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:


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Lisa Bourne

,

Pressure mounts as Catholic Relief Services fails to act on VP in gay ‘marriage’

Lisa Bourne
By Lisa Bourne
Image
Rick Estridge, Catholic Relief Services' Vice President of Overseas Finance, is in a same-sex "marriage," public records show. Twitter

BALTIMORE, MD, April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Nearly a week after news broke that a Catholic Relief Services vice president had contracted a homosexual “marriage” while also publicly promoting homosexuality on social media in conflict with Church teaching, the US Bishops international relief agency has taken no apparent steps to address the matter and is also not talking.

CRS Vice President of Overseas Finance Rick Estridge entered into a homosexual “marriage” in Maryland the same month in 2013 that he was promoted by CRS to vice president, public records show.

Despite repeated efforts at a response, CRS has not acknowledged LifeSiteNews’ inquiries during the week. And the agency told ChurchMilitant.com Thursday that no action had been taken beyond discussion of the situation and CRS would have no further comment.

"Nothing has changed,” CRS Senior Manager for Communications Tom said. “No further statement will be made."

LifeSiteNews first contacted CRS for a response prior to the April 20 release of the report and did not receive a reply, however Estridge’s Facebook and LinkeIn profiles were then removed just prior to the report’s release.

CRS also did not acknowledge LifeSiteNews’ follow-up inquiry later in the week.

“Having an executive who publicly celebrates a moral abomination shows the ineffectiveness of CRS' Catholic identity training,” Lepanto Institute President Michael Hichborn told LifeSiteNews. “How many others who hate Catholic moral teaching work at CRS?”

CRS did admit it was aware Estridge was in a “same-sex civil marriage” to Catholic News Agency (CNA) Monday afternoon, and confirmed he was VP of Overseas Finance and had been with CRS for 16 years.

“At this point we are in deliberations on this matter,” Price told CNA that day.

ChurchMilitant.com also reported that according to its sources, it was a well-known fact at CRS headquarters in Baltimore that Estridge was in a homosexual “marriage.” 

“There is no way CRS didn't know one of its executives entered into a mock-marriage until we broke the story,” Hichborn said. “The implication is clear; CRS top brass had no problem with having an executive so deliberately flouting Catholic moral teaching.”

“The big question is,” Hichborn continued, “what other morally repugnant matters is CRS comfortable with?”

While the wait continues for the Bishops’ relief organization to address the matter, those behind the report and other critics of prior instances of CRS involvement in programs and groups that violate Church principles continue to call for a thorough and independent review of the agency programs and personnel.

“How long should it take to call an employee into your office, tell him that his behavior is incompatible with the mission of the organization, and ask for his resignation?” asked Population Research Institute President Steven Mosher. “About thirty minutes, I would say.”

“The Catholic identity of CRS is at stake,” Hichborn stated. “If CRS does nothing, then there is no way faithful Catholics can trust the integrity of CRS's programs or desire to make its Catholicity preeminent.” 

Advertisement
Featured Image
Thousands of marriage activists gathered in D.C. June 19, 2014 for the 2nd March for Marriage. Dustin Siggins / LifeSiteNews.com
The Editors

, ,

Watch the March for Marriage online—only at LifeSiteNews

The Editors
By

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- At noon on Saturday, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and dozens of cosponsors, coalition partners, and speakers will launch the third annual March for Marriage. Thousands of people are expected to take place in this important event to show the support real marriage has among the American people.

As the sole media sponsor of the March, LifeSiteNews is proud to exclusively livestream the March. Click here to see the rally at noon Eastern Time near the U.S. Capitol, and the March to the Supreme Court at 1:00 Eastern Time.

And don't forget to pray that God's Will is done on Tuesday, when the Supreme Court hears arguments about marriage!

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

, ,

Hillary Clinton: ‘Religious beliefs’ against abortion ‘have to be changed’

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

NEW YORK CITY, April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Speaking to an influential gathering in New York City on Thursday, Hillary Clinton declared that “religious beliefs” that condemn "reproductive rights," “have to 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,” Hillary told the Women in the World Summit yesterday.

