UNFPA vs Humanity
Tags: International Organizations.
Click here to get Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority by Matt Margolis and Mark Noonan.
And so far, Humanity isn’t winning this battle:
Overpopulation hysteria has real world consequences. One of these is a United Nations population control agency that goes by the name of the UN Population Fund (UNFPA).
Started in 1969 following a massive lobbying effort by billionaire John D. Rockefeller III, the UNFPA claims to work to “reduce poverty and to ensure that every pregnancy is wanted, every birth is safe, every young person is free of HIV/AIDS, and every girl and woman is treated with dignity and respect.” In fact, the UNFPA, like its founder, believes that the way to reduce poverty is to reduce the numbers of the poor through sterilization, contraception, and abortion campaigns.
We know.We have conducted repeated investigations of UNFPA operations around the world. We have found that, despite its soothing rhetoric about improving “reproductive health,” and “safe motherhood”—the UNFPA spends a huge chunk of its budget on soporific propaganda–the agency continues to be fixated on the numbers. We have documented its involvement in coercive population control policies in countries like China, Vietnam, Peru, and North Korea, as well as in refugee camps around the world.
Its intimate connection to China’s brutal one-child policy merits special attention. For three long decades, the Chinese government has aborted and sterilized millions of women each year. For three long decades, the UNFPA has provided financial aid, ideological encouragement, and international sanction to these abuses through its offices in Beijing and around the Chinese countryside. This shameless pattern of complicity in some of the worst human rights abuses on the planet is the chief reason why the Bush Administration, for seven years running, has refused to fund the UN agency.
We at PRI have hard evidence on the UNFPA’s involvement in coercion—videotapes, cassette tapes, written and spoken testimony from dozens of witnesses. Our information was verified by the U.S. State Department, and is accessible on our web site, as well as in our new video series: Exposure: Investigative Realism from PRI. Even Secretary of State Colin Powell, who in the past has been friendly towards the UNFPA, declared the UNFPA ineligible for U.S. funding because of its complicity in forced abortion and forced sterilization.
And now Obama, Hillary and the pro-abortion crowd will get the United States firmly behind the process of reducing the number of people in the world. Forty years after the population hysteria and with abundant evidence that the whole concept of “over-population” was non-existent and with birth rates declining towards catastrophic levels in many places, we’re still following the model of killing the unborn and discouraging parenthood. Why?
It could just be the enforced, leftwing stupidity so prevalent in our society. Once the left latches on to an idea and calls it dogma, to dissent from it in any way, shape or form means ostracism from the left and a campaign of slanders against you – so, most lefties just keep at it, no matter how far leftist theory diverges from obvious reality. The fact that if the United States were as densely populated as Japan it would have half the world’s population in it doesn’t seem to impress itself upon the mind of the left – we’re “overpopulated” and there’s an end on it. And China is, too – for crying out loud, they’ve got a billion people, so they must be overpopulated…and as Leon Trotsky once said, “we have to get over this Papistical-Quaker nonsense about the sanctity of human life”. Can’t everyone see that China is poor and it must be because of overpopulation? And except for the fact that China has far less than half the population density of Japan – which is rich, while China is poor – also doesn’t seem to break into leftwing population thinking.
There are about 57.5 million square miles of land area in the world – lets take 25% of that as absolutely uninhabitable by humans and call it 43 million square miles of land human beings could be on at any given time. If the whole world became as densely populated as Japan – where people live well and there is countryside and farmland, etc – then the population of the world would be 35,948,000,000. We’re a long way from that – and, in fact, there is no rational argument to be made that human population would ever rise that high. In other word’s, there never has been and never will be a problem with the number of human beings on the planet – there has been, on the other hand, a problem with how human beings are governed, and how they govern themselves. Had China been governed on the Japanese model there is every reason to expect that China would be as prosperous as Japan, and probably more prosperous as China has vastly more natural resources and arable land than Japan.
