by Dr. Eowyn
Inés San Martin reports for Crux, Nov. 15, 2018, that the United Nations Human Rights Committee wants to make abortion and “assisted suicide” — a euphemism for euthanasia — a univeral human right.
A “General Comment” is a UN agency’s interpretation of the provisions of the treaties to which it is a party.
According to a draft “General Comment” of the UN Human Rights Committee’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, UN member governments:
- Must decriminalize abortion for women and abortionists.
- Must guarantee “safe, legal and effective” access to abortion when the life of the pregnant woman is at risk, or when carrying the pregnancy to term could cause her “pain or suffering” as in the cases of rape or incest.
- Must remove barriers that deny access to a safe abortion, “including barriers caused as a result of the exercise of conscientious objection by individual medical providers.” In other words, medical providers must be forced to perform abortion, regardless of their religious or moral objection.
- Guarantee girls’ and women’s access to post-abortion health care “in all circumstances, and on a confidential basis.”
- Guarantee access by “boys and girls” to a wide range of affordable contraceptive methods.
- Allow medical professionals to “facilitate the termination of life of afflicted adults, such as those who are terminally ill, who experience severe physical or mental pain and suffering and who wish to die with dignity.”
An earlier version of the draft was read in July 2017, during the 120th session of the Human Rights Committee and made available online by the UN. “All interested stakeholders” were invited to comment on the draft. Although many pro-life groups submitted comments, their views are disregarded as the current version of the draft, as of October 31, shows that the language calling for governments to guarantee access to abortion and “assisted suicide” remains.
Meanwhhile, writing for American Thinker, Oct. 27, 2018, E. Jeffrey Ludwig reminds us that in 2015, the UN issued a program for world government, entitled Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
The 14,883-words document has 91 numbered sections addressing issues under the five headings of People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnership; and contains 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to improve life on the planet.
The earlier UN ideas and ideals of rights, freedom, equality, and justice are now subsumed under “sustainability”. The UN World Commission on Environment and Development defines “sustainable development” as:
- Development “that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” — whatever that means.
- “Environmentalism” — preventing the depletion of scarce planetary resources.
- The Marxist axiom that society should be organized around the idea of “from each according to his ability to each according to his needs.”
Ludwig warns:
The entire “Transforming Our World” document is cast in a stream of consciousness of pious platitudes for a utopian future. It is an outsize utopian dream. Five of the 17 items pertain to the environment. There are goals for the cities, for women, for the poor, and even for life under the water. Absolutely no sphere of human activity is exempt from control by the UN….
The one-worlders of the 1950s and early 1960s are now in the UN driver’s seat, and they have made their move. The overlay of Marxist talk about “meeting needs” has moved to center stage. The UN has assigned itself a time frame for moving forward in its plan for planetary hegemony.
This projected transformation detailing (yet without details) a new world order of environmental responsibility and a significant reduction of poverty and hunger never speaks to the practical dimension of vast manipulations of people by cynical leaders and ignorant bureaucrats who hold their positions through terrorism and bribery. They never discuss incompetence and corruption, twin brothers in the family of venality. The document portrays a sincere world where all those in power want to help humanity despite the daily evidence of the selfishness, corruption, murderous intents, devilish manipulations, thefts, personal immoralities, hatreds, and utter depravity of many governmental leaders in every country in the world, and among the leaders of business as well. Is not the Agenda for Sustainable Development itself one of those devilish manipulations?
The sustainability ideal is not wedded to a Christian worldview; instead, individual liberty is submerged in a scientifically determined collectivist mindset with final decisions in the hands of the devilish, all-knowing Big Brothers. The relevance of the individual is downplayed. It is being put forward by a UN that is no longer pro-western, a much larger body than existed in 1945. Will you accept it, or is it time, more than ever before, to begin rethinking our membership in that unsustainable body?