Liberal politicians use “reproductive health” as a blanket term that includes abortion. However, Hillary's reference echoes National Organization for Women (NOW) president Terry O’Neill's op-ed from last May that called abortion “an essential measure to prevent the heartbreak of infant mortality.”

The Democratic presidential hopeful added that governments should throw the power of state coercion behind the effort to redefine traditional religious dogmas.

“Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper. Laws have to be backed up with resources, and political will,” she said. “Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed.”

The line received rousing applause at the feminist conference, hosted in Manhattan's Lincoln Center by Tina Brown.

She also cited religious-based objections to the HHS mandate, funding Planned Parenthood, and the homosexual and transgender agenda as obstacles that the government must defeat.

“America moves ahead when all women are guaranteed the right to make their own health care choices, not when those choices are taken away by an employer like Hobby Lobby,” she said. The Supreme Court ruled last year that closely held corporations had the right to opt out of the provision of ObamaCare requiring them to provide abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives, and sterilization to employees with no co-pay – a mandate that violates the teachings of the Catholic Church and other Christian bodies.

Clinton lamented that “there are those who offer themselves as leaders...who would defund the country's leading provider of family planning,” Planned Parenthood, “and want to let health insurance companies once again charge women just because of our gender.”

“We move forward when gay and transgender women are embraced...not fired from good jobs because of who they love or who they are,” she added.

It is not the first time the former first lady had said that liberal social policies should displace religious views. In a December 2011 speech in Geneva, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said perhaps the “most challenging issue arises when people cite religious or cultural values as a reason to violate or not to protect the human rights of LGBT citizens.” These objections, she said, are “not unlike the justification offered for violent practices towards women like honor killings, widow burning, or female genital mutilation.”

While opinions on homosexuality are “still evolving,” in time “we came to learn that no [religious] practice or tradition trumps the human rights that belong to all of us.”

Her views, if outside the American political mainstream, have been supported by the United Nations. The UN Population Fund stated in its 2012 annual report that religious objections to abortion-inducing drugs had to be overcome. According to the UNFPA report, “‘duty-bearers’ (governments and others)” have a responsibility to assure that all forms of contraception – including sterilization and abortion-inducing ‘emergency contraception’ – are viewed as acceptable – “But if they are not acceptable for cultural, religious or other reasons, they will not be used.”

Two years later, the United Nations' Committee on the Rights of the Child instructed the Vatican last February that the Catholic Church should amend canon law “relating to abortion with a view to identifying circumstances under which access to abortion services may be permitted.”

At Thursday's speech, Hillary called the legal, state-enforced implementation of feminist politics “the great unfinished business of the 21st century,” which must be accomplished “not just for women but for everyone — and not just in far away countries but right here in the United States.”

“These are not just women's fights. These have to be America's fights and the world's fights,” she said. “There's still much to be done in our own country, much more to be done around the world, but I'm confident and optimistic that if we get to work, we will get it done together.”

American critics called Clinton's suggestion that a nation founded upon freedom of religion begin using state force to change religious practices unprecedented.

“Never before have we seen a presidential candidate be this bold about directly confronting the Catholic Church's teachings on abortion,” said Bill Donohue of the Catholic League.

“In one sense, this shows just how extreme the pro-abortion caucus actually is,” Ed Morrissey writes at HotAir.com. “Running for president on the basis of promising to use the power of government to change 'deep seated cultural codes [and] religious beliefs' might be the most honest progressive slogan in history.”

He hoped that, now that she had called for governments to change religious doctrines, “voters will now see the real Hillary Clinton, the one who dismisses their faith just the same as Obama did, and this time publicly rather than in a private fundraiser.”

Donohue asked Hillary “to take the next step and tell us exactly what she plans to do about delivering on her pledge. Not only would practicing Catholics like to know, so would Evangelicals, Orthodox Jews, Muslims, and all those who value life from conception to natural death.”

You may watch Hillary's speech below.

Her comments on religion begin at approximately 9:00. 

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook