View Larger Map
(Social Justice South Africa)
Article by Marc Aupiais
Article summary: article looks into media across the left/right divide and secular/religious divide to explain why funding to UNICEF promotes a leftest agenda which includes promotion of sexual freedom among teens, contraception, abortion, sterilization, and other political agendas which divert from helping children including alleged funding of terrorist propaganda in Palestine.
A reader wrote to our service, to paraphrase:
your article on Selena Gomez was harsh, she's put so much into her fashion line, and wants to do what hundreds of girls fail to do, she wants to succeed in a tough business, and is UNICEF, which sales will help fund really that bad?
This is our service's response.
"Several years ago the Vatican withdrew its support for UNICEF and later Renato Cardinal Martino, then Vatican representative at the UN, asked Catholics to cease donating to the organization."
LifeSiteNews (Catholic; Independent; Canadian; used by the Vatican recently to gain accurate information on Catholic organizations funding abortion)05 / 06 | June / 2009
While the speech of Renato to the United Nations is hard to find on the only recently existent Vatican website, it does note something similar as well as elaborating on our first issue: promotion of contraceptive and "birth control":
"Among other organizations, we may also mention UNICEF and UNHCR as particularly significant. The former has for some time launched contraceptive and sex education programmes; as is known, the Holy See has suspended its symbolic contribution to UNICEF in the light of the latter’s refusal to guarantee that this contribution would not be used for programmes contrary to Catholic principles.
The international bodies most affected are, in the UN system, UNICEF, UNFPA, WHO, UNDP and the UN Economic Commissions ECA, ECLAC and ESCAP. In particular, UNFPA, together with the [abortion promoting alliance] IPPF (International Planned Parenthood Federation), has programmes in 157 countries lobbying to change laws and to implement programmes of birth control, with reserves of 335 million US dollars."Vatican11 / 02 | February / 2000
American Life League is more direct:
"Until the mid 1960's UNICEF fulfilled its mission and performed a great service to many of the neediest children in the world. However, as the world and the UN began to change, more unscrupulous programs replaced these worthy works and the original mission was lost to population control euphemisms and "reproductive health issues". A recent series of articles in the British medical journal, The Lancet, on the growing number of preventable childhood deaths worldwide provide a clear indication that UNICEF needs to redirect its "emphasis [on] its traditional mission of child survival". (1)
UNICEF promotes itself and raises funds at Halloween by having children carry its donation boxes door-to-door. It is also financed in large part by U.S. purchasers of UNICEF's Christmas Cards. While contributions may help to provide food, clothing, medicine or the like, chances are they may also go toward various forms of birth control, abortion and sterilization."Americal Life League (ALL) (American; Independent; Catholic)05 / 10 | October / 2005
The British Guardian paper, notes UNICEF's direct entry into promoting sexual education, and prevention of pregnancy:
"According to the United Nations agency Unicef, women born into poverty are twice as likely to stay that way if they have their children too soon. They are more likely to be unemployed, to suffer from depression and to become dependent on alcohol or drugs.
Unicef's explanation is pretty unequivocal. Sweden, for example, radically changed its sex education policies in 1975. "Recommendations of abstinence and sex only within marriage were dropped, contraceptive education was made explicit, and a nationwide network of youth clinics was established specifically to provide confidential contraceptive advice and free contraceptives ... Over the next two decades, Sweden saw its teenage birth rate fall by 80 per cent." Sexually transmitted diseases, in contrast to the rising rates in the UK and the US, declined by 40% in the 1990s.
"Studies of the Dutch experience," Unicef continues, "have concluded that the underlying reason for success has been the combination of a relatively inclusive society with more open attitudes towards sex and sex education, including contraception." Requests for contraceptives there "are not associated with shame or embarrassment", and "the media is willing to carry explicit messages" about them that are "designed for young people". This teeming cesspool has among the lowest abortion and teenage birth rates on earth.
