 a9ortions in 1..4 alone. In light o! such statisticsC one #ould thin; that lac; o! in!ormation and ignorance
#ould 9e the ;ey -ro9lems !acing advocates o! !amily -lanning. A9ortion -oliticsC ho#everC have overshado#ed all
other o9stacles. 8any manu!acturersC !or instanceC !ear a -olitical 9ac;lash !or develo-ing ne# methods o!
contrace-tion. 8i!e-ristone OR=:4*&QC the so:called S)rench a9ortion -illCS #hich e0-els an im-lanted eggC #as used
in )rance !or years 9e!ore anyone dared ta;e ste-s to ma;e it availa9le here. Relatively !e# American #omenC
mean#hileC ;no# that 9irth control -ills ta;en a!ter se0 can -revent -regnancy. Higher doses o! -ills that millions o!
#omen already -ossessC ta;en #ithin 72 hours o! intercourseC can -rovide emergency contrace-tion. 4ut 9et#een
a9ortion scare tactics and a !ear o! consumer la#suitsC com-anies have hesitated to rela9el their -roducts and
advertise them as such. ItRs easy to understand #hyC considering the reaction that a L21 Semergency contrace-tive
;itS dre# #hen it #as a--roved 9y the )ood and Drug Administration in Se-tem9er. +he ;it 9asically consists o! a
home:-regnancy test and !our 9irth:control -illsC #ith instructions a9out #hen to ta;e them as SemergencyS
contrace-tion. +he -ills cannot a<ect an esta9lished -regnancyC 9ut that did not sto- one right:to:li!e leader !rom
slamming the Sdo:it:yoursel! a9ortion ;itS and the )DA. It #as Iust !our years agoC during the =nited (ations:
s-onsored International Con!erence on "o-ulation and Develo-mentC in CairoC /gy-tC that the =.S. made 9road
commitments to 9e a leader in !ending o< a glo9al -o-ulation crisisC #ith !amily -lanning 9eing the Mrst line o!
attac;. +odayC #ith the -olitical landsca-e altered and Re-u9licans holding -o#er in CongressC many !eel that
America is reneging. A =niversity o! 8aryland survey sho#s that 74 -ercent o! Americans su--ort
assistance !or international !amily -lanning. 4ut in 1..&C Congress actually cut !oreign
-o-ulation assistance $ -ercent and then delayed and restricted release o! the money.
222
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
+olitics8Olive 6ranch ,in-
&he lan is a concession to democrats8the3 are ushing 2or the lan no5%
Winston9$alem JournalC Dune 2$C 2007. %e0is.
+he =.S. House o! Re-resentatives struc; a 9lo# !or com-assion and common sense last #ee;
#hen it moved to reverse a 9an on contrace-tion aid to international grou-s that o<er a9ortion
or -romote a9ortion rights. +he Senate should !ollo# suit. 4y a narro# marginC mem9ers o! the
House voted to allo# the =nited States to donate contrace-tives to !amily:-lanning
organi>ations overseas even i! the organi>ations include a9ortion or a9ortion counseling among
their services. Re-. (ita %o#eyC a (e# Aor; DemocratC introduced a 9ill that #ould have
allo#ed the =nited States to give money !or such organi>ations to use !or contrace-tives. 4ut in
the !ace o! sti< o--osition !rom conservativesC she amended it to allo# only the donation o!
contrace-tives themselves.
#emocrats suort e<ansion o2 2amil3 lanning and contracetive rograms
Washington +ostC &?22?2007. EA Section,Democrats "ass "rovision !or Contrace-tives in House )oreign Aid
4illG 8ove Is )irst Challenge +o Antia9ortion Riders.F
House Democrats narro#ly -assed a measure yesterday to -rovide contrace-tives to overseas
organi>ations that had 9een 9anned !rom receiving !oreign aid 9ecause they -rovided or
-romoted a9ortion. +he amendment to an im-ortant antia9ortion measure in the House !oreign aid s-ending 9ill
#as a re9u;e to "resident 4ushC #ho has strictly o--osed -roviding any assistance to grou-s that -romote a9ortion.
+he Reagan:era measureC ;no#n as the 8e0ico City -olicyC #as Mercely -rotected 9y 4ushC #ho has issued t#o veto
threats over the !oreign aid 9ill should Democrats attem-t to alter any o! the antia9ortion measures it contains. +he
change to the measure may -rove to 9e the House DemocratsR only signiMcant challenge to the antia9ortion riders
that have 9een added to a range o! annual s-ending 9ills 9y a9ortion o--onents over three decades. +he 8e0ico City
measure is one o! more than a do>en -rovisions 9anning 8edicaid reci-ientsC D.C. -u9lic health -atientsC -rison
inmatesC government #or;ers and even "eace Cor-s volunteers !rom getting a !ederally !unded a9ortion. And
Democrats have a--eared cautious a9out ta;ing on the 9igger Mght. +hat #as evident even in the de9ate 9e!ore
yesterdayRs vote. +he House -assed the !oreign aid 9ill 241 to 17*. Re-. (ita 8. %o#ey OD:(.A.QC s-onsor o!
the amendment and chairman o! the A--ro-riations su9committee on state and !oreign
o-erationsC sought to reassure Re-u9licans that the contrace-tives -rovision does not sha;e the
core antia9ortion -ortion o! the -olicy. S2hat I did #as -ut in a very narro# -rovision that #ill
reduce a9ortionC unintended -regnancy and reduce the s-read o! HIB?AIDSCS %o#ey said. +he
-rovision dre# the su--ort o! antia9ortion Democrat +im Ryan O3hioQC #ho argued on the Joor that Sthe a9ortion de9ate in the 21st century needs to 9e a9out -revention.S
Democratic leaders have said that as the s-ending cycle revs u-C they -lan to steer clear o!
additional challenges :: not only to a9ortion restrictions 9ut also to other social issues that have
deMned the -arty 9ut tend to divide Americans. +hey are -rotective o! their !ragile maIorityC rattled 9y re-eated 2hite House veto
threatsC and have their sights on the 2hite House in 211*. SIRm on the le!t. . . . 4ut thereRs another team on the MeldC and you ;no# #hatK +heyRve got 9loc;ers and tac;lersC
tooCS said House A--ro-riations Chairman David R. 39ey OD:2is.Q. S2e #ant to get things done.S +hat reality has guided DemocratsR decision not to tin;er #ith measures in the
s-ending 9ills that many advocacy grou-s #ho are longtime allies thought they #ould target. And so, A9stinence:only se0 education !avored
9y 4ush is slated !or a L27 million increase. An amendment 9arring !ederal agents !rom sharing gun:tracing in!ormation #ith local -olice
has so !ar stayed intact. A 9an on the medical use o! mariIuana in the 9ill !unding the D.C. government #ill remain.c
22)
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
+olitics86iartisanshi ,in-
$uort is gro5ing to overturn the gag rule in congress%
Alyssa ReadC American "ros-ect #riting !ello#C .?24?2001. +he American "ros-ectC E+he Sound o! Silence.F
3ne 9right s-ot, /<orts 9y the -ro:choice community are gradually moving o-inion in Congress.
