Simply giving money to various “good” causes is not itself always necessarily virtuous. In fact, it may be downright harmful and evil. A lot depends on where your money is going and what it is being used for. I have written about this before. For example just recently I wrote about the baby-killing connections with many aid organisations – even Christian ones:
And I have written before about how foreign aid between nations is also often ineffective and/or used for morally dubious if not morally unjustified causes: billmuehlenberg.com/2009/10/17/rethinking-foreign-aid/
We have more cases of both activities again in the news. On the home front we have the recent announcement by our government that Australian aid money (that is, Australian taxpayers’ money) will be going into more baby killing overseas.
Here is how one news report covers the story: “Australia will double aid funding targeted at reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies in the Asia-Pacific region. Australia’s contribution will increase from $26 million a year to $50 million by 2016 for developing countries in the region.
“The funds will provide contraception, reproductive health services and family planning information. ‘All women have a right to basic reproductive health care and family planning advice,’ Foreign Minister Bob Carr said in a statement on Thursday.
“‘Good family planning reduces maternal and child deaths, and is fundamental to improving economic outcomes for women and girls. That’s why Australia is making this new commitment to funding family planning in our region, and why we’ll be pushing others in the global community to follow suit.’ Australia also will commit to a global effort to raise up to $2 billion for family planning services.”
Radical social engineering programs always depend upon radical engineering of language to make them more palatable. Euphemisms, half-truths, and deception are used big time to try to sell rather ugly agendas. And we have that here big time.
This is all about baby killing pure and simple. Whenever you hear the weasel words “unwanted pregnancies,” “contraception,” “reproductive health services” and “family planning” you know what we really have is the coercive utopians from the West working overtime to decimate the populations of poor overseas nations.
And then Carr has the gall to say something incredible like this: “Good family planning reduces maternal and child deaths, and is fundamental to improving economic outcomes for women and girls.” How does killing unborn babies reduce child deaths Bob? How are people’s outcomes improved when they are killed?
We have not only governments involved in this sordid business, but individuals and organisations as well. Consider all the mischief one very wealthy individual is getting up to lately. Melinda Gates and her Gates Foundation, along with groups like Save the Children, are all up to their ears in using aid money as killing money.
One report begins this way: “Recently, Save the Children announced that family planning ‘saves lives’ of both women and babies. It has called for aid money to be spent on contraception, claiming that it is a good investment, cheaper than saving children from death by disease or starvation after they are born….
“In promoting contraception, Save the Children is echoing agencies that promote abortion and population control for poorer countries. The popular face of this campaign is a call to address the alleged ‘unmet need for contraception’ among the world’s poorest women. Although Save the Children says this would cost only one pound per woman per year, the UK government, the EU, the US, the Gates Foundation and others are proposing to give many billions of pounds more to stop around 0.2 billion poor women bearing children.”
Austin Ruse, the president of C-FAM, a pro-life group that works to press the pro-life cause at the United Nations, spoke about a Family Planning Summit in London hosted by Gates with two of the biggest pro-abortion groups in the world, the UN Population Fund and International Planned Parenthood Federation:
“They say they want to raise $4 billion to promote contraception among poor women. This is population control plain and simple, population control aimed at poor dark-skinned women. We have tried to get pro-lifers registered for this summit so there can be a counter voice but we are getting shut out by Planned Parenthood.”
Lisa Correnti of C-FAM made these comments: “The UK Family Planning summit has concluded and the total financial commitment by attending countries and foundations amounts to $4.6 billion, which exceeds the $4 billion goal. The Gates Foundation was clear from the onset that it expected solid commitments from countries that attended. Now as one of the presenters said from a prominent foundation ‘we need to create the need through education.’
“Apparently much of the unmet need is from women who don’t know they have an unmet need. Leave it to affluent western nations, billionaires foundations and pharmaceutical companies to do this. In the afternoon session of the UK Family Planning Summit Melinda Gates pledged to increase support for family planning by $560 million through 2020. This addition to current funding will bring the total to $1 billion over the next 7 years. Imagine if this funding was directed to providing clinics in the poorest regions of the world rather than for implants, injectibles, and sterilizations. What a shame.”
Denise Hunnell, MD, offers more details about just what is going on here: “Empowering women, reducing poverty and improving the overall health and well-being of women and children are noble goals. As with all great visions, however, the devil is in the details. Melinda Gates claims that the key to reducing poverty is to flood the developing world with contraceptives and abortifacients.
“A cornerstone of this effort is the development of a new injectable contraceptive that would be analogous to the currently available medroxyprogesterone acetate also known as DMPA, or by its brand name Depo-Provera. Unlike Depo Provera, which requires an intramuscular injection and must be administered by a medical professional, this new form is a self-administered subcutaneous injection. Ms. Gates hopes that her efforts will bring contraception to at least an additional 120 million women worldwide, with the primary focus being in sub-Saharan African and South Asia.
“But what exactly is Ms. Gates offering these women? Her ‘solution’ will result in the death of countless newly conceived children, it may double the transmission rates of HIV and it will certainly increase the risks for breast cancer. In addition, progestin-only contraceptives are associated with a significant risk for blood clots and strokes.
“There are two mechanisms of action for injectable contraceptives like Depo Provera to prevent pregnancy. The first is to prevent ovulation so that conception does not occur. However, if this mechanism is unsuccessful and conception does occur, Depo Provera keeps the lining of the uterus so thin that implantation will not occur. The result is that the newly conceived life is aborted.”
Her concluding words are especially worth noting: “This effort is just another iteration of the Malthusian principles that have been around since the nineteenth century. Concerns about overpopulation lead to efforts to limit the fertility of those deemed ‘undesirable.’ Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger pushed contraception on African-American communities to limit their growth. Likewise, the Gates Foundation sees contraception as way to limit the population of the impoverished people of Africa and Asia.
“Improving the health and well-being of women does not depend on increased availability and use of contraception. No professional medical association recommends the routine use of hormonal contraceptives in healthy women as a means of preventing disease or maintaining good health because of the significant risks associated with their use. On the other hand, women are empowered when they are educated. A longitudinal review of women in Chile over a fifty-year period found that the most critical factor in improving maternal health and in reducing both maternal and infant mortality was better education, not contraceptives.
“The answer to poverty must be grounded in respecting the dignity of impoverished peoples – not in eliminating them. Both men and women need to be educated in order to contribute to the public discussion and formulation of social policy, and this should include education in the harmful effects of the drugs Ms. Gates is proposing be used to lower fertility in the developing world. Motherhood should be considered a valuable vocation and not a drain on society. Only then can the real roots of poverty be addressed.”
Yes quite so. The new population controllers are really just the old eugenicists. Their coercive utopian agendas, their secular humanist ideology, and their contempt for poor people in poor countries is resulting in an ongoing “Final Solution”. Sure, the message has been repackaged and spruced up, but the diabolical agenda remains the same.
As Columbia University historian Matthew Connelly wrote in his important 2008 volume, Fatal Misconceptions: “The great tragedy of population control, the fatal misconception, was to think that one could know other people’s interests better than they knew it themselves. . . . The essence of population control, whether it targeted migrants, the ‘unfit,’ or families that seemed either too big or too small, was to make rules for other people without having to answer to them. It appealed to the rich and the powerful…”