CupidS Escorts
Toronto Escorts

How Trump signed a Global Death Warrant for WOMEN

MadonnaLove

Banned
Dec 1, 2012
1,976
11
0
GTA
Six months ago, one powerful white man in the White House, watched by seven more, signed a piece of paper that will prevent millions of women around the world from deciding what they can and can’t do with their own bodies.

In that moment, on his very first Monday morning in office, Donald Trump effectively signed the death warrants of thousands of women. He reversed global progress on contraception, family planning, unsustainable population growth and reproductive rights. His executive order even has implications for the battle against HIV, tuberculosis and malaria.

Rarely can the presidential pen have been flourished to such devastating effect. The policy it reintroduced will shut health clinics in Uganda and HIV programmes in Mozambique; it will compel women from Nepal to Namibia to seek out deadly back-street abortions.

“It is an unprecedented attack on women’s rights – it goes much deeper than abortion,” said Ulla Müller, president and CEO of EngenderHealth, a leading advocacy organisation.


“Girls are kicked out of school if they get pregnant. They are very often forced to marry the fathers. Very often they have to live in their in-laws’ house, where they have to do unpaid labour. It is a violation of women’s rights. We need to see this as a gender issue and very much as a power issue.”

Tewodros Melesse, director general of the the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), which stands to lose as much as $100m, said the US move “seeks to restrict the rights of millions of women. It asks us as a health provider, to stop providing services which are entirely legal in countries through our members – where some of the most poorest women, depend on them.

“The human cost of the gag rule will have a long and fatal legacy.”

Like so many far-reaching American policies, Trump’s executive order is enshrouded in complexity to the point where it seems almost designed to confuse.

The order reinstated the Mexico City policy (so called because it was first signed at the International Conference of Population in Mexico City, in 1984). Under this policy, any NGO outside the US seeking American funding for family planning has to pledge it will not carry out abortions anywhere in the world, even with its own money. Such organisations must agree not to talk to women about a termination, nor lobby governments to liberalise their policy on abortion.


What is the ‘global gag rule’, and why does Trump support it?
US aid has never been used to fund abortion services (it is forbidden, by law). This is a ban on speaking about abortion – a restriction on free speech which the First Amendment does not permit within the US. For this reason, the rule became known as the global gag.

Trump’s version of the policy has massively expanded its reach. It is no longer just international family planning organisations that must agree not to “perform or actively promote abortion”. Every global health organisation that accepts US funding now has to sign the same clause. Anyone working to fight HIV, get vaccines or vitamins to children, or prevent Zika or malaria is facing a stark and unprecedented choice: sign, or lose all funding from the biggest aid donor in the world.

I believe that President Trump doesn’t give a hoot about any of these issues
Jon O'Brien, president, Catholics for Choice
As much as $10bn (£7.7bn) of global health funding hangs in the balance. Among those who will lose money if they refuse to sign up to the anti-abortion orthodoxy are the two big international family planning organisations, Marie Stopes International (MSI) and the IPPF. But for the first time, global NGOs such as Save the Children, WaterAid and the International HIV/Aids Alliance are also targeted.

The effects will be felt most keenly in the tiny, frontline clinics run by small NGOs struggling to help women and children in crowded townships, refugee camps and remote rural villages. There are no abortion doctors in such places (in most African countries, abortion is banned unless the woman’s life is in danger). These clinics instead offer contraceptive injections and condoms for those who would struggle to feed numerous children. But they also treat children for malaria and malnutrition and their mothers for HIV. This integrated care is now under threat.

But that’s not all. Trump has also decided to stop funding the UN Population Fund, which does hard and heroic work, reaching some of the most oppressed women in the world in refugee camps and war zones, as well as getting contraception to the remotest parts of the planet. In 2016, the US gave the organisation $69m in core funds and for its humanitarian response work.

And deep budget cuts to foreign aid under Trump include a proposal to axe every cent for overseas family planning, currently $600m a year.

The triple blow is already being felt by some of the world’s poorest women.

Take Nigeria, a country with one of the world’s fastest growing populations. The average woman there has more than five children. MSI predicts that because of Trump’s “global gag rule”, there will be an additional 660,000 abortions in Nigeria over the next four years, with 10,000 women dying as a result.