+he Senate )oreign Relations Committee recently voted 12:7 O#ith the su--ort o! several
Re-u9licansQ to overturn the gag rule. In the HouseC sentiment has 9een shi!ting against it. 3n
the most recent Joor voteC last 8ayC o--onents came #ithin eight votes o! stri;ing it. +hirty:
three Re-u9licans 9raved 2hite House arm:t#isting to vote against the gag rule. As the 9rutal
costs o! 4ushRs -olicy 9ecome 9etter understoodC the gag rule is more li;ely to 9e remem9ered
as an em9arrassment than as a moral trium-h.
22*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
+olitics8A&' GO+ 6ac-lash
Onl3 e<tremist reublicans suort the gag rule%
&he OregonianC 11?22?1;;7. E/0cuse 8e !or GaggingF /ditorial, 412 H %e0is.
+his maliciously stu-id amendment is no# 9y 9eing used 9y the House Re-u9lican leadershi- as
a 9argaining chi-C a condition o! Re-u9lican su--ort !or ClintonRs !ast:trac; !ree:trade
legislation. 3nly the most e0treme anti:a9ortion grou-s !avor this amendmentG many legislators
#ho o--ose a9ortion are also o--osed to this !olly. 4ut Re-u9licans are increasingly letting
e0tremist grou-s set their -olicies on all ;inds o! issues.
22/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
=uroean 1nion C+
&he =1 should rovide 2unding to relace 1%$% 2amil3 lanning aid%
Rachael $eeversC D.D.C 4roo;lyn %a# SchoolC 2000. 4roo;lyn Dournal o! International %a#C E+he "olitics o!
Z\.1[ 4. "rovide )unding to Address Agency:S-eciMc )unding Cuts
In recognition o! this short!all in international !amily -lanning !unding as #ell as the damage 9eing done 9y the Gag
RuleC some international 9odies have 9egun to address the lac;luster Mnancing o! neutral !amily
-lanning activities. +hese 9odies may 9e valua9le allies to =.S. activists and !oreign (G3s in
search o! alternate !unding sources. In 211C the "arliamentary Assem9ly o! the Council o!
/uro-e called on its mem9er countries to ma;e u- the -ayments cancelled 9y the =nited States
as a result o! the Glo9al Gag Rule. 1.7 +his recommendation #as echoed 9y a recent /uro-ean "arliament
Re-ort that called u-on the Commission to Sta;e into account the devastating im-act o! the 8e0ico City "olicy o! the
4ush AdministrationS and Mll the 9udgeting ga- -rovo;ed 9y the "olicy. 1.* +hese calls to Mll S9udgeting ga-sS
generally re!er to larger -roviders such as =()"A and I"") #ho have lost massive amounts o! !unding as a result o!
the Gag RuleC though the Mnancial need o! other smaller (G3s has also 9een ac;no#ledged. 1.. It is clear that
/uro-e has recogni>ed the need to counteract the damage 9eing done 9y the anti:choice =.S. a9ortion -olicy
e0em-liMed 9y the Glo9al Gag RuleG ho#ever they have !ocused too narro#ly on the issue o! lost !unding. 211 Z\.2[
+he international community should not #ait !or (G3s to 9e -unished 9y =SAID !or 9rea;ing their silence and
s-ea;ing u- a9out the dangers o! unsa!e a9ortions in order to o<er them alternative !unding. +here needs to 9e
a 9roader international res-onse that not only addresses s-eciMc cuts to agencies that result
!rom -erceived Gag Rule violationsC 9ut one that also -rovides an alternate source o! !unding
!or (G3s that do not #ant to acce-t the =SAID restrictions. 211 +he /= and other
international 9odies should continue to -ush their mem9er states to increase individual state
contri9utions to international !amily -lanning -rogramsC and =.S. activists should !ocus on this
alternative regime rather than continue challenging the constitutionality o! the Gag Rule in =.S. courts. 212 In
res-onse to the lac;luster !unding !or IC"D goals coming !rom industriali>ed nationsC the International
"arliamentarians Con!erence on the Im-lementation o! the Cairo "rogram in 2112 -ressed nations to increase their
contri9utions to -o-ulation -olicy and se0ual and re-roductive health -rogramsC and urged them to contri9ute $:11
-ercent o! their national 9udgets to these -rograms in order to meet IC"D goals. 21 /= re-orts have gone
even !urtherC calling !or legali>ation o! a9ortion in order to com9at the continued maternal
mortality that results !rom unsa!e a9ortions. 214 +hese re-orts have recogni>ed that #hile a9ortion should
not 9e encouraged or used as a method o! !amily -lanningC Slegal and medically sa!e interventions Zshould[ 9e
-ossi9le !or #omen #ho have no other Z\.[ #ay out o! their di<icultiesC in order to -rotect their re-roductive and
mental health.S 21$ +hese /= s-onsored re-orts led to a /uro-ean "arliament Resolution on "o-ulation and
Develo-ment in 2114. +his resolution called !or Sa greater share o! humanitarian and emergency aid to 9e used to
9eneMt the re-roductive health o! -eo-le in emergency situationsS and Sto ma;e more !unding availa9le !or the
-rotection o! re-roductive health.S 21& +he resolution also enacted a 2114 -ro-osal to assure the S!acilitation o!
medically sa!e a9ortionsS and called !or Slegal and medically sa!e interventions to 9e -ossi9le.S 217 )inallyC the
Resolution stated that healthcare aid should 9e allocated to develo-ing countries #hile ensuring that Sthis aid is used
also to maintain or restore re-roductive health.S 21* /= 9odies have clearly demonstrated a commitment
to #omenRs health through these resolutions as #ell as through their contri9ution o! millions o!
dollars to Mll !unding ga-s created 9y the Glo9al Gag Rule. +he /= -resents the most
immediateC natural ally !or e<orts to -rovide neutral !amily -lanning !unding to !oreign (G3sC
ho#ever larger international 9odies may also 9e ta--ed !or increased Mnancial commitment to the goals o! the IC"D.
+he =nited (ations has -ro!essed a strong commitment to #omenRs rightsC human rightsC and health careC ho#ever
Mnancial contri9utions !rom =( organi>ations to glo9al !amily -lanning -rograms amounted to Iust 17.& -ercent o!
the IC"D target !or 2111. 21. It is distressing that the !unding commitments !or !amily -lanning are so meagerC given
the =(Rs -ledge to -rotect human rights and increase access to health care. 211 +he /= has called on mem9er states
to coordinate activities among donor countries more e<iciently in order to -rovide Z\.4[ !amily -lanning !undingC
and its seems that coo-eration 9et#een the =( and the /= 9odies #ould 9e a logical ste-. 211 +he =nited States
has clearly moved to the right o! the international community #hen it comes to re-roductive rightsC and this shi!t
should not 9e reJected 9y the rest o! the #orld. 212 +he 9roader international community should recogni>e the
damage the =.S. -olicy is doing to re-roductive rights and !ollo# the suggestion o! the /= 9y -roviding increased
220
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
overall !unding !or !amily -lanning activities and strive !or a universal $:11 -ercent contri9ution to neutral glo9al
!amily -lanning -rograms 9y all mem9er states o! the =( and the /=. +he -u9lic health situation is only going to
deteriorate. 3ne 9illion young -eo-le #ill soon enter the re-roductive -hase o! their livesC and increasing num9ers o!
