U.S. Abortion Policy Is None of the U.N.’s Business

O ver 200 abortion-activist groups are attempting to leverage the United Nations to punish the United States for pro-life protections following the reversal of Roe v. Wade. “The US must be castigated on the world stage for its treatment of women, girls and others who can become pregnant” — so reads the letter, which criticizes the U.S. for violating so-called abortion rights.

Signed by Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and Ipas, among other major abortion-promotion groups and individuals, the letter falsely asserts that the U.S. is in violation of its international human-rights obligations since the decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization last June. The signatories identify as “a coalition . . . promoting civil rights, human rights, women’s rights, children’s rights, gender equality, racial justice, religious freedom, economic justice, and the right to access to healthcare.” The letter goes so far as to make the egregious claim that as a result of recent pro-life achievements, “people residing in the US who can become pregnant are facing a human rights crisis.”

Addressed to various U.N. working groups and officeholders, the letter ostensibly aims to rally the international community around the goal of penalizing the U.S. for exercising its sovereign prerogative to protect unborn life. And notably, the intended recipients, including the U.N.’s Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health and the Independent Expert on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, are vocal proponents of an extremist pro-abortion worldview — evidence of the highly self-referential symbiosis that characterizes the relationship between activist groups and the bureaucracy of the U.N.

Most scandalously, the letter accuses the U.S. of specifically violating international human-rights protections relating to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. It makes the outrageous assertion that “anti-abortion laws . . . may infringe upon the [abortion] provider’s freedom to manifest their freedom of conscience and religion or belief.” What we can see here is a clear effort to hijack one of the most essential defenses of the pro-life cause — the right of conscience to say no to abortion — making the sickeningly radical claim that there is an affirmative religious dimension to the “right” to abortion, worthy of the highest levels of international protection.

Laws that “punish people of faith who feel obligated by their religion or belief to help others access abortion . . . do not meet the thresholds set by international law that would permit the State to limit their freedom to practice their religion or belief,” notes the communication. Adding to this absurdity, it further claims that faith leaders “whose belief system affirms the right to abortion” are disproportionately targeted by pro-life protections.

Along the same vein, the Satanic Temple in the U.S. has indicated it will likely seek a religious exemption for the dispensation of mail-order abortifacients. And this is just the start of the usurpation of religious “rights” for abortion access. In reality, intentionally ending unborn life can never warrant religious protections. While international law does of course guarantee the fundamental rights to conscience and religious freedom upon which these incendiary claims are predicated, it in no way protects a right to abortion. To contend that abortion is protected as a matter of conscience is a blatant distortion of the fundamental freedoms guaranteed to us all by virtue of our inherent dignity.

Ironically, assertions of religious-freedom violations come at the same time that real religious-freedom abuses in relation to abortion are escalating. One need only look to recent arrests in the United Kingdom for the mere act of silent prayer on the public street in the vicinity of abortion facilities. These and many other violations of religious freedom exemplify the real crisis of human rights engendered by the attempts of extremist abortion promoters to silence and sanction pro-life expression, going so far as to prosecute crimes of thought.

Despite the disingenuous clamors to the contrary, there is no international “right” to abortion. International human-rights law is based on a profound respect for all human life, at all stages. As indicated by the travaux préparatoires of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, international law explicitly recognizes the unborn child’s human rights. For example, article 6(5) protects the right to life of unborn children whose mothers have been sentenced to death. Such is the profound understanding of the rights of the unborn that underpins the international human-rights system. In this light, the U.S. is well within its prerogative to refashion its national laws on abortion, including by protecting unborn life at the earliest stages.

Technically, U.N. bureaucrats lack the power to directly penalize the U.S. — thwarting the very reason behind this initiative. However, what they do wield is tremendous soft power that allows them to work in concert, weaponizing the full power of the U.N. system, to rebuke the U.S. for post-Dobbs developments. For abortion activists in the U.S., there is enormous force in being able to claim that international law is on their side, albeit falsely, invoking the argument that “the U.N. is demanding that the U.S. recognize a right to abortion.” One can infer that such a campaign would be disproportionately more destructive in a developing country, many of which are staunchly pro-life, without the resources to stand up to the U.N.

Every country has not only the right, but also the duty, to protect unborn life. And saving lives can never be a “human-rights crisis.” As to the role of the U.N., the International Conference on Population and Development, the guidebook for all matters related to abortion deliberations at the U.N., makes explicit that national governments have sole jurisdiction over any measures relating to abortion law. There is no role for the U.N. to play in manipulating national laws to promote abortion.

We must call these efforts out for what they are — nothing more than activist interference in matters that fall squarely within the national sovereignty of the U.S. While the road after Roe has been far from easy, we must vigilantly defend our right as Americans to chart our own course on this most difficult of issues. It is imperative that we reject activist incursions into our national sovereignty, preserving for Americans the crucial task of championing a pro-life America for ourselves and future generations.