Julio Severo

The UN’s made-up up figures: now claims 200,000 die from illegal abortions in Brazil

Julio Severo
Julio Severo
Image

February 22, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Last week Brazil’s Dilma Rousseff administration was pressed by the UN’s CEDAW (Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women) about an alleged 200,000 deaths of women each year because of illegal abortion in Brazil. The Brazilian representatives showed no willingness to question this patently inflated number.

Official data from the Brazilian government show that 146 women, whose pregnancies ended in abortion, died in 1996. In 2004, 156 women died.

Where did CEDAW get the extravagant figure of 200,000 deaths? From Brazilian feminist NGOs funded largely by U.S. pro-abortion institutions such as the MacArthur, Rockefeller, and Ford Foundations, which usually sponsor the pro-abortion training of feminist leaders in Brazil, so that they may not be out of step with their American counterparts in maneuvers of language, statistics and political and legal actions.

After this training, they are ready progress to several government and non-government capacities, and many of them are today in the UN system echoing First World ideological insanities with a “Brazilian” voice.

CEDAW made Brazilian representatives give an accounting of this high figure, asking the question, “What are you going to do with this huge political problem?” It also made it clear that it believes criminalization of abortion is connected to high death rates.

This was a timely application of such “pressure”, because the Brazilian government has every willingness, ideological and otherwise, to solve “this huge political problem.” Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, a “former member of a communist terrorist organization that sought to overthrow the Brazilian government in the 1960s and 70s, is on record supporting the decriminalization of abortion before her presidential run”.

Yet, she found herself forced to sign a pledge not to introduce abortionist or homosexualist legislation during her presidential term to boost her sagging poll numbers after Christians began to alert the population to her record.

Because of this pledge, she has faced some difficulty in her effort solve “this huge political problem.” But it did not hinder her from appointing Eleonora Menicucci as the women’s minister. Menicucci, who led the Brazilian delegation to “face” CEDAW, is a friend of Rousseff and was incarcerated with her during the 1970s, when they were arrested for terrorism.

Menicucci was a member of a feminist group and trained, in Colombia, to do abortions. Even though abortion is illegal in Brazil (except in case of rape and life risk for mothers), she has bragged that she had two abortions.

It was no displeasure for her to meet her fellow feminists in CEDAW, which made it clear that CEDAW “cannot defend abortion.” Nevertheless, Magaly Arocha, of CEDAW, told the Brazilian delegation, “women are going to abort anyway. This is reality.”

The official UN document said, “Unsafe abortions in Brazil were an issue of great concern to that Committee [on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women], which had already recommended that Brazil decriminalize abortion.”

To calm down her UN abortion comrades, Menicucci’s report explained the government’s attempt to squelch a right-to-life bill called the Statute of the Unborn, which would prohibit the killing of unborn children in all circumstances.

CEDAW also complained to the Brazilian delegation that “discriminatory practices in… marriage could still be found in legislation and sought clarification.” But the official Brazilian response assured that the government has been taking measures to eliminate “inequalities”: “Important achievements had been made through judicial proceedings, especially of the Supreme Court, which allowed same sex couples to register their civil union.”

Wow! The priority of CEDAW, as a UN agency to “help” women, is to advance homosexual “marriage” and abortion! It is no surprise that the same CEDAW that is advancing a radical feminist ideology is a fierce enemy of Mother’s Day. CEDAW hates every original trace of feminine characteristics. It wants women in 50% of all traditionally male capacities, including military. It hates women in female roles.

CEDAW complained that Brazil has a small number of women in the Congress. The UN ideal, of course, would be 50%, but be assured that UN would not be pleased if such women resembled Mother Theresa of Calcutta. The ideal woman for UN is like Eleonora Menicucci, with a story of abortions, abortion training, communist terrorism, and a promiscuous sex life. With such women, the Brazilian Congress and Rousseff will nevermore have any problems to advance feminist, abortion, gay and other ideologies approved by UN.

So far the conservative views of most Brazilians, especially women, have hindered Rousseff and Menicucci from being free to impose their personal, ideological views on the all Brazilian women and other Brazilians. Similarly, the conservative views of most women and nations have hindered the UN from being free to impose its personal, ideological views on the rest of the world.

Even so, with word games and euphemistic language about “rights”, they hope to achieve what with honesty and correct figures they could never achieve.

FREE pro-life and pro-family news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Subscribe today. 