Greed, servility, selfishness, cowardice, tyranny – this explains poverty. But our leftists aren’t buying it. To them, its just us and if there were less of us then we’d all have more. Its either this sort of idiocy or we’ll have to fall back on the original reason for population control – getting rid of the “lesser” breeds of people via abortion and euthanasia, as Sanger’s Planned Parenthood wanted at the start (and given that PP takes donations from people saying they want black kids aborted, its not too farfetched to think that PP is still on the eugenics track). What all of this means is that those of us on the side of life have quite a battle on our hands over the next four to eight years.
Thank you for visiting Blogs For Victory. If you enjoy our content, please consider making a donation to help us cover the costs of our servers.Mark Noonan is co-author (with Matt Margolis) of Caucus of Corruption: The Truth About The New Democratic Majority. He also blogs at Nevada News and Views. Follow Mark on Twitter.
17 Responses to “UNFPA vs Humanity”
Caucus of Corruption
Mark, it’s not just the amount of land. It’s the amount of water, food, and other resources. That cuts it down by a lot.
For example, the world’s fresh water supplies are surprisingly low. Maybe not for you and me, who use 2 1/2 gallons every time we flush, but for places like Africa and Asia. Overpopulation doesn’t mean population density. That’s why Japan isn’t in chaos. Overpopulation means that the amount of minimum consumption per person exceeds the amount of resources per person.. For example, we could put 10 people on a one acre plot of land in the rainforest. Chances are, the people would get by for a while on the abundancy of fruit, wood, animals, and water. However, stick those ten people on a one acre plot of land in the Sahara, then see what happens. Not only that, but give them one bottle of water and 1/2 a pound of meat, throw in a knife, and what do you get? Conflict.
mule,
There are 326,000,000,000,000,000,000 gallons of water on Earth. We won’t be going dry any time soon.
The world produced about 1,544,000,000 metric tons of iron ore last year. We won’t be running out of iron any time soon.
The world has extracted about 1,520,000,000 tons of copper. We won’t be running out of copper any time soon.
There are in proven reserves about 908,000,000,000 tons of coal in the world. We won’t be running out of coal any time soon.
We’ve been dealing with gloom and doom since Malthus came up with his very clever and learned theory – the only trouble with it was that it was wrong. Essentially, the resources of the world are unlimited as human ingenuity has always proved able to adapt to changing conditions. Remember, the first oil crisis was the shortage of whale oil…which was replaced by petroleum…
Mark, is that all the water on Earth? Or just the fresh water? If it’s all the water, then that means that 3 quadrillion, 260 trillion gallons are fresh and accesible. Of this, 80% of it is in Europe, North America, and all other first world nations. More people live in the second and third world than the first world. They need at least three gallons a day. It is hard to access the water that does exist. Combine all these, and you have chaos. As for the iron, copper, and coal, why would a 17 year old in a Congolese village give a damn? Those aren’t basic resources.
mule,
Traditionally, “water on Earth” means “water on Earth”.
The point is that there are vast resources, they only have to be used properly. My contention – which is the general contention of everyone non-left – is that moral failure causes our problems…moral failure on the part of populations to stand strong for liberty, moral failure on the part of the successful to help the less fortunate, moral failure on the part of ruling elites to govern properly. To make the answer to moral failure the immoral act of killing unborn and restricting the development in new life is to compound the error. Death is never the answer – it is something which at times prove necessary as a temporary expedient to succor the oppressed, but the answer is always life, and its handmaids, liberty and hope.
Overpopulation means that the amount of minimum consumption per person exceeds the amount of resources per person
Oh, okay. I see. So the people already born, are more deserving of earth’s resources than the unborn.
You know, you’ve got a pretty good argument there.
The Devil would be proud of you.
“water on earth” is “water on earth”
Thank you captain obvious.
I think the point being made is despite all of the water on earth only a small portion of it is useable for drinking. Therefor it is important to protect what we have and limit the impacts of pollution on drinking water.
Clean water will be one of the scarce resources if we do not act to preserve what we have.
cam,
Until you realize that water is made of hydrogen and oxygen…not the most uncommon elements in the world, right?
All water is usable and the amount of water on Earth is de-facto limitless as it can be used over and over again.
