Trump’s Global Gag Rule a Blow for Women’s Rights and Lives
Amnesty International USA
152

The morality of abortion and of abortion availability is one thing; but isn’t there a case for US citizens having some way on where their tax dollars go?

Given that abortion is a very divisive and contentious debate, is there something to said for spending the money on a form of aid or assistance more acceptable to a wider segment of the population?

In this case, the topic is abortion, but it could be made a general principle/rule of thumb too. In different countries, there are many things like vivisection, battery farming subsidies, euthanasia, the arms industry, etc. that are potentially divisive issues.

I am not dealing here (of course) with the question of whether there is any moral analogy between any of these, or between either of these AND abortion, but merely on the point that where issues are fundamentally divisive, tax payer’s money becomes a tricky one.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.