“This is going to be really huge,” said MSI country head Effiom Effiom of the US decision to pull funding. “They’ve been key in strengthening healthcare. It’s their funding that allowed us to reach 500,000 women in the past three years. Who will bridge that gap?” he asks.

It’s a question that bothers Sakina Sani as well. She has two children already and knows she cannot afford many more. She is grateful to a family planning clinic in northern Nigeria for furnishing her with a contraceptive implant that will enable her to plan out her family for the next four years. But after that, she’ll be on her own.

Sakina Sani, a mother of two, receives a contraceptive implant
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
Sakina Sani, a mother of two, has a contraceptive implant – known informally among young Nigerians as a ‘tattoo’ – placed in her arm. Photograph: Ruth Maclean for the Guardian
“I’d have to have more children,” she admits. “All I could do is pray harder for God to help feed them.”

Across the continent, in Uganda, her experience is replicated by Dausi Mukwana, 26, who had the first of her four children at the age of 14. An injectable contraceptive called Sayana Press and a tireless healthworker called Aisha Mugoya have belatedly given her control over family planning. But this is now in jeopardy: funding will dry up in the coming weeks.

“The number of maternal deaths will increase as the number of pregnancies increases, and the number of abortions is going to increase,” said Dr Moses Okilipa of Reproductive Health Uganda, a branch of the IPPF, which refuses to sign up to the Mexico City policy.


Dausi Mukwana, 26, a rural Ugandan, receives a contraceptive called Sayana Press. Photograph: Juozas Cernius/for The Guardian
The glaring paradox is that the global gag policy doesn’t even work. “The gag rule contributes to the very thing it purportedly seeks to reduce: the frequency of abortion,” said a report in June from the Guttmacher Institute, a US research organisation focused on sexual and reproductive health and rights. Evidence shows that when the gag is imposed, unwanted pregnancies and abortions go up.


Banning abortions and forcing NGOs not to offer any counselling or advice about them drives desperate women to the back-street abortionists and witch doctors.


Hardline opponents of abortion don’t understand this; they don’t believe it or don’t care. At Trump’s right elbow when he signed the order was Mike Pence, a born again Christian. Trump is not religious, but some of his most influential advisers are – and the choice of Pence as his running mate brought on board the religious right. The new, improved global gag is their reward.

“I believe that President Trump doesn’t give a hoot about any of these issues one way or the other,” said Jon O’Brien, president of Catholics for Choice. He pointed out that Trump’s closest advisers include a significant number of ultraconservative Catholics. Kellyanne Conway has been a prominent anti-choice campaigner for decades, he said, claiming in interviews that “unborn babies can feel pain at 20 weeks” (a view that the evidence does not support). Steve Bannon, chief strategist and Sean Spicer, White House press secretary, are both conservative Catholics. Katy Talento, a health policy aide on the Domestic Policy Council, recently published an article alleging that “chemical birth control causes abortions and often has terrible side effects, including deliberate miscarriage”, a claim about the pill that is not supported by scientists.

And then there is Pence. At the Republican National Convention in Ohio last July, he called himself “a Christian, a conservative and a Republican, in that order”. Born into an Irish Catholic Democrat-voting family in Indiana, he found God at a Christian music festival in Kentucky in 1978. He was still a Democrat in 1980, when he voted for Jimmy Carter, but his views started to shift to the right at college and he became a big admirer of Ronald Reagan’s “common sense conservatism”. By 1988 he was running for Congress as a Republican. He lost but won a seat in the House of Representatives for Indiana in 2000.

In his 2000 Congressional campaign, he urged that the Ryan White Act, which provides funds for HIV treatment for the poor, should only be renewed if the money was “directed toward those institutions which provide assistance to those seeking to change their sexual behaviour”.



continues....
https://www.theguardian.com/global-...lation-reproductive-rights-mexico-city-policy
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,773
3
0
This may all be true, and it may be decidedly unpleasant, but what the article seemingly argues is that no U.S. Administration is allowed to discontinue this sort of funding. That it is not a gift on the part of the U.S.A. but rather somehow "damn it you owe it to us" is the new mantra.

