Several months into President Donald Trump’s second term, it is now clear that he intends to not only reset the U.S. government but also reshape the global order. From day one, his “America First” foreign policy has driven swift changes related to immigration, national security, and national sovereignty. The State Department has identified three questions guiding this new foreign policy approach: Does it make America safer? Stronger? More prosperous?

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has declared a “return to the basics of diplomacy by eliminating [the Department’s] focus on political and cultural causes that are divisive at home and deeply unpopular abroad.” He said this shift will allow the Department “to conduct a pragmatic foreign policy in cooperation with other nations to advance our core national interests.”

Shortly after taking office, Trump withdrew the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO) and barred U.S. taxpayer funding from supporting abortion and gender ideology around the world. These actions were swiftly followed by a review of foreign assistance grants and programs, which resulted in the shuttering of many initiatives. Although the USAID review and other actions may appear chaotic and indiscriminate at times, there is no denying that a “housecleaning” is underway.

What does this mean for the state of faith, family, and freedom around the world?

How Did We Get Here?

USAID Highlights a Much Broader Trend: The History of the West’s Anti-Family Exports

The Trump administration’s widely publicized USAID review revealed that many U.S. government grants were funding programs aligned with anti-family ideas in Central and South America, Africa, and Asia. This revelation gave visibility to a concerning trend, one that has been occurring for some time: wealthy Western countries — consisting of Western Europe, the “Anglosphere” (which includes the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand), and the United States — have been exporting anti-family values to the rest of the world. These cultural “exports” include abortion and its promotion, gender ideology, and same-sex marriage. Each of these is a variation of the same sustained assault on the human design as God created it.

The assaults on God’s design are, at times, subtle, hidden beneath euphemisms such as “reproductive health,” “women’s health,” or “comprehensive sex education.” Anti-family ideas are infused into curricula or aid programs, masquerading as some legitimate need. Unaware of the real implications, countries in need of assistance may welcome these programs, only to find they come with unexpected consequences. When the host country discovers that the West’s version of “help” is often inseparable from these anti-family programs, they are left in a bind: accept the compromised programs or reject them and leave their people with no assistance for their underlying medical, educational, and social needs.

Sometimes, the “assistance” takes on a more overtly coercive form. Recently, abortion advocates attempted to sneak the legalization of abortion into Sierra Leone by way of legislation known as the Safe Motherhood Bill. Although the title implied a positive initiative that any reasonable person would support, beneath the surface lurked a different objective that might never be successful if it were obvious: promoting abortion. When Sierra Leone balked at the bill, the Biden administration threatened to withhold foreign assistance unless Sierra Leone’s Parliament passed it.

One must ask: what is driving such irrational demands in foreign diplomacy, where pragmatic interests usually reign supreme? Why does the West insist on coercing African countries into accepting anti-family programs they do not want? Can’t the U.S. government see this only strains the relationship with these countries and drives them further into the arms of governments like China, which is waiting to “help” with loans that bind these countries to itself through economic dependency?

The West’s anti-family programs are counter-productive, driving would-be allies away and straining relations with the overwhelmingly culturally traditional countries in Latin America, Africa, and Asia that we are trying to court. Thankfully, this oppressive global arrangement may be entering a period of disruption and, hopefully, reform.

Europe and Adjustments to Its Status Quo

When Vice President J.D. Vance spoke at the Munich Security Conference in February 2025, many attendees likely expected him to announce changes in American foreign policy regarding NATO and Ukraine. They probably did not anticipate him criticizing their own nations and telling them to get their houses in order on fundamental human rights and freedoms. In his remarks, Vance addressed not only the world’s dependence on the United States for security but also the deteriorating state of freedom in Europe. He expressed concern about the prosecution of speech, even silent prayer. Vance’s message was clear: Washington has new values and priorities that will affect both security arrangements and foreign relations more broadly.