#omen #ill resort to illegal a9ortions. 21 8aternal mortality rates #ill only riseC and the restrictions on s-eech and
advocacy created 9y the Glo9al Gag Rule #ill #rea; increasing havoc on #omenRs health and -lague develo-ing
democratic movements as s-eech and -olitical activism are silenced. According to the /uro-ean "arliamentC Saccess
to re-roductive health can only 9e guaranteed i! the international community meets the goals set in the Cairo
"rogram.S 214 =.S. activists and (G3s should re!ocus their e<orts to increase the level o! neutral
!unding availa9le !or !amily -lanning activities through coo-eration #ith the =( and the /= as
#ell as other international 9odies that share their commitment to #omenRs health and -olitical !reedom and
-artici-ation. International e<orts to address the damage to health and democracy that has
resulted !rom the Glo9al Gag Rule should assist (G3s that have lost !unding 9ecause o! the
Gag Rule restrictionsC as #ell as (G3s that currently receive gagged !undingC 9ut #ould li;e to
re-lace this !unding in order to address massive and continued -u9lic health ris;s o! illegal
a9ortion. 2ith this a--roachC organi>ations li;e the 8anuelas that have a history o!
re-roductive rights advocacy can move a#ay !rom their reliance on gagged =.S. Z\.$[
!unding and truly re-resent the interests o! their constituents through -olitical advocacy !or
increased access to a9ortion.
227
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
=uroean 1nion C+
&he =1 5ill Ell in 2or the gag rule b3 2unding develoing countries%
Women7s (e5sC 2?2?2001. E/uro-eans 8ay 8atch )unds Cut 4y Glo9al Gag RuleFC
htt-,??###.#omensene#s.org?article.c!mKaidW4$*.
In ne# t#ist to the gro#ing controversy over "resident 4ushRs inter!erence #ith the health care o! #omen in other
nationsC the /uro-ean =nion and mem9er states indicate that they may ste- in and su9stitute !or
the cuts in =.S. !amily -lanning aid. "resident George 2. 4ush re:im-osed the so:called glo9al gag
rule Danuary 22 9anning health agencies a9road that receive =.S. !amily -lanning !unds !rom
counseling #omen a9out a9ortion and lo99ying !or a9ortion la# re!orm. In res-onseC "oul (ielsonC
/uro-ean Commissioner !or Develo-mentC Co:o-eration and Humanitarian AidC during a recent 2orld
4an; con!erence in %ondonC announced that indeed the /uro-ean =nion could Mnd the !unds to
re-lace the =.S. aid and Mll #hat he termed the Sdecency ga-.S +he /uro-ean Commission is the
e0ecutive 9ody o! the /=. (ielson -ro-osed to com-ensate !or cuts in =.S. !unding 9ecause he is
concerned a9out #omenRs healthC rights and reducing the num9er o! a9ortions. SHe considers that
counselingC in!orming a9out o-tionsC these are things that #ill lead to a reduction o! the num9er o! a9ortionsC rather
than increase the num9er o! a9ortionsCS said 7ristian SchmidtC a mem9er o! (ielsonRs ca9inet. Commissioner (ielson
thin;s a9ortion is a thing to avoidC 9ut you donRt avoid it 9y !orcing organi>ations #or;ing in the Meld to not in!orm
their -atients a9out it. In addition t#o /= mem9er statesC Denmar; and the (etherlandsC declared -u9licly
that they #ere also #illing to contri9ute !unds.
22:
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Canada C+
Canada can Ell in 2or the lac- o2 1$ 2unding%
+he Otta5a Citi4enC 3cto9er 2C 200*. htt-,??###.ac-d.ca?ac-d.c!m?en?section?ac-dmedia?articleID?2&1
)or the third straight yearC the 4ush administration has #ithheld its L4:million =.S. annual
contri9ution to the =nited (ations "o-ulation )und 9ecause it -rovides !amily -lanning
servicesC such as contrace-tives. +he =()"A estimated the L4 million in 2114 could have
-revented t#o million unintended -regnancies #orld#ideC *11C111 a9ortionsC 4C111 maternal
deaths and 77C111 in!ant and child deaths. (umerous organi>ations are Mghting the -olicies
!rom #ithin the =.S. A grou- called 4 8illion )riends o! =()"A #ants 4 million Americans to
each donate L1 to ma;e u- the short!all. So !arC they have raised slightly more than L2 million.
It has long 9een ho-ed other countriesC -articularly the /uro-ean =nionC #ould Mll the !unding
ga- le!t 9y the =.S. -olicyC says 8s. 8cDonaldC o! the AC"D. SCanada is ositioned to ta-e a
lead roleCS she says. She #ants Canada to ma;e the Mght !or international re-roductive rights
-art o! its !oreign -olicy agenda. She #ants the Canadian International Develo-ment Agency to
agree to restore !unding to more o! the !amily -lanning clinics that lost their !unding. CIDA has
already given money to 8arie Sto-es clinics in +an>ania.
22;
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Alternate Actor C+
"ncreasing 2amil3 lanning 2unding 2rom alternate donors can solve 2or the imact to
the global gag rule%
Rachael $eeversC D.D.C 4roo;lyn %a# SchoolC 2000. 4roo;lyn Dournal o! International %a#C E+he "olitics o!
Z\.1[ Re-ealing the Gag Rule through court action a--ears unli;ely. 1.2 +he -olicy has 9een
challenged Mve times in =.S. courtsC o!ten 9ased on the restrictions on !ree s-eech and
association su<ered 9y =.S. (G3s #or;ing a9road. 1. /ach timeC the court has dismissed the
case !or lac; o! standing or !ound the restrictions to 9e -ermissi9le. 1.4 AdditionallyC =.S.
!oreign -olicy has 9ecome increasingly conservativeC ma;ing success!ul congressional action
even more unli;ely than it has 9een in the -ast. 1.$
4ecause o! the relative !ailure o! challenges to the rule 9ased on constitutional groundsC and the
im-ro9a9ility that -ositive action #ill 9e ta;en 9y other areas o! the governmentC this (ote
-ro-oses a shi!t a#ay !rom e<orts to com-letely re-eal the Gag Rule. As long as the -olitical
climate in the =nited States remains hostile to #omenRs rights and un!riendly to !amily -lanning
activities that go 9eyond the A4CRsC revo;ing the Glo9al Gag Rule is unli;ely. 1.&
As an alternative a--roachC activists in the =nited States and a9road should !ocus on securing
access to alternative sources o! !unding 9y lo99ying more conscientious nations and
international 9odies to increase state contri9utions to !amily -lanning -rograms. 4y -roviding
!amily -lanning (G3s #ith neutralC non:gagged !undingC re-roductive rights advocates may
ena9le -reviously gagged !oreign (G3s to !reely voice the concerns o! their constituents and
continue their e<orts to achieve increased re-roductive rights in their o#n countries. +hough
-ast e<orts to increase Mnancial assistance to international !amily -lanning -rograms have
-roduced dismal resultsC creating an alternative source o! !unding that could ta;e the -lace o!
the =nites States may 9e -ossi9le.
