Major children’s charity criticized for pushing population control agenda
LONDON, June 28, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A major international aid charity’s claim that more contraception and “family planning” is the solution to maternal deaths in the developing world is “false, illogical and unfounded,” the UK’s leading pro-life group has said.
Save the Children (SCF) has issued a report claiming, “Pregnancy is the biggest killer of teenage girls worldwide.”
“Every year one million teenage girls die or suffer serious injury, infection or disease due to pregnancy or childbirth,” the report said, and went on to recommend fulfilling the “unmet need for family planning” as the solution to maternal morbidity.
The report cited statistics that “girls under 15 are five times more likely to die in pregnancy than women in their 20s. Babies born to younger mums are also at far greater risk and around one million babies born to adolescent girls die every year - babies are 60% more likely to die if their mother is under 18.”
But Paul Tully, general secretary of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, responded to the claims, saying that they are “simply not backed by the studies [SCF] references in its report.”
“It is misleading to say that pregnancy or childbirth are in general causes of death. Haemorrhage, sepsis and infection may cause death. In most cases, death and serious injury can be averted by good maternity care, such as trained birth attendants, blood transfusion [and] antibiotics,” Tully said.
The same applies to child mortality, he observed. “Babies in the developing world die because of lack of good maternity and newborn care. This will continue whether young women use contraception or not.”
CLICK ‘LIKE’ IF YOU ARE PRO-LIFE!
With this report, SCF appears to be positioning itself as a player in the population control lobby, saying they are “urging world leaders to increase the global availability of contraceptives” and to ensure that “women are empowered to decide when to have children through education and the law.”
Anthony Ozimic, SPUC’s communications manager, said that the “unmet need for family planning,” which for leftist organization typically includes artificial contraceptives, as well as abortion and sterilizations, is a myth invented by the international abortion/contraception lobby. Groups like the UNFPA, International Planned Parenthood Federation, and the World Health Organisation regularly use the concept to push national governments to comply with birth control programs.
The assumption, he said, is that every woman who is not trying to get pregnant but is not using contraception automatically has an “unmet need” for it. The reality, he said, is that rich and powerful ideologues are pushing “a decadent Western ideology of sexual liberation onto poor, vulnerable, culturally conservative societies.”
“Yet even the Save the Children report has a whole chapter entitled ‘Stimulating demand for family planning’. That’s not to deny that there are some cultural practices which should be addressed, such as coercion of teenage girls. But contraception doesn’t address that problem – it may even help to hide the evidence of abuse, help to enable it to continue.”
The report relies heavily upon claims by the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the Population Reference Bureau, the Guttmacher Institute – an offshoot of Planned Parenthood – and the Population Council, as well as officials in the relevant sections of WHO, UNICEF and DFID. These groups, Ozimic says, are effectively one: the international abortion-contraception lobby.
While the report names Somalia as an example of a country in which high fertility and population growth are linked to high child mortality, SPUC points out that Somalia is one of the “failed states,” in a constant state of violent crisis, without a central government or infrastructure, let alone a healthcare system. Similar deficiencies exist in governance and healthcare provision in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
“Save the Children should not be exploiting the negative cultural practices which have been linked to those cultures (e.g. coercion of teenage girls) to promote population control,” Ozimic said.
In related news, another major player in the international abortion/population control lobby, Marie Stopes International, has praised the British minister for foreign aid for his comments boosting contraception in poor countries.
The UK government is currently working with another of the leading population control lobbyists, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation on a Family Planning Summit to be held in London early next month. In preparation for this, the Secretary of State for International Development, Andrew Mitchell, presented Parliament with the Global Impact Report prepared by Marie Stopes “that clearly demonstrates the benefits of contraception” in the developing world.
“Access to contraception,” the Marie Stopes report claims, is 20 per ent in sub-Saharan Africa.
Mitchell said, “This important report, which comes just two weeks before The London Summit on Family Planning, is a valuable piece of research that clearly demonstrates the benefits of contraception and why we are working to provide access to family planning for an additional 120 million of the world’s poorest women who want it.”