Think about some things – Lake Baikal in Russia has about 20% of the surface freshwater on Earth…not exactly the most tapped resource.
Certainly there are areas where water management is required – out here in Las Vegas in spite of large population increases we’re actually using less water than we did five years ago due to wise incentives and management. All it took was for us to make the correct moral choices – drain our water supply for lawns we don’t need, or switch over to plants native to the area…we choose correctly, and so can everyone else.
God has provided us with all the water we’ll ever need…for everyone. The problem is that man, wants to let evil greed to control his heart, he wants to own the planet supreme. So, all this really amounts to, is more scaremongering tactics by Democrats to further this destructive mentality to control life, and our way of living. Who is easiest to pick on? Those “worthless” and most innocent little babies.
Scaremongering is just one of their tactics, or one half I should say…the other half is sexual gratification … but even then, they still use scare tactics to try and persuade women to believe that having a baby “endangers” their life, and that the child will have “insufficient” care.
If you don’t have, and knowingly don’t have the necessary financial abilities to care for a child … why would you then choose to have sex?
Yet the Democrats continue enforcing the idea, especially in education that it’s “ok” to have sex before marriage and even though they may not be financially stable enough to do so. They don’t even encourage good work ethics, “Just depend on the government”, and if you do work, “don’t have children, they will get in the way.” “If you do get pregnant, just hop on down to your nearest Planned Parenthood clinic and they’ll remove the “parasite, ASAP”.” And as if destroying the unborn is not enough, they now encourage the most abhorrent and dangerous form of sexual behavior ever as a further deterrent to the family unit … sodomy.
Sex and scaremongering all the way around …
More sex, more sex, more sex, more sex…kill, kill, kill … more sex, more sex, more sex … kill, kill, kill … more sex, more sex, more sex …. kill, kill, kill … more sex, more sex, more sex….
Just about everything is based upon unlimited sexual gratification … and they know if they can get their way with it, that it will destroy society, even themselves.
For those of you reading this … I leave you with a simple offer. As we see the times corroding more quickly with each passing day … won’t you ask Christ into your heart and life?
Just as He promised Abraham, He will promise you…fulfilling the covenant, once more, with a lost soul in so desperate a need of His love and direction.
Let’s assume that the entire world becomes the technological utopia you seem to be envisioning, and that no birth control, of any kind, is ever used. Right now, the countries with the highest birth rates are at about 50/1000 people = 5%. Of course, not all that are born survive to reproduce. The current lowest child mortality rates in the world is 4/1000 live births = 0.4%. Multiply the two and subtract from the first and you get 4.98%. The lowest death rate in the world is 1.4/1000 people = 0.14%. 4.98% – 0.14% gives us an annual growth rate of 4.84%. Starting from the present population of 6.7 billion, we solve for
35,948,000,000=6,700,000,000·1.0484ᵗ
and get t = 35.5434 years. Note that my math may be a little shaky, but also remember that Einstein once said, “The most powerful force in the universe is compound interest.”
Therein lies the rub. We have a moral imperative to foster such ingenuity. However, we have been falling short. The entenched powers have been fighting the ingenuity tooth and nail — sabotaging the development of the electric car, fighting against alternative energy initiatives, denying that problems even exist, and so forth.
First and foremost, no one except the Chinese government is advocating forced abortion. If the UNFPA has been involved in that, charges need to be filed. However, the opposition to birth control is nonsensical. Yes, it would be nice if we had the technology to support unlimited population growth, but we don’t.
Please, please, please tell me you’re joking.
Teenagers are not famous for their judgment.
Teenagers are not famous for their judgment.
True.
Especially when they’re instructed in reverse judgment.
Sergei,
You think once water is dirty is stays dirty forever? Ever taken any sort of chemistry class?
We rebuilt the Las Vegas Wash in order to revive some of the native species in our area and to clean the city runoff before it goes into Lake Mead – dirty water goes in one end of the wash, clean water comes out the other end by ENTIRELY NATURAL PROCESS. Water is hydrogen and oxygen – these are basic elements, you can’t get them dirty, you can just have them mixed with dirt. Take out the dirt, and you’ve just got plain, old water…
Take out the dirt, and you’ve just got plain, old water…
That’s exactly right.
You know, I have drank numerous times out of the small mountain streams … I was on a fishing trip one time, it was in the spring-time, mid-April, early-May, somewhere around there…so it had started to warm up quite a bit, and I was getting thirsty…of course, I never thought to take some water, or I had drank all that I brought with me…one of the two, but anyway, I started searching for water…and I knew that I wouldn’t want to drink the water in the stream…it was a stream that held brook trout, and they say that if trout can live in it, that it’s good water, because little brookies have to have especially clean, cold water to survive and reproduce in…but anyway, with the abundance of deer we had, I decided that I wasn’t going to try it, for fear of Ecoli, a nasty little bug found common in many streams, especially where animals congregate, and slower running streams, like rivers … so I went off looking for water, and so happened, while I was digging a few ramps, I hear water dripping, I kept looking around, and finally I spotted it, there was a steady stream running out of the rock-embankment there in front of me … so I hollered for my friends to come, and so we all knelt down there debating it, and came to the conclusion that since it was so confined that the animals could not contaminate it….So we all cupped our hands underneath it and drank to our contentment….and it was really good water too. I have since drank out of numerous small seeps like that.
Anyway, just to caution against any water-born diseases….a neat little camper’s trick to purifying water is to boil it for at least ten minutes, then it’s as clean or cleaner than the tap water you get out of your well or the water you pay for from the city.
Well water is the best, as it goes through the natural purification process…through a layer of shale, then a layer of delayed carbon, a layer of rock, and a layer of coal again, but it at last is laying on granite or limestone….limestone water is very good, sweet water.
I might ask you the same thing. Just to begin with, do you have any idea how much goes into desalinization? Do you understand that the mere fact that water is composed of hydrogen and oxygen does not mean that you can just empty a box of each into a mixing bowl, stir it it, and end up with water?
Take out the dirt, and you’ve just got plain, old water…
Wow. You’ve said some really ridiculous things during scientific discussions, but this might just take the cake. You should probably just avoid any sort of scientific discussion altogether, Mark–you just end up embarrassing yourself horribly every time. In fact, you should probably just remove the word “science” from your vocabulary until you develop even an elementary fluency in the subject.
Abortion is the practice of assigning value to a human life based on any of several arbitrary criteria. The most popular one is that of the age of the life—-first trimester, for example—-but there is the criterion of whether or not someone (not the life involved, of course) has determined that the quality of life would not meet some outside standard (Down syndrome, for example).
But when you get right down to it, it is the practice of taking one human life because another person has made a value judgment–too young, too imperfect, too inconvenient.
Now that we have gotten used to the canard that it is not really human until it has been out of the womb and taken a breath, that has been expanded, as in the infamous Chicago case, to mean that even it if the life IS out of the womb, and IS breathing, it is still not valued as a human life and is not entitled to basic human rights. According to some, including Obama, the real issue here is whether or not the woman WANTED the baby to live, not the status of the baby.
So why stop at abortion as a means of limiting population? Why not go all the way into Socialist Nirvana and start assigning value to human life based on all sorts of criteria? If it is OK to take a human life because it is too young (in the first trimester, for example) then why not because it is too old? 65? 70? Pick a number.
If it is OK to take a human life in utero because of a perceived and disliked “defect” then why not eliminate all post-embryonic life that is not perfect? Amputees? Any of the infirm? Drooling? Bad memory?
There is the logical conclusion that the elites in power might determine that a certain political orientation is a defect, as so many of you Libs already have……………..
And after all, isn’t it a lot easier to kill people than to solve problems in other ways? A simple saline injection, or suction procedure, is obviously easier than designing and installing a filtrtion system for water.
I suggest we take a look at the hysteria of the 60’s, such as “The Population Bomb” and see how many of those dire predictions actually have transpired, before we start wiping out human life willy-nilly, in the name of saving human life.