Posted on 06/21/2004 8:50:05 PM PDT by Polycarp IV
Nope.
1. When we've closed down the UN, and Bill Rancic develops the property for Donald Trump.
2. When you're defeated in your next election.
Sounds good to me.
Get the US outta the UN and the UN outta the US.
I'll be happy if Bush kicks the UN out of the US. Although I'm sure he won't.
People who say Bush isn't conservative enough (and I'm inclined that way myself) really need to read more. He does stand up for the right things - no fetal stem cell research, and he's always defunding abortion. If he gets re-elected (I fervently hope that he does) maybe - just maybe - he'll be a little more conservative. Cut more crap from spending, and so on.
It's good to have a President who is very unlike Clintoon. Very good.
Wrong. The earth does not need 9 billion people. We all would live just wonderfully (enough food, water, and other resources) with only 2 billion.
Malthus and baby eating aside, something needs to be done to stabilize global population growth.
If the Bush administration offer no alternative (and I am sorry abstinence does not cut it) then it's morally appropriate stance against these baby-killers is negated by the neglect of a serious problem that will cause the deaths of an equal if not greater number.
If a man dies in the desert on a 5 day journey because he was only given 1 days rations, it was not God's will. It was an execution.
I agree...we should take all of the liberals in the world and put them on one continent and not let them leave. Soon enough all of their good intentions will lead to their demise and they will no longer plague the general populace. Problem solved!
Amusing, but not helpful, Adolf.
How do you know how many people the earth needs?
Malthus and baby eating aside, something needs to be done to stabilize global population growth.
Why does something need to be done to "stabilize global population growth", and what do you propose?
If the Bush administration offer no alternative (and I am sorry abstinence does not cut it) then it's morally appropriate stance against these baby-killers is negated by the neglect of a serious problem that will cause the deaths of an equal if not greater number.
Abstinence before marriage is the appropriate moral stance. If you are concerned with morality and avoiding the causing of the deaths of people, I can tell you with certainty that it doesn't kill anyone.
If a man dies in the desert on a 5 day journey because he was only given 1 days rations, it was not God's will. It was an execution.
Who is giving a man rations? Why is he in the desert, and why, if he starves, is it an execution? What is the meaning and relevance of your analogy?
Cordially,
President Bush Withholds Funds From China's Forced Abortion Policy
| President Bush Withholds Funding From China's Forced Abortion Policy | |
| Send a thank you to President Bush | |
| Below is a statement from Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ) applauding President Bush's decision to withhold federal funds to the UNFPA because of the organization's involvement in China's forced abortion policy. This decision means that this organization will not receive the $34 million earmarked for its activities by Congress for the current fiscal year. FRIDAY, JULY 16, 2004 Contact: Nick Manetto (202) 225-3765 Smith Applauds Bush Decision to Withhold Funding from China's Forced Abortion Program WASHINGTON, D.C. - Congressman Chris Smith (R-Hamilton), Vice Chairman of the House Committee on International Relations and a leading human rights advocate in Congress, issued the following statement today on the Bush Administration's decision to withhold federal funds from UNFPA because of the organization's involvement with China's horrific forced abortion and sterilization policies: "The UNFPA continues to be guilty of shamelessly supporting and whitewashing terrible crimes against humanity, and the United States will have no part in subsidizing them. In refusing to fund the UNFPA, President Bush and our country have taken the side of the oppressed and have refused to cooperate with the oppressor. The United States will not fund the brutal and oppressive Chinese government's one-child-per-couple policy. "If UNFPA lobbied the Chinese government to stop forced abortion as aggressively as they lobby the United States to overturn human rights policy, there would be less suffering in China right now. The international community should be appalled that UNFPA spends more time and energy demonizing the U.S. for giving funding to other organizations than it does in criticizing the coercive Chinese population control program. It's important to note that every dime of this money will be given to humanitarian organizations that help women and children and do not violate human rights standards. "We again call on the UNFPA to immediately stop supporting, defending and whitewashing the coercive population control program in China. It is long past time for the UNFPA to sever its ties with China's one-child-per-couple family planning program that relies on forced abortion, involuntary sterilization and heavy economic penalties on women to achieve its results. "Other countries should also look at the evidence and hold the UNFPA and the Chinese population control program accountable at The Hague for crimes against humanity. The UNFPA has funded, provided crucial technical support and, most importantly, provided cover for massive crimes of forced abortion and involuntary sterilization. Tens of millions of children have been slaughtered - their mothers robbed of their children by the State. The UNFPA has aggressively defended this barbaric policy that makes brothers and sisters illegal, and makes women the pawns of the population control cadres. "It is disappointing that some in Congress would like to change the law to allow for the funding of coercive programs. Instead of seeking to weaken the law, they should help women who have been victimized and pressure the UNFPA to divest itself of programs that rely on coercion." |
|
The proposed UN budget for 2004-2005.
Total U.S. Contributions to the UN System,
Both Assessed and Voluntary -
Estimated at $3.0 Billion
Humanitarian/Human Rights - 39%
Environment - 2%
Development - 8%
Weapons of Mass Destruction - 3%
UN Regular Budget - 9%
UN Peacekeeping - 31%
Open Markets - 4%
Health - 4%
*Figures are based on FY 2002, excluding U.S. arrears payment.
Percentages reflect how U.S. dollars are divided within the UN system
(This does not include the Bush Global Fund AIDS $500 milliom giveaway)
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/rls/24236.htm
See Related LifeSite coverage on UNFPA:
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2002/jul/02072305.html
Other Related Coverage:
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2003/aug/03082702.html
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/apr/04042703.html
See the LifeSiteNews.com Extra Special report explaining the WHY of the fanatical push for abortion, explicit sex-ed, pornography, contraception, homosexuality and anything else that will harm family life and bring down the population of the world.
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/may/040518a.html
Bush withholds funds to China
$34 million for 'family planning' cancelled over forced abortions
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39503
Here's hoping and praying that they continue to be disgruntled for the next four years!!
If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.