We are very much aware that President Donald Trump is eager to make big transitions with risks involved to bring the United States of America to its former glory.
And despite the public's doubt of Trump's success, his aggressive stance against abortion is no surprise and has stirred reactions on Twitter and other social media platforms. It was apparent even before he took office, that he is a pro-life president.
On Monday, he made the mark on his word as he reinstated former republican president Ronald Reagan's 1984 Mexico City Policy.
Here's President Trump signing an executive order that endangers millions of women around the world. Notice anyone missing? pic.twitter.com/aPA84530m5
— Chirlane McCray (@NYCFirstLady) January 23, 2017
Where are the women?
First to notice the oddity is New York City First Lady Chirlane McCray. The order blocking the United States from funding foreign organizations from the performance of abortion or providing any type of abortion-related services pleases the pro-life advocates. However, many are very concerned about Donald Trump's selection of anti-abortion justices. Some think that this may be yet an another expansion to the past anti-abortion laws with unnecessary regulations. Others describe it as an assault of a high degree.
Anti-abortion activists, on the other hand, believe that they are not extreme enough. Thus, president Trump's signing the anti-abortion executive order with only a group of white men is making the public feel that they're not being represented by minorities and women.
BREAKING: group of rich white men very proud after denying access to essential reproductive health care on a global scale #TrumpGlobalGag pic.twitter.com/dwKF5X4KTn
— Sharon Kann (@sharonkann) January 23, 2017
The threat to over 27 million women worldwide
For most who are against the reinstatement, #GlobalGagRule appears to be an outmoded pattern of marginalizing those who disagree.
Women witnessing an all-men deciding for women's health even for international family planning funding only is causing an outrage. Without the funding, some of the most effective health organizations at work in the developing won't provide HIV services and maternal health care. The United States being the largest contributor, restoring a prohibition to help women in developing countries to reach contraceptive services is apprehended to result in possible unsafe abortions. This is owing to a fact that despite the restriction, abortion will not stop, but only turn about life-saving basic health services to the poorest women.
