UNITED NATIONS, July 4, 2005 ( – In one of its most thinly veiled references to overt population control ever, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) has come out advocating abortion as a means for curbing child poverty, improving child education, and improving the sustainability of the environment.

At the UN’s annual Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) meeting running throughout July the UNFPA has been circulating a report, Reducing Poverty and Achieving the Millennium Development Goals: Arguments for Investing in Reproductive Health & Rights. The report argues that “sexual and reproductive health services”– a UN euphemism for abortion, contraception and sterilization – are necessary to eradicate child poverty, AIDS, and even to ensure ecological sustainability by calming population growth.

By eliminating children through abortion, there will be fewer children to become impoverished – or so the UN geniuses who thought up the proposal claim. In addition, if families allow fewer children to survive pregnancy, there will be more resources available for the remaining ones, thus ensuring them a better education, the same reasoning proposes.

The UNFPA document was launched in time for September’s Millennium Summit+5, expected to be the largest gathering of world leaders in history.

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, in a press release preceding World Population Day, 11 July 2005, praised the ideals of the UNFPA in promoting abortion as a means to curb world poverty: “On this World Population Day, let us resolve to empower women and girls by our commitment to gender equality”– gender equality here, again, being a reference to abortion and contraception. “And let us remember that every society that wishes to overcome poverty, hunger, armed conflict and disease must draw fully on the talents and contribution of all of its members.”

The UNFPA report includes a copy of the Stockholm Call to Action, which called for “universal access to reproductive health by 2015 as a target for MDG 5.”

Read the full UNFPA report (pdf) at:



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.