The United Nations has sided with the pro-choice movement, declaring abortion as a “human right” for women.
Last year, the U.N. Human Rights Committee adopted General Comment No. 36, a document expounding on article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Humandefense.com reports: Article 6 posits that every human being “has the inherent right to life” and that this right “shall be protected by law.”
BYPASS THE CENSORS
Sign up to get unfiltered news delivered straight to your inbox.
You can unsubscribe any time. By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use
At first, the Human Rights Committee’s newest document appears to affirm this unambiguous message:
“It is the supreme right from which no derogation is permitted… It is most precious for its own sake as a right that inheres in every human being, but it also constitutes a fundamental right whose effective protection is the prerequisite for the enjoyment of all other human rights and whose content can be informed by other human rights.”
However, when it comes to the matter of preborn life, the document makes clear that this “supreme right” is not one afforded to them:
“Although States parties may adopt measures designed to regulate voluntary terminations… restrictions on the ability of women or girls to seek abortion must not, inter alia, jeopardize their lives, subject them to physical or mental pain or suffering…”
The document goes on to explain governments “must provide safe, legal and effective access to abortion” in the case that the pregnancy would potentially cause the woman “pain or suffering.” In addition, no laws or barriers may be placed that may push women towards “unsafe” abortions, including those caused by the “exercise of conscientious objection by individual medical providers.”
The last point may prove quite problematic for doctors and institutions that find abortion unethical. Will they still be allowed to opt out of providing abortions due to moral or religious objections? Or will they be mandated by the state to breach their own ethics?
Beyond that, certain terminology used in the document is ambiguous. For instance, what constitutes “mental pain?” Does raising a child constitute mental pain? Does giving a baby up for adoption? And certainly, you would be hard pressed to find any mother who found the process of childbirth itself entirely devoid of “pain” and “suffering.” Given that, does this mean abortion is never actually restricted? In effect, does this mean any woman could claim exemption from abortion laws at any point?
At the end of the day, this all comes down to one question: does every human being have an inherent right to life or not? If this question can be answered clearly, then everything else should fall into line. The U.N. needs to come forward with whether or not they still stand by the words articulated in the original International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Because, at this moment, it appears they do not.
Sean Adl-Tabatabai
The UN is an evil Satanic organization, a waste of our tax dollars.
GET THE U.S. OUT OF THE U.N. AND THE U.N. OUT OF THE U.S.!
.
Democrats are the party of:
Infanticide & Selling Baby Body Parts.
Redistributionism
Blackface
Totalitarianism
Cross burning
Klan robes
Socialism
Communism dressed up as environmentalism
Lying about Native American Heritage
Hate Hoaxes
Rushing to judgement about obvious hate hoaxes
Race-baiting
Gender-baiting
Tax Fraud.
End Game Full Goverment Controled Communism
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d2d9e976b3b2e1157a213f52a8e6d10a42d2c720596be3b6aa32884fecc40b57.jpg
Yeah, this looks just like someone’s “rights”.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/0325b57746dfd32d22fcf1b1a37d036b3d5ca450d7556efa21f8f201eab14f24.jpg
GET THE U.S. OUT OF THE U.N. AND THE U.N. OUT OF THE U.S.!!
.
They mean the Christian countries only, of course. They would never try to sully the purity of Muslims or destroy their culture and beliefs. That is strictly reserved for Christianity.