2)0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Allo5 Advocac3 C+
Allo5ing advocac3 2or abortion 5ithout allo5ing (GOs to actuall3 rovide the service
still solves 2or democrac3 and 2ree seech 5ithout causing olitical controvers3%
Avette Aguilar? St. 8aryRs =niversity School o! %a#C Candidate !or D.D ? 2002% +he Scholar, St. 8ary6s %a#
Revie# on 8inority IssuesC EGagging on a 4ad Rule, +he 8e0ico City "olicy and its e<ect on #omen in develo-ing
countriesCF %e0is (e0is Data9ase.
Due to the nature o! our legislative -rocess and the struggle 9et#een the Democrat and the
Re-u9lican -arties to get legislation -assed #hich meets !avora9ly #ith 9oth -artiesC it is
unrealistic the com-lete re-eal o! the 8e0ico City "olicy #ill -ass. +here!oreC this comment
-ro-oses a com-romise : the -artial re-eal o! the 8e0ico City "olicy #ith the harshest e<ect.
+he 8e0ico City "olicy most harms those countries #hich have anti:a9ortion la#s that either
com-letely !or9id a9ortion under any circumstances or allo# it in very limited circumstances.
According to the "AI Z\7*[ studyC these countries tend to have the highest maternal mortality
ratesC highest incidence o! HIB?AIDS in 9oth men and #omenC and the highest occurrence o!
anemia in -regnant #omen #orld#ide. 2.1 )urtherC the #omen living in these countries have
the lo#est -ercentage o! contrace-tive useC lo#est rate o! -renatal careC and the lo#est
amounts o! 9irths attended 9y s;illed -ersonnel #orld#ide. 2.2 +hese are the #omen o! the
#orld #ho are most in need o! !amily -lanning servicesG ho#everC the 8e0ico City "olicy
endangers their access to these servicesC 9ecause these countries are also the most in need o!
a9ortion re!orm #hich the Glo9al Gag Rule -rohi9its. +he (G3s in these countries are the voice
!or these #omen 9y utili>ing research to lo99y the =nited (ations and their o#n governments
in an e<ort to decriminali>e a9ortion. +he (G3s are the voice !or the #omen li;e those !ound in
(e-alC #ho are im-risonedC in some cases #ith their childrenC !or the crime o! a9ortion. I! it
#ere not !or the assistance o! (G3s lo99ying the government o! (e-al to release these #omen
!rom -risonC most o! them #ould 9e serving their !ull sentence. +he voice o! the -oorest #omen
in the #orld should not 9e silenced. +his comment -ro-oses the removal o! the section in the
8e0ico City "olicy #hich includes lo99ying in the deMnition o! S-romotion o! a9ortion.S 2. +he
list o! activities #hich constitute -romotion o! a9ortion activities !or9idden under the 8e0ico
City "olicy is non:e0haustiveC thus it is too 9road and o-en !or #ide inter-retation. +he
deMnition o! S-romotion o! a9ortionS should 9e a narro# construction so as not to hinder the
human rights e<orts o! #omen in develo-ing countries. =nder my -ro-osalC lo99ying !or the
decriminali>ation o! a9ortion could 9e done 9y reci-ient organi>ations #ith the -rovision they
use their o#nC non:=SAID !unds. +his #ould ena9le (G3s to lo99y !or a9ortion re!orm in their
countriesC #hile still -roviding vital !amily -lanning services in their countries.
2)1
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Lund Women7s =ducation C+
+romoting 5omen7s education and integration into the econom3 solves overoulation
and gender ine.ualities%
!ummel? 2000 OColonel %aurel D. HummelC 8arch 1$C 211&C E%o#ering +otal )ertility Rates in Develo-ing States,
Security and "olicy Im-lications !or Su9:Saharan A!ricaCF =nited States ArmyC =SA2C S+RA+/GA R/S/ARCH
"R3D/C+ H "roIect Advisor, Ca-tain Donald RootC htt-,??stinet.dtic.mil?cgi:9in?Get+RDocK
)ocal "oint o! the )uture, /m-o#ering 2omen +o that endC I recommend the ado-tion o! the !ollo#ing -olicy em-hasisC #hich #ill 9est 9e achieved through 9ilateral
coo-eration #ith other statesC increased leadershi- #ithin multi: national organi>ations such as the =nited (ations O-articularly its "o-ulation DivisionC De-artment o!
/conomic and Social A<airsQC and as )rancis Cru-i recently suggested in #arameter, ro9ust su--ort o! -an:A!rican organi>ations.$2 )ull =S -artici-ation in =nited (ations
con!erences is es-ecially im-ortant !or several reasons. +he -u9lished -lans o! action #hich come out o! =( con!erences can inJuence government -olicies through
international -eer -ressure. +he goals and 9enchmar;s #hich ensue !rom these meetings can 9e use!ul tools !or monitoring -rogress and s-earheading invigorated action.
Con!erence documents act as de !acto grant -ro-osals !or donor agencies.$ +he =S can also demonstrate its dedication to the s-irit o! multinational -rocessC #hich #ould
seem es-ecially im-ortant given its loss o! international esteem in the #a;e o! the #ar in Ira5. =S international aid and =S !oreign -olicy
must ena9le the em-o#erment o! #omen : the -rocess 9y #hich #omen gain greater control
over the circumstances o! their o#n lives : as there is a connection 9et#een enhancing
#omen6s status #ithin their !amily and -u9lic li!e and increasing their control over
child9earing.$4 Des-ite su9:Saharan #omen6s traditional maIor res-onsi9ilities in agricultural -roductionC their -rimary roles are as #i!e and mother.
2omen o!ten have limited legal rights and are e0-ected to su9ordinate to males in the
household in all res-ects. +heir status is o!ten eroded !urther 9y the #ides-read -ractice o!
-olygyny.$$ 4ecause #omen have limited o--ortunities outside the !amilyC child9earing is their
-rime method o! gaining status.$& +he ;ey to em-o#ering #omen in develo-ing regions is
im-roving their socialC economicC and -olitical statusC #hich can inJuence social environmentsC
hel- change cultural normsC and ultimately lo#er the +otal )ertility Rate. +he single most
im-ortant ste- to#ard increasing #omen6s status and lo#ering the !ertility rate is girls6 and
#omen6s educationG =S international aid e<orts ought to !ocus here.$7 Indeed the 2orld 4an; has called #omen6s education the Esingle most inJuential
investment that can 9e made in the develo-ing #orld.F$* Research has sho#n conclusively that #omen 1 #ith more education 9ecome mothers later and have !e#erC
healthier children.$. Im-roved maternal and in!ant health also corres-onds to a lo#er in!ant mortality rate and less need !or critical health care intervention Oas o--osed to
health care -ro-hyla0esQ. +here is a secondary res-onse 9eneMt associated #ith su--ressed in!ant mortality rates : #hichC li;e the AIDS argumentC may seem counterintuitive
at Mrst. Reduction in child mortality in and o! itsel! can lead to a decline in the +)RC as over time the cultural memory o! !ormerly high in!ant death rates recedesC re-laced
#ith the reali>ation that it no# ta;es !e#er 9irths to -roduce enough surviving young adults to -rovide !or a !amily6s oldest generationOsQ.&1 "romotion o!
