By Alan Mercer
Continuing from Part 12
References for Further Research
- WMA (World Medical Association) Medical Ethics Manual (http://www.wma.net/en/20activities/10ethics/30ethicsmanual/index.html)
- Canadian Medical Association
- Canadian Medical Association Journal
- CMA search “conscience”
- CMA: Abortion
- CMA search “contraception”
- CMAJ (CMA Journal) search “contraception”
International Birth Control Efforts
You can see the MDG goals listed starting on page 8 of the above pdf. First of all, what gives these people at the United Nations the right to fix the world’s problems? Did you ever have a say in that? I think that part of this is really about grabbing power, about people being inserted into positions of authority and control using “problems” as excuses for doing so.
Some of these goals sound great on the surface. Other goals are certainly more about social engineering, and what they amount to essentially is to separate human beings even further from their actual nature so that they can be more easily controlled and indoctrinated.
Many of these goals are a direct targeting on the mind (“education”) or on traditional family and gender roles (“equality”), and also on sexual reproduction.
We are soaked in pure propaganda, so what I’m saying might seem very inappropriate.
But these are the conditions we live with already in “advanced” nations. “Advanced” just means that, unlike third world countries, we are already highly propagandized, conditioned and modified–via education and media and drugs and food and electronic communications and countless man-made laws–and we live apart from our nature.
Essentially, it’s all about birth control, and every other kind of control, and the data collection and monitoring that goes along with the “scientific” society. Ironically the same people building this scientific dictatorship of birth control chemicals and indoctrination that attacks human nature are also promoting the “nature first”, “earth first”, green “environmentalist” doctrines.
When you have all the power and carry out all the brainwashing, you can get away with these contradictions–like being pro-nature and anti-nature at the same time.
It’s amazing what you can do with all that money made up out of thin air.
Are the same elites actually behind the wars too? And behind both “right” and “left”? Yes. There are some exceptions and different emphases for public consumption, but mostly they’re all on board with the overall plan of Agenda 21 and New World Order, whatever you want to call it. Right and left just take turns pushing their part of the agenda.
Wikipedia article on Birth Control (Accessed Feb. 2, 2015)
This article shows you that birth control is an “international” policy. Who is “international”?
When was the last “international” election you participated in? When was the last time you had a clear choice to vote for or against a particular international policy at an election? When was the last time you voted on the fact that the government borrows money from–meaning that it serves–private international banks? Who do you think tells the government what to do if it’s not listening to your detailed thoughts at election time?
Answer: Foundations, NGOs and corporations. Who owns them? Who pays their salaries? Why do you hear them on the media lobbying for some specific legislation, and why aren’t there other points of view in the media?
Somebody has already decided the direction for our society, and for the world too. And you’d think that would be impossible, but most people seem to be going along, and nobody seems to be stopping this agenda.
Further information: Timeline of reproductive rights legislation
Human rights agreements require most governments to provide family planning and contraceptive information and services. These include the requirement to create a national plan for family planning services, remove laws that limit access to family planning, ensure that a wide variety of safe and effective birth control methods are available including emergency contraceptives, make sure there are appropriately trained healthcare providers and facilities at an affordable price, and create a process to review the programs implemented. If governments fail to do the above it may put them in breach of binding international treaty obligations.
In 2010, the United Nations launched the Every Woman Every Child movement to assess the progress toward meeting women’s contraceptive needs. The initiative has set a goal of increasing the number of users of modern birth control by 120 million women in the world’s 69 poorest countries by the year 2020. Additionally, they aim to eradicate discrimination against girls and young women who seek contraceptives. . . .
World Contraception Day
The 26th of September is World Contraception Day, devoted to raising awareness and improving education about sexual and reproductive health, with a vision of a world where every pregnancy is wanted. It is supported by a group of governments and international NGOs, including the Asian Pacific Council on Contraception, Centro Latinamericano Salud y Mujer, the European Society of Contraception and Reproductive Health, the German Foundation for World Population, the International Federation of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology, International Planned Parenthood Federation, the Marie Stopes International, Population Services International, the Population Council, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and Women Deliver.
Reference 140 from above article:
Cottingham J., Germain A., Hunt P. (2012). “Use of human rights to meet the unmet need for family planning”. The Lancet 380 (9837): 172–180. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60732-6. PMID 22784536.
In this report, we describe how human rights can help to shape laws, policies, programmes, and projects in relation to contraceptive information and services. Applying a human rights perspective and recognising the International Conference on Population and Development and Millennium Development Goal commitments to universal access to reproductive health including family planning, we support measurement of unmet need for family planning that encompasses more groups than has been the case until recently. We outline how human rights can be used to identify, reduce, and eliminate barriers to accessing contraception; the ways in which human rights can enhance laws and policies; and governments’ legal obligations in relation to contraceptive information and services. We underline the crucial importance of accountability of states and identify some of the priorities for making family planning available that are mandated by human rights.
In other words, there is a very active strategy of using innovate “human rights” ideas and treaties in order to bind governments (some of them supposedly democratic) into promoting family planning (population reduction) policies.
