Posted on 09/10/2001 2:14:59 AM PDT by kattracks
The United Nations has another problem now, smaller but more interesting than the disaster in Durban, South Africa. The UN is wondering whether it should tinker with some abortion language to keep President Bush from boycotting next week's conference here on children's rights.
A roomful of diplomats stayed up half the night Thursday scratching their heads about whether to fudge or clarify the code phrase "reproductive health services" in the final declaration of the meeting. They did neither, though the Bush administration wants the phrase out.
Critics say Bush is wrong to inject abortion politics into the meeting by complaining about "reproductive health services."
At the UN, controversial proposals are often cloaked in innocuous language. Other code words covering abortion include "sexual rights" and "forced child-bearing."
The UN language on "children's rights" seems harmless, but in reality it undermines parental authority. It may be an international offense to spank and, perhaps, even to criticize one's children, since "physical or mental violence" is forbidden.
"Gender mainstreaming" is the code phrase meaning that there are no important sexual differences between males and females.
The Beijing conference on women called for "gender balance," which Christina Stolba of the Independent Women's Forum translated into normal English as "international quotas."
The more terms like "reproductive health services" or "gender mainstreaming" appear in international documents, the greater the likelihood evolving international law will take them for granted.
A great many activists get the point of this tactic. But nobody is supposed to discuss it. One of the abortion lobbies, however, actually put it into the text of a suit filed against George W. Bush, et al., over a Mexico City ruling. The Center for Reproductive Law and Policy wrote this: " ... to prepare for the eventuality that Roe [vs. Wade] may be overruled by the United States Supreme Court ... [the center] has worked and will continue to work to guarantee that the right to abortion be protected as an internationally recognized human right by treaties ratified by the United States, international conference documents endorsed by the United States Senate and customary international law."
The key phrase is "customary international law." It shows that the lobby does not feel bound by U.S. law or democratic procedures. It is working on an end run around democracy to get what it wants.
Activists, including those in nongovernmental organizations accredited to the UN, now heavily stress "international human rights standards," a way of putting national governments on notice that they will be judged by mostly unelected actors on the world stage.
Most Americans pay little attention to the UN and assume that nothing serious ever happens there. Alas, they are wrong.
E-mail: johnleo@usnews.com
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.