What about Poland?


At a U.N. conference on equal rights for women, U.S. officials are trying to force the subject of abortion. The L.A. Times reports that the issue isn't even on the agenda, but the State Department is concerned that documents ratified 10 years ago imply the right to terminate a pregnancy. They're also throwing in some ideas for a worldwide ban on prostitution and having fun with the definition of international consensus. Explains a deputy assistant secretary of State:

"The United States is looking for concrete recognition that those documents from 10 years ago do not create new human rights with the weight of a treaty or a right to an abortion. The U.S. believes that there is international consensus on that."

But Monday evening, only Egypt and Qatar supported the U.S. position.

NEXT: Ethnic Cleansing, 1755

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. To the current administration, Egypt and Qatar would count as a coalition of the will…erh…”international consensus”. I mean, there’s us and some ferriners, so that’s “international”. And they agree with us, so that’s “consensus”.

  2. 50.1% is a mandate, and 3 countries is an international consensus. Everybody knows that. What are you, a liberal?

  3. It is interesting the allies the US has on these international issues. Just like the conservatives complaining that we are no longer in the company of Iran, China, Somalia and Saudi Arabia in executing minors. Why are the positions of conservative Republicans the same as Islamic fundamentalist and despots. I thought they were for “freedom”.

  4. Must be a lieberal. I love all these cute nicknames that the factions have for each other. I have to get back to hating America because I don’t agree with various policies and ask questions.

  5. thetruth,

    I think that’s the freedom to do and think as you’re told, or as is socially acceptable.

  6. “You are free to do as we tell you!”

  7. What about the right to a fair stoning?

  8. And following the last sentence quoted in the article:

    Most other delegations agreed that the Beijing plan of action did not imply a right to abortion and that they were wary of opening the document to reinterpretation. The U.S. representatives stood firm, signaling that a debate over the issue could dominate the week’s discussions.

    Clever editing Kerry.

  9. The delegations were in agreement that the plan of action didn’t imply a right to an abortion, counter to what the State Department was saying. As I quoted, only Egypt and Qatar are in agreement.

  10. I can see one good thing coming out of these “faith-based” shennanigans of the Bushies. Hopefully fans of the UN, mostly of leftoid persuasion, will realize the extent to which it is just another bureaucracy, of the worst sort, and as such can be used by the Right to impose it’s designs, too ie it’s not just something the Left can use for a world ban on tobacco or whatever their latestgreatest wet-dream is.
    Though their likely response will be to blame Bush. Oh well … at least the UN SecGen is a villain in Philip K Dick’s books.

  11. Kerry,

    The majority of delegates agree that the Beijing document does not imply a right to an abortion. That is what the quoted official says there is international consensus on.

    It is on the question of whether the current conference should offer “concrete recognition” of this fact, where the US is left alone with Egypt and Qatar.

  12. Basically, the position on which the US claims there is an international consensus, is not the same position as the one only supported by three delegations.

    Your quote makes it sound like the rest of the world except the US, Egypt, and Qatar thought that Beijing implied that abortion was a human right. Which was so hard to believe that I RTFA, which confirmed my suspicions that the quote was out-of-context.

  13. Two points:

    First, I’m with Bush on the this one. While I think abortion should be legal in the US, it is a country by country issue. Do we really was the _UN_ deciding fundamental rights? Next it will declare a fundamental right to free health care.

    Second, the inconsistancy in the UN position is glaring. It says women have a right to an abortion, because each woman should weigh the moral, emotional, and physical risks and benefits for herself. When it comes to prostitution, the buerocrates deney women the right to do the same.

  14. Of course, I’d be really surprised if the already-Republican Senate of 1995 ratified a treaty declaring a universal right to abortion.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.