Staff Reports
Conservative Republicans Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey and Rep. Brad Wenstrup of Ohio are pushing back against the World Health Organization’s (WHO) proposed “pandemic treaty,” calling it a direct threat to American sovereignty and an endorsement of “abortion on demand.” The WHO plans to vote on the treaty on May 27, and Smith and Wenstrup are leading the charge to expose its dangers.
Rep. Chris Smith sounds alarm on WHO 'pandemic treaty’ over ‘abortion on demand’ https://t.co/G6seqT5vNy https://t.co/G6seqT5vNy
— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) February 7, 2024
The treaty aims to create a binding agreement among countries to address global pandemics, but Smith and Wenstrup believe that it infringes on national independence, intellectual property rights, and free speech. The crux of their concerns lies in the WHO’s inclusion of “essential health services” during pandemics, which the organization asserts includes access to abortion. Smith staunchly opposes this, citing the WHO’s view that abortion should be treated as a human right, a stance he adamantly rejects.
Furthermore, Smith expresses deep reservations about the WHO’s favoritism towards abortion advocacy groups, such as the International Planned Parenthood Federation and the Center for Reproductive Rights, which both push for widespread access to late-term abortion. He emphasizes that these organizations actively lobby for changes in laws and advocate for abortion on demand, a position that goes against his pro-life stance.
In addition to these concerns, Smith questions the use of tax dollars to fund the treaty, pointing out the lack of clarity on the extent of financial obligations. He also criticizes the WHO’s intention to combat false information, particularly in light of the organization’s past mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic and alignment with Chinese narratives.
Wenstrup echoes Smith’s sentiments, condemning the WHO for bowing to political pressure and failing to conduct an independent investigation into the origins of COVID-19. He believes that the treaty’s clause on disinformation could potentially silence dissent from scientists and doctors who do not align with the WHO’s conclusions.
Overall, Smith and Wenstrup are vehemently opposed to the WHO’s proposed pandemic treaty, viewing it as a significant threat to American values and principles. Their unwavering stance against abortion on demand and their skepticism of the WHO’s integrity reflects their dedication to conservative values and the protection of national sovereignty.
