top
International
International
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

US draws jeers for abortion comments at UN

by nzh
Jeers and catcalls greeted the top US delegate to a global women’s conference as she stressed Washington’s opposition to abortion and support for sexual abstinence and fidelity.
After withdrawing an unpopular anti-abortion amendment from a key UN document, the United States joined in approving the declaration that reaffirmed a 150-page platform agreed 10 years ago at a landmark UN women’s conference in Beijing.

However, top US delegate Ellen Sauerbrey drew boos from the audience, which included some of the 6,000 activists who came from around the world, when she commented on Washington’s interpretation of the document.

"We have stated clearly and on many occasions ... that we do not recognise abortion as a method of family planning, nor do we support abortion in our reproductive health assistance, " Sauerbrey said.

The loudest catcalls, unusual at the world body, came when she articulated US policy on Aids prevention for adolescents: "We emphasise the value of the ABC - abstinence, be faithful, and correct and consistent condom use where appropriate - approach in comprehensive strategies to combat the spread of HIV/Aids and the promotion of abstinence as the healthiest and most responsible choice for adolescents. "

Earlier Friday, Sauerbrey said the United States was dropping its demand that the document be amended to say that abortion is a matter of national sovereignty and not a human right delineated by the 1995 conference in Beijing.

After a week of closed-door negotiations at the United Nations during a two-week conference on women’s equality, Sauerbrey said the US point had been made and therefore Washington’s amendment was no longer needed.

The first version of the abandoned amendment said the Beijing meeting’s final document did not recognise abortion as a fundamental right; a later version said the document did not create any new international human rights, code for abortion.

"We think we have really accomplished what we set out to do," Sauerbrey said. "We have heard from countries ... that our interpretation is their interpretation. So the amendment we recognise is really redundant, but it has accomplished its goals. We will be withdrawing the amendment. "

Despite US lobbying, public support for Washington’s abortion stance was initially limited to the Vatican delegate; delegates from the European Union, Asia and elsewhere forcefully opposed it.

"The text of Beijing is unequivocally clear. We should not spend hours splitting hairs over phrases that mean the same thing," said New Zealand’s UN Ambassador Don Mackay, speaking for his country, Canada and Australia. He emphasised that the Beijing document included a woman’s right to control her own sexuality.

The current UN session is meant to assess how far women have come toward equality since the 1995 Beijing conference and a follow-up meeting five years ago. Organisers seeking consensus drafted a streamlined document they hoped would be easily approved without controversy.

The US amendment was seen by some as a distraction from the main goals of the conference - economic development and women’s equality - but Sauerbrey said, "I don’t think in any way we have interfered with the flow of work. "

Amnesty International spokesman Alexandra Arriaga praised the US move.

"We welcome the US decision to join the international consensus and affirm that women’s rights are human rights, " Arriaga said. "What was clear was that the United States had a very specific agenda it brought to the UN and that the world unanimously rejected an effort to hijack the commission. "

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/index.cfm?c_id=2&ObjectID=10113735
by shocked
"The loudest catcalls, unusual at the world body, came when she articulated US policy on Aids prevention for adolescents: "We emphasise the value of the ABC - abstinence, be faithful, and correct and consistent condom use where appropriate - approach in comprehensive strategies to combat the spread of HIV/Aids and the promotion of abstinence as the healthiest and most responsible choice for adolescents. "

I'm just shocked!! How dare these Washington facists suggest girls should be abstinent, faithful, and responsible! Girls should be able to screw anything or anyone they want to without any reprecussions. They should be able to be able to kill any unborn child they find inconvenent.
by shocked?
...the brutal lives of the low-income children that already exist. If you were so shocked you'd stop accusing people of killing babies and take responsibility for the ones that exist and are either beaten up, living on welfare, suffering sexual abuse and/or drug addiction. Gee somehow they got LEFT BEHIND.

As for the right to screw or not to screw, why don't you take that up with our fine soldiers at Abu Ghraib and G-tmo.

"I'm just shocked!! How dare these Washington facists suggest girls should be abstinent, faithful, and responsible! Girls should be able to screw anything or anyone they want to without any reprecussions. They should be able to be able to kill any unborn child they find inconvenent."
It always saddens me when I hear someone frame problems like AIDS or unwanted children in the context of something that girls or women have done wrong. I don't think it's the case that boatloads of women are out there forcing themselves sexually on their partners. I think it's more the case that men are socialized and encouraged to have many sexual partners - to the point where even if a man didn't want a sexual interaction he might not have the words to explain it. Women on the other hand are expected to "save themselves" for their partners, and then are magically bestowed the blame for STDs and unwanted pregnancies. This is the type of sexism that laws won't change, the type that's embedded into our culture and we'll have to keep fighting our whole lives to change.
by Ellen Sauerbrey is an idiot.
what a buffoon. We have accomplished our goal: a sound bite and a cheesy inch of newsprint.

