United Nations Global Compact- 2050- Abortion Fresh Meat For NGOs$$$

 The United Nations has decided abortion is a “right to life” issue. Unfortunately for the preborn, it is not their right?

.

 

Late last year, the U.N. Human Rights Committee adopted General Comment No. 36, a document expounding on article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Article 6 posits that every human being “has the inherent right to life” and that this right “shall be protected by law.”

At first, the Human Rights Committee’s newest document appears to affirm this unambiguous message:

“It is the supreme right from which no derogation is permitted… It is most precious for its own sake as a right that inheres in every human being, but it also constitutes a fundamental right whose effective protection is the prerequisite for the enjoyment of all other human rights and whose content can be informed by other human rights.”

However, when it comes to the matter of preborn life, the document makes clear that this “supreme right” is not one afforded to them:

“Although States parties may adopt measures designed to regulate voluntary terminations… restrictions on the ability of women or girls to seek abortion must not, inter alia, jeopardize their lives, subject them to physical or mental pain or suffering…”

The document goes on to explain governments “must provide safe, legal and effective access to abortion” in the case that the pregnancy would potentially cause the woman “pain or suffering.” In addition, no laws or barriers may be placed that may push women towards “unsafe” abortions, including those caused by the “exercise of conscientious objection by individual medical providers.”

The last point may prove quite problematic for doctors and institutions that find abortion unethical. Will they still be allowed to opt out of providing abortions due to moral or religious objections? Or will they be mandated by the state to breach their own ethics?

Beyond that, certain terminology used in the document is ambiguous. For instance, what constitutes “mental pain?” Does raising a child constitute mental pain? Does giving a baby up for adoption? And certainly, you would be hard pressed to find any mother who found the process of childbirth itself entirely devoid of “pain” and “suffering.” Given that, does this mean abortion is never actually restricted? In effect, does this mean any woman could claim exemption from abortion laws at any point?

At the end of the day, this all comes down to one question: does every human being have an inherent right to life or not? If this question can be answered clearly, then everything else should fall into line. The U.N. needs to come forward with whether or not they still stand by the words articulated in the original International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Because, at this moment, it appears they do not.

https://humandefense.com/un-declares-abortion-a-human-right/

Views: 22

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Like Oppss!!! LMBO....:)

Make use of, opt it.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by Lisa BensonPolitical Cartoons by Henry Payne

ALERT ALERT

‘Watch: Female HS Student Says She ‘Felt Violated’ After Seeing Trans Student’s Penis In Locker Room

“I could tell that he was wearing women’s underwear and what was underneath it”

 A Pennsylvania student attending Honesdale High School has filed a complaint with the United States Department of Education Office of Civil Rights after her school administrators allowed a trans woman, a biological male who feels he is a woman, to dress and undress in the female locker room.

The student said she felt violated and scared when she looked across the aisle in the locker room to discover a member of the opposite sex in his underwear. In a video released by her legal team, she says it was obvious he was biologically male, as she “could tell that he was wearing women’s underwear and what was underneath it.”

“It was the first period, and I had gym class,” said the student, “And I walked in with all my friends, and while I was putting on my pants, I heard a man’s voice, so I turned around, and he’s standing there on the opposite aisle looking at me.”

“I glanced down and I could tell that he was wearing women’s underwear, and what was beneath it.”

She added that having a man apparently gawking at her while in various stages of undress made her feel unsafe.

“When I knew that a man was looking at me, I felt very violated, and very scared,” she said. “Especially looking at me while I am getting dressed.”

Her attorney said that this should be considered a form of sexual harassment in the eyes of the law.

“Opening up restrooms and locker room facilities to members of the opposite sex is sexual harassment,” said Andrea Shaw, the high school student’s attorney, “And like many forms of sexual harassment the girls in this school have little power over their situation.”

The attorney also notes that the school’s only attempt to remedy the situation was to allow the female high school student to wait to change until the biologically male student was finished, making her chronically late to gym class.

According to local media, the school district’s superintendent claims he is not able to comment on the case, but stated that the school is following the letter of the law. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court is expected to take up the case, otherwise biologically male students will continue to be allowed to dress and undress with biologically females.

SPECIAL VIDEOS

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service