America and the UK, by contrast, are "less inclusive societies" where "contraceptive advice and services may be formally available, but in a 'closed' atmosphere of embarrassment and secrecy". The UK has a higher teenage pregnancy rate not because there is more sex or abortion, but because of "lower rates of contraceptive use"."Guardian (UK/British; Independent; Secularist; liberal)11 / 05 | May / 2004
Unfortunately, the opposite trend was recently shown to be more accurate in a modern world: whereby research has found abstinence education both more effective in causing teens to use contraception, as well as successful in causing teen abstinence: Archive 24 / 02 | February / 2010- either way, UNICEF is promoting an accepting atmosphere to extra-marital sex among teens.
To then quote a more conservative group [note, the poor formatting is their's, not ours]:
"UNICEF also helps to fund organizations that promote abortions. One such organization is the Population Council, the group which holds the U.S. patent for the "abortion pill" RU-486. Another is a South African group called LoveLife, which actively encourages teenage girls to have abortions.
LoveLife provides a toll free number to Marie Stopes International abortion clinics, recommending abortion "... if you are happy to pay for the services. Remember, it is your right to get counseling [and] an abortion. If people are unhelpful, donÂ¡Â¯t get discouraged. Keep trying. You donÂ¡Â¯t need permission from anybody to have an abortion." LoveLife, which describes an abortion as a "gentle suction," encourages girls to "Talk to someoneÃ¾ua health worker, a counselor, or someone you can trust." Afterwards, LoveLife tells girls, "You will feel a sense of relief. Some people like to do a ritual to end the processÃ¾ulight a candle, plant a flower, write a poem or go for a long walk." No mention of post-abortion trauma here, one is merely "ending a process," not taking the life of the child.2"Population Research Institute (Catholic; Independent; American; pro-life; one of the organizations researching the ageing population problem)18 / 10 | October / 2010
The Liberal guardian, several years later again quoted UNICEF to promote contraception:
"A report by the United Nations agency Unicef notes that in the Netherlands, which has the world's lowest abortion rate, a sharp reduction in unwanted teenage pregnancies was caused by "the combination of a relatively inclusive society with more open attitudes towards sex and sex education, including contraception". By contrast, in the US and UK, which have the developed world's highest teenage pregnancy rates, "contraceptive advice and services may be formally available, but in a 'closed' atmosphere of embarrassment and secrecy"."Guardian (UK/British; Independent; Secularist; liberal)26 / 02 | February / 2008
A UN Lobby, C-FAM, notes that once again, UNICEF has then ignored the plight of children to a degree in their annual report for 2009:
"NEW YORK, NY, January 30, 2009 (C-FAM) - The UN children’s agency, UNICEF, launched its annual report this week claiming that, “Having a child remains one of the biggest health risks for women worldwide,” and dedicated the 168-page flagship publication to the issue of maternal mortality, virtually ignoring the agency’s mandate of child survival. The report recommends increased global financing of UN initiatives aimed at “family planning” and “reproductive health services” as the primary way to reduce maternal deaths, but also provides extensive evidence that there is no reliable data to substantiate its claims.
Entitled, “The State of the World’s Children 2009: Maternal and Newborn Health,” the study addresses the problem of 536,000 maternal and 4.7 million newborn annual deaths worldwide, focusing on Africa, Asia and Latin America. Yet, the report undercuts at length the validity of its own statistics, stating that a “high degree of uncertainty for maternal mortality ratios indicates that all data points should be interpreted cautiously,” and saying “The [UN’s] 2005 maternal mortality estimates are far from perfect,” merely reflecting “a strong commitment on the part of the international community to continually strive for greater accuracy and precision.” And while it argues that “more than 99 per cent” of maternal deaths “occurred in developing countries,” it goes on to call “commonplace” the absence of data to make such a claim.
