Mrs. Don-O...either you are a Papal misinformation agent or you just blatantly lie.
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld
“Sustainability” is the key word and can be found over 100 times in this document that he’s pushing at the UN in the next few days. What does that word mean when it comes to humanity multiplying?
Jesus Christ, who is none other than God, declared for us to (Genesis 1:28) “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”
I’ve know far too many Catholics who consider themselves more “Catholic” than actually Christians. He’s Marxist, he’s a NWO stooge, he’s a universalist, and more importantly, he blatantly goes against Biblical teachings time and again in his ridiculous statements that he makes, yet because he’s your “Vicar of Christ” (which is Blasphemous to the extreme), you defend him. He wants “Global Citizenship” for all. Does that not even raise a red flag with you?
Most conservative Catholics are turned off by that phrase.
He’s pushing this:
http://www.un.org/disarmament/
And this:
http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/salw/
I suppose if I lived 500 years ago, I’d be burned at the stake eh?
You responded by calling me a propagandist or a liar. This is really unacceptable.
You followed this up by your own proffered evidence, all of which was from the U.N. and its related SDG agencies, and none of which dealt with Pope Francis' position on these SDG policies. Therefore, it did not actually refute my points or justify your original statement that Pope Francis is all for de-population.
The fact is, that the Vatican has been strategically, and with some success, opposing the inclusion of population-control and sexual perversion in the SDG and related U.N. programs.
As you know, such terms as "reproductive health" and "sexual rights", are used in UN and globalist documents as euphemisms for contraception, sterilization, abortion, sodomy and other perversions. The fact is, since the very beginning of Francis' pontificate--- and in fact, since years before that, stretching across the regnal years of the two previous popes --- the Holy See has been faithfully blocking "reproductive health" and "sexual rights" from inclusion in the SDG documents. Together with many mainly African countries, sometime (under Bush) with the U.S. delegation and sometimes (under Obama) against it, and cooperating with NGO's such as C-Fam, the Vatican has provided the main push-back to the whole program of de-population of which you speak.
Just a couple of days ago, C-Fam noted that the results have been teeter-tottering back and forth: for instance, the Vatican + African + C-Fam coalition stopped the inclusion of LGBT Agenda language, but the Western elites retaliated by blocking any mention of the family --- a big set-back for the Vatican and the pro-family delegations.
This has been a two-decades’-long, hard-fought, very close-run thing. Sometimes the Western elites win --- as when they excluded any mention of the family --- and sometimes the Vatican-prolife delegations win, as when population control and LGBT perversions were excluded from the SDG’s mandates.
One could argue that the Vatican should wash its hands of the UN and the SDG and abandon the whole process. Let the population-bombers and the buggers take it over, and let them go to the devil. I think a case can be made for that.
One could argue that if Pope Francis is on the level, he should not be associating with Ban Ki-moon and Jeffrey Sachs in the promotion of his encyclical. I would agree heartily with that.
One could even argue that if Pope Francis thinks he can simultaneously hit the accelerator (by supporting SDG) and stomp on the brakes (by opposing population-control, which many say is a core component of SDG) , he’s a strategic noncompoop because the Western elites will get what they want anyway, chew up his feckless conscientious objections and spit out the splintered bones.
And --- prescinding from questions of population control --- one can argue against the SDG on its own terms. It's not all Plumpy-Nuts for the kids in Malawi, after all!
Those would be good positions debate about.
“Pope Francis is all for de-population” is not a good position. It is particularly egregious because under Pope Francis’ watch, the Vatican has been actively organizing against the de-population agenda and in favor the pro-life, pro-family agenda.
It’s no use biting the Holy See, the one indispensable ally the pro-life and pro-family movement has got in these perilous international circles; an ally which is still able to speak and operate freely.
Do you get Austin Ruse's C-Fam communications? I rely heavily on him and Stefano Gennarini for the insiders' view.