And it appears obvious that one of the “barriers” in the way of the efficient implementation of these projects is freedom of conscience.
Reference 141 from Wikipedia article:
Susheela Singh; Jacqueline E. Darroch (June 2012). “Adding It Up: Costs and Benefits of Contraceptive Services Estimates for 2012” (PDF). Guttmacher Institute and United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), 201.
“Barriers” is one of the themes:
Furthermore, “beyond family planning” interventions are needed to address social factors that inhibit the use of modern contraception. Such barriers include women’s low level of decision-making power within the family, differences in fertility preferences between partners, religious beliefs and attitudes opposed to modern contraception (among women and communities), and the stigma attached to sexual activity among unmarried women and their use of contraceptive services. Addressing these types of barriers requires commitment to long-term, extensive interventions, such as providing comprehensive sex education and well-designed, large-scale public education efforts.52 The heavy reliance on long-acting contraceptives in developing countries raises the need for policymakers and service providers to guard against placing pressure on potential users . . . (pg. 17)
OK? It’s clear. This is the point.
Religion, beliefs and attitudes are getting in their way. They need to have “extensive interventions.”
All our lives this has been going on, and it’s accelerating: a worldwide tax-funded and foundation-directed global effort to interfere with the attitudes and beliefs of every human being on earth. “Public education.” Over and over, United Nations-related documents go on and on about the need for “educating” the public about climate change or whatever they want the public to believe. And we’re trained to automatically think that’s it’s all legitimate, harmless, valid information. It’s not called “propaganda” or “marketing” of products or toxic chemicals. It’s called “education.”
Improving services for current users and adequately meeting the needs of all women who
currently need but are not using modern contraceptives will require increased financial commitment from governments and other stakeholders, as well as changes to a range of laws, policies, factors related to service provision and practices that significantly impede access to and use of contraceptive services.(pg. 1)
It’s part of the “education” to frame potential opposition to “birth control” as “religious” as if there is no rational objection why someone might not want to expose themselves to a particular chemical or surgery. The media obfuscates the issues. The propaganda that makes people believe it is just a question of religious dogma doesn’t let us see the other issues that only require common sense and logic.
Notice the terminology. Who are the “other stakeholders”? Why is it so important to have all of these governments and organizations funnel our money into birth control (or sterilization or hysterectomies or abortion or anti-family propaganda) for people we never met? Isn’t it their personal business? Shouldn’t it be left to them?
Reference 19 at the end refers to an article about the “unfinished agenda”? (“Cleland J et al., Family planning: the unfinished agenda, Lancet, 2006, 368(9549):1810–1827.”) When will it be “finished”?
Being forced to fund anything, but especially practices we disagree with, goes against our rights as far as I’m concerned.
You see how this concept of “human rights” is used to concentrate money and power in the hands of these supposedly benevolent international organizations?
But, are we really being forced to fund “human rights” or is it just the opposite? How many tragedies are occurring around the world with women especially being pressured into being sterilized? Case after case. And what sorts of covert operations have already being going on against both genders?
Who is calling the shots? Who runs things? The Acknowledgments on page 2 of this report (by the Guttmacher Institute and the UNFPA) illustrate how world society is managed:
This report was funded by grants from the UK Department for International Development and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The findings and conclusions contained within are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect positions or policies of the donors.
The Guttmacher Institute gratefully acknowledges the general support it receives from individuals and foundations—including major grants from The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation and the Ford Foundation—which undergirds all of the Institute’s work.
Reference 142 from Wikipedia article:
“About Every Woman Every Child”. United Nations Foundation. Retrieved 21 September 2013.
From the current About page for this organization:
Every Woman Every Child provides a new opportunity to improve the health of hundreds of millions of women and children around the world, and in so doing, to improve the lives of all people. The health of women and children is critically important to almost every area of human development and progress, and directly impacts our success in achieving all of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), adopted by world leaders in 2000.
It sounds very nice, and why wouldn’t it? This is how population reduction is marketed to the public.
This would mean saving the lives of 16 million women and children, preventing 33 million unwanted pregnancies, ending stunting in 88 million children, and protecting 120 million children from pneumonia by 2015.
So in the middle of this paragraph, you see that the UN wants to prevent 33 million “unwanted” pregnancies. I’m not sure how they figured out the number of “unwanted” pregnancies, but they’re packaging it along with “saving lives” and preventing pneumonia.
Personally, I think people would do much better and be much healthier if they were left alone, but they never are.
Another target audience for “education”:
30 April 2012
At the 45th Session of the United Nations Commission on Population and Development (CPD), member states issued a bold resolution in support of young people’s sexual and reproductive health and human rights. This resolution reflects values espoused in the Global Strategy, which acknowledges the vulnerability of adolescents and calls on global actors to help ensure they have control over their life choices, including their fertility. Learn more [link to International Women’s Health Coalition].
