Overpopulation: a Threat Caused by Religion Autor tekstu: Janet Brazill
Wilson, the first ambassador to the Holy See, confirmed that the Vatican
dictated the agenda, when he stated in Time
magazine on February 24, 1992, „American policy was changed as a result of the
Vatican's not agreeing with our policy. American
aid programs around the world did not meet the criteria the Vatican had for
Vatican expanded its control to population conferences sponsored by the United
Nations, where, as the Holy See, it enjoys a unique „nation" status, giving
it voting rights no other religion possesses. This has allowed it to disrupt
conferences, joining forces with several repressive
Muslim regimes to argue points and block consensus on issues dealing with birth
New Right Movement has supported the Vatican in its interference in these
the August 1995 monthly letter for Focus
on the Family, James Dobson, FOF president, asserted that the United Nations
Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, China, „will represent the most
radical, atheistic and anti-family crusade in the history of the world.."
on the Family
is a huge magazine publishing and radio empire with broadcasts reaching millions
is an evangelical Christian ministry with firm ties to other conservative
religious organizations who have the same political objectives. A former worker with FOF estimates that if you combine the Southern
Baptist membership with the followers of Dobson and the Christian Coalition you
have around 25-30 million people. [ 21 ]
like this have clout. The May 4, 1998 U.S.
News & World Report featured a cover story about James Dobson,
„Righteous Indignation." It describes his meeting with 25 House Republicans
where he threatened, in effect, to bring down the GOP unless it made conservative
social issues, including abortion, a higher legislative priority. „If I go," he said, "I will do everything I can to take as many people with
me as possible."
two months before, Dobson
had issued a press release showing a letter he had sent to all Republican
legislators on Capitol Hill, as well as Republican Governors, outlining
pro-family legislative priorities for the remaining 105th congressional session.
The first item listed was to „defund Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion
organizations." [ 22 ]
power to control the pulse of the nation rivals the authority of the Catholic
Church. The sheer force of numbers claimed by both the church and what is now
called the Religious Right has helped elect members of Congress who consistently
vote against family planning measures that would help control the world's
George W. Bush ran on a promise of moderation, he has been zealous in his
attacks on family planning now that he is president. On his very first day on
the job, the president re-imposed the global "gag rule," first instituted by
President Ronald Reagan, then lifted by President Bill Clinton in January 1993.
It bars international health providers receiving American family planning
assistance from providing abortion services even with their own money, or
counseling women about abortion, or even engaging in lobbying their own
governments on abortion, in effect limiting their right to free speech.
Many providers were forced to turn down our country's family planning
help because of these conditions.
international assistance was lost when President Bush cut off the $34-million
support for the United Nations Family Planning Agency, the largest multilateral
provider of family planning and reproductive health assistance serving over 150
countries. The UNFPA estimates that
the money it lost would have been enough to prevent 2 million unwanted
pregnancies worldwide, avoiding 800,000 abortions, 4,700 maternal deaths, 77,000
infant and child deaths, and 60,000 serious maternal illnesses. [ 23 ]
by the suffering this has caused, the Bush administration has
recently taken additional steps to appoint antiabortion activists to key
positions on U.S. delegations to U.N. conferences, [ 24 ]
and in October it publicly announced at a U.N. Asia regional meeting that
it was unable to reaffirm its commitment to the 1994 Cairo Plan of Action, a global agreement between 178 countries to support reproductive health and family
planning. U.S. delegates said some of the wording, including „reproductive
health services" and "reproductive rights," could be read as
advocating abortion and underage sex. They also attempted to block an
endorsement of condom use to prevent AIDS. U.S. demands for changes or deletions
in the regional document were overwhelmingly rejected, [ 25 ]
representing an embarrassing defeat for the Bush administration.
actions of this administration include the following:
2002, U.S. delegates to a U.N. Special Session on Children tried to block a proposal promoting children's rights because it promised "reproductive
health services," and the delegates even opposed special U.N. efforts to help
young girls who are war crime rape victims.
summer, the White House withdrew support for the Senate ratification of a Women's Rights Treaty that would require countries to end discrimination
against women's access to legal rights and health care.
November, the U.S. held back a $3-million grant to punish the World Health
Organization's reproductive health program for conducting scientific research
into the „morning after" pill. [ 26 ]
January 12, 2003, The New York Times
declared, „President Bush's assault on reproductive rights is part of a larger ongoing cultural battle. If abortion were the only target, the
administration would not be attempting to block women's access to
contraceptives, which drive down the number of abortions. His administration
would not be declaring war on any sex education that discusses ways, beyond
abstinence, to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.