In fact, the report admits that only 35 percent of the data used to create the 536,000 number in 2005 was based upon “complete/good” data. A full 35 percent of the 171 countries surveyed to create the number had “no data.” Another 20 percent of the total maternal mortality figure was from “estimates” and “uncertain/poor data.”
Another contradiction in the report is its discussion of abortion. According to the report, abortion complications are the smallest contributor to maternal death in every one of the three developing regions studied. By contrast, hemorrhaging is the cause of nearly 30 percent of maternal deaths in all three regions, followed by hypertension and sepsis. Undefined “other causes” account for nearly a third of deaths in Africa and one fifth of the deaths in Asia and Latin America.
Contradicting this evidence, the report calls for a “continuum of care” that promotes “reproductive health services,” a term used by some UN officials to include abortion. It then puts at the top of its eleven recommended interventions for reducing maternal deaths “promoting access to family planning services, based on individual country policies,” with skilled birth attendants and emergency obstetric care mentioned as lower priorities.
The report also claims that in 2005, heads of state created “a specific target on reproductive health: Millennium Goal 5, Target B,” which seeks to “Achieve, by 2015, universal access to reproductive health” and includes “contraceptive prevalence rate,” and “unmet need for family planning,” as indicators of attaining the target. The UN Population Fund, contradictorily, claims that such a target was created in 2008. In fact, the heads of state rejected the target in 2005, and have never voted on or adopted such a target."C-Fam (Catholic; Independent; American based: New York, located near the United Nations30 / 01 | January / 2009
Continuing a policy of pro-abortion efforts in the developing world, a representative UNICEF in June 2009 called any Catholic who opposes its efforts radical:
"PAHO and UNICEF both promote "reproductive health" that is an acknowledged euphemism at the United Nations for the promotion of abortion, abortifacient drugs, artificial contraception and sterilization. UN groups, while stating that their reproductive health policies are in conformity with local laws, also engage in heavy pressure tactics, particularly through committees such as that of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), to change national laws to allow abortion on demand. Earlier this year, UNICEF published a 168-page report that called for massive increases in "reproductive health services," in developing countries.
Several years ago the Vatican withdrew its support for UNICEF and later Renato Cardinal Martino, then Vatican representative at the UN, asked Catholics to cease donating to the organization.
Asked if UNICEF would be willing to give up promotion of their anti-life policies in order to form a partnership with the Catholic Church, Dr. Manrique said that it is only "radicals" in the Catholic Church who oppose those things, not the Church as a whole.
"Well, that may be the recommendation of the Cardinal, but along with the recommendation of the Cardinal there are many other opinions," he said. "There are radicals that do not help the advancement of organizations."
Asked if the promotion of condoms for AIDS prevention, the "reproductive right" of abortion and contraception, and "gender ideology" are in conflict with the Church, Manrique responded, "These three issues ... are perfectly in tune with the Catholic Church.""LifeSiteNews (Catholic; Independent; Canadian; used by the Vatican recently to gain accurate information on Catholic organizations funding abortion)05 / 06 | June / 2009
As for a secular source to close off our review of Unicef, we chose major American News Source, the National Review Online:
"Americans mostly know UNICEF through the “trick or treat for UNICEF” campaigns. The “trick” is on the donors who think that UNICEF is all about helping poor children.
UNICEF has been a major financier of Palestinian “summer camps” which encourage children to become suicide bombers. One such camp is named for Wafa Idris, a female suicide bomber.
UNICEF’s focus on politics and political correctness has come at the expense of saving the lives of the approximately ten million children under the age of five who die each year from preventable causes.
According to UNICEF, the major cause of child poverty in the world is the free market—even though countries with free markets have vastly lower levels of child poverty than do the kleptocratic, statist economies extolled by UNICEF.
A 2003 report praised the North Korean dictatorship:
the particular strength of the DPRK’s policy framework lies in its comprehensiveness, integration and consistency in addressing the interests of children and women. It has been aligned with the collective production system. The Government has proactively broadened and updated its laws and policies on an ongoing basis, also making an effort to harmonize with international innovations and standards.
