In a remarkable case of double-speak, United Nations officials announced they want to include a “right to abortion” as part of the internationally recognized “right to life.”
The original idea was that protecting the life of the mother – through killing an unborn child – should be included in the “right to life.”
The U.N. sought to require governments to provide access to abortion.
But that plan is raising alarms at the U.N.’s Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which contends that abortion of children because of a disability violates the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.”
The European Center for Law and Justice, which has been monitoring the issue, reported the committee further explained that this type of abortion is often based on inaccurate diagnosis and that “even if it is not false, the assessment perpetuates notions of stereotyping disability as incompatible with a good life.”
“In this declaration, the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities directly opposes the Human Rights Committee, which has undertaken the reinterpretation of the ‘right to life’ as implying a right to abortion ‘most notably … when the foetus suffers from fatal impairment,’ The Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities asks for the removal of this assessment,” ECLJ said.
The organization continued: “In 1947 already, the writers of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights had to oppose the attempt aiming at allowing the ‘prevention of the birth of children mentally handicapped’ and children ‘born from parents suffering from mental illness.’ The similarity of these propositions with the Nazi ideology was then denounced.”
The U.N. committee also opposed a so-called “right to euthanasia,” which “perpetuates stereotypes about severely impaired people suffering and being better off dead,” ECLJ said.
WND reported last week the Human Rights Committee’s proposed revision regarding the right to life in Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights says, “States must provide safe access to abortion.”
ECLJ said it is “absurd and unacceptable to draw from the right to life a ‘right to kill an innocent human being’ or a ‘right to be killed.'”
The original Article 6 states: “Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.”
But the revision, the ECLJ explained, denies “any protection to human life before birth and urges the 168 state parties to the covenant to legalize abortion on demand. The text gives no real condition or time limit to the ‘right’ to access to abortion which should be available as soon as carrying the pregnancy ‘would cause the woman substantial pain or suffering,’ whether ‘physical or mental.'”