So, this interference is characterized as providing choice over their fertility, or helping them to limit their fertility as if the limits imposed by nature aren’t enough – in addition to all sorts of hardships and toxic chemicals that somehow don’t provide them with plenty of infertility “choices” already. That’s another way of looking at it. Traditionally, “health” is associated with fertility, and fertility was seen as a blessing. To reverse the associations, and associate “health” with a toxic product is an amazing modern “scientific” accomplishment, but you have to stop listening to propaganda for a second to think about it. This is how we’ve been trained to see things in the West already. Check out the birth statistics.
About the “Maternal Health” Health Part of the Millenium Development Goals
Part of GOAL 5: IMPROVE MATERNAL HEALTH (accessed 9 February 2015):
Achieve, by 2015, universal access to reproductive health
- More women are receiving antenatal care. In developing regions, antenatal care increased from 65 per cent in 1990 to 83 per cent in 2012.
- Only half of women in developing regions receive the recommended amount of health care they need.
- Fewer teens are having children in most developing regions, but progress has slowed.
- The large increase in contraceptive use in the 1990s was not matched in the 2000s.
- The need for family planning is slowly being met for more women, but demand is increasing at a rapid pace.
- Official Development Assistance for reproductive health care and family planning remains low.
So, four of the above points equate “health” and even “progress” with preventing pregnancy. Not having children is “health.”
In the West, including Canada, was it more common in the past for so-called teens to get married and have families? I think so. But in modern times, we’ve had delayed childhood and extra costs associated with having children that people didn’t use to deal with. So it’s frowned upon more than ever.
Because everyone supposedly has something better to do than start a family and have children. Like what?
Well, we all have to slave away to pay taxes and work off debt for the rest of our lives, and be distracted, and believe what we’re told, and do whatever we’re told by Big Brother government, education, news media, and corporations. That’s what life is “all about.” The United Nations organizations (the bankers) say so, the new “God.”
What was the sexual revolution about? Read Brave New World.
Procrastination about having a family as some kind of life strategy in this world may not be such a great reproductive strategy if it contributes to many of us not having children at all.
Is there a future for my family if I have no children? Many of us are in this situation, and it’s not a matter of so much moralizing. It’s just that we need to recognize the effectiveness of propaganda and other interventions that tend to discourage reproduction: covert and overt, economic, chemical, legal, entertainment, environmental, etc. Those who see my point should think about ways we can insulate ourselves from these influences.
Reference 155 from Wikipedia article on Birth Control
“World Contraception Day” (accessed 9 February 2015)
WORLD CONTRACEPTION DAY
On September 26th, or World Contraception Day as we prefer to call it, it is our mission to spread the word and raise awareness about contraception and safe sex. Our aim is to help each new generation of adults make informed decisions until every pregnancy in the world is a planned one.
[“Planned”: Supposedly that means planned by the potential parents, but what does it mean in a more and more authoritarian world that plans your life?
“Each new generation” seems like wishful thinking.
“Informed” decisions is a great idea. Everyone should study the ingredients (including official package inserts/product monographs) of each product they want to use, the side-effects, and so on. Also they should collect information from different points of view.]
World Contraception Day is supported by a coalition of 11 international Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), governmental organizations and scientific and medical societies with an interest in sexual and reproductive health and is sponsored by Bayer HealthCare.
The list of partners for this World Contraception Day project is interesting. It’s amazing how many groups there are and how much activity and money is directed towards “population services,” “reproductive rights,” “maternal health,” or whatever terminology is used for the same thing.
Here are a few of the partners listed:
Monopoly and “Scarcity”
By the way, I think there is a certain logic that monopolists have. The claim we hear repeated constantly is that the world is “over-populated.”
We don’t hear so much about how this supposed crisis is already being addressed by international organizations we don’t know anything about. That’s the reason for these posts.
This information demonstrates how some people are already very busy with this “problem.” In my view, a monopolist feels threatened by people and their ideas. The more people, the more stray ideas floating around, the more competition for “scarce” resources, the more potential for competing powers and systems that threaten that monopoly.
Everything becomes a “scarce” resource when someone wants control over the planet (which is the point of Agenda 21).
For example, we make believe that diamonds are “rare,” we’re told that animals are “endangered,” we’re told that forests and “eco- systems” are “threatened.” There’s always a “security” problem, or a lack of water, or a crisis with food, or a shortage of healthcare providers, or a tight budget. And we have complete nonsense now about how the atmosphere can only handle so much carbon dioxide (which makes up a tiny fraction of the atmosphere, but which is essential for plants to grow).
Oh, the planet is “over-populated” they say. “We’re running out of everything!” Without proof, without argument. Some of us would tell them that it’s not their business anyway!
But they’re not waiting for you to hear all the arguments for or against, or agree with them. They’re not telling you that they’re already reducing the population. They’re not running it all by you in an election about what they’re already doing. Someone is spinning tall tales of crises, because they need you to submit to them, bow down to them and pay more taxes to their institutions of power, old and new.
“The Common Enemy of Humanity is Man: In searching for a new enemy to unite us [politically], we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. In their totality and in their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which demands the solidarity of all peoples [world government]. But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap about which we have already warned, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention [or government intervention, or made up or hyped] and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour [submission to authoritarian indoctrination and post-consumer rationing] that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.