maternal and in!ant survival through im-roved nutrition and interru-tion o! disease ecology is
also a -roven long: term method to#ard !ertility rate reductionC and can 9e -artly achieved 9y
#omen6s education and increased situational a#areness. +hough the lin;ages 9et#een
education and lo#ered !ertility rates are less distinct in cases #here girls have received a little
educationC the =nited (ations re-orts that in many develo-ing statesC #omen #ith no
schooling have a9out t#ice the num9er o! children as do #omen #ith ten or more years o!
education.&1 Another study suggests that seven years o! education !or #omen in these states
may 9e a threshold !or signiMcant !ertility decline.&2 Im-roving girls6 access to schooling
increases #omen6s access to income:generating o--ortunities and o-ens avenues !or economic
and social -artici-ation more e5ual to menC such as control over money and resources and the
a9ility to travel alone and at #ill. +husC girls6 education is the ;ey to reducing -overty among
#omen #ho re-resent a dis-ro-ortionate share o! the -oorC and #ho are also the -oorest o! the
-oor. +hese #omen6s disadvantaged -osition -er-etuates high !ertilityC -oor nutritionC early
-regnancyC severe limitation to s;illed healthcareC and thus high in!ant mortality rates. (ot
incidentallyC Increasing #omen6s roles in government : !or #hich education is a means : is one tool to im-roving their status in the !utureC and may have the added 9eneMt o!
EleadZing[ to shi!ts in -riorities !avoring human develo-ment over continued stri!e.F& As #ellC other -aths to#ard em-o#erment o!
#omen are associated #ith education and sel!:advocacy. +he a9ility o! #omen to deny
un#anted se0ual advancesC insist on sa!e se0 -racticesC re!use arranged marriagesC and avoid
genital mutilation are ;ey to lo#ering e0-osure to HIB and other se0ually transmitted disease.
Develo-ment o! greater sel!:esteem through education normally leads to lo#er tolerance !or domestic violenceC se0:selective a9ortions O#hich are
o!ten inIurious to the motherQC and une5ual nourishment o! male and !emale children. +he a!orementioned -henomena are 9ut a !e# e0am-les o!
#omen6s lac; o! -o#er to control and -rotect their o#n lives and the lives o! their children. Although they a<ect #omenC 14 they are not d#omen6s
issues6. =n!ortunatelyC they have long 9een seen as d!eminist interests6 and thus tend to 9e marginali>ed as -art o! a too:radical agenda. =nited
(ations 8illennium Develo-ment Goal C esta9lished in 2111C commits =( mem9er states to E-romote gender e5uality and em-o#er #omenF
through actions designed to Eeliminate gender dis-arity in -rimary and secondary educationC -re!era9ly 9y 211$C and in all levels o! education no
2)2
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
later than 211$.F &4 As the glo9al su-er-o#erC it is the moral o9ligation o! the =nited States to
e0-end greater -olitical commitment and more !unding o! !oreign assistance -rograms that
ena9le #omen and cou-les to choose timing and !re5uency o! child9irth. /ducational
o--ortunity !or girls and #omen #ill not 9e a -anacea in lo#ering the tragically high !ertility
rates in su9:Saharan A!rica : 9ut it is the O-ardon the -unQ most !ruit!ul -lace to !ocus our
considera9le ca-a9ilities. As this -a-er has demonstratedC lo#ering the +otal )ertility Rate in
su9:Saharan A!rica is critical !or a host o! reasonsC and is ;ey to regional andC -otentially glo9alC
security and sta9ility.
2))
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Abstinence/Lund the $tatus Ruo C+
Lunding 2aith based organi4ations to romote abstinence in A2rica is emiricall3
success2ul8utting mone3 into ris- reduction rograms encourages romiscuit3%
Dose-h ,oconte? 2illiam /. Simon )ello# in Religion and a )ree Society at the Heritage )oundationC 11?27?200).
E+he A4Cs o! AIDSCF The *eritage %oundationC htt-,??###.heritage.org?"ress?Commentary?ev11221a.c!m.
Such Merce o--osition should come as no sur-rise, Grant managers have a history o! 9al;ing at
religious -rograms that -romote res-onsi9le se0ual 9ehavior. 4ut it is -articularly sel!:de!eating
in A!ricaC #here #ea; -u9lic: health systems are su--lemented 9y large num9ers o! church:
9ased clinics and #or;ers a<iliated #ith medical charities. SMan3 o2 the 2aith9based
organi4ations have been on the ground 2or 3earsCS says DoAnne %yonC e0ecutive director o!
2orld Ho-e InternationalC an evangelical grou- #or;ing #ith 2$1 churches in Nam9ia to hel-
AIDS or-hans. S2e 9ring a net#or; o! relationshi-s...and a 9elie! that -eo-le and structures
can 9e trans!ormed.S 4ushRs critics arenRt 9uying it. +hey demand that every -enny o! =.S.
assistance continue to Jo# through health care -roviders #ho hold the o--osite vie#, that
high:ris; 9ehavior is di<icult or im-ossi9le to change. +hese -roviders already receive most
international AIDS money. +hey invest it in Sris; reductionS -rogramsC #hich 9y any !air
assessment tend to legitimi4e romiscuit3 C -rostitutionC and illegal drug use. "lainlyC 4ushRs
AIDS chie! #ill !ace sti< resistance to the dis9ursement o! money to ne# -layers. At his
conMrmation hearingC +o9ias said he endorsed =gandaRs em-hasis on a9stinence and marital
Mdelity. Democrat Russ )eingold interru-ted him::una9le to tolerate this deviation !rom -u9lic:
health orthodo0y::and insisted that condoms had -layed a crucial role. SI donRt acce-t that
characteri>ationCS )eingold said. S+he lessons o! =ganda must not 9e changed !rom #hat
actually ha--ened.S +o9ias should not 9e intimidated. +he -residentRs a--roach has !ormida9le
9ac;ers. S)aith:9ased organi>ations remain a great unta--ed -otential in the glo9al Mght
against AIDSCS says HarvardRs /d#ard GreenC author o! SRethin;ing AIDS "revention, %earning
!rom Successes in Develo-ing CountriesS O211Q. S+hey ought to 9e given more su--ort in doing
#hat they do 9estC namelyC su--orting Mdelity and a9stinence.S
Research conErms that romoting abstinence is the most efective strateg3 2or
reventing A"#$ sread%
Dose-h ,oconte? 2illiam /. Simon )ello# in Religion and a )ree Society at the Heritage )oundationC 11?27?200).
E+he A4Cs o! AIDSCF The *eritage %oundationC htt-,??###.heritage.org?"ress?Commentary?ev11221a.c!m.
