He cited a study by Dr. David Reardon which found the “vast majority” of pregnant rape and incest victims did not want abortions but were emotionally manipulated into having them. One hundred percent of pregnant victims who gave birth said they made the right choice, while a large majority of those who aborted said they regretted their decision.
McKeegan defended the innocence of the unborn child, saying he or she is entitled to “the same protections as everyone else.”
“It is revolting that women’s groups continue to propose adding a second tragedy of killing the unborn child to the tragedy of the rape,” he commented.
The leaked cable outlining the grants is more clear and transparent than most government requests, Meaney noted.
“This is probably because it was not intended for publication and public consumption,” he said.
U.S. funding for these groups could create a “powerful lobby” to change foreign countries’ laws and to make “substantial” cultural changes.
Mexico has “strict laws” forbidding most abortions outside the Mexico City Federal District, and groups such as Semillas hope to “reverse protection of the right to life of preborn children.” Such groups have also made “significant” attempts to promote same-sex “marriage” and a greater acceptance of homosexuality, he reported.
Under Republican administrations since 1984, the U.S. government has held to the Mexico City Policy which bars taxpayer funding for organizations which promote or perform abortion overseas. President Obama lifted the policy in January 2009.
But Meaney thought the grants in the WikiLeaks cable would “probably not have been made illegal” by the previous policy, which applies only to funds from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and not other branches of the State Department.
“This actually shows how restrained this policy was,” he said.
For his part, McKeegan thought the grants would have been forbidden.
(Story continues below)
Subscribe to our daily newsletter
“This is precisely why pro-abortion groups demanded that President Obama rescind the Mexico City Policy, so that their own organizations could once again receive U.S. funding,” he explained.
One grant proposal in the cable shows U.S. involvement to advance feminist goals in Mexico’s political process. It came from the Consortium for Parliamentary Dialogue and Equality (Consorcio para el Dialogo Parlamentario y la Equidad), which organizes alliances related not only to women’s political and social rights, but also their “sexual and reproductive rights.”
The proposal, listed as the U.S. embassy’s second preference, aimed to fund the consortium to “promote the arrival and permanence of women in elected positions” by encouraging compliance with mandatory gender quotas for Mexican political parties’ lists of candidates.
Meaney said U.S. support for gender quotas could affect Mexican politics, even though there are many conservative women who run for office and win.
“They could benefit from these quotas, but typically only those who are quite liberal get foreign support,” he commented. “Socially radical political parties tend to promote women as candidates more than conservative parties do.”
McKeegan was more forceful in his criticism, charging that the quotas empowered “radical feminists” who “can’t win a fair election on their own.”