Newman sets out to explain why a revolution occurred in France, but not England, using a multidisciplinary methodology. She investigates the origins of the French Revolution using demographic patterns, land-tenure and inheritance systems and comparative research.
Pope Francis needs to be praised for calling for an "ecological conversion" for the faithful in his sweeping new encyclical on the environment. "Each year sees the disappearance of thousands of plant and animal species which we will never know, which our children will never see, because they have been lost forever," he writes.
In a draft of his encyclical on the environment , Pope Francis says that the world could see the destruction of entire ecosystems this century without urgent action on climate change. He makes direct connections between our "throw-away culture" that pollutes and degrades the environment with how our society discards those "excluded" from the global economy, exploits workers, harvests human organs, and traffics in people.
The release of the Pope's 184-page teaching letter on the environment is being seen as the moment when the leader of 1.2 billion Catholics threw the Church's support behind the climate movement. 2
The Pope backs scientists who say global warming is mostly man-made and that developed countries have a particular responsibility to stem a trend that will hurt the poor the most. However, the Pope is being intellectually dishonest and evasive by rejecting suggestions that population control would solve the environmental crisis, saying instead the problem is one of “extreme consumerism”.
But, contradictorily, he also claims that:
Population "control", or less harshly, family planning, is far removed than a "culture of death" but of spacing pregnancies and avoiding unwanted ones. It doesn't have to mean abortion, but the use of contraceptives! He's equating "population control" with "abortion"?
Overpopulation is often the cause of poverty,and environmental degradation.
The Pope does not acknowledge that the Catholic Church has contributed to these environmental and social justice problems by its irrational and adamant opposition to responsible family planning.
So, if we will all switch off excessive lights, reduce the use of paper, plastic and water, separate trash, practice car-sharing then global population can keep overshooting natural limits with impunity? While we may individually reduce our impact on natural resources and waste, in absolute terms anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions will still keep rising due to exponential population growth!
Pope Francis still defends the Church's opposition to contraception. He's being enlightened, but at the same time directing the blame for over-consumption on the "wealthy" nations. Disingenuously, he's ignoring the impoverishing and destructive impacts of overpopulation.
Pope Francis goes on to acknowledge that “attention needs to be paid to imbalances in population density, on both national and global levels” . Apparently, then, it is not a surplus of babies that is the real problem, but where they are born.
Overpopulation is certainly not the sole cause of our environmental crisis, but there’s no question it is a significant contributing cause, and a rapidly expanding population will only exacerbate our environmental problems. 2
Improved access to contraception must be an integral part--albeit an essential one--of a larger effort to improve health and well-being in the developing world. 4
"Every people deserves to conserve its identity without being ideologically colonised," the Pope said. But, during his trip to the Philippines the Pope defended traditional Vatican teaching, which opposes artificial contraception. 
He said this after commenting that, "Progressive, Western ideas about birth control and gay rights were increasingly being imposed by groups, institutions or nations there, often as a condition for development aid."
The idea of this article is to compare:
Foreign Aid ideology and birth control, juxtaposed to pre-European steady states.
Cite Anthony Daniels, Fool or Physician.
Source of quoted material:
Pope Francis: No Catholic need to breed like 'rabbits' (BBC).
The Center for Biological Diversity has a very successful campaign linking human population growth to other species loss. They sell "Endangered species condoms." Their creative approach has now been independently recognised by, of all things, the American Advertising Federation. Good on them!
Our wildly popular Endangered Species Condoms are getting some additional love. This week we found out the colorfully packaged condoms, part of our campaign highlighting the connection between overpopulation and species extinction, won the American Advertising Federation's gold ADDY Award in Tucson in the "public service" category. In case you haven't seen them, the nifty condom packages feature illustrations of six different endangered species, along with catchy slogans like "Cover your tweedle, save the burying beetle" and "Wear a jimmy hat, save the big cat." The Center handed out 350,0000 condoms last year and hopes to send more out soon to draw attention to this crucial issue. Through the empowerment of women, education of all people and universal access to birth control, we can curb our population to an ecologically safe level.
But some members of Congress are making that very hard. In fact, the House has just passed a bill to cut government funding for critical programs like women's health clinics -- which for millions of people provide the only available access to reproductive services, family planning and birth control. With this February marking Global Population Speak Out month, it's time to tell our elected representatives they should be expanding those programs, not cutting them -- for the sake of our planet and the public.
Check out our Endangered Species Condoms Project and sign the GPSO pledge. Then learn more about the legislative attack on family-planning services from politico.com and contact your senators asking them to counter it. (Ed. Actually www.politico.com doesn't appear to have any directly accessible information on this subject.)
The Center for Biological Diversity
[The following material comes directly from the Center for Biological Diversity.]
Through a network of more than 5,000 volunteers, in 2010 the Center for Biological Diversity distributed 350,000 free Endangered Species Condoms in all 50 states — as well as Canada, Puerto Rico, and Mexico — to highlight how unsustainable human population growth is driving species extinct at a cataclysmic rate.