Marie Stopes enjoys massive government contracts to provide abortion and contraceptives in countries with high rates of birth as well as high maternal mortality and morbidity.
‘Little miracles’: Mom gives birth to naturally-conceived quintuplets after refusing ‘selective reduction’
AUSTRALIA, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- A 26-year-old Australian mom has given birth to five healthy babies, all conceived naturally, after refusing the doctor’s advice that she must abort three of them in order to give the remaining two a better chance at life.
“After my initial ultrasound I was told I could consider the selection method to give 2 babies the best chance in life,” wrote mom Kim Tucci in a Facebook post last September.
“I watched a YouTube video on the procedure and I cried. I could never do that! Was I selfish for not giving two the chance of 100% survival? All I knew is that I already love them and that every heart beat I heard I connect with them more. For me life starts when a heart starts beating and all I know for sure is that I will do whatever it takes to bring them into this world healthy,” she wrote.
Last Thursday Kim and her husband Vaughn welcomed the five new members into their family — one boy and four girls —increasing the number of their children from 3 to 8. The babies were born at 30 weeks, 10 weeks early, due to insufficient space in Kim’s womb. They weighed on average about 2.5 pounds.
The quintuplets’ story began last March, after Kim and Vaughn had been trying for six months to conceive just one more child for their family. Due to health complications, Kim wondered if she would ever become a mother again.
After what she thought was an extra long cycle, she decided to take a pregnancy test.
“I was feeling tired and a little nauseated and thought I would take a pregnancy test just to get the ‘what if’ out of my head. To my shock and utter excitement it was positive,” she wrote on a Facebook post.
The parents got the shock of their lives when doctors confirmed in an ultrasound examination that there was not one baby, but five.
“After a long wait for the ultrasound we finally went in. The sonographer told me there were multiple gestational sacks, but she could only see a heart beat in two. I was so excited! Twins!”
“I was moved to another machine for a clearer view and had the head doctor come in and double check the findings. She started to count, one, two, three, four, five. Did i hear that correctly? Five? My legs start to shake uncontrollably and all i can do is laugh. The sonographer then told me the term for five is ‘quintuplets,’” Kim wrote.
Even though Kim began to feel stretched to the limit with all those human lives growing inside her, she chose to focus on her babies, and not herself, referring to them as “my five little miracles.”
“It's getting harder as each day passes to push through the pain, every part of my body aches and sleeping is becoming very painful. No amount of pillows are helping support my back and belly. Sometimes I get so upset that I just want to throw my hands up and give in.”
“Sometimes my pelvis becomes so stiff I can barely walk and my hips feel like they are grinding away constantly. I'm finding it hard to eat as I basically have no room left in my stomach, and the way it is positioned it's pushed all the way back with the babies leaning against it.”
“My skin on my belly is so stretched its painful and hot to touch. It literally feels like I have hives! No amount of cream helps relieve the discomfort. I have a lot of stretch marks now. Dealing with such a huge change in my body is hard.”
“Is it all worth it? Yes!!!! I will keep pushing through,” she wrote in one Facebook post days before the babies were born.
The newborns' names are Keith, Ali, Penelope, Tiffany, and Beatrix. They were born at King Edward Memorial Hospital in Subiaco, Western Australia. Mother and babies are reported to be doing well.
UN rights chief tells Catholic countries to legalize abortion over Zika virus: bishops and cardinal react
GENEVA, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) -- The United Nations, following the lead of international abortion activists, is now urging Latin American countries hit by the mosquito-borne Zika virus to lift restrictions on abortion for pregnant women who have contacted the virus and whose pre-born children may be at risk for birth defects, including having smaller than normal heads.
The UN human rights office said today that it is not enough for South American countries to urge women to postpone pregnancy without also offering them abortion as a final solution.
“How can they ask these women not to become pregnant, but not offer… the possibility to stop their pregnancies?” UN spokeswoman Cecile Pouilly told reporters.
UN human rights chief Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein said that governments should make available contraception and abortion services.
“Laws and policies that restrict (women’s) access to these services must be urgently reviewed in line with human rights obligations in order to ensure the right to health for all in practice,” he said.
