If big tech continues censoring conservatives, that means our days on these platforms may be numbered. Please take a minute to sign up to our mailing list so we can stay in touch with you, our community. Subscribe Now!
During the course of the coronavirus pandemic, the underlying intents of the global abortion industry have been made clear. While many businesses and industries have been shut down around the world after being classified as "non-essential" by officials, abortion facilities remain open, and many international abortion organizations continue their operations.
Several US states have chosen to classify abortion facilities as "non-essential," while dozens more have allowed those facilities to continue their services. While some facilities have complied with shut down orders, others have chosen to take their states to court over their "wrongful" classification as "non-essential."
While many countries have been frantically looking for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), Canada, the United States, and many European countries have decided to allow abortion facilities—which use vital PPE—to remain open. This comes despite the fact that most elective surgeries have been forbidden, precisely due to risk of coronavirus infection and a desire to not use PPE resources.
In order to keep abortion facilities operating, governments with vested interests in keeping the abortion lobby happy have classified abortion as "essential." Michigan’s Governor Gretchen Whitmer went so far as to deem abortion a "life sustaining" service.
On the international front, the fights for and against life have taken on dramatic measures. Poland, for example, has proposed a revised bill to ban abortions of non-viable fetuses, while in Ireland and Britain, women seeking an abortion no longer have to see a doctor (which is essential to determine the gestation of the baby to ensure a "safe" abortion.) They can now have a consultation over the phone before having misoprostol and mifepristone mailed to them.
In 16 European countries that have mandatory wait times, and 13 others including Belgium, Netherlands and Italy that have mandatory counselling services, groups such as the Centre for Reproductive Rights are calling for the removal of these fail-safes.
The Centre’s European director stated, "European governments must act urgently to guarantee safe and timely access to abortion care during the COVID-19 pandemic," she continued, "they (the government) should move swiftly to eradicate all medically unnecessary requirements that hamper access to abortion care and should authorize women to access early medical abortion from their homes."
A new way pro-abortion organizations such as International Planned Parenthood, Marie Stopes International, UNFPA, UNICEF and the World Health Organization have been pushing the abortion agenda is in presenting governments with softly-worded recommendations that prioritize and promote self abortion, or what they refer to as, "self-care."
In June 2019, the World Health Organization published consolidated guidelines on what they call "self-care interventions for sexual and reproductive health" stating, "Self-care interventions are among the most promising and exciting new approaches to improve health and well-being, both from a health systems perspective and for people who use these interventions."
It also defines "self-care" as "the ability of individuals, families and communities to promote health, prevent disease, maintain health, and cope with illness and disability with or without the support of a health-care provider."
If we use this "self-care" terminology as intended by pro-abortion organizations like the WHO, what they actually define as "most promising and exciting" are do-it-yourself (self guided) and chemical abortions, both occurring without the consultation of a physician. It would be up to the pregnant woman to determine her baby's gestational age (a major factor in determining if a chemical abortion is "safe.")
It would also be left up to the woman to determine if she had any complications post-abortion and required medical assistance, if any complications arose.
Many advocacy groups, like the Centre for Reproductive Rights, are trying their darnedest to remain relevant among the coronavirus crisis by calling for women to have unprecedented access to chemical abortions, or pharmaceutical abortions. Many pass taking abortion pills off as a safe and private means of getting rid of an inconvenient, problematic, stumbling block, all codes for what pro-abortion individuals label an innocent, unborn child.
Not only is a child starved to death in the womb during a chemical abortion, but the entirety of a woman's physiology is affected during an abortion in the "safety and privacy" of her home. Women deserve better than the false empowerment that is touted as women's rights, female empowerment, or liberation. Women deserve to know the facts about what happens to both themselves and their child.
While surgical abortions in the US are at an all time low, chemical abortions are increasing. The promotion of DIY, at home abortions, should sound the alarms for both pro-life and pro-abortion advocates. These are the new "back alley abortions," and while they are less stigmatized, they are a danger.
Legal abortion was meant to alleviate the severe risks of "back alley abortions," but those very real dangers are the substance of DIY abortions. Not only are women left with the burden of ending their child’s life on their own but they’re also left with the ramifications of self abortion. These include retained fetal parts, the possible need for emergency surgery, severe bleeding, infection and sometimes, even death. Does heaping the burden onto women of ending their child's life in the safety and privacy of their own homes still sound like empowerment?
Hillary Margolis, a researcher at Human Rights Watch stated, "we're extremely concerned that women’s and girls’ reproductive rights are being undermined and not being upheld during the pandemic." What kind of women's rights advocate would want to see women and girls go through the horrors of an at-home abortion?
The one common message that I hear from post-abortive women is that the regret is heavy. Many say that they thought they were going to die during the procedure, whether surgical or self administered, and that their mental, and often physical health, was greatly affected.
The United Nations and her corresponding agencies have also staked a claim to a pro-DIY-abortion stance. The UN’s $2.01 billion Coronavirus Relief Fund poses a significant threat to governments who have shown a consistent effort to protect human life. Roughly $450 million was allocated to the World Health Organization, $120 million to the UN Population Fund (UNFPA,) with the remaining funds distributed to various UN agencies.
UNFPA is the "responsible entity" for actions taken relating to pregnancy, maternal health services, emergency obstetric care, as well as ensuring access to "sexual and reproductive health services." This is UN speak to disguise abortion. According to UNFPA, "women's and girls' sexual and reproductive health choices and rights must be respected regardless of... COVID-19. This including access to contraception, emergency contraception, safe abortion where legal and to the full extent of the law, and post-abortion care."
But this isn’t just about abortion, this is also a matter of national sovereignty. Multiple sources directly show the ways UNFPA circumvents laws surrounding abortion by linking arms with abortion providers in countries that ban or restrict it. There isn't a plan or strategic outline of how these "partnerships" will be carried out but within a statement made by the UN it clearly states that "most of the funding to UN agencies will be implemented through NGO partnerships."
UNFPA has a long track record of working alongside International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and Marie Stopes International (MSI), which has been banned from countries for performing illegal abortions. These partnerships leads to us believe UN funds will be appropriated for abortions in countries where it is illegal.
Countries where pro-life and pro-family values hold a dominant place within culture and influence policies and to enforce safeguards for women and those children in their wombs are particularly vulnerable to UN dictates that determine aid. When there are high levels of conflict and poverty, governments often accept funding presented to them as relief. Some of these countries include Ethiopia, Central African Republic, Sudan, Rwanda, Venezuela, Yemen, Syria and Afghanistan, among many others. The women in these countries, who are opposed to abortion, are not listened to.
The UN continually pushes a ruthless neo-colonialistic, cultural-imperialism that undermines the legitimacy of humanitarian assistance. Governments must take a stand and be ready to reject the UN’s coercive pressures and remain firm in their sovereign prerogative to protect life. The UN is more interested in undermining culture than preserving it.
The move towards DIY abortions and full abortion access by pro-abortion activists is pure negligence, and it reveals that the abortion industry is willing to do anything it can to reach women with the deadly lies of abortion, no matter how many born or pre-born lives are at risk or the national and international legal hoops they try to jump through. Funding and false claims of empowerment are what keep the abortion industry thriving, not altruism or a real interest in care.