Somehow I doubt that if a Labour Government reversed a policy of a previous Conservative Government, that the Guardian would argue that they didn't have the moral right do so.

One can also clearly hear the reporter/columnist's utter disbelief that anyone might actually have heartfelt opinions founded upon religious belief, whether or not one's own religious belief is in line with that of these political leaders.
 

SchlongConery

License to Shill
Jan 28, 2013
11,254
4,492
113
This may all be true, and it may be decidedly unpleasant, but what the article seemingly argues is that no U.S. Administration is allowed to discontinue this sort of funding. That it is not a gift on the part of the U.S.A. but rather somehow "damn it you owe it to us" is the new mantra.

You really amuse me with your ability to twist things to support Trump.

Nobody is saying "you owe us".

If you read the article (which I doubt as you are dismissing it out of hand with "this may all be true... BUT") it really shows that what the sole problem is that the United States is banning any discussion on any contraception, abortion etc by any of the agencies it funds as a condition of the funding. The abortion and contraception argument is largely religious based and to stifle open discussion and impose the religious beliefs of the current Administration's key people (very devout Catholics) , on what really is a world health and world governance issue is contrary to the spirit of the United States .

Never mind that by de-funding these programmes, the US is only creating more problems that they will then feel they have to solve.
 

MattRoxx

Call me anti-fascist
Nov 13, 2011
6,753
2
0
I get around.
The agencies should just trump the gag order. ie say they will follow the rules and then ignore them. "Abortion? No we were discussing adoption. NBD, nothing to see here."
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,773
3
0
You really amuse me with your ability to twist things to support Trump.
Why is staying that the United States Government has the right to impose conditions on money it gives "Supporting Trump?"


Nobody is saying "you owe us". . . the United States is banning any discussion on any contraception, abortion etc by any of the agencies it funds as a condition of the funding. The abortion and contraception argument is largely religious based and to stifle open discussion and impose the religious beliefs of the current Administration
Really this isn't saying how dare you do this, the money should be given without condition, it isn't really a gift it is an entitlement?

Whether it is wise is another question entirely, personally I do not believe it is, but if the article had hoped to make that argument effectively, the opening paragraph certainly defeats that by starting off "How Trump signed a Global Death Warrant for WOMEN. . .Six months ago, one powerful white man in the White House. . ." that is a polemic not a reasoned argument.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,773
3
0
The agencies should just trump the gag order. ie say they will follow the rules and then ignore them. "Abortion? No we were discussing adoption. NBD, nothing to see here."
Then the U.S. cuts off the money.

Just because I disagree with the policy, doesn't mean that the U.S. Government doesn't have the right to have it, as a matter of fact the U.S. has had the same rules a number of times in the past. If other countries want to make up the difference by funding what would be lost in U.S. support, obviously they are free to do so.

Is the Prime Minister planning to do so?
 

behemoth_dick

Banned
Jun 21, 2017
256
0
0
sending birth control to 3rd world shitholes clearly does not work; their populations are still exploding.

stop sending all birth control, all food and all money to 3rd world shitholes. when enough of their babies die in front of their eyes, only then will they stop having them.
 
Last edited:

Insidious Von

My head is my home
Sep 12, 2007
38,233
6,506
113
behemoth you are a clever one. With your enormous appendage you must be very popular with the ladies.

The GOP has also cut funding to Planned Parenthood by a substantial margin and, to a not insignificant degree, public school lunches. Trump also signed a religious freedom executive order, I wonder how that's playing out. And to make matters even more interesting he's also gotten very chummy with Saudi Arabia - where raped and pedophilia are not illegal activities.

Btw Cazzo Enorme, English is my second language....I'm all about making people happy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AASovUSdhlg
 

MattRoxx

Call me anti-fascist
Nov 13, 2011
6,753
2
0
I get around.
Then the U.S. cuts off the money.

Just because I disagree with the policy, doesn't mean that the U.S. Government doesn't have the right to have it, as a matter of fact the U.S. has had the same rules a number of times in the past. If other countries want to make up the difference by funding what would be lost in U.S. support, obviously they are free to do so.

Is the Prime Minister planning to do so?
As the leader of a compassionate progressive nation, the Prime Minister has already stepped up, thanks for asking.