U.S. LACKS SUPPORT –- The United States halted its effort to pass a pro-life amendment at a United Nations women’s conference because of a woeful lack of support.
The U.S. delegation sought to amend a 10-year-old declaration adopted at a women’s conference in Beijing, China, to clarify that the document did not promote abortion rights. The proposed amendment said the statement did not recognize any new human rights, including abortion. Pro-life advocates had charged some organizations with using the declaration to promote abortion, according to The Washington Post.
The U.S. delegation withdrew the measure March 4 but said the attempt proved beneficial. Representatives of many countries had privately told the United States they believed the Beijing declaration did not establish a right to abortion, said Ellen Sauerbrey, head of the U.S. delegation, The Post reported.
“We have heard from countries that our interpretation is their interpretation,” Sauerbrey said, according to The Post. “So the amendment, we recognize, is really redundant, but it has accomplished its goals. We will be withdrawing the amendment, and we will be joining consensus today on the declaration.”
Among the 130 countries at the two-week meeting in New York, only Egypt, Qatar and the Vatican supported the U.S. amendment, The Los Angeles Times reported. It appears there will be a unanimous vote to reaffirm the Beijing document, according to The Post.
by shocked
"...the brutal lives of the low-income children that already exist. If you were so shocked you'd stop accusing people of killing babies and take responsibility for the ones that exist and are either beaten up, living on welfare, suffering sexual abuse and/or drug addiction. Gee somehow they got LEFT BEHIND."

Yes, your right. I cry your pardon. Obviously every child born of inconvience is sexually abused and beaten up. I've no right to condem them to such a horrible life. Things couldn't possibly improve for them. They are obviously better off dead.

"As for the right to screw or not to screw, why don't you take that up with our fine soldiers at Abu Ghraib and G-tmo."

They belong in prison. However I think the militia's in The Congo and Sudan are far more in need of a lesson.


by shocked
"It always saddens me when I hear someone frame problems like AIDS or unwanted children in the context of something that girls or women have done wrong. I don't think it's the case that boatloads of women are out there forcing themselves sexually on their partners."

Your so right. Women hate sex and only have it when exploited by men.

"I think it's more the case that men are socialized and encouraged to have many sexual partners - to the point where even if a man didn't want a sexual interaction he might not have the words to explain it."

Right once again. Men never say no.

"Women on the other hand are expected to "save themselves" for their partners, and then are magically bestowed the blame for STDs and unwanted pregnancies."

Isn't it sad when someone expects you to take some responsibility? It's facism I tell you! Next thing you know they'll be killing babies...


"This is the type of sexism that laws won't change, the type that's embedded into our culture and we'll have to keep fighting our whole lives to change."

Excellent notion. Lets all screw around with as many partners as possible. That'll stop AIDS in its tracks.

by to shocked...
killing babies, eh? what about killing women? Oh it's OK to be judgemental about them is it? Cause you know all about their circumstances, and they're all dirty sluts. Here's something you can have a look at.
by shocked
Your right of course...anyone who is against killing babies MUST be in favor of killing women. You must have one of the other you know.
by one thing about "shocked"
chock full of sarcasm and knows what's best for everyone. good on you shocked! You choose for the rest of us!
by independent student
Throughout many of the international foreign policy issues the U.S. becomes engaged in, often I wish the U.S. would have been more mulitlateral and just gone with the flow with everyone else to be in agreeance. I'm glad to find that certainly some things - such as the right to life - have a foundation still in our country, and that we don't stand to promote murder as an "international human right". We fight for lives throughout the world, to have the chance of freedom and a good life, yet so many wish to take that away from the very beginning -- that is the truest tragedy of our times.
by Thank the US?
For trying to stuff our right-wing religious beliefs down the throats of poor third world women? Go back to school.

We fight for lives, but lets see how many we've taken lately... pro-life? Oops!
by martian
shocked is obviously a flamer who is not really interested women's issues and is just using inflamatory rhetoric in order to anger people. Please disregard any further comments by this postee.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$110.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network