Scientifically accurate information about contraceptives and abortion would not
have begun disappearing from federal government Web sites."
deliberate efforts to subvert attempts to reduce world population must cease if
our country is to make any progress in fighting terrorism. When more than
150,000 children are born each day around the world with no reasonable hope of
good education, jobs or health care, [ 27 ] this contributes to
terrorism. When surplus young adult
males (what some call „rogue males") predominate now in seven Asian
Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Nepal, China and Taiwan-the
resulting instability can lead to „rogue" governments that harbor and aid
terrorists. [ 28 ]
plays a prominent role in the conflict in the Middle East, where nearly half of
all males in the Palestine Territory are aged 15 to 29-the
group most likely to engage in violence. [ 29 ]
There are simply too many young men seeking jobs, mates, and recognition
who find instead squalor, alienation, and hopelessness. Overpopulation creates
conditions of unrest and instability in places already overburdened by poverty,
disease, and natural resource depletion. Support for terrorism is rooted in
Bush administration is ignoring the truth. The National Intelligence Council
(NIC) report „Global Trends 2015" tells us the world will be rife with
conflict and increased terrorism unless rapid population growth can be curbed.
As the demand for limited-in
some cases, nonexistent-resources
increases, hostilities will erupt. The NIC report cites future water shortages
as flashpoints for conflict. It also predicts the potential for famine in some
parts of the world. It is no wonder that there will be global unrest when such
suffering affects so many people. [ 30 ]
births in other countries lead to high immigration here at home. Not only has
this created economic problems for states with tight budgets, but high traffic
across our borders increases the difficulty of preventing terrorists from
entering and committing terrorist acts on our own soil.
is encouraging that some presidential candidates are beginning to address the
connection between overpopulation and terrorist attacks.
They must, however, understand that our government is now controlled by
anti-family-planning forces, and until that hold is broken, no progress can be
made. They must then make the voters realize that the very safety of our country
may depend on a change in American policy.
must take back our government from dogmatic beliefs that refuse to recognize
reality, preferring to believe that „God will provide." We must elect a president who regards the „good of the world" and the national security of
our country as being more important than promoting the ideology of his or her
D. Rockefeller III, who was involved in President Nixon's plan, wrote: „Men
of influence must be shown that the true objective of population stabilization
is the enrichment of human life, not its restriction.… To my mind, population
stabilization is not a brake upon human development, but rather a release that,
by assuring greater opportunity to each person, frees man to attain his
individual dignity and to reach his full potential." [ 31 ]
Originally published in the American Rationalist © 2003
[ 21 ] Letter by Randy Ralph Shafer, published in the Colorado Springs Independent March 18-24, 1998 [ 22 ] "James Dobson Outlines Conservative Christian Community's Legislative Priorities to House and Senate Republican Leadership," 03/05/98 09:EST, www.prnewswire.com [ 23 ] Pop!ulation Press, newsletter of the Population Coalition, Nov/Dec 2002: p. 3. [ 24 ] "Islamic Block, Christian Right, Team Up To Lobby U.N.," www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61275-2002Jun16.html [ 25 ] Vijay Joshi, AP, December 18, 2002, rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/ap/ap_on_re_as/inlinks/ ; www.unescap.org [ 26 ] Letter from Pathfinder International, March 2003 [ 27 ] Pop!ulation Press, newsletter of the Population Coalition, Sep/Oct 2001: p. 2. [ 28 ] Pop!ulation Press, newsletter of the Population Coalition, Nov/Dec 2002: p. 4. [ 29 ] Letter from Population Coalition, December 2002 [ 30 ] Letter from The Population Institute, Spring 2003 [ 31 ] John D. Rockefeller III. Quoted from his prologue to "Family-Planning Programs: An International Survey," edited by Bernard Berelson (New York: Basic, 1968).
« Społeczeństwo (Publikacja: 16-05-2003 Ostatnia zmiana: 21-09-2003)
Wszelkie prawa zastrzeżone. Prawa autorskie tego tekstu należą do autora i/lub serwisu Racjonalista.pl.
Żadna część tego tekstu nie może być przedrukowywana, reprodukowana ani wykorzystywana w jakiejkolwiek formie,
bez zgody właściciela praw autorskich. Wszelkie naruszenia praw autorskich podlegają sankcjom przewidzianym w
kodeksie karnym i ustawie o prawie autorskim i prawach pokrewnych.