"resident 4ush invo;es the e0-erience o! =ganda::the most success!ul country at con!ronting
the disease:: as the -aradigm !or ;ey -ortions o! his AIDS initiative. =ganda has Ssho#n the
#orld #hat is -ossi9leS in -reventing the s-read o! HIBC 4ush said #hen =gandan -resident
Ao#eri 8useveni visited the 2hite House. IndeedC a decadeRs #orth o! research conMrms a
result that has startled the AIDS esta9lishment, )rom 1..1 to 2111C =ganda reduced its
national HIB in!ection rate !rom a9out 21 -ercent to & -ercent among -regnant #omen. In
7am-alaC the rate dro--ed !rom 1 -ercent to 11 -ercent. Ho# did a -oorC #ar:torn nation #ith
a tiny health care 9udget ta;e the lead in HIB?AIDS -reventionK +he ans#er goes to the heart o!
the -olitical Mght li;ely to ensnare +o9ias and the administration. 2hen the e-idemic emerged
as a -ro9lem in =gandaC "resident 8useveniC #ho came to -o#er in 1.*&C launched an all:
!ronts cam-aign to discourage 9ehavior that s-reads the AIDS virus. Government o<icials
enlisted religious leaders to Ioin them in delivering a consistent AIDS message, A9stain !rom
se0 or 9e !aith!ul to your -artner. )ailing thatC use a condom::or die. +hey called the cam-aign
SA4CS::A9stainC 4e !aith!ulC orC as a last resortC use a Condom. 2ithin a !e# yearsC =ganda had
develo-ed #hat researchers call a Ssocial vaccineS against HIB, cultural norms a9out se0ual
res-onsi9ilityC -reached in clinics and -u9lic schoolsC as #ell as churches and mos5ues. "roud
2)*
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
o! his countryRs achievementC 8useveni reIects the 2estern -riority on condom distri9ution::as
i! Sonly a thin -iece o! ru99er stands 9et#een us and the death o! our continent.S RatherC he
saysC S#e made it our highest -riority to convince our -eo-le to return to their traditional
values o! chastity and !aith!ulness orC !ailing thatC to use condoms.S =gandans have a color!ul
term !or their goal o! Mdelity to a single -artner, S>ero gra>ing.S Research conMrming the
e<ectiveness o! =gandaRs 9ehavior:9ased model comes !rom an unli;ely 5uarter, the very health
organi>ations that cham-ion Ssa!e se0S and condom distri9ution. +he list includes the =.S.
Agency !or International Develo-mentC the Doint =nited (ations "rogram on HIB?AIDS
O=(AIDSQC the 2orld Health 3rgani>ationC and the Harvard School o! "u9lic Health. 8ost
researchers no# agree that . out o! 11 =gandan adults changed their 9ehavior to avoid the
disease. A9stinence and marital Mdelity #ere the most im-ortant changesC according to a
recent study 9y Daniel %o#:4eer and Rand %. Stone9urner in the A!rican Dournal o! AIDS
Research. /ven teenagersC in large num9ersC delayed having se0. Condom use among high:ris;
grou-sC such as those involved in commercial se0C a--arently -layed a much smaller role.
S8any o! us in the AIDS and -u9lic health communities didnRt 9elieve that a9stinence and
!aith!ulness #ere realistic goalsCS says /d#ard GreenC a medical anthro-ologist at Harvard #ith
1 yearsR e0-erience in A!rica and %atin America. SIt no# seems #e #ere #rong. +he =gandan
model has the most to teach the rest o! the #orld.S
2)/
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Abstinence/Lund the $tatus Ruo C+
+romoting abstinence is emiricall3 success2ul8its
Douglas $3lvaC Senior )ello# at the Catholic )amily and Human Rights Institute OC:)A8QC 200)% +night on the
Ne,C EA9stsinence Success in =ganda Resisted 9y AIDS Community H )air Comment H A!ricaCF Danuary 7C 211C
htt-,??Mndarticles.com?-?articles?miTm1$71?isT2T1.?aiT.&2*1.2.
As AIDS s#ee-s across A!ricaC =ganda remains a lone success story. 8illions o! =gandans have
em9raced traditional se0ual moralityC including se0ual a9stinence outside o! marriage and
Mdelity #ithin marriageC in order to avoid in!ection. 4ut the international AIDS community has
9een reluctant to -romote this strategy else#hereC continuing instead to -lace its !aith in
condoms. According to a =.S. Agency !or International Develo-ment 1DSAIDQ study o! =gandaC
SHIB -revalence -ea;ed at around 1$ -ercent in 1..1C and 9ad !allen to $ -ercent as o! 2111.
+his dramatic decline in -revalence is =ni5ue #orld#ideS =SAID 9elieves Sthe most im-ortant
determinant o! the reduction in HIB incidence in =ganda a--ears to 9e a decrease in multi-le
se0ual -artnershi-s and net#or;s.S In com-arison #ith other A!rican nationsC S=gandan males
in 1..$ #ere less li;ely to have ever 9ad se0 ... more li;ely to 9e married and ;ee- se0 #ithin
the marriageC and less li;ely to have multi-le -artners.S =SAID concludes that Sthe e<ect o!
HIB -revention in =ganda O-articularly -artner reductionQ during the -ast decade a--ears to
have had a similar im-act as a -otential medical vaccine o! *1 -ercent e<icacy. ... A
com-rehensive 9ehavior:change:9ased strategy ... may 9e the most e<ective -revention
a--roach.S Ho#everC the =gandan e0-erience is not 9eing -romoted else#hereC #hich leads
some o9servers to conclude that ideology may 9e -laying a role. In !actC as ne#s o! the =gandan
success has s-readC the de!ense o! condoms has gro#n more insistent. S-eciMcallyC international AIDS activists have
increased their attac;s on the 4ush administrationC #hich no# see;s to incor-orate a9stinence training into the =.S.
international AIDS -rogram. Amy CoenC -resident o! "o-ulation Action InternationalC recently stated that Sthe
im-ortance o! condoms cannot 9e overstated. Aet here in the =nited StatesC #e are #itnessing a retreat on the -art
o! the government and a #all o! silence descending around condom use. +he case !or condoms is indis-uta9le.S AndC
according to a column 9y 8arie Cocco in (e#sdayC S"resident George 2. 4ush has 9egun a--ointing critics o!
condoms to a -residential advisory -anel on AIDS. +hey include social conservatives #ho 5uestion the international
scientiMc consensus that condoms are highly e<ective in AIDS -revention.S
2)0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
A&' Condoms $olve A"#$
Condoms are inefective at stoing the A"#$ andemic in A2rica8the current 2ocus on
abstinence is success2ul%
/d#ard C. Green and 2il!red Mla3C Senior Research Scientist in the School o! "u9lic HealthC Center !or
"o-ulation and Develo-ment StudiesC Harvard =niversityC 2001. htt-,??###.st#r.net?content?vie#?111?7?.
Condoms are e<ective in slo#ing the s-read o! AIDS among those -articularly at ris;, -eo-le
#ith HIB:in!ected -artnersC #omen tra--ed in the commercial se0 industryC their customers and
those customersR #ives. 2hile condoms argua9ly may have sta9ili>ed HIB transmission rates in
the =nited States :: #here AIDS is largely conMned to those engaged in high:ris; 9ehavior ::
they have -roven inade5uate in countries #here most HIB is !ound in the general -o-ulation.