Select Your Edition:

Donate to LifeSiteNews

Give the gift of Truth.


Share this article

Advertisement
Hillary Clinton
Shutterstock
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

, , ,

For Hillary Clinton, abortion access trumps religious liberty

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins

WASHINGTON, D.C., May 1, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- For Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton, apparently abortion trumps religious liberty.

It may have gotten bipartisan support in the House of Representatives last night, but a spokesperson for the Democratic Party's leading presidential candidate says a resolution protecting religious liberty in the District of Columbia "overrule[s] the democratic process" and hurts women.

The vote, which saw three Democrats join the GOP majority and 13 Republicans stand with Democrats, was meant to protect pro-life and religious organizations in the District from the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Act (RHNDA).

RHNDA was signed by the mayor of the District of Columbia, Muriel Bowser, in January, and makes it illegal for any employer, including religious and pro-life organizations, to use a person's belief or actions about abortion in employment considerations. It also requires employers to provide abortion coverage.

The resolution now goes to the Senate, where it is expected to fail due to the Senate being on recess. Under existing federal law, the measure has 30 legislative days to be disapproved by Congress and President Obama. If this does not happen, it becomes law.

The 30-day window ends on Saturday. President Obama promised a veto of the resolution on Thursday, even though RHNDA was opposed by former District mayor Vincent Gray. According to Gray, while he "applaud[s] the goals of this legislation," the former mayor believes RHNDA could violate the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal treatment under the law.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

The statement by the Clinton campaign left no doubt that she stood with Obama and a majority of Democratic legislators. Spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri told CNN, "Hillary Clinton has fought for women and families and their right to access the full range of reproductive health care without interference from politicians or employers."

"Hillary will fight to make it easier, not more difficult, for women and families to get ahead and ensure that women are not discriminated against for personal medical decisions."

The remarks come a week after Clinton took criticism for saying that "religious beliefs" critical of "reproductive rights" must "be changed."

“Yes, we've cut the maternal mortality rate in half, but far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health,” she told the Women in the World Summit on April 23.

“Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper," said Clinton in her speech. "Laws have to be backed up with resources, and political will."

“Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed,” said the candidate.

Advertisement
Featured Image
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

, ,

Social conservatives may be funding the destruction of marriage: corporate watchdog

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins

May 1, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- With over $55 million in annual revenue, the Human Rights Campaign may be America's most powerful LGBT activist group. And according to a conservative corporate watchdog, that's in part because social conservatives are funding it.

"Conservatives would be surprised to know that many of the dollars they spend every day are helping fund an agenda that seeks to destroy traditional marriage and undermine religious freedoms," said 2nd Vote National Outreach Director Robert Kuykendall. "Even when they purchase a beverage from a company like Coca-cola or Starbucks, their dollar is going to support HRC's liberal agenda to redefine marriage."

Less than 18 months old, 2nd Vote has graded hundreds of corporations on six issues -- corporate welfare, the environment, education, support for the Second Amendment, abortion, and as of two weeks ago, same-sex "marriage." Using their "scoring" system, 2nd Vote ranks corporations on their direct or indirect involvement with these hot-button public policy and cultural issues.

And according to them, some of America's favorite corporations are making the radical HRC agenda possible.

"HRC is the largest LGBT lobbying organization in the United States with reported revenues of over $55 million," Kuykendall told LifeSiteNews. "The redefinition of marriage and the undermining of religious freedom are major components of HRC’s policy agenda. To fund their policy goals, HRC has enlisted the help of many major corporations that we do business with every day to help fund. Over a third of the contributions received by HRC are listed as 'Corporate/Foundation Grants.'" 

Why should conservatives care about corporate donors to HRC? Kuykendall says the organization is both politically influential and publicly deceptive. "Last election cycle, HRC spent around a million dollars on electioneering activities and in support of liberal candidates willing to push their legislative agenda. HRC is responsible for spreading much of the misinformation regarding [Religious Freedom Restoration Act] laws and has also mischaracterized the protections provided by these laws."

"HRC organized a massive grassroots campaign in support of the legal battle to overturn state laws protecting marriage and influence the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges," said Kuykendall.