But Brazil’s bishops strongly asserted yesterday that efforts should be made to eradicate the virus, not the people who may be infected by it.
The disease is “no justification whatsoever to promote abortion,” they said in a statement, adding that it is not morally acceptable to promote abortion “in the cases of microcephaly, as, unfortunately, some groups are proposing to the Supreme Federal Court, in a total lack of respect for the gift of life.”
Honduras Cardinal Oscar Rodriguez Maradiaga has also come out strongly against the notion of “therapeutic abortions” as a response to the problem. Unlike Brazil where abortion is legal in the case of rape or health of the mother, abortion remains entirely illegal in Honduras.
“We should never talk about ‘therapeutic’ abortion,” the cardinal said in a homily at a February 3 Mass in Suyap. “Therapeutic abortion doesn’t exist. Therapeutic means curing, and abortion cures nothing. It takes innocent lives,” he said.
While the World Health Organization (WHO) declared an international public health emergency February 1 on account of concerns over the virus, critics have pointed out, however, that not one death as resulted from the virus. Even on WHO’s own website the virus is described in mild terms.
“It causes mild fever and rash. Other symptoms include muscle pain, joint pain, headache, pain behind the eyes and conjunctivitis. Zika virus disease is usually mild, with symptoms lasting only a few days,” the website states. “To date, there have been no reported deaths associated with Zika virus,” it added.
Critics suspect that the crisis is being manipulated to advance an anti-human agenda on the pre-born.
“Is Zika, actually, a hideous virus that threatens to spread uncontrollably across the world creating an army of disabled children with tiny heads and low IQ’s? Or might this be a willful misinterpretation of the scarce data to manipulate public opinion and legislatures?” wrote pro-life critic Mei-Li Garcia earlier this week.
“It becomes very clear that the publicity surrounding this story has a very little to do with medicine and a lot to do with a convenient crisis that is being used by those pushing for the legalization of abortion around the world,” she wrote.
Hillary’s litmus test for Supreme Court picks: They must ‘preserve Roe v. Wade’
DERRY, NH, February 5, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) - Hillary Clinton has a litmus test for Supreme Court nominees - several, in fact. At a Democratic event on Wednesday, Clinton unveiled her criteria in selecting a judge for the nation's highest court.
“I do have a litmus test, I have a bunch of litmus tests," she said.
"We’ve got to make sure to preserve Roe v. Wade, not let it be nibbled away or repealed,” she said.
That echoes her recent call to arms speech before Planned Parenthood last month, when she stated that taxpayers must fund abortion-on-demand in order to uphold the "right" of choice.
“We have to preserve marriage equality,” Clinton said, referring to last summer's Obergefell v. Hodges case, a 5-4 ruling that redefined marriage nationwide. “We have to go further to end discrimination against the LGBT community."
Her views differentiate her from the Republican front runners. Ted Cruz has called the court's marriage ruling "fundamentally illegitimate," and Donald Trump told Fox News Sunday this week that he would "be very strong on putting certain judges on the bench that I think maybe could change things." Marco Rubio has said he won't "concede" the issue to the one-vote majority.
All Republican presidential hopefuls say they are pro-life and will defund Planned Parenthood.
Her husband, Bill Clinton, raised the makeup of the Supreme Court early last month in New Hampshire, saying it receives "almost no attention" as a campaign issue.
On Wednesday, Hillary said "the next president could get as many as three appointments. It’s one of the many reasons why we can’t turn the White House over to the Republicans again.”
Clinton said her judicial appointees must also reverse the Citizens United ruling on campaign finance and oppose a recent decision striking down a portion of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. In 2013's Shelby County v. Holder, justices struck down Section 4(b) of the act, which said that certain states and jurisdictions had to obtain permission from the federal government before changing their voting laws.
At one time, most politicians frowned upon any "litmus test" for judicial nominees, emphasizing the independence of the third branch of government. "I don't believe in litmus tests," Jeb Bush told Chuck Todd last November.
But with the rise of an activist judiciary in the middle of the 20th century, constitutionalists have sought to rein in the power of the bench.