News

NEW YORK, Jan 4, 2001 (LSN.ca) – The manifest bias of the United Nations against pro-life groups has gained media attention. Following a press release by the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-Fam), mainstream media outlets published stories noting that the upcoming conference on “child rights” has severely restricted access by pro-life groups. Officials of the UN Children's Fund (UNICEF) have ordered that non-governmental organizations (NGOs) be limited to two representatives each in closed negotiating sessions at a New York summit in September. C-Fam notes that the restriction is a tactic by the organizers to rid the pro-lifers from the negotiations since they have only a very small number of accredited groups.

An editorial in the National Post today illustrated clearly the bias as it said, “though the delegates will come from far and wide, they will not represent anything close to a true cross-section of world political opinion.” The article editorial says that at prior UN conferences “anti-abortion NGO delegates were outnumbered by abortion supporters by a ratio of some 230-to-1, which compares starkly to the 6-to-4 or 7-to-3 ratio of pro-abortion to anti-abortion poll numbers typical in First World countries.” The conference on child rights is set to push for sex education, abortion and a severe curb in parental rights.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.