The earth’s population has nearly doubled since the original Earth Day in 1970. In those days, it was well understood that human overpopulation was causing the many environmental challenges cropping up around the world. Now, with the passing of the 40th anniversary of the original Earth Day, unsustainable human population growth is too often ignored, even though it continues to drive all the major environmental problems that plague our planet.
At 6.9 billion people, the human race is not only the most populous large mammal on Earth but the most populous large mammal that has ever existed. Providing for the needs and wants of this many people — especially those in high-consumption, first-world nations — has pushed homo sapiens to absorb 50 percent of the planet’s freshwater and develop 50 percent of its landmass. As a result, other species are running out of places to live.
Human overpopulation is the driving force behind the current mass-extinction crisis, endangering:
• 12 percent of mammals
• 12 percent of birds
• 31 percent of reptiles
• 30 percent of amphibians
• 37 percent of fish
To help people understand the impact of overpopulation on other species, and to give them a chance to take action in their own lives, the Center is distributing free packets of Endangered Species Condoms depicting six separate species: the polar bear, snail darter, spotted owl, American burying beetle, jaguar, and coquí guajón rock frog.
The beautifully designed packages, featuring clever slogans, are being distributed by a network of 5,000 volunteers ranging from ministers to grandmothers to healthcare providers to college students and biologists. The condoms will be handed out at concerts, bars, universities, spiritual groups, local events, and farmer’s markets. Along with two condoms, each package contains original artwork and information on the species, facts about overpopulation and the extinction crisis, and suggestions on how the human population can be stabilized.
To help ensure a world that is livable for other species — and healthy and prosperous for us — practice responsible reproduction and learn more about the Center’s campaign to address overpopulation.
It has become a tradition in my community, the island of Dr. David Hypocrite, to hold an annual fundraiser for the Philippines. On the face of it, the income raised by these events to help develop pre-school programs in seven villages in Luzon sounds like an unmitigated good. After all, what could be wrong about helping over a 1,100 children and their families? Actually, a lot. But tell that to people here, who regard attendance at this bazaar almost like a mark of civic responsibility and a gesture of community solidarity.
For me, unconditional aid of any kind to nations like the Philippines is an act of criminal irresponsibility and ignorance. The same kind of irresponsibility and ignorance which permits self-righteous environmentalists to birth or sire two or more carbon footprints, but mount the moral high-horse because they recycle their garbage or save paper. Rage compelled me to write the attached diatribe. Distributing it would be what Jack Alpert calls "Pissing in your own soup." I have to live here among the wolves, so the prudent course would be to follow Lenin’s advice that "You then must howl like a wolf." Handing it out to those in attendance would be equivalent to wearing a sandwich board that says "Legalize Pedophilia".
Then again, it is not like I could hurt my reputation. I am irreparably isolated--politically and socially. Like a pig farmer in Saudi Arabia. It is nature's paradise, but Bertoldt Brecht's hell. In a small communities like this, where one ruling clique controls the politics and the media, to get along, one must "go along". And as you know, that just isn't my style. You might as well tell a fish to start walking.
Does invective and insult achieve anything? Certainly. It makes me feel good--- and Sierrans should relate to that because all of their activities seem to be about feeling good about yourself rather than changing anything. As Kirkpatrick Sale remarked, “The whole individualist what-you-can-do-to-save-the-earth guilt trip is a myth. We, as individuals, are not creating the crises, and we can’t solve them.” The role of the activist is not to "feel good", nor is it, as Derrick Jensen said, " ... to navigate systems of oppressive power with as much integrity as possible, but rather to confront and take down those systems." But of course, soft green environmentalists are not about challenging the growth economy or stopping growth, but managing it. Voila---"smart growth". It's smart to accept growth because they that way corporate donors like Encana natural gas, RBC and the TD Bank will keep sending donations to their beloved NGOs. (How can greens feel good about that?).
Mindless philanthropy is now, apparently, a national trait. Prime Minister Harper reflected that Canadian character flaw recently when he asked Canadians to "open their hearts and their wallets to Pakistan." Another country on the road of reckless fecundity which, if it doesn't get its demographic act together, is set to double its population in a generation, thus wiping out any benefits that flow from foreign aid. Canada is on the sucker list of Haiti, Afghanistan, central Africa or any basket case that refuses to send their bishops and mullahs packing so that people can get the family planning they need. But then, why should they? They will get our assistance anyway.
September 16, 2010
So much for the efforts of soft-headed volunteers in the Quadra Philippine Connection
A gauntlet thrown at the community
You have possibly heard of the “Labour of Sisyphus”, the ancient Greek fable about futility. Poor Sisyphus struggled to role a boulder up a hill, only to see roll all the way back down to the bottom, where he would have to struggle to roll it all the way back up, to see it roll down to the bottom once more. But who knows, may be he was a New-Age Buddhist Quadra fool volunteering for the annual fundraiser for the Philippines. One thing about these gentle cretins of good intentions, they can b e counted on not to do any research for themselves. “In the Sierra Club and Delai Lama We Trust” might be the inscription on any coins if they were minted here. What does aid of any kind do for a country that will not control its own numbers? What has it done for Haiti? For Afghanistan? For Africa?
