Last week the Dilma Rousseff administration was pressed by CEDAW (Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women) about an alleged number of 200,000 deaths of women each year because of illegal abortion in Brazil. The Brazilian representatives showed no willingness to question this patently inflated number.
Official data from the Brazilian government show that 146 women, whose pregnancy ended in abortion, died in 1996. In 2004, 156 women died.
Where did CEDAW get the extravagant figure of 200,000 deaths? From Brazilian feminist NGOs funded largely by US pro-abortion institutions as MacArthur, Rockefeller, and Ford Foundations, which usually sponsor the pro-abortion training of feminist leaders in Brazil, so that they may not be out of step with their American counterparts in maneuvers of language, statistics and political and legal actions.
After this training, they are ready to progress to several government and non-government capacities, and many of them are today in the UN system echoing First World ideological insanities with a “Brazilian” voice.
CEDAW made Brazilian representatives give an accounting of this high figure, asking the question, “What are you going to do with this huge political problem?” It also made it clear that it believes criminalization of abortion is connected to high death rates.
This was an excellent, timely “pressure”, because the Brazilian government has every willingness, ideological and otherwise, to solve “this huge political problem”. Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff, a “former member of a communist terrorist organization that sought to overthrow the Brazilian government in the 1960s and 70s, is on record supporting the decriminalization of abortion before her presidential run”.
Yet, she found herself forced to sign a pledge not to introduce abortionist or homosexualist legislation during her presidential term to boost her sagging poll numbers after Christians began to alert the population to her record.
Because of this pledge, she has some difficulty to solve “this huge political problem”. But it did not hinder her from appointing Eleonora Menicucci as the women’s minister. Menicucci, who led the Brazilian delegation to “face” CEDAW, is a friend of Rousseff and was incarcerated with her during the 1970s, when they were arrested for terrorism.
Menicucci was a member of a feminist group and trained, in Colombia, to do abortions. Even though abortion is illegal in Brazil (except in case of rape and life risk for mothers), she has bragged that she had two abortions.
It was no displeasure for her to meet her fellow feminists in CEDAW, which made it clear that CEDAW “cannot defend abortion”. Nevertheless, Magaly Arocha, of CEDAW, told the Brazilian delegation, “women are going to abort anyway. This is reality.”
The official UN document said, “Unsafe abortions in Brazil were an issue of great concern to that Committee [on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women], which had already recommended that Brazil decriminalize abortion.”
To calm down her UN abortion comrades, Menicucci’s report explained the government’s attempt to squelch a right-to-life bill called the Statute of the Unborn, which would prohibit the killing of unborn children in all circumstances.
CEDAW also complained to the Brazilian delegation that “discriminatory practices in… marriage could still be found in legislation and sought clarification”. But the official Brazilian response assured that the government has been taking measures to eliminate “inequalities”: “Important achievements had been made through judicial proceedings, especially of the Supreme Court, which allowed same sex couples to register their civil union.”
Wow! The priority of CEDAW, as a UN agency to “help” women, is to advance homosexual “marriage” and abortion! It is no surprise that the same CEDAW that is advancing a radical feminist ideology is a fierce enemy of Mother’s Day. CEDAW hates every original trace of feminine characteristics. It wants women in 50% of all male capacities, including military. It hates women in female roles.
CEDAW complained that Brazil has a small number of women in the Congress. The UN ideal, of course, would be 50%, but be assured that UN would not be pleased if such women resembled Mother Theresa of Calcutta. The ideal woman for UN is like Eleonora Menicucci, with a story of abortions, abortion training, communist terrorism, and a promiscuous sex life. With such women, the Brazilian Congress and Rousseff will nevermore have any problems to advance feminist, abortion, gay and other ideologies approved by UN.
CEDAW also praised highly “Maria da Penha”, a Brazilian law against “domestic violence”. Any minimal violent act from a husband or partner can bring about harsh penalties to them. Yet, in violent acts between women and unborn children, there is no “Maria da Penha” to protect children from female violence and murder, which are softened and turned into a right. If men embraced a similar ideological insanity, they could be guaranteed by UN a “right” to murder women. And with such insanity in motion, the foremost worry of UN would be the murder of women as a “right”.
The reality is, the foremost worry of CEDAW with the Brazilian delegation was how to decriminalize the murder of unborn babies through abortion!
There was an interesting game between Brazil and UN. Menicucci and CEDAW wanted to defend abortion openly, but both recurred to trickery language to express their ideological feelings.
The Brazilian report to CEDAW complained, “The distancing from conservative positions in relation to the role of men and women in our society is happening less rapidly than would be desired.”
The conservative views of most Brazilians, especially women, have hindered Rousseff and Menicucci from being free to impose their personal, ideological views on the all Brazilian women and other Brazilians.
Similarly, the conservative views of most women and nations have hindered the UN from being free to impose its personal, ideological views on the rest of the world.
Even so, with word games and trickery language about “rights”, they hope to achieve what with honesty and correct figures they could never achieve.