Accuracy in Media

President Donald Trump has ordered the United States to oppose a measure before the United Nations that amounts to a backdoor way of getting Americans to fund overseas abortions, and HuffPost is not happy about it.

“U.S. Threatens to Veto UN Resolution Aimed At Supporting Survivors of Rape During War,” reads the headline on Dominique Mosbergen’s story. “The American delegation has reportedly taken issue with the proposal’s references to reproductive and sexual health,” reads the subhead.

The Trump administration has been clear it will not fund overseas abortions in any form. Last month, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced the U.S. not only would refuse to provide aid to foreign groups that promote or provide abortions, but also would deny funding to groups that support them, saying, “We will enforce a strict prohibition on back-door funding schemes and end runs around our policy; American taxpayer dollars will not be used to underwrite abortions.”

Mosbergen’s story begins: “The U.S. is reportedly threatening to veto a United Nations Security Council resolution aimed at preventing the use of rape and sexual violence as a weapon of war and terrorism. The issue at hand? The proposal includes promises to provide reproductive and sexual health support to survivors of rape in conflict – and the U.S. is allegedly having none of it.”

It’s not actually an abortion proposal, advocates, Mosbergen wrote. It’s just a “resolution [that] seeks to punish perpetrators of sexual violence in conflict, improve the monitoring of such violence and boost support for survivors of these atrocities.”

An effort to create a monitoring body was removed after opposition from not just the United States but Russia and China as well, Mosbergen wrote.

The part that remains a sticking point is “language in the resolution that refers to the provision of ‘comprehensive healthcare services including sexual and reproductive health’ to rape survivors,” Mosbergen wrote.

“The language has been interpreted by the U.S. as a reference to abortion,” which “is a ‘red line’ for the U.S. – which, under the Trump administration, has been pushing an anti-abortion agenda both at home and abroad.”

It then quoted a lawyer from the far-left Human Rights Campaign referring to the move as “the latest step in Trump’s war on women,” in which the “US opposes healthcare for survivors of rape during war. Yes, you read that right.”

It then quotes Pamela Patten, the UN special representative on sexual violence in conflict, saying, “It would be a huge contradiction that you are talking about a survivor-centered approach and you do not have language on sexual and reproductive healthcare services, which is for me the most critical.”

Mosbergen then quoted from an op-ed by Noor Sheikh, whom she identifies as an American human rights activist who is “’ashamed’ of her home country for undermining the healthcare needs of sexual violence survivors.”

Sheikh wrote that a possible U.S. veto “is all the more shocking when you consider the contexts described in the report” – the treatment of Rohingya women and girls in Burma, sexual slavery of the Yazidi by ISIS in Syria and Iraq and rapes of young girls in the Congo and South Sudan.

“Any country denying abortion to women who have become pregnant after rape would be subjecting them to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment,” Sheikh is quoted as writing in the HuffPost piece. “By forcing victims of rape to carry the pregnancy caused by their sexual abuse, the U.S. will also be directly contributing to more suffering of countless victims of such violence.”

She did not mention the violence done to the children who are aborted nor even anyone to explain why the administration opposed the measure.

Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.


Comments are turned off for this article.