The United Nations' 2005 World Summit is underway in New York, and an expected 170 heads of state and government in attendance would make this event the largest gathering of world leaders in history. The US is already in hot water with the assembled statesmen and lobbyists, accused of attempting to eliminate much of the language of the "Millenium Development Goals" that are at the center of the Summit's agenda. Two of those stated goals are to "eradicate extreme poverty" and "promote gender equality by empowering women."  Those last few words should trigger alarm bells for anyone who values the true equality found only in freedom.

 

Pro-life analysts worldwide warn that abortion groups are using this UN event to promote abortion as an acceptable means to eradicate poverty. Euro-Fam, a pro-life group which monitors the EU parliament, notes that in order to do this, abortion advocates are aggressively lobbying to introduce a "right to sexual and reproductive health"--in other words, government-sponsored access to abortion, and fertility regulation--in several of the goals. These advocates believe that abortion "empowers women" by giving them the right to control their economic future. The fewer children we have, you see, the less stress on the family budget…the better our access to education…the fewer people around to spread the AIDS virus. Now, bear in mind--we could have fewer children by having less--or NO--unprotected, promiscuous sex. But that's just too much to ask of "empowered women," I guess. It's all about choices...choices for the MOTHER, that is. Why diminish one's sexual experience or opportunities, when she can simply "dispose of" any "mistakes" later?  

 

If the morality of government-sponsored fertility control and abortion isn't chilling enough for you, consider then the purely libertarian implications. In a nation where we hold a number of truths to be self-evident--among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness--can we be willing to sacrifice the first two, on the altar of the third? Especially when the life and liberty we surrender are not our own...but those of unborn children, without a voice...murdered, ostensibly, in the name of the mother's empowerment and prosperity.

You know, it's interesting. Those who are currently fighting to eliminate the concept of marriage in the nation of Sweden are using the same sort of argument--that matrimony is not about relationship, but about ownership--a means to control the property of another, or control another as property. We'll address that in part two of this editorial tomorrow. But, similarly, it appears abortionists are now just as ready to justify the willful taking of life for the same basic reason: economic gain. Now, such imperialism by a sovereign nation would be attacked and decried by thinking people in every land. But where the narcissistic individualism of abortion is concerned...it seems no outrage is off-limits.

Tomorrow: The true economic implications of abortion and marriage