The Role of Global Entities in Spreading Anti-Family Ideas Around the World

The global flow of anti-family ideas has not been limited to country-to-country transfer. They have also penetrated global bodies like the United Nations and the World Health Organization. The WHO was recently found to be promoting abortion and gender ideology, and the U.N. has a long history of promoting anti-family programs. The Trump administration’s withdrawal from the WHO and reduced funding to various global organizations should curtail their activities, reducing the promotion of these harmful ideologies.

However, these entities are often funded with private donations in addition to government funding. Therefore, all funding streams must be considered when assessing the strength of anti-family programs globally. Even if the United States pulls its support for global entities, other Western governments, corporations, and private foundations may increase their funding.

Where Do We Go from Here?

Step 1: Stop the Exportation of Anti-Family Ideas

The first step is for Western countries to stop exporting anti-family ideas. This change will prevent further damage and hopefully mitigate existing harm. In the United States, this appears to be happening. Given the scope and amount of U.S. foreign assistance and the influence of U.S. foreign policy, these changes will have a sizeable impact. However, it remains to be seen how other governments with anti-family policies will “fill the gap” left by the United States.

Step 2: Adjust Current Programs That Have Inflicted Harm on the Family

Although some of the international programs pushing anti-family ideas need to be fully abolished, others have been or are in danger of being cannibalized by anti-family ideas that have latched onto them.

One example is the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which has been sending assistance to Africa for over 20 years to treat and prevent AIDS. In the past few years, it came to light that abortion-promoting organizations had received over $1 billion in PEPFAR funds. Even more recently, it was revealed that PEPFAR money had been used to fund four abortions in Mozambique. Furthermore, the Biden administration had issued policy documents to promote LGBT ideology as part of PEPFAR. There is no reason an AIDS relief program should be used to fund and promote abortion and LGBT ideology.

One solution would be to mandate the attachment of the expanded “Mexico City Policy” — which prevents U.S. taxpayer dollars from being allocated to any overseas organization that promotes abortion — to any PEPFAR reauthorization. If such programs cannot be fixed to align with their stated purpose and establish accountability mechanisms to ensure funds are not redirected to anti-family initiatives, we must consider discontinuing them.

Step 3: Advance New Programs Designed to Support, Strengthen, and Defend Families Around the World

The first two steps encompass “Phase 1” of this global reset in favor of the family. “Phase 2,” addressed below, entails the proactive, forward-leaning, pro-family programs and policies that must fill the gap left by Phase 1.

Anti-faith, family, and freedom policies and ideas have become deeply ingrained in the current global order. If this global order were to undergo a reset, it could open the door for pro-family policies. The United States has an opportunity to take the lead in guiding the focus away from global entities and toward families and local communities. It can do this by announcing a foreign policy that prioritizes the family, recognizing them as the foundational building blocks of society and key to creating healthy communities. This policy announcement could be backed by funding and support for initiatives led by faith-based organizations and other partners around the world who share a vision of the family that adheres to God’s original design and the created order.

There is no better time globally to do this. For the first time since the Black Death reached Europe 700 years ago, we are about to enter a period of global decline in population. Many countries have fertility rates well below the 2.1 births per woman generally seen as necessary to sustain a population. This demographic shift will profoundly affect society and government policies. The only region currently above the population replacement rate is sub-Saharan Africa, but even there, we are seeing a decline. The world is ready for change in favor of family growth!

Although modernity and technology are often cited as major factors in declining birth rates, we cannot discount the damaging effects of anti-family policies that the West has been exporting around the world. In sub-Saharan Africa, the last region still experiencing population growth, Western money has been trying to snuff out African lives before they take their first breath outside the womb. This is a tragedy that must be addressed.

Technology is indeed exacerbating current problems. It not only makes it easier to quickly export harmful ideas around the world but is also incentivizing a reliance on technologically driven fake “relationships” for real, live human relationships. Why should a young man bother building a family when he can interact with an AI “girlfriend” chatbot? Yet right now, this is the direction the world is heading.

In light of this, we must reclaim and “revalue” the family and its humanity in all of its “realness.” Human relationships are irreplaceable, and those take place primarily in families and local communities.

Read part two