The UNFPA (United Nations Population Fund) recently joined with the pro-abortion Center for Reproductive Rights to publish a report that tries to validate the “human rights” perspective on abortion and contraception. The report, “The Right to contraceptive information and services for women and adolescents,” was published on March 24th and is being hailed by abortion advocates as “the first comprehensive effort to link the right to contraceptives to the human rights framework,” according to Luz Angela Melo, UNFPA’s Human Rights Adviser.
What is really worrying it that the study calls for states to provide a “minimum core obligation” of healthcare (read: Abortion) services, which should be maintained independent of shifting socio-economic factors. This includes a so-called “right” to the abortion pill, Misoprostol.
The report also targets the “barriers” in some countries, which come in the form of parental and/or spouse consent requirements for young girls seeking abortions.
How can letting an emotionally and psychologically fragile 15-year-old choose abortion be considered a human right, while the life of a defenseless 21-week-old person NOT be considered a human right? Isn’t defending life, “in a spirit of brotherhood”, also a human right? How can the right to Life be trumped by right to contraceptive services? Priorities need to be reordered.
In addition, the report specifically rejects the right of medical professionals to conscientiously objection to being involved in abortion. It states :
“Because a conflict of conscience can be experienced only by an individual, conscientious objection cannot be exercised on behalf of an institution. “States have an obligation to regulate conscientious objection”, and says that governments should “require health facilities to have non-objectors available to provide medical services and goods; require objectors to submit their objections in writing and for review; and prohibit individuals not engaged directly in the provision of the service (including administrative staff) from exercising conscientious objection”.
This was mentioned in relation to cases where pharmacists have objected to selling the abortion pill and so-called “emergency contraceptives.”
According to LifeSite News:
“The document draws on a variety of UN references in order to create the image of an official consensus; however no specific right to contraception has ever been included in any UN treaty. It says, ‘States parties to international and regional human rights treaties have committed to promoting and protecting the basic rights that underlie the right to contraceptive information and services’ “
It is true. In the report, they state that:
“Reproductive freedom lies at the heart of the promise of human dignity, self-determination, and equality embodied in both the U.S. Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”
It is just so sad to see how the power of words can be used to deceive, especially in developing countries that are pro-life. The massive, international pro-abortion lobby will go to great lengths to stomp out pro-life convictions by turning words upside down to hide the gruesome reality, the FACT that abortion denies the first and most intrinsic human rights*: the right to Life.
(*expressed in that same Universal Declaration of Human Rights they are so proud to remember)