Canada spending $650-million on reproductive rights, including fighting global anti-abortion laws

In a sharp reorientation of Canada’s foreign-aid strategy, the Trudeau government plans to spend $650-million on sexual and reproductive health and rights worldwide – a move that could see Canada paying for a battle against anti-abortion laws in dozens of countries.

The three-year plan, announced by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Wednesday as he marked International Women’s Day, would finance a range of global programs, including contraception, reproductive health, legal abortion, sexuality education and advocacy work.

Abortion is illegal or severely restricted by law in an estimated 125 countries worldwide, mostly in Africa, Latin America, South Asia and the Middle East. But under the new plan, Canada could pay for advocacy groups to challenge those laws.

Denise Balkissoon: On this Women's Day, women should strike – for someone else

One of the activities that Canada will finance, according to a background document, is “removing judicial and legal barriers to the fulfilment of sexual and reproductive health and rights.”

A federal official confirmed that these barriers include the anti-abortion laws in many countries.

“Advocacy is included in our initiative, so yes, we will support local groups and international groups who advocate for women’s rights, including abortion,” International Development Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau told The Globe and Mail in an interview on Wednesday.

The campaign could be an uphill battle. In regions such as Africa, most governments are socially conservative and heavily influenced by Christian and Muslim groups that are strongly anti-abortion. Abortion is fully legal in only a small handful of countries, such as South Africa.

While helping to fight anti-abortion laws, the new federal strategy would also try to reduce the estimated 22 million unsafe abortions annually – a leading cause of death among women in the developing world, who often turn to dangerous backstreet providers because they have no access to legal abortion.

The new federal strategy would aim to “reduce the number of unsafe abortions, through education, contraception, family planning,” Ms. Bibeau said. “All of this strategy is to empower women and protect them. They put their lives at risk when they go to clandestine abortions.”


At a news conference, Mr. Trudeau was asked about the countries where abortion is illegal. He voiced his concern about the risk of death. “For far too many women and girls, unsafe abortions and lack of choices in reproductive health mean that they either are at risk and at risk of death, or else simply cannot contribute and cannot achieve their potential,” he told reporters.

The Liberal government’s plan to finance contraception and abortion programs internationally is in sharp contrast to the policy of the previous Conservative government.
While the Conservatives created a multibillion-dollar foreign-aid program for maternal and child health, less than 2 per cent of its budget was allocated for contraception services and it refused to pay for any abortion-related services.

Some rights activists praised the new federal strategy. “Investing in sexual and reproductive health and rights is an investment in human rights that has the potential to prevent tens of thousands of deaths each year and millions of unwanted pregnancies,” said a statement by Sandeep Prasad, executive director of Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights.

Oxfam Canada welcomed the federal announcement, saying it comes “at a critical moment” when the world is seeing “the clawing back of hard-won women’s rights in many countries.”

A spokesman for Ms. Bibeau said the $650-million will be financed from “unallocated funds” in the government’s existing budget for foreign aid. He said it won’t reduce the $3.5-billion allocated for maternal and child health by the previous Conservative government, which has three years remaining in its five-year budget.
 

Insidious Von

My head is my home
Sep 12, 2007
38,233
6,506
113
I should mention that Pope Benedict XVI got taken in by hubris. He influenced the 2006 Italian General Election that returned Silvio Berlusconi to power. Then he lobbied to have Italy's abortion laws overturned. He was very aggresive in this regard - then the rampant pedophilia within the Catholic Church and the runaway corruption of The Vatican Bank blew up in his face.

https://www.ft.com/content/289e5d34-c0fa-11e5-846f-79b0e3d20eaf
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,773
3
0
As the leader of a compassionate progressive nation, the Prime Minister has already stepped up, thanks for asking.
Canada is now giving an extra 3.6 Billion dollars (Canadian)? That does seem one heck of shortfall from the 650 Million Canadian you mention.
 

toguy5252

Well-known member
Jun 22, 2009
15,971
6,110
113
This is just another example of Trump pandering to his new base since he decided he was a Republican. Hew was always pro-choice until he decided which party it would be easier to hijack.
 
Toronto Escorts