Marriage isn't the only issue on which conservatives may be at odds with HRC's corporate backers. "2nd Vote’s research into other issues such as life, the environment, and the 2nd Amendment shows that many of the companies supporting HRC have taken liberal stands on other issues as well,” he said. “For example, Apple, Citigroup, Microsoft, and Coca-Cola are Platinum Partners, the highest level of HRC’s National Corporate Partners, that have also funded the liberal Center for American Progress [CAP]."

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

"Bank of America, Google, Goldman Sachs, Starbucks, PepsiCo, and Morgan Stanley are also HRC Corporate Partners that have funded CAP. Furthermore, all of these companies signed the amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to overturn state marriage laws."

In Indiana, the state's religious liberty law was modified because of corporate pressure led by Tim Cook, Apple's gay CEO. Kuykendall says conservatives should not give up, though he acknowledges that "for too long, conservatives have let liberals and groups like HRC bully companies into not just going along with their agenda, but actively funding and promoting it."

"However, conservatives have also proven their ability to mobilize and use their dollars in support of traditional values as we’ve seen through the fundraising campaigns for the pizza parlor and wedding cake makers who have been attacked by liberals for their beliefs. Conservatives need to turn the tables on the left, and groups like HRC, and motivate companies to stop funding the liberal agenda through the power of their shopping habits."

Only nine companies have ranks of "five" or "four" on 2nd Vote's ranking system, indicating a pro-marriage perspective. They are outnumbered more than 10 to 1 by organizations that support redefining marriage.

Concerned citizens can download the app on 2nd Vote's website. The full list of corporation scores can be found here.

Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Fr. Mark Hodges

First graders exposed to book about transgender boy—without parental notification

Fr. Mark Hodges
By Fr. Mark Hodges

KITTERY POINT, ME, May 1, 2015, (LifeSiteNews.com) – Parents at one Maine school are upset that children as young as six were exposed to a book promoting transgender issues, in the name of "acceptance."

Parents were not only not consulted, they were never even notified of their children's exposure to transgenderism.

Horace Mitchell Primary School read the book I Am Jazz to first-grade students. The book is about a boy who identifies as a girl from the age of two, "with a boy's body and a girl's brain." He eventually finds a doctor who tells his parents, "Jazz is transgender."

Parents began to inquire about what was being taught at Horace Mitchell Primary after children came home with questions about their own sex and wondering if they, too, might be transgender.

One mother, upset that teachers would broach the subject of transgenderism with her little boy, said the primary school ignored her complaint. "I feel like my thoughts, feelings and beliefs were completely ignored...My right as a parent to allow or not allow this discussion with my child was taken from me," she told Hannity.com.

"When I spoke with the principal he was very cold about it," the mother continued. "It's amazing how thoughtless the school has been with this whole thing."

Only after Sean Hannity made national inquiries did Horace Mitchell Primary School suggest that teachers should have told parents ahead of time.

Allyn Hutton, the superintendent of the local district, said she supported reading the book but admitted that parents should have been given advance warning about the subject matter. "We have a practice of – if a topic is considered sensitive – parents should be informed. In this situation, that didn't happen," she said. "We understand that toleration is tolerating people of all opinions."

Horace Mitchell Primary School sent an e-mail, after the fact, to concerned parents, including a link to a blog post of the school's guidance counselor, explaining their motivation was "cultivating respect."

"Some may think primary school students are too young to worry about addressing issues surrounding gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning (LGBTQ) students. Not so, experts say,” the school's guidance counselor wrote. “It’s never too early to begin teaching children about respecting differences."

Homosexual activists say they support the teaching of transgenderism to first-graders, with or without parental notification. "The staff of Mitchell School is...shedding a light on [LGBTQ] issues,” said a column in Gay Star News.

The LGBT puublication goes even further, advocating homosexual propaganda be commonplace in elementary schools across the country. "LGBTQ issues should never be classified as a 'sensitive subject,' [because] there is nothing sensitive about the way we are born. Blonde hair, brown hair, gay, straight or somewhere in-between."

Brian Camenker of MassResistance commented on the infiltration of homosexual propaganda in children's schools. "We deal with parents and teachers a lot, and the idea that teachers would do this is unconscionable. It's like the people that promote this stuff are evil. It's demonic. You can't imagine adults that would do this to other people's children, and do it with such anger, and such vitrol.”

Camenker emphasized that this is “not an isolated incident with just one, rogue teacher. This happens because the whole administrative hierarchy buys into it.”

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

“The new generation of educators is very, very frightening,” he said.

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook