UNFPA & Abortion

UNFPA & Abortion

UNFPA supporting abortion


Everyone wants to reduce maternal mortality and no-one is opposed to authentic overseas development. However, women's "reproductive rights" is internationally recognised pro-choice jargon which includes sterilisation and abortion - the death of preborn children. Whilst the UNFPA portrays an image of concern for women's reproductive health, is there a hidden agenda to reduce population growth in developing countries?

The UNFPA deny they are involved in abortion. Lets look at some facts from China and Kosovo :

      Line Ill - New Line


      On January 13, 2001, El Salvador was hit by an earthquake that left 844 people dead, 4,723 people injured and 108,226 houses destroyed. On February 13, El Salvador was hit by another earthquake. In a country of only 6 million people, over a million and a half people have been affected including 1159 lives lost. Some 70,000 were without drinking water.

      Yet, before the dust settled from the first earthquake, UNFPA had already begun shipping their now infamous reproductive health kits. Leave it to UNFPA to offer a traumatised woman an IUD rather than water, food, and clothing for herself and her displaced family. These latest actions have been decried as "demographic imperialism" by Julia de Cardenal, president of a family advocacy group, Si a la Vida, and leader of an effort to aid the earthquake victims. Mrs. de Cardenal sees UNFPA's offer of contraception (including the means for sterilisation) in their hour of need as demeaning and as adding insult to injury.

      Salvadorians love and respect life. Responding to the pressure of the developed world to accept abortion, El Salvador amended its constitution in 1999 to officially recognise that life begins at the moment of conception. Abortion is forbidden. Apparently, UNFPA disregards a nation's laws when pushing its anti-natal agenda.

      UNFPA seems to have an agenda of promoting the acceptance of sterilisation and abortion regardless of the laws and morals of the recipient nations. Governments should not be funding an organisation that uses an earthquake as an opportunity to push abortion and sterilisation to people still standing in the rubble of an earthquake that has devastated their lives.