Published: 8/20/10 07:46 AM - By Amanda Pawloski
UNESCO in Academia
UNESCO recently installed the first francophone African chair of bioethics in the Côte d'Ivoire at the University of Bouaké.
University World News, Africa Edition, reports,
The general aim of the chair, according to Unesco, is to take up the ethical challenges of the millennium and, specifically, to:
* Adapt expertise and behaviour to new ethical demands raised by technological and scientific development and the growing assertion of human rights.
* Develop and promote skills in etchical and bioethical matters to guarantee the quality of public debate on conteporary ethical problems.
* Formalise scientific exchanges between experts (teachers and researchers) of West Africa and those from the North and South specialised in ethics and bioethics.
* Promote in Africa the principles and standards of bioethics.
* Spread information about Unesco's declarations concerning bioethics.
It is great news that Africa will have its own voice in contributing to bioethical debates that trouble policy makers all over the world. However, given the last duty listed to "spread information about Unesco's declarations concerning bioethics", it is dubious whether the new chair of bioethics will be exercising academic authority, or simply spouting Unesco's propaganda.
In the past, Unesco has produced sexual education curriculums that seem to be based less on science than on politically correct ideas, and created public outrage with the release of their 2009 International Guidelines on Sexuality Education. Supposedly based off of studies that incorporated developmental psychology and other social sciences, Unesco advised teaching young children (5-8 yr olds) about sexually pleasuring themselves, and (9-11 yr olds) about abortion.
We hope that the University of Bouaké adheres to the practice of rigorous research and the spirit of true academic discipline, rather than simply take its cues from Unesco.
|
Filed Under : Human Rights, UN Agencies |
 |
|
Published: 8/18/10 01:47 PM - By Seana Cranston, J.D.
Some People Just Don't Have A Sense of Humor
An article over at catholicexchange.com, originally published on Lifesitenews.com, debunks claims by a Polish pro-abortion group, the Polish Federation for Women and Family Planning, that "thousands" of women were traveling from pro-life Poland to Britain to abort their children. Apparently the Polish Federation for Women and Family Planning also recently submitted a report to the UN's Committee on Economic Social and Cultural Rights that whines about Poland's "homophobic" and "anti-feminist" culture. The report also specifically targets Poland's Commissioner for Civil Rights Protection, Janusz Kochanowski, complaining that he apparently "publicly stated that he does not like feminists because they do not like other women." (!!!!)
One thing I've noticed over the years about all these so-called feminist groups, like the Polish Federation for Women and Family Planning, is that they don't seem to have any sense of humor . . . I mean, give me a break, Mr. Kochanowski's statement is something to complain to the UN about???? How utterly ridiculous.
|
Filed Under : Abortion, UN Committees |
|
|
Published: 8/18/10 12:03 PM - By Amanda Pawloski
Common Sense and Common Sensibility
As the Millennium Development Goals come under scrutiny next month, the terms "donor fatigue" and "scaling up" get thrown around with more intensity. In an effort to energize the MDGs, advocates are trying to appeal to hearts and minds to get countries and philanthropic institutions to reach further into their pockets.
This article from the Huffington Post, by Jonathan Lewis titled "Ending Global Poverty Isn't About Doing Good", demonstrates a different approach. Lewis proposes the not-so-new-idea that self-interest may drive development a lot further than supposedly self-less giving. Lewis tells the tale of a company called Bamboo Finance, writing,
In its own words, Bamboo Finance believes that "emerging base-of-the-pyramid markets can be served profitably by sustainable businesses which have the power of transforming radically the lives of the poorest people on earth."
"Base-of-the-pyramid" is economic development jargon for the millions of impoverished people around the world who, if given the chance, will spend precious pennies, nickels and dimes on life-critical products and services. Government and private donors will never have enough money to remake the ghettos, barrios and slums of the world; hence, private investors are being enticed with profits to take up the cause of economic justice.
That's smart. It's also doing good.
|
Filed Under : UN Agencies |
|
|
Published: 8/16/10 12:56 PM - By Amanda Pawloski
Why the World Doesn't Need Another UN Super-agency
Over at the Guardian, Sarah Boseley recently wrote an article on her Global Health Blog titled "Why Argentina -and the rest of us- need a UN women's agency." I would agree with Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women of America, as quoted in C-FAM's Friday Fax covering UN Women, "Women need respect and opportunity, not a global agency demanding money and power for its well-heeled elitist leaders. The money would be better spent going directly to the areas and people in need with programs that have proven to work, not to another agency to empower the people who run it."
That said, there are a few issues that Boseley's article raises that readers would do well to challenge:
1) Boseley references the Human Rights Watch report "Illusions of Care: Lack of Accountability for Reproductive Rights in Argentina" that states, "International human rights law recognizes this [need for reproductive healthcare] and provides support for women and girls to access needed health care and independent decision-making through the protection of the rights to life, health, nondiscrimination, physical integrity, freedom of expression and religion, and the right to decide independently the number and spacing of children." In the context of Boseley's article, this statement seems to argue that an international right to abortion exists, when in fact, it does not. Abortion advocates have been trying their best to produce a legal right to maternal health, but even that victory has yet to be claimed.
2) As Boseley notes, Latin America has a strong Catholic cultural background, and she hopes that an agency such as UN Women would be able to challenge how these countries provide reproductive healthcare. Yet, the statement above provided by Human Rights Watch calls for the protection of freedom of religion. If Latin America is predominantly Catholic, why would UN Women need to step in and "forcibly argue" for a healthcare system that contradicts the religious beliefs of Latin America?
3) Boseley states, "But to change the world for women, the new UN agency needs to be tough, well-led and well-funded." In other words, UN Women must be aggressive, intrusive, and cost a fortune to well-meaning donors. In contrast, the same Catholic Church that Boseley fears is holding back the healthcare system in Latin America is also a significant source of charitable giving worldwide. Catholic charities generate billions of dollars in international aid, as well providing indispensable services through communities such as the Missionaries of Charity. Founded by Mother Teresa, the Missionaries of Charity live in complete poverty and dedicate not just funds but their entire lives to helping the poor, a sharp contrast to many UN agencies that are "well-funded".
Despite these issues with Boseley's article, she and I do agree on something. The appointment of the new Under Secretary-General for UN Women should be an open process, which the UN does not appear to be following.
|
Filed Under : Abortion, Human Rights, NGOs, Sovereignty, UN Agencies |
|
|
Published: 8/13/10 12:31 PM - By Samantha Singson
UN Launches International Year of Youth
According to UN statistics, the world has never seen a larger population of youth – 1.8 billion young people aged 10-24 and the international community will spend the next 12 months focusing on "youth issues."
While some have targeted youth employment and education, at yesterday’s ceremony, UNFPA Executive Director Thoraya Obaid laid out her agency’s youth agenda for this year, focusing on "universal access to sexual and reproductive health services" for young people.
The first major event of the International Year for Youth is the upcoming World Youth Conference in Mexico. Although not an official UN conference, UNFPA and other UN agencies have been highlighting Mexico as an important meeting to help set the tone and agenda for the rest of the year.
As reported by the Friday Fax, the draft declaration which will be considered by government participants at the World Youth Conference calls for "comprehensive development of young people that includes: a humanist education to face ethical challenges," "sexuality education" and "universal access to reproductive health, including through family planning as a method of reducing maternal mortality in adolescent girls and young women." Organizers intend on presenting the final declaration to the UN General Assembly sometime this fall.
The World Youth Conference, though billed as a "global" conference, has raised the ire of pro-life and pro-family groups who have attempted to gain access to the meetings in Leon and Mexico City. Participation has been limited to only the pre-screened applicants approved by the organizing committee.
400 screened non-governmental organizations are expected to participate and conference organizers have confirmed that 92 delegations – 40 headed by ministers – will be in attendance.
The World Youth Conference will take place in Mexico from August 23 – August 27.
|
|
Published: 8/12/10 04:47 PM - By Dianelle Martinez
Mexican Supreme Court Attacks Federalism, Forces States to Recognize Same-Sex Marriages
In a 9-2 decision, Mexico’s Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (SJCN), ruled this week that registered same-sex marriages in Mexico City must be recognized in all 31 Mexican states. This ruling came after the law took effect on March 4th allowing same-sex couples to marry and adopt children in Mexico City. Majority justices cited Article 121 of the Constitution, which stipulates that all civil acts consummated through a federal entity must be recognized in the other remaining states. However, state governments are not compelled to ratify same sex marriage laws of their own, but are required to recognize marriages performed in Mexico City.
A law passed last year made Mexico City the first capital city in Latin America of predominantly Roman Catholic faith to allow all legal rights to same-sex marriage, allowing them to covered by their partner’s insurance plans, inheritance rights, adoption of children, divorce and jointly apply for federal bank loans.
SJCN Justices Guillermo Oritz Mayagoitia, president of SJCN, and Salvador Aguirre Anguiano, strongly opposed this decision because “gay marriage breaks the federal pact which will then mandate to introduce a new image that not all states recognize.” Mayagoitia emphasized that same-sex marriages “are not the same for the biological reason in which heterosexual couples can reproduce and procreate.” This caused one of the majority justices, Jose Fernando Franco, to proclaim that “procreation is not an essential element to marriage.”
This debate has been one of great intensity and controversy not only amongst Supreme Court justices, but also between civil groups and government officials. Cardinal Norberto Rivera Carrera, Archbishop of Mexico City, called this “an absurd view” which “allows the union between individuals of the same sex, the Church cannot fail to call this evil.” He stated that same-sex marriage is one that “contradicts the divine plan and de-virtualizes the nature of matrimony being raised by Christ to the dignity of a sacrament,” and added that “such activity can never be equivalent to the sexual expression of conjugal love because it threatens the dignity and rights of the family.”
