Exporting Death

Last week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was awarded the Margaret Sanger award by the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. In her remarks to the gathering she said, “I want to assure you that reproductive rights and the umbrella issue of women’s rights and empowerment will be a key to the foreign policy of this Administration.”

On this topic, I wholeheartedly agree–I believe that women around the world should have free and unhindered access to photocopiers. They should have the right to reproduce anything they want, any time they want. Why shouldn’t women have the same freedom to reproduce as men? Why shouldn’t…wait a second…oh…oh my…my apologies dear reader, that’s not the type of reproduction that Secretary Clinton was speaking about.

My apologies to Secretary Clinton as well because she was talking about human reproduction. Well, on this topic, I also wholeheartedly agree with her–women in China should have the right to reproduce all the children they want. They shouldn’t have to be forced to have only one child. They shouldn’t live in fear that they will be forced to have an abortion if they’ve already had their “quota” of children and they become pregnant with another child. Their families shouldn’t be punished for choosing to have more than one child. The women of China shouldn’t…wait a second…oh boy, this is so embarrassing…I’ve done it again…my apologies to you once more, dear reader, that’s not the type of reproductive rights that Secretary Clinton was speaking about either.

Apparently, the reproductive rights that Secretary Clinton was talking about are the same reproductive health and rights that are listed as goals of the UN Millennium Project. On this topic, I can completely support Secretary Clinton and the UN–pregnant women around the world should have access to good prenatal care.  They should have easy access to vitamins and proper nutrition during their pregnancy.  They should be able to receive care from skilled health providers and have access to decent health facilities so that they have successful pregnancies, and good outcomes with healthy babies. And after birth, women should get competent maternal after-care for themselves, medical care for their babies, and parenting classes to help them raise their children in a healthy and safe environment. Pregnant women around the world should…wait a minute…I think I’ve put my foot in my mouth once again.

Although the UN does endorse the need for the above resources for pregnant women and their children, I guess that’s not all the UN and Secretary Clinton are talking about. It would appear that the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) is also looking to export abortion as one of their  methods of assuring reproductive rights (see the UN goals for gender equality or this article from CNA).

Wait, I’m confused…if one of their goals is to encourage, promote, and fund abortion world-wide, wouldn’t that goal be more accurately stated as “non-reproductive” rights? Because they’re not really trying to protect a woman’s right to reproduce (e.g. Chinese women), or just make sure a woman has a right to “reproduce healthily”; rather, they’re trying to ensure and promote a woman’s desire to not reproduce, both through contraception and, when contraception fails, through abortion–which definitely results in a bad outcome for that baby.

So, I guess I’m not really in agreement with the UN and Secretary Clinton after all–because I definitely can’t support their continued efforts to export death around the world.

Did I get it right this time?

3 thoughts on “Exporting Death

  1. Haha….I love the photocopier quote! You got it soooo right, Ed! Excellent post!

  2. Ed, I did not get by the first sentence before I had to comment… Hillary was honored with the Sanger award?! Why does she deserve any honor? And who would be pleased with receiving the Sanger award? It seems that nothing more than political correctness is needed to justify honoring Miss Hill. And being honored in the name of an avowed socialist, supporter of eugenics and euthanasia and the 1957 Humanist of the Year is a, good thing? I don’t think so!

    1. Thanks, Jim, the history of Margaret Sanger is something that needs to be exposed. I’ve started doing some reading and research into her writings. I’ll be sharing insights into the beginnings of Planned Parenthood soon, along with the paradigm they’ve created in our society.

Comments are closed.