Given UNICEF’s affinity for the extreme left, it should be no surprise that UNICEF helps fund the gun- prohibition lobby in Brazil.
The Executive Director of UNICEF is traditionally chosen by the United States (although nominally appointed by the U.N. Secretary-General). All of the abuses described above took place during the tenure of Executive Director Carol Bellamy, who was selected by President Clinton in 1995. In May 2005, President Bush chose former Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman as executive director.
While there is no reason to believe that Veneman shares Bellamy’s extreme Left agenda, it would be fair to say that she has a long way to go to fix UNICEF. The organization today stills promotes the Brazilian gun prohibition lobby Viva Rio, and funds the pro-terrorist Palestinian Youth Association for Leadership and Rights Activation as one of its “partners” in what it calls “occupied Palestinian territory.” UNICEF also “partners” with the Palestinian Red Crescent Society, which uses ambulances to transport terrorists and their weapons, and whose personnel have participated in suicide bombings.
UNICEF’s executive board includes China (whose forced abortion policy is neither pro-life, nor pro-choice, nor pro-child) and Bhutan (where children are among the many victims of the regime’s human rights abuses). UNICEF has doled out unaccountable money to the North Korean regime.
Under Veneman, UNICEF is not as bad as it was under Bellamy, and even under Bellamy, the organization performed some good works. However, most people who give money to groups which help children would prefer that none of their donations be used to finance terrorism, the destruction of civil liberties, or tyranny. "National Review Online (NRO) (American; Secular; Conservative)26 / 10 | October / 2007
Whatever the conservative write for the National Review Online says, many of UNICEF's projects for promoting abortion, and also contraception come under the new leadership. SImply because a previous leader was appointed by a Democrat, does not make a Republican any better for the job.
On 8 March 2009 she said in "Statement by UNICEF Executive Director Ann M. Veneman on International Women’s Day 2009":
"In places like the Democratic Republic of Congo, where five million people have died in the conflict, sexual violence leaves many survivors with horrific injuries, emotional wounds, HIV and AIDS and unwanted pregnancies. It can inflict devastating long-term consequences on the lives of the affected women and girls, and on entire societies. "UNICEF (United Nations Children's Fund08 / 03 | March / 2009
But Unicef has changed leadership again, likely once again swinging further left:
"Feb. 18 (Bloomberg) -- Anthony Lake, who served as national security adviser to former President Bill Clinton, has been endorsed by the Obama administration to head the United Nations Children’s Fund, a U.S. official said.
During President Barack Obama’s campaign for the White House, Lake served as a foreign policy adviser to him."Bloomberg (Secular; Independent; American)18 / 02 | February / 2010
Lake was linked to a campaign scandal during his serving under Clinton, according to Time Magazine (American; Secular; Independent; liberal)
He has also continued UNICEF advocacy for girls' "empowerment" and "education" in re "health", possibly a reference to their programs promoting contraception and abortion, and saying that saving mothers' lives is the most important part of saving children, and reducing global poverty:
"Admitting that some progress is being made to save both child and maternal lives, Mr Lake pointed out that the Countdown Decade Report is important in that it reveals the startling truth: “We are not making enough progress: 19 million children and women have died because of treatable causes since the last Countdown report (in 2008).” Mr Lake emphasized that the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were inter-connected, linking girl’s education and empowerment to health of women and children: connection between saving mothers’ and children’s lives: “I know that saving mother’s lives (MDG5) is the single most important factor in saving children (and achieving MDG 4)...and reducing global poverty (MDG1).” He concluded by applauding the health care professionals’ work and action: “We can do this, but only by working in partnership with governments, civil society...and most of all, families who are most affected. We have a tremendous responsibility to do what we must do—now!"WHO World Health Organization08 / 06 | June / 2010
Countdown Decade Report takes special note of contraceptives, and advocates an increase in funding for "family planning services", also looking into maternal deaths due to abortion.
