Taxation abortion is a cornerstone in the strategy of transnational imperialism to impose their totalitarian rule on all the world. Under the principle of maximum benefit in enforcing population control exploitation and poor countries to eliminate the revolutionary potential of these peoples subjected to hunger and misery. However
reduce abortion only to its economic dimension, both poor countries and in the rich, is not seeing the background and scope of this strategy. It's become complicit in the system to the entire world population by killing millions of children to secure the totalitarian power of the powerful. If imperialism makes the population accepts or just take the abortion, ie killing their children, as something normal, even justifiable, but do not share, will have achieved one of its greatest victories. Therefore the abortion camouflaged behind words like "family planning", "reproductive health" and other trifles imperialists.
Excerpted from the Libertas Forum article published in the April 6, 2010:
The lobby of the population needs to generate a sense of urgency to donor nations to invest in family planning and abortion
Hillary Clinton says she can not have maternal health without reproductive health and not abortion. "When it comes to maternal health, you can not have it and not reproductive health. And reproductive health including contraception and access to legal abortion, "said Clinton in a speech in the Canadian city ... It will be recalled, according to Aciprensa, the Obama administration, which recently won approval for a health reform on the life, go in the next six years a 63,000 million dollars to promote and implement comprehensive health plan that has as one of its objectives to "reduce the mortality of mothers and children under five years."
pro-abortion policies that currently encourage the Administration of the United States come to coincide with the United Nations also stands. A recent report The UN says that nations should double investments to family planning and abortion in poor countries, for a total of 24,000 million U.S. dollars annually. As reported by Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute (C-FAM), the report is hiding behind that in this way will reduce significantly the rate of infant and maternal mortality and will solve a lot of social ills.
The study, which responds to the title Using accounts: costs and benefits of investing in family planning and maternal and neonatal health claims that if the UN Member States earmarked an extra $ 12,000 per year the "modern family planning, the result would include global cost reduction for poor countries in health, water, sanitation and social services, lower 2 / 3 of the pregnancies, 70% of deaths maternal and 44% of deaths of newborns, as well as the reduction of 73% of abortions 'risky' and 60% of disability.
The text says that "if all women who wish to avoid pregnancy will use modern contraceptives, the resulting decline in unwanted pregnancies result in a reduction in the cost of all these women provide the recommended standard maternal and neonatal care for 5,100 million dollars (of 6,900 of 1,800 million). " But who is behind this approach that puts the economic returns to life? The report is financed and written by the Guttmacher Institute (Planned Parenthood branch of research) together with the Population Fund, the UN, which received input from leaders of major institutions of population control, among which are The Population Council, Population Action International and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID, for its acronym in English). For their part, critics argue that this proposal the only reason it appeals to the maternal and child deaths in the new report is that the lobby of the population needs to generate a sense of urgency to donor nations to invest in family planning.
The report criticizes the fact that "donor assistance intended specifically to family planning has declined significantly in absolute dollars since the mid 90's." In the same line of anti-life policy of the Obama Administration, the report notes that "family planning services and maternal health should be seen as interconnected parts in the process of care." This Thus it is not clear what proportion of the improvements in maternal and child health will result from improved prenatal care and what percentage derived from the avoidance of births through family planning.
The authors say: "A comparison of contraceptive services, the neonatal and maternal outcomes are more complex and more difficult to define and measure" and added that "it is difficult to estimate the benefits of neonatal and maternal care because few studies have addressed the matter. " Significantly, it is the first time that the report "Making accounts', first published in 2003, attempts to use the issue of maternal and child health to justify the need to invest more funds in contraception and abortion worldwide.
Author: http://www.solidaridad.net/ - Date: 2010-05-10
reduce abortion only to its economic dimension, both poor countries and in the rich, is not seeing the background and scope of this strategy. It's become complicit in the system to the entire world population by killing millions of children to secure the totalitarian power of the powerful. If imperialism makes the population accepts or just take the abortion, ie killing their children, as something normal, even justifiable, but do not share, will have achieved one of its greatest victories. Therefore the abortion camouflaged behind words like "family planning", "reproductive health" and other trifles imperialists.
Excerpted from the Libertas Forum article published in the April 6, 2010:
The lobby of the population needs to generate a sense of urgency to donor nations to invest in family planning and abortion
Hillary Clinton says she can not have maternal health without reproductive health and not abortion. "When it comes to maternal health, you can not have it and not reproductive health. And reproductive health including contraception and access to legal abortion, "said Clinton in a speech in the Canadian city ... It will be recalled, according to Aciprensa, the Obama administration, which recently won approval for a health reform on the life, go in the next six years a 63,000 million dollars to promote and implement comprehensive health plan that has as one of its objectives to "reduce the mortality of mothers and children under five years."
pro-abortion policies that currently encourage the Administration of the United States come to coincide with the United Nations also stands. A recent report The UN says that nations should double investments to family planning and abortion in poor countries, for a total of 24,000 million U.S. dollars annually. As reported by Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute (C-FAM), the report is hiding behind that in this way will reduce significantly the rate of infant and maternal mortality and will solve a lot of social ills.
The study, which responds to the title Using accounts: costs and benefits of investing in family planning and maternal and neonatal health claims that if the UN Member States earmarked an extra $ 12,000 per year the "modern family planning, the result would include global cost reduction for poor countries in health, water, sanitation and social services, lower 2 / 3 of the pregnancies, 70% of deaths maternal and 44% of deaths of newborns, as well as the reduction of 73% of abortions 'risky' and 60% of disability.
The text says that "if all women who wish to avoid pregnancy will use modern contraceptives, the resulting decline in unwanted pregnancies result in a reduction in the cost of all these women provide the recommended standard maternal and neonatal care for 5,100 million dollars (of 6,900 of 1,800 million). " But who is behind this approach that puts the economic returns to life? The report is financed and written by the Guttmacher Institute (Planned Parenthood branch of research) together with the Population Fund, the UN, which received input from leaders of major institutions of population control, among which are The Population Council, Population Action International and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID, for its acronym in English). For their part, critics argue that this proposal the only reason it appeals to the maternal and child deaths in the new report is that the lobby of the population needs to generate a sense of urgency to donor nations to invest in family planning.
The report criticizes the fact that "donor assistance intended specifically to family planning has declined significantly in absolute dollars since the mid 90's." In the same line of anti-life policy of the Obama Administration, the report notes that "family planning services and maternal health should be seen as interconnected parts in the process of care." This Thus it is not clear what proportion of the improvements in maternal and child health will result from improved prenatal care and what percentage derived from the avoidance of births through family planning.
The authors say: "A comparison of contraceptive services, the neonatal and maternal outcomes are more complex and more difficult to define and measure" and added that "it is difficult to estimate the benefits of neonatal and maternal care because few studies have addressed the matter. " Significantly, it is the first time that the report "Making accounts', first published in 2003, attempts to use the issue of maternal and child health to justify the need to invest more funds in contraception and abortion worldwide.
Author: http://www.solidaridad.net/ - Date: 2010-05-10
0 comments:
Post a Comment