Tribunal members still have a big issue on the agenda to discuss. Namely, if it will be constitutional for same-sex couples to adopt children. Statistical information has been requested from the National Institute of Pediatrics (INP), Mexican Institute of Sexual Orientation (IMOS), and the National System for Integral Family Development (DIF) by court members to aid the decision made on this matter. Meanwhile, the government of Mexico City has announced that since the law passed in March there have been 320 same-sex marriages performed.
|
Filed Under : Homosexuality, Sovereignty |
|
|
Published: 8/12/10 04:32 PM - By Tyler Ament
UNFPA: Reproductive Health and Family Planning Theatrics in Yemen...Literally
Recently, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) organized “theatrical and art performances raising awareness on reproductive health” in Yemen. The theatrics were put on by the Reproductive Health Project at the Charitable Social Society Welfare (CSSW) in Hajja. They state that the goal of these theatrics was to “demonstrate the benefits of reproductive health for family and society and their role in the overall development process.” UNFPA and the Reproductive Health Project at CSSW also put on another theatrical show in Mukala to “raise awareness on family planning methods and the risks of early marriage.” Historically, UNFPA has been criticized for promoting population control in the context of development.
|
Filed Under : Population Control, UN Agencies |
|
|
Published: 8/12/10 03:20 PM - By Austin Ruse
EU intrudes into domestic issues, no suprise there...
David Quinn, our friend in Ireland, who runs the influential Iona Institute, is reporting that the EU is funding a Dublin conference calling for same-sex adoption. EU types are always pleased to tell you that the EU has "no competence" in family matters. This does not seem to stop them from meddling.
|
Filed Under : EU Institutions, Homosexuality, Sovereignty |
|
|
Published: 8/12/10 08:37 AM - By Seana Cranston, J.D.
A Response to "The SCOTUS, same-sex 'marriage,' and International Law"
In a post earlier this week, J.C. von Krempach appears to argue that the use of foreign law in a U.S. Supreme Court decision defining "marriage" is not "really something we should be worried about," since "[t]he influence of foreign case law may at times lead to regrettable results, but at times it may also turn out helpful." With all due respect to my blog colleague, I believe Justice Scalia has a term for his argument--it's called "sophistry." ("To invoke alien law when it agrees with one's own thinking, and ignore it otherwise, is not reasoned decisionmaking, but sophistry." Roper v. Simmons, 125 S. Ct. 1183, 1228 (Scalia, J., dissenting)). Mr. von Krempach further cites to "helpful" precedent from a recent decision in the European Court of Human Rights, which held that the word "marriage" in Article 12 of the European Convention on Human Rights does in fact mean traditional marriage.
Mr. von Krempach thus appears to argue that there is no problem with our U.S. Supreme Court importing foreign case law and using it to decide a question of constitutional interpretation--which, in this case, would essentially mean that the Court would look to foreign decisions, such as those of the European Court of Human Rights, to define "marriage."
This position is problematic, on multiple levels. There was a fantastic law review article published a few years ago in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy regarding the general topic of the use of foreign law that delves into all the key arguments against its use. Authored by Prof. Robert J. Delahunty and Prof. John Yoo, "Against Foreign Law" argues that the substantive use of foreign decisions 1) undermines the separation of powers and violates the constitutional rules against delegation of federal authority to bodies outside the control of our national government, and 2) undermines the limited theory of judicial review articulated in Marbury v. Madison.
In a sense, the problem of using foreign case law to decide U.S. decisions has some parallels with one of the key problems with Roe v. Wade. Although it would take a much longer blog post to delve into this idea further, many conservatives have consistently argued that one of the problems with Roe was that--even apart from the obvious and immediate horrific moral implications of the decision--in Roe a federal court usurped an issue that had previously (and constitutionally) been the sole prerogative of state governments. At the risk of sounding too simplistic (again, this would take a much, much longer blog post to flesh out), doesn't the argument that the U.S. Supreme Court should look to foreign courts/decisions (in other words--a "level" of government outside of--or higher than--that of the U.S. Supreme Court and its own line of jurisprudence) rather parallel the Roe Court's snatching of the abortion issue away from the states? Because, in a sense, looking to foreign courts and foreign case law to decide an issue undermines the separation of powers in the same way that Roe undermines our federalist system in which power is split between the states and the federal government.
|
Filed Under : Abortion, European Court of Human Rights, Family, Sovereignty |
|
|
Published: 8/12/10 08:26 AM - By Seana Cranston, J.D.
Bad News for the ICC
Kevin Jon Heller promotes a new book over at Opinio Juris that looks fantastic. Fact-Finding Without Facts: The Uncertain Evidentiary Foundations of International Criminal Convictions, is published by Cambridge University Press. Apparently, "[a]fter reviewing thousands of pages of transcripts from various international criminal tribunals, the author reveals that international criminal trials are beset by numerous and severe fact-finding impediments that substantially impair the tribunals' ability to determine who did what to whom." The description further states that "[t]he author concludes that international criminal tribunals purport a fact-finding competence that they do not possess, and as a consequence, base their judgments on a less precise, more amorphous method of fact-finding than they publicly acknowledge."
Doesn't sound like this bodes well for that beacon of justice, the International Criminal Court . . . .
|
Filed Under : Sovereignty |
|
|
