News
Featured Image

NEW YORK, February 19, 2021 (C-Fam) — The longstanding way UN negotiations come to agreement is with consensus rather than voting. Though consensus has changed over the years, it still allows a relatively small group of countries to block the political wishes of larger groups. This may be changing.

Progressive countries are increasingly frustrated that consensus has in some venues blocked both abortion and the LGBT agenda. This just happened in the Commission on Social Development.

The changes will be discussed in April at the next session of the Commission on Population and Development (CPD). The annual commission has been the scene of controversial negotiations on issues like abortion and sexual orientation and gender identity for decades. In three of the last four years, it has failed to reach an agreement. This is a source of frustration and embarrassment.

The written and unwritten rules of diplomacy require adoption of diplomatic agreements on the basis of unanimous consensus. This is considered the gold standard in all international proceedings. Agreements should be adopted without a vote and without objections. The simple threat of calling a vote and thwarting consensus is enough to stop a text from being adopted.

Diplomats preparing the next session of the commission asked for suggestions on how the working methods of the commission can be improved. Specifically, they were asked if the commission should move away from adoption of documents by consensus.

Socially conservative countries argue the deadlock on controversial issues is not because of longstanding UN procedures, but the inflexibility of progressive countries who promote abortion and LGBT issues and are unwilling to compromise.

The U.S. suggested that the commission stick to consensus-based adoption. It urged the commission to avoid “language on sensitive issues on which consensus has not been possible in previous years” and “always” include a “sovereignty clause” to safeguard national prerogatives. The exclusion of the sovereignty clause was a large contributing factor in the failure of the commission to reach an agreement in recent years.

Similarly, the Russian Federation blamed the failure to reach consensus on “persistent attempts by a part of the CPD membership to include in the draft resolutions terms/concepts not in line with and stepping aside from” previous UN agreements. This is understood as referring to notions such as “sexual rights” and “LGBT rights” by diplomats working on the commission.

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: Oppose taxpayer-funded abortion #SaveHyde
  Show Petition Text
43511 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 45000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

The Hyde Amendment prohibits the use of most federal funds for abortions, except in some limited circumstances.

But, with the Democrats in charge of the Congress and the presidency, the Hyde Amendment is now under severe attack.

That's why 200 Republican Congressmen vowed in a letter addressed to U.S. House and Senate leadership their "unified opposition to Congressional Democrats’ efforts to repeal the Hyde Amendment and other current-law, pro-life appropriations provisions."

Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition to signal your support of the effort to keep the Hyde Amendment firmly in place, and prevent our federal tax dollars from funding abortion.

After signing the petition, please take a few minutes to quickly and easily contact your congressmen to politely voice your opposition to the repeal of the Hyde Amendment. Simply click on the link in the 'For More Information' section below, and follow the directions.

No-one should be forced to pay for any abortion, ever, against their will. Forcing taxpayers to pay for abortion would be a gross violation of freedom of conscience, and should be vigorously resisted.

Although President Joe Biden was originally in favor of the Hyde Amendment, even as recently as 2019, he has dramatically altered his position to align with the Democratic Party platform, which has promised to repeal the amendment throughout the 2020 presidential campaign and, indeed, since taking the presidency.

The Democrats officially support unlimited abortion on demand, funded by taxpayers. Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris marked the anniversary of Roe v. Wade by pledging to make abortion available to "everyone."

But, Americans overwhelmingly disagree with this proposed policy change. A 2019 Politico/Morning Consult poll found that 49% of Americans agree with the Hyde Amendment, while only 33% oppose it.

Regardless of polls, though, abortion is always and everywhere wrong.

Abortion is not necessary medical treatment, it is the deliberate destruction of unborn human life at its most vulnerable stage. Forcing taxpayers to pay for abortion would be unconscionable.

Please SIGN and SHARE this petition, telling Congressmen of both political parties, to supports efforts to keep the Hyde Amendment in all federal budgets.

Thank you!

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Please CLICK HERE to CONTACT your congressmen. It only takes a couple of minutes and the platform is very user-friendly. Thank you!

'200 GOP congressmen slam Democrats, say they’ll never vote for tax-funded abortions' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/200-gop-congressmen-slam-democrats-say-theyll-never-vote-for-tax-funded-abortions

2019 Poll on the Hyde Amendment - https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/11/poll-abortion-funding-reversal-helps-biden-with-primary-voters-1359210

**Photo Credit: Shutterstock

  Hide Petition Text

Progressive countries on the other hand expressed a willingness to change the rules in order to get the controversial issues into agreements.

The Netherlands, a leading progressive nation, suggested “the Commission should consider voting as a way to not block discussions and progress.”

Denmark similarly called on diplomats to “be open to consider alternative methods of adoption when taking action, including by voting.”

Canada suggested “the Commission voting on selected paragraphs without requesting a vote on the resolution as a whole.” This could ensure that controversial language gets into agreements of the commission while trying to maintain a veneer of consensus.

International Planned Parenthood Federation also called on the commission to drop consensus. And they pushed back against suggestions that controversial issues could be dropped.

“The argument that contentious issues such as SRHR (sexual and reproductive health and rights) should not be included in negotiations is inherently flawed,” the abortion industry giant argued.

The abortion industry giant is a main participant in the commission each year. The policies adopted at the commission direct political and financial support to IPPF affiliates around the world who provide abortion, contraception, comprehensive sexuality education, and HIV/AIDS testing.

Published with permission from C-Fam.

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.