+hose #ho consider condoms a -anacea !or A!ricaRs AIDS e-idemic ignore their trac; record
and naively a--ly a =.S. solution to an A!rican -ro9lem. In !actC the A!rican countries #ith the
highest levels o! condom availa9ility :: Nim9a9#eC 4ots#anaC South A!rica and 7enya :: also
have some o2 the highest !"I rates in the 5orld. =ganda is a case in -oint. 4et#een 1..1
and 2111C =ganda lo#ered its in!ection rate !rom 21 -ercent to & -ercent. =nli;e most heads o!
stateC =gandaRs -residentC Ao#eri 8useveniC intervened early and !orce!ully. Im-overished and
#ar:#earyC =ganda ado-ted the least e0-ensive intervention availa9le, -u9lic education
stressing a9stinence 9e!ore marriage and !aith!ulness a!ter. SNero gra>ingS :: staying !aith!ul to
one -artner :: #as the message 8useveni and other government o<icials re-eated over and
over. 4et#een 1.*& and 1..2C the =gandan A4C model #as mostly !ocused on A and 4C
reserving condoms -rimarily !or those already in!ected and high:ris; grou-s. Com-aring
condoms to -enicillinC 8useveni saidC SDust as #e #ere o<ered the Rmagic 9ulletR in the early
1.41sC #e are no# 9eing o<ered the condom !or Rsa!e se0.R 2e are 9eing told that only a thin
-iece o! ru99er stands 9et#een us and the death o! our continent. I !eel that condoms have a
role to -lay as a means o! -rotectionC Z9ut[ they cannot 9ecome the main means o! stemming
the tide o! AIDS.S 8useveni enlisted =gandaRs religious communityC #hich rein!orced the A and
4 message. 2hile many religious leaders o--osed the use o! condomsC they remained relatively
silent on the issue to avoid undermining -u9lic health e<orts. +he a--roach #or;ed. +he
num9er o! young -eo-le engaged in -remarital se0 -lummeted 9et#een 1.*. and 1..$. 4y
1..$C according to a survey Mnanced 9y the =nited StatesC .$ -ercent o! =gandans #ere
re-orting either one se0ual -artner or none. 8ost =gandans in the ages surveyedC 1$ to 4.C are
married and there!ore se0ually activeC so S>ero gra>ingS #as the -redominant res-onse to the
threat o! AIDS.
2)7
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Global #emocrac3 +romotion Act C+
&he Global #emocrac3 +romotion Act 5ould allo5 abortions 5ithout being as
oliticall3 controversial%
In res-onse to "resident 4ushRs re:im-osition o! the "olicy in 2111C moderate and li9eral
la#ma;ers introduced the Glo9al Democracy "romotion Act in 9oth the 117th Congress and the
current 11*th Congress. n21* 2ith the goal o! res-ecting the sovereignty o! !oreign
governments and their la#sC the 9ill allo#s (G3s receiving =.S. assistance to use their o#n
!unds !or a9ortion:related servicesC so long as their actions do not violate the la#s o! the
country in #hich the services #ere -rovided. n21. Although the 117th Congress did not -ass
this legislationC the House International Relations Committee -assed an amendment that #ould
have included the 9illRs language in an authori>ation 9ill in 2111C and the su9se5uent 21*:211
vote on the amendment in the House o! Re-resentatives #as close. n211 8omentum to -ass
the Glo9al Democracy "romotion Act may 9e 9uilding againC since the 4ush administration
s-ar;ed a vigorous de9ate #ith its -ro-osed e0tension o! the 8e0ico City "olicy to !unding
Z\221[ !or HIB?AIDS. n211 In Duly o! 211C the Senate a--roved an amendment to the State
De-artment Authori>ation 9illC #hich #ould overturn the 8e0ico City "olicy. n212 I! the Glo9al
Democracy "romotion Act #ere to -ass #ithout any modiMcationsC its language #ould 9e 9road
enough to overturn such a -ro-osed e0tension to HIB?AIDS !unding. n21 In !actC the 9illRs
a--lication to the -ro-osed e0tension may 9e the ;ey !or mo9ili>ing congressional su--ort in
!avor -assing the Glo9al Democracy "romotion Act in the 11*th Congress. n214
2):
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
"merialism Criti.ue ,in-s
+ushing ro9abortion is erceived as oulation control8this is imerialist and leads
to a bac-lash 2rom A2rica%
Cleaver? 2001 Director o! -lanning and in!ormation !or the secretariat !or -ro:li!e activities at the =S
Con!erence o! Catholic 4isho-s O7athyC Committee on )oreign RelationsC E8/VIC3 CI+A "3%ICA, /))/C+S 3)
R/S+RIC+I3(S 3( I(+/R(A+I3(A% )A8I%A "%A((I(G )=(DI(GFC Duly 1.C 2111C
htt-,??!r#e9gate.access.g-o.gov?cgi:9in?getdoc.cgiKd9nameW117TsenateThearingsPdocidW!,7$&14.#aisQ
And as #e have learned !rom our e0-erience in international con!erences on -o-ulationC it is
not the 8e0ico City "olicy 9ut the =nited StatesR -romotion o! -ermissive a9ortion attitudes
through !unding o! such -rograms that is li;ely to cause resentment in these countries. +his is
es-ecially true #hen it is -erceived as a means 9y #hich the 2est is attem-ting to im-ose
-o-ulation control -olicies on develo-ing nations as conditions !or develo-ment assistance.
+he 8e0ico City "olicy is needed 9ecause the agenda o! many organi>ations receiving =.S. -o-ulation aid
has 9een to -romote a9ortion as an integral -art o! !amily -lanning. +hatRs no secret. And they do this
even in develo-ing nations #here a9ortion is against the la#. SoC !ar !rom 9eing -erceived as
an im-osition on develo-ing nationsC the 8e0ico City "olicy against !unding a9ortion -rograms
has 9een greeted 9y those nations as a #elcome re!orm. +he vast maIority o! these countries
have legal -olicies against a9ortionC and virtually all !or9id the use o! a9ortion as merely
another method o! 9irth control.
2);
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Criti.ue8A&' Cede the +olitical
&urn8democrats are 5al-ing a tightroe to avoid an ideological standof 5ith the right
8reealing the gag rule 5ould revent them 2rom ursuing a liberal agenda%
+he Washington +ostC Dune 22C 2007. %e0is.
+he #ider -lanC Democratic leaders sayC is to avoid ideological stands that turn o< moderate
voters to -revent Re-u9licans !rom -asting them #ith a li9eral la9el :: and s-eed -assage o! the
9illsC already 9ehind schedule. 2hile they ;ee- !aith #ith traditional -riorities such as
environmental cleanu- and human rightsC student loans and Io9 trainingC Democrats have also
9ee!ed u- homeland security and counternarcotics -rogramsC 9order controls and local -olice
grants. +hey have le!t most #ar:related s-ending alone and increased s-ending !or veteransR
health care. +he change in the 8e0ico City -olicy in the !oreign aid 9ill #as a care2ull3
calibrated challenge C Democratic strategists said. 4y !orcing Joor de9ate on a -olicy that
Democrats say has increased un#anted -regnancies and the num9er o! a9ortionsC the -lan #as
to highlight its ine<ectiveness and Sthe e0tremismS o! o--onentsC one leadershi- aide said.