Although Anthony/Tony Lake does seem to now emphasize the need for skilled birth attendants:
"“Saving women’s lives is an important factor in saving children’s lives, just as improving women’s status in the world may well be the single most important factor in reducing global poverty.
“UNICEF strongly supports the Muskoka Initiative’s emphasis on strengthening health systems to improve maternal and child health. Prenatal care, skilled birth attendants, early and exclusive breast feeding, better primary medical care – these are key interventions we know can prevent the causes of most neonatal and many maternal deaths. To make a sustainable difference, we also need to work together to scale up integrated, community-based services that can save many child lives and are not only cost-effective, but also well designed to reach those in greatest need.
“Today, the G8 countries have renewed their commitment to maternal and child health, and we must all hold ourselves accountable for achieving greater progress on this critical challenge.”"UNICEF25 / 06 | June / 2010
The Muskoko Initiative which he praises, once against uses language that makes clear what was already known about G8 efforts, given the controversy of Canada not wanting to fund abortion:
"2. Scope: The Initiative is related to MDGs 4 and 5, as well as elements of MDGs 1 (nutrition) and 6 (HIV/AIDS, malaria). The Initiative is focused on achieving significant progress on health system strengthening in developing countries facing high burdens of maternal and under-five child mortality and an unmet need for family planning. Improving maternal and under-five child health requires comprehensive, high impact and integrated interventions at the community level, across the continuum of care, i.e., pre-pregnancy, pregnancy, childbirth, infancy, and early childhood.
3. This Initiative includes elements such as: antenatal care; attended childbirth; post-partum care; sexual and reproductive health care and services, including voluntary family planning; health education; treatment and prevention of diseases including infectious diseases; prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV; immunizations; basic nutrition and relevant actions in the field of safe drinking water and sanitation."Muskoka InitiativeG8 Summit, June 2010
""For American children and parents, Trick-or-Treat for UNICEF offers an impactful way to make a difference in the lives of vulnerable children," says Selena. "Trick-or-Treat for UNICEF was created to support UNICEF, which has saved more children's lives than any other humanitarian organization in the world.""Seventeen Magazine (American; Secular; Independent)01 / 07 | July / 2010
Selena may believe her claim on more lives saved, and that may be the case, the problem lies with lives lost due to UNICEF. Her direct linking of buying Dream Out Loud to UNICEF, means that those who buy her product will be supporting UNICEF's efforts in the world. After all, she says her fans can make a difference via Dream Out Loud's support of groups such as Unicef. I do hope she is not intentionally supporting such an organization. Her association with pro-abortion groups, and other issues, are of some concern, although I have never read or seen or heard her directly support abortion, although she linked to a video on her twitter of Pink's Dear Mr President, which was addressed to George Bush, Although Selena linked during Obama's presidency: the song advocates abortion and de jure homosexual "marriage". She is also performing at this year's Lilith Fair, which is concerning given the tour's history with abortion. I do believe our service was justified in our "harsh tone" article, none the less, the reader comment was more than welcome, and enabled this long response, precisely because we so value their opinion, and desire to show our reasoning why we warned our readers.
South African Catholic News Service: Twitter|Facebook|Facebook Discuss|CAF|YouTube|UStream News|UStream Editorial
As an internationally collaborative: initiative to provide a more transparent, accurate view of the world: This service is brought to you by the Scripturelink Search Engine (quotations, or confers in this service/initiative, are provided to give perspective independently, or reference some external sources: and do not imply collaboration, or any kind of affiliation, or co-operation with other services, or initiatives, which are quoted or noted in articles)
Check the accuracy, and perspectives of our contents via the above listed search engine: against other "Catholic" services
Subscribe to our articles via email:
Subscribe to South African Catholic
Add your email to our system to: subscribe to: "South African Catholic News Service"'s dispatches: via email