Cameroon Tells Pro-Abortion UN Committee “Abortion is Murder”

Volume 12, Number 5

January 15, 2009

Cameroon Tells Pro-Abortion UN Committee “Abortion is Murder”

By Samantha Singson

(NEW YORK – C-FAM) The committee that monitors state compliance with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) will begin a new session in Geneva next week, but even prior to the meeting six of the eight states who will be reviewed have already been questioned on abortion. In a stinging written response to the CEDAW committee’s advance questions, Cameroon fired back that “abortion is murder.”

CEDAW does not mention abortion, but the committee has courted controversy for years by pressuring over 65 countries to liberalize their abortion laws. In a written communication to the Cameroon government, the CEDAW committee asked the government to account for how they have implemented CEDAW’s previous recommendations to “review the abortion law and increase access to, and availability of, contraception.”

The government of Cameroon provided a lengthy written answer to the question and repudiated the tendency to “elevate” abortion to “the rank of a right and dignity.” Cameroon continued that abortion “is portrayed as a freedom without mentioning that the mother exercises this freedom to the detriment of the child’s.”

The Cameroon response lists the risks associated with abortion, including death, intestinal aspiration, hemorrhaging, infection, sterility, ectopic pregnancy, future miscarriage, perforation of the uterus and distress. Cameroon warned that new ideologies and scientific and technical progress “must not lead to an erosion in basic values.”

Cameroon emphasized the traditional African philosophy that “recognizes the permanent bond that links societies and families to their ancestors” and how children are a “bridge between generations past and present, while representing future prospects for communities.” Therefore, any abortion performed for any reason “other than to save the life of the mother or child, impedes the expression of this vital social dynamic.”

Cameroon also reminded the CEDAW committee of an aspect it feels is overlooked – “the tremendous joy that the possibility of having a child brings to women, as well as to men and families.” Cameroon asks the members of the committee to “Think for a moment of the anguish felt by the many couples who do not have children; think of the thousands of women and men who, in spite of their comfortable material existence, desperately want a child, even if it means adopting just one child.”

While the recommendations of the CEDAW committee are non-binding, abortion activists have brought litigation in various countries citing human rights treaty bodies, like the CEDAW Committee, in challenging laws against abortion. Such arguments helped convince the Colombian constitutional court to liberalize that country’s restrictions on the practice.

CEDAW critics will be watching the next session closely to monitor the performance of several newly elected committee members such as Violet Tsisiga Awori of Kenya and Barbara Evelyn Bailey of Jamaica, who were high-ranking members of non-government organizations that advocated for abortion rights in their respective regions.

Along with Cameroon, the CEDAW Committee will also be reviewing the country reports of Armenia, Dominica, Germany, Guatemala, Haiti, Libya and Rwanda.

UN Commission Ends with Delegations Saying No to Abortion

UN Commission Ends with Delegations Saying No to Abortion

By Samantha Singson

(NEW YORK – C-FAM) As the sun rose on the last day of negotiations at the Commission on Population and Development (CPD) at the United Nations (UN) today, delegations were still embroiled in a contentious debate over language concerning “sexual and reproductive health and rights,” which some radical NGOs and UN committees have interpreted and used to promote abortion. As UN member states came together at the closing meeting to adopt the document, delegations took the floor to define abortion out of the document.

Up until the eleventh hour, the contentious term “sexual and reproductive health and rights” remained in the draft document. Just prior to adoption, Iran took the floor to object to the phrase which has never before been included in any negotiated UN document. Iran stressed that the term remained problematic for a number of delegations and urged the Commission to revert back to previously agreed upon and carefully negotiated language from the 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) Program of Action, which is understood not to create any right to abortion.

In an attempt to get consensus, the chairwoman from Mexico suspended the meeting and after twenty minutes, returned to the room and announced that Iran’s proposal would be accepted and that the term “sexual and reproductive health and rights” would be removed from the text. The document was then adopted by consensus.

Several delegations, however, went further and made statements to explicitly define abortion out of the CPD document and to reiterate that the document created no new rights. Comoros, Peru, Poland, Ireland, Chile, the Holy See, Malta, and Saint Lucia spoke out against the other remaining reproductive health-related terms such as “reproductive rights,” “reproductive health services” and “sexual and reproductive health” and emphasized that these could not be construed to “support, endorse or promote” abortion.

Malta’s ambassador stated that his delegation was finding it more difficult in accepting the resolutions of UN bodies like the CPD where there were consistent attempts to expand “reproductive health” to include abortion.

Saint Lucia made an explicit objection to the term “safe abortion” because the term could “give the impression that abortion was a procedure completely free of medical and psychological risks.” Saint Lucia also highlighted a provision in the CPD document which called on states where abortion was legal to “train and equip health service providers and should take such measures to ensure that such abortion is safe and accessible.” The Saint Lucian representative stressed that her delegation understood this provision did not impact the right of healthcare providers to refuse to perform or be complicit in abortions as a matter of conscience, stating, “Again, no new rights are created or acknowledged in this document, and the universal right to conscience can in no way be overridden or weakened.”

Only the representative of Norway expressed regret that the term “sexual and reproductive rights” was not accepted in the text, saying that his country had widespread access to abortion and virtually no negative effects on women.

The CPD will next meet in April 2010.
Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute
Editor in Chief – Austin Ruse
Managing Editor – Piero Tozzi
Assistant Managing Editor – Hannah Russo
Chief Correspondent – Samantha Singson
Contributors – Susan Yoshihara / Katharina Rothweiler


© Copyright 2009 Permission granted for unlimited use. Credit required.
866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 495, New York, NY 10017
www.c-fam.org

Archbishop Buti Tlhagale Harvesting ovarian human eggs in Africa

Below I have borrowed this news item from the blog http://spuc-director.blogspot.com/2009/02/catholic-universities-in-us-and-rome.html so that I can 1) get the word out on Archbishop But Tlhagale and 2) get the word out on said blog so that you will visit it often.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Saturday, 7 February 2009

Catholic universities in US and Rome place African bishops in impossible position
Archbishop Buti Tlhagale, (pictured), the archbishop of Johannesburg, has denounced biological colonialism whereby "Harvesting ovarian human eggs in Africa will help meet the needs of embryonic stem cell research in industrialised countries" in his presidential address to the South African Catholic Bishops' Conference who met last week.

In the same address, in a clear reference to the The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) he refers to "unscrupulous campaigners" intending to legalize abortion. The CEDAW committee is notorious among pro-lifers for using the CEDAW convention to bully countries into allowing abortion, even though the convention doesn't mention abortion.

As I have mentioned before, I am very sorry to say that Cherie Blair, a fellow Catholic, endorses the work of CEDAW committee (as well as other radical pro-abortion groups) - and specifically its work on "reproductive rights". On a page in the Women of the World section of her website, Mrs Blair says:

"The [United Nations] Convention [on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) ... is the only human rights treaty which affirms the reproductive rights of women".

"Reproductive rights" is a term commonly used to include abortion on demand.

The page on Mrs Blair's website ends by linking to the CEDAW committee, which is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the CEDAW convention.

With Catholic universities in the US and Rome inviting Cherie Blair, a leading promoter of radical pro-abortion campaigning groups, to speak on subjects such as human rights and family life, it places African bishops seeking to protect their countries from "unscrupulous campaigners" in a well-nigh impossible situation.

Cameroon Tells Pro-Abortion UN Committee “Abortion is Murder”

http://www.c-fam.org/publications/id.977/pub_detail.asp

Volume 12, Number 5

January 15, 2009
Cameroon Tells Pro-Abortion UN Committee “Abortion is Murder”

By Samantha Singson

(NEW YORK – C-FAM) The committee that monitors state compliance with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) will begin a new session in Geneva next week, but even prior to the meeting six of the eight states who will be reviewed have already been questioned on abortion. In a stinging written response to the CEDAW committee’s advance questions, Cameroon fired back that “abortion is murder.”

CEDAW does not mention abortion, but the committee has courted controversy for years by pressuring over 65 countries to liberalize their abortion laws. In a written communication to the Cameroon government, the CEDAW committee asked the government to account for how they have implemented CEDAW’s previous recommendations to “review the abortion law and increase access to, and availability of, contraception.”

The government of Cameroon provided a lengthy written answer to the question and repudiated the tendency to “elevate” abortion to “the rank of a right and dignity.” Cameroon continued that abortion “is portrayed as a freedom without mentioning that the mother exercises this freedom to the detriment of the child’s.”

The Cameroon response lists the risks associated with abortion, including death, intestinal aspiration, hemorrhaging, infection, sterility, ectopic pregnancy, future miscarriage, perforation of the uterus and distress. Cameroon warned that new ideologies and scientific and technical progress “must not lead to an erosion in basic values.”

Cameroon emphasized the traditional African philosophy that “recognizes the permanent bond that links societies and families to their ancestors” and how children are a “bridge between generations past and present, while representing future prospects for communities.” Therefore, any abortion performed for any reason “other than to save the life of the mother or child, impedes the expression of this vital social dynamic.”

Cameroon also reminded the CEDAW committee of an aspect it feels is overlooked – “the tremendous joy that the possibility of having a child brings to women, as well as to men and families.” Cameroon asks the members of the committee to “Think for a moment of the anguish felt by the many couples who do not have children; think of the thousands of women and men who, in spite of their comfortable material existence, desperately want a child, even if it means adopting just one child.”

While the recommendations of the CEDAW committee are non-binding, abortion activists have brought litigation in various countries citing human rights treaty bodies, like the CEDAW Committee, in challenging laws against abortion. Such arguments helped convince the Colombian constitutional court to liberalize that country’s restrictions on the practice.

CEDAW critics will be watching the next session closely to monitor the performance of several newly elected committee members such as Violet Tsisiga Awori of Kenya and Barbara Evelyn Bailey of Jamaica, who were high-ranking members of non-government organizations that advocated for abortion rights in their respective regions.

Along with Cameroon, the CEDAW Committee will also be reviewing the country reports of Armenia, Dominica, Germany, Guatemala, Haiti, Libya and Rwanda.