%o#ey has chaired the HouseRs a9ortion rights tas; !orceC 9ut under her direction the !oreign
aid 9ill le!t nine o! the 11 antia9ortion riders untouched. 2hen Re-u9licans -ut !or#ard an
amendment yesterday to restore the -olicy in !ullC she s-onsored a com-eting amendment
clari!ying that the changed language does nothing to end the !oreign aid 9an to -ro:a9ortion
grou-s. It #as that amendment that -assed. SIt ta;es time to reverse the damage done 9y the
Re-u9licansCS %o#ey said in an intervie#. SRome #asnRt 9uilt in a day.S (ARA% "ro:Choice
America "resident (ancy 7eenan saidC S+odayRs vote mar;s an im-ortant Mrst ste- to#ard
reversing a seven:year -olicy to 9loc; re-roductive health services !or #omen overseas.S +he
change #as slammed 9y Re-u9licans and antia9ortion grou-s as an e<ort to gut the -olicy.
S+his 9ill re-resents an unconsciona9le -olicy reversal that dramatically #ea;ens current -ro:
li!e -oliciesCS said House Re-u9lican leader Dohn A. 4oehner O3hioQ. SItRs clear the Democratic
leadershi- #ants to sho# it can ma;e the a--ro-riations trains run on timeCS said Douglas
DohnsonC legislative director o! the (ational Right to %i!e Committee. SI! they try to re-eal these
-ro:li!e riders theyRll 9lo# u- their o#n railroad 9ridges.S
2*0
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
Misc8A&' Rights Malthus
&urn8democrac3 sustains overoulation no58technolog3 5ill continue to create
resources but increasing the o5er o2 the government 5ill e<acerbate 2amine and
environmental destruction%
De< ,indsa3C Cor-orate "atent Strategist and Senior Research )ello# at the 7im9erly:Clar;
Cor-orationC 200/. htt-,??###.Ie_indsay.com?3ver-o-.shtml
(e#s-a-ers have 9ecome over-o-ulatedC so to s-ea;C #ith #arnings a9out human
over-o-ulation. Such #arnings have 9een issued regularly !or decades : even centuries : #ith
consistently incorrect -redictions. 3n the Mrst /arth DayC "aul /hrlichRs 1.&* 9estsellerC +he
"o-ulation 4om9C #as #idely 5uoted. He -redicted that 9y 1.*$C the S-o-ulation e0-losionS
#ould lead to #orld !amineC the death o! the oceansC a reduction in li!e e0-ectancy to 42 yearsC
and the #asting o! the 8id#est into a vast desert. He #as a9out as accurate as 8althus
himsel!C the /nglishman #hoC in 17.*C -redicted catastro-hic !ood shortages that never came.
+he -o-ulation doomsayers usually o<er the solution o! glo9al government : 4IG government :
to determineC in Gaylord (elsonRs #ordsC Sthe o-timum num9er o! -eo-le.S IronicallyC #here
there is !amineC the -ro9lem usually is not an e0cess o! -eo-le 9ut an e0cess o! governmentC
#hich leads to gross misallocation and misuse o! resources as corru-t 9ureaucrats or dictators
see; -o#er more than the #el!are their su9Iects. Dust #hat is Sover-o-ulationSK Ho# does one
determine #hen a nation is over-o-ulatedK +here are no clear demogra-hic indicators !or this
!u>>y notion. I! -o-ulation density is used as the criterionC then 4ermuda and 8onaco #ould 9e
crisis >onesC #hile (igeria and /thio-ia should 9e -aradise. 3ther !actorsC li;e -o-ulation
gro#th rateC also -rovide metrics riddled #ith inconsistencies. AesC there are -laces #here
-eo-le lac; resources and go hungryC 9ut eliminating neigh9ors is not the solution to the
condition o! -overty. I! #e are #orried a9out those #ho go hungryC let us recogni>e that the
hungry are su<ering !rom -overtyC not !rom over-o-ulation. 4ut isnRt -overty directly related to
-o-ulation si>e or to ra-id -o-ulation gro#thK A9solutely not. +he -o-ulation control cro#d is
no# em9arrassed 9y the light o! scientiMc study into the relationshi- 9et#een -o-ulation and
economic develo-ment. A #ide variety o! recent economic studies on this issue have shattered
the myth that -o-ulation gro#th is 9ad !or a nationRs economy. +hough rarely re-orted 9y the
mediaC this has led to a remar;a9le revolution in the scientiMc Onot the -oliticalQ community.
+his scientiMc revolution is documented 9y Dr. Dulian SimonC =niv. o! 8arylandC in Day %ehrRs
9oo; Rational Readings on /nvironmental ConcernsC Ban (ostrand Reinhold "u9l.C 1..2. (o#
the real scientiMc de9ate centers on #hether -o-ulation gro#th has a neutral or -ositive e<ectC
9ut there clearly is no signiMcant negative e<ect. )ascinating case studies can 9e !ound in -airs
o! similar nations having centrally:-lanned and mar;et economiesC such as China and +ai#an or
the !ormer /ast and 2est Germany. +hough the centrally:-lanned nations 9egan #ith similar
resources and similar 9irth ratesC and even lo#er -o-ulation densitiesC than their mar;et:9ased
counter-artsC the mar;et economies -ros-eredC in s-ite o! the higher S-o-ulation -ressure.S
/ven #ith high -o-ulation densityC enter-rise:9ased economies Jourish #hile centrally:-lanned
nations stagnate and 9ecome addicted to !oreign aid. +he real -ro9lem is not e0cess -eo-leC 9ut
e0cess government. Ho# can the So9viousS logic o! the -o-ulation control lo99y 9e #rongK
4ecause the resources o! the -lanet are not a M0ed -ie that d#indle #ith each 9irth. +he
resources are #hatever #e can ma;e o! this -lanet : or solar system : and it ta;es the #or; o!
human 9eings to trans!orm ra# materials and energy into use!ul resources. Humans are not a
lia9ilityC 9ut a resource that #e needk 3n this to-icC I recommend the #or; o! Drs. C. 8aurice
and C. Smithson o! +e0as AP8C +he Doomsday 8ythC Hoover Instit. "ressC Stan!ord =niv.C 1.*4.
O+his gem #ill hel- you have a lot more !un and success in de9ates #ith the doomsaying cro#d.Q
3ur technological societyC !ueled 9y the -recious resource o! a9undant #or;ingC thin;ing human
2*1
Gag Rule Afirmative
Alderete/Weil
9eingsC has ena9led cro- lands to s;yroc;et in -roductivity and has ena9led humans to live
vastly longer than ever 9e!ore. +he resulting large -o-ulationC living at a higher standard than
ever 9e!oreC 9reathing cleaner air and drin;ing -urer #aterC is a cause !or cele9rationC not !or
doomsaying. 3nce:neglected resources : solar energyC sandC radioactive mineralsC salt #aterC
car9on dio0ideC the vast interior mantle o! the earth itsel! : may -rovide the !oundations !or
!uture economies 9eyond anything #e have today. +he !uture could 9e 9rightC unless #e
surrender #hatRs le!t o! our !ree economy !or a glo9alC centrally:-lanned economy in #hich
-olitical elitists rule and decide ho# many o! us must live to achieve Sthe o-timum num9er o!
human 9eings.S

Gag Rule Aff ClassHSDFHSic

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Gag Rule Aff ClassHSDFHSic

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Michigan Classic 2007

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi