‘Pro-family’ groups stay silent on row
NEW YORK: Even as many religious organisations, from liberal to conservative, denounced Mr Trump’s policy of separating immigrant families at the US-Mexico border, some major advocacy groups that depict themselves as “pro-family’’ declined to join in the criticism.
Two of the most influential anti-abortion groups in the US — the National Right to Life Committee and the Susan B Anthony List — said their focus on abortion is so intense that they avoid wading into other issues.
“We refrain from public comment on immigration, including other policies that impact families,’’ said the SBA List’s president, Marjorie Dannenfelser.
David O’Steen, executive director of National Right to Life, said the organisation has its hands full of “trying to stop the killing of babies’.’
“There are many policies on which we have no stand, for or against,’’ Mr O’Steen said. “We’re not on either side of this issue’’.
He noted that President Donald Trump had fulfilled several campaign promises to anti-abortion groups, including appointing federal judges endorsed by anti-abortion groups and curtailing government funding to Planned Parenthood.
Mr O’Steen and Ms Dannenfelser commented after their groups’ silence on the separations was criticised in an opinion piece in The New York Times.
“If the traditional pro-life movement is to regain credibility as something other than a tool of Mr Trump, it must speak out clearly and forcefully against harming innocent children as a means of deterring undocumented immigration,’’ wrote Charles Camosy, a Fordham University professor who is on the board of Democrats for Life of America.
The separation policy was in flux on Wednesday as Republicans worked on legislation to address the issue permanently and Mr Trump signed an executive action to halt the separations.
Ahead of those new developments, two major Christian-oriented advocacy groups — the Family Research Council and Focus on the Family — had issued statements expressing regret that some immigrant families were being separated. But unlike numerous religious groups, they did not assail Mr Trum’s administration.
“It’s impossible to feel anything but compassion for these kids, who must be dealing with a great deal of pain and confusion,’’ wrote Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. “But the origin of that pain and confusion isn’t US law. That burden lies with their parents who knowingly put them in this position’’.
Jim Daly, president of Focus on the Family, wrote in a blog post that the crisis at the border is “a complex consequence of bad policy, unenforced laws and an inability of politicians to make difficult and often unpopular decisions’’.
In his post, he attacked Planned Parenthood — a leading provider of abortions — for its criticism of the separation policy.