Pro-abortion UN report on child health defeated by African, Egyptian and Islamic delegates

April 5, 2013 – LifSiteNews

National delegates to the March 7 meeting of the UN Human Rights Council have rejected a report prepared on the “right of the child to the highest attainable standard of health,” after being warned by pro-life campaigners that it was a threat to parental rights and undermined their ability to protect children.

Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) described the report by Navanethem Pillay, the UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights, as “appalling” in its efforts to push abortion as part of a comprehensive strategy for children’s health.

A significant bloc of national delegates refused to endorse the report, including the African Group, which issued a statement saying that “hazardous behaviors among children, such as sexual activity among minors and drug use, should not be a justification to normalize these practices and accept them.”

The Egyptian delegate told the meeting that his country’s officials “express their deepest disappointment at the report.”

“Instead of providing a contribution to global and national efforts, the report presents a high-risk and culturally insensitive approach that disregards the priorities of the developing countries and departs from the main legal frame of reference embodied in” the Convention on the Rights of the Child, he said.

Delegates were warned in an analysis by Patrick Buckley, SPUC’s international affairs officer at the UN and EU, that the report “set out an agenda” for children’s health that highlighted “comprehensive sexuality education” and access to “confidential sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services” that included abortion.

SPUC director John Smeaton said that the defeat of the report is “a sign of better things to come – and shows what can be done when well-informed lobbying combines with the activities of nations, however weak they may be geopolitically, who are doing their best together to resist the population control imperialistic agenda of powerful western nations.”


Also read:  More Sickness From UN Social Engineers: Conditioning Children Into Accepting Abortions

More Sickness From UN Social Engineers: Conditioning Children Into Accepting Abortions

April 4, 2012 – Infowars

[Editor’s note: If there’s one entity in the world that should be banned from educating children on sexuality it is most certainly the United Nations. Let the collected information on the United Nations Brigandage website be a valid reason for that!]

Video link:

A 2009 draft report on ‘International Guidelines on Sexuality Education’ proposes desensitizing children as young as 5 to the concepts of masturbation and incrementally preparing them for the concept of aborting life. Although the report sparked a mild controversy in the beginning of September 2009, the final ‘Conference Ready Version’ of the abject report has not removed the proposals.

In case you missed it the first time, here it is again: UNESCO is intent on exposing 5 year old children to the reality of abortions and masturbation.

In the 2009 report authors Nanette Ecker and Douglas Kirby propose five different age ranges and just as many teaching methodologies for ‘sexuality education’ to confront children with. The reason given for all this is “HIV prevention” in order to achieve “Universal Access Targets.” According to Ecker and Kirby, the first thing to impress upon 5 year old children (under the header “Key Ideas”) is that “many different kinds of families exist around the world (e.g. two-parent, single parent, child-headed, guardian-headed, extended and nuclear families, same-sex couple parents, etc.).”

Proposed as “Key Ideas” to impress the impressionable with are, in the age range of 5 to 8:

1: “People receive messages about sex, gender and sexuality from their cultures and religions”.

2: “How harmful cultural/traditional practices affect health and well-being.”

3: “Difference between consensual sexual activity and forced sex.”

4: “Girls and boys have private body parts that can feel pleasurable when touched by oneself.”

5: “Touching and rubbing one’s genitals is called masturbation.”

6: “Some people masturbate and some do not.”

7: “Bodies can feel good when touched.”

8: “Some people are unable to care for a child.”

The last-mentioned “Key Idea” is obviously meant to prepare the children for the possibility of an abortion- for one of the “Key Ideas” mentioned in a later age range, 9 to 12, includes “definition of abortion” and “legal status of abortion locally and globally”. The learning curve is made complete when the authors propose, in the age range of 15 to 18, “advocacy to promote the right to and access to safe abortion.”

Here we have it: at a very early stage children are first being introduced to the idea that “some people are unable to care for a child”; in the next stage (9 to 12) the concept of abortion is being introduced as a means to resolve that issue. In the last stage (15 to18) the “Key Idea” is to explicitly advocate abortion.

Whatever one’s position in regards to the subject, everyone should agree that it is nothing less than a crime to desensitize children to such ideas at such an early age.

In a section called “common concerns about the provision of sexuality education”, the authors try to ‘debunk’ possible concerns about delivering this information to the very young. One of the concerns the authors toss up is “sexuality education deprives children of their ‘innocence’.”

To put the word innocence in between quotes says everything about the mindset behind these proposals. These sickening UNESCO sociopaths have the audacity to call into question a child’s innocence, proposing the school should inform the children about such matters at the age of 5.

“Parents”, according to the authors, “are often reluctant to engage in discussion of sexual matters with children because of cultural norms, their own ignorance or discomfort.”

In a twisted mind-warp the authors therefore propose taking upon themselves the role of the parents, and dangerous ones at that. To quote co-author Nanette Ecker: “We (…) need to start sexuality education young, such as teaching 5- to 8- year-olds the correct terminology about their bodies and how they work so they have the language to ask questions or report abusive, coercive behaviour or sexual violence.”

The World Health Organization shares this point of view. In the appendix to the above mentioned monstrosity can be read: “The World Health Organization (WHO) concludes it is critical that sexuality education be started early (…).”

“The International Guidelines”, say the authors, “will have immediate relevance for education ministers and their professional staff, including curriculum developers, school principals and teachers. However, anyone involved in the design, delivery and evaluation of sexuality education, in and out of school, may find this document useful.”

There is no more doubt, if ever there was any. The globalists, through their United Nations social engineers, are coming for the kids.