Thirty-Two
Nations Sign Statement Declaring There is “No Right to Abortion,” But the
Statement Puts Feminism Before Babies
By Julio Severo
The United States, Brazil, Egypt, Hungary,
Indonesia and Uganda on October 23, 2020 co-sponsored a nonbinding
international pro-life declaration, in a rebuke of United Nations human rights
bodies that have sought to increase abortion access.
The statement was signed by 32 countries in total, representing more than 1.6 billion people, and was titled “Geneva Consensus Declaration.”
“There is no international right to
abortion,” said U.S. State Secretary Mike Pompeo.
The
declaration states the signing countries “emphasize that ‘in no case should
abortion be promoted as a method of family planning’” and that “the child…
needs special safeguards and care… before as well as after birth.” It also says
states have no obligation to finance or facilitate abortion.
Pompeo
said in his remarks, “Under President Trump’s leadership, the United States has
defended the dignity of human life everywhere and always. He’s done it like no
other President in history. We’ve also mounted an unprecedented defense of the
unborn abroad… Today, we’re taking the next step, as we sign the Geneva
Consensus Declaration. At its very core, the Declaration protects women’s
health, defends the unborn, and reiterates the vital importance of the family
as the foundation of society.”
In
September 2020, Trump told the UN General Assembly, “America will always be a
leader in human rights” and he added, “My administration is advancing religious
liberty, opportunity for women, the decriminalization of homosexuality,
combating human trafficking, and protecting unborn children.”
Trump
put religious liberty in first place. But in a misguided decision, the Trump
administration gave its highest religious freedom
award to a Brazilian left-wing sorcerer who has persecuted conservative
evangelicals, including black evangelicals, in Brazil.
It was one of the most absurd awards I ever saw, even after years witnessing
many absurdities from the left-wing Obama administration.
And
Trump put the decriminalization of homosexuality before protection of unborn
children. To put decriminalization of homosexuality in a conservative speech is
by itself a nonsense, but to put it before protection of unborn babies is a
greater nonsense. Is it any wonder that gay activists say that Trump is the most
pro-gay president in the U.S. history?
Even so, his evangelical supporters are
reluctant to criticize it.
This
is not the only controversy. Trump also believes that unborn children
victims of a rape deserve no legal protection.
Even
though the Geneva Consensus Declaration presents a pro-life defense against
abortion, it never called abortion murder. It said,
“Reaffirm
that there is no international right to abortion, nor any international
obligation on the part of States to finance or facilitate abortion, consistent
with the long-standing international consensus that each nation has the
sovereign right to implement programs and activities consistent with their laws
and policies.”
Murder
is always inconsistent with the right to life. If abortion had been mentioned
clearly as murder, nations would understand that “programs and activities
consistent with their laws and policies” would never condone any murder, including
abortion.
Besides,
in a feminist tone, the document put women and their rights before family, even
saying,
“Improve
and secure access to health and development gains for women, including sexual
and reproductive health.”
“Sexual
and reproductive health” is a UN jargon for the feminist, homosexualist and
even abortion agenda. So how can a pro-life document condemn abortion and at
the same time uses one of its UN jargons?
Then
how “improve” “sexual and reproductive health” for women? Under “sexual and
reproductive health,” girls have received plenty of immoral sex education and
birth control around the world, resulting in abundant sexual activity, with
many girls concluding that there is no need for marriage. Under “sexual and
reproductive health,” girls are led to feminism, not marriage and family. And
does the document propose to increase all of this?
The
document was signed by Pompeo and Alex Azar, Secretary of Department of Health
and Human Services (HHS). If abortion is a matter of human rights and murder,
why did a health secretary sign a pro-life document? After all, is abortion
really murder or a health issue? If it is a health issue, it follows that pro-abortion
feminists are right because they have managed to frame abortion as a health
issue.
The
pro-life document should never be signed by the HHS secretary. It should be
signed by the Attorney General, because abortion is not a health issue, but a criminal
and legal issue.
Among
seven important items, the statement put family in the sixth place. Abortion
was put in the third place. The other items were dedicated to the advancement
of women — when clearly it should have dedicated to the advancement of the
rights of unborn children.
The document mentions women 13 times, family
7 times and children 2 times. In fact, the first item of the “pro-life”
document says,
“Ensure the full enjoyment of all human
rights and equal opportunity for women at all levels of political, economic,
and public life.”
This is a fulfilled feminist dream or
nightmare. In the vision of this document, which represents the feminist
vision, if men can be generals, women have equal right to be general and occupy
any other male job.
While in a feminist document there is no room
for pro-life words, in a pro-life document should there be plenty of feminist words?
So in a pro-life document, which should be
dedicated totally to defend unborn life, there is feminist advocacy.
The Geneva Consensus Declaration is much
more feminist than pro-life.
Feminist papers address not only abortion,
but also the advancement of women. In contrast, a pro-life document addresses
abortion without mentioning murder and promotes feminist issues putting family
in second place. This is a feminist victory among pro-lifers. The Geneva
Consensus Declaration did not also show any importance to the role of authority
God gave to men in family and society.
NSSM 200,
a paper prepared by the CIA in 1974 for a Republican administration, had
guidelines and plans for the U.S. government to implement around the world to
reduce the population of several nations, including Brazil, for the purpose to
increase U.S. influence. One of these plans was to make the United Nations and the
nations promote the advancement of women to reduce families and children.
For women, their advancement in male jobs
reduces their chances to form families and have many children.
For men, their advancement in
homosexuality equally reduces their chances to form families and have many children.
In fact, when women occupy men’s jobs and roles, the only role left for men is…
to be “women.”
So even though the Geneva Consensus
Declaration condemns abortion without saying that it is murder, it contains
many suspicious mentions of advancement of women, which contributes to
population control and its natural effect sooner or later: abortion.
With information from LifeNews, HHS and
UPI.
Portuguese
version of this article: Trinta e duas nações assinam declaração afirmando que
“não existe direito ao aborto,” mas a declaração coloca o feminismo na frente
dos bebês
Source: Last Days Watchman
Recommended Reading:
Trump
Became First U.S. President to Attend March for Life
President
Donald Trump Proclaims January 22nd “National Sanctity of Human Life Day”
Trump
Has Broken His Promise of Defunding the American Abortion Holocaust
Exposing
the Global Population Control Agenda
Tom
Parker: the Biggest Threat to Abortion in this Generation, According to
Pro-Abortion Critic
Trump
and Prophecies, and a New Model of National and World Leader
Posts
No comments :
Post a Comment