Sir Bob Geldoff was, for all intents and purposes, the father of forty million Ethiopians. When Ethiopian was a starving nation of 40 million people in 1985, Geldoff organized his “Band Aid “ concert to recruit global sympathy and philanthropy to rescue that nation’s children. Result , those children grew up to have sire or birth many times their number, so Ethiopia’s population doubled in 25 years and now 6.2 million people are starving. As Dr. Russell Hopfenberg has demonstrated, the more food that is made available, the more the population will grow up to meet that supply. Human beings are just like any other species in that regard. But what makes us different is that we have the ability to limit our numbers with birth control programs. Over a generation, the results can be dramatic. 25 years ago Thailand was in the same pathetic basket case as the Philippines. But they decided to embark on family planning, while the Philippines did not. The result is predictable. Thailand has been able to feed its population, while the Philippines still languishes in misery. Like Sisyphus, it labours to double its housing, its schools, its medical clinics and food supply every generation just to stay in the same spot.
“The Philippine population in the early 1990s continued to grow at a rapid, although somewhat reduced rate from that which had prevailed in the preceding decades. In 1990 the Philippine population was more than 66 million, up from 48 million in 1980. This figure represents an annual growth rate of 2.5 percent, down from 2.6 percent in 1980 and from more than 3 percent in the 1960s. Even at the lower growth rate, the Philippine population will increase to an estimated 77 million by the year 2000 and will double every twenty-nine years into the next century. Moreover, in 1990 the population was still a youthful one, with 57 percent under the age of twenty. The birth rate in early 1991 was 29 per 1,000, and the death rate was 7 per 1,000. The infant mortality rate was 48 deaths per 1,000 live births. Population density increased from 160 per square kilometer in 1980 to 220 in 1990. The rapid population growth and the size of the younger population has required the Philippines to double the amount of housing, schools, and health facilities every twenty-nine years just to maintain a constant level.” http://countrystudies.us/philippines/34.htm
What makes this possible? In a nutshell, unconditional foreign aid, that is, aid not made conditional on birth control. Why don’t countries like this, governed as they are by religious ignorance, make family planning accessible to women? Apart from the fact that partriarchal political, religious and domestic authority denies so many women of that choice? Simply put, because they have no incentive to do so. Credulous dupes and well-meaning sadists in private agencies work to keep the gravy train coming. And governments like Canada dole out money unconditionally. In Haiti, for example, Harper handed out $300 million in aid in 2008, to much fanfare in Port-au-Prince, and to the acclaim of CBC Pravda. But not a single dollar went to condoms or birth control pills. The result is runaway population growth and starvation. In January 2007 a committee of the Canadian Senate concluded that 40 years of development aid totalling $575 billion dollars had only made Africans more miserable and wretched at a higher population level. A level that has resulted in more clearcut forests and loss of wildlife habitat, more environmental degradation. The life support system of the human population.
The aid agencies of countries like Canada are not supplicants. We have bargaining power and leverage. We have the money and too many countries need it. We can set the terms. If African dictators or mullahs and priests won’t accept our terms, there are many other countries like Madagascar who will, and use it to limit families and control growth. We can either focus on the endless enterprise of saving lives, or we can end the cycle of poverty by focusing on preventing lives from being born. Those who protract misery by their mindless philanthropy and volunteer fund-raising efforts are practitioners of cruelty wrapped in the guise of sainthood. As Garrett Hardin said, “There is nothing more dangerous than a compassionate shallow thinking person.”
Helping people is not about feeling good about yourself, it is about achieving positive long-term results for them. What would you prefer if you were laying injured in a roadside accident---to be assisted by a clumsy, incompetent do-gooder who with his good intentions paralyzed you for life by moving you when he shouldn ‘t have been? Or to be attended to by a cold hearted bastard who employed his first aid training to treat you proficiently? The Bill Gates, Stephen Lewises, Bob Geldoffs and Mother Theresas are the clumsy do-gooders. The birth control promoters are the people who will actually improve a people’s long term quality of life. Use your brain, not your Quadra group-think herd instinct. Better to do nothing than do to harm. The Philippines needs to be starved to their senses, not be given what amounts to perpetual birth incentives. Would you give money to a drunken panhandler? Would you continue to give lunch money to your teenager if you knew he was spending it on drugs? If you were a bank manager would you make loans without setting down conditions? Then why would you help those who will not agree to help themselves?
Try thinking for yourself for a change. And direct your money and your time to effective foreign aid through family planning initiatives.
One of our CanDoBetter commenters, 'RichB', has highlighted the site Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. This is a visionary site! The movement seems to have gone to some considered endeavour to explore the issues. I like the question toward the bottom of the site:
'What will the world be like when our population starts getting smaller?'
As more globally-aware people begin to question the 20th Century 'growth-only' tenet, alternative ideals such a 'Low Population Planet', deserve to be considered and debated. But where to start?
One practical moral campaign that would immediately start curbing the out-of-control human birth explosion would be to lobby against the funding requests of charities supporting countries that have high birth rates. Now before readers jump to questionning the morality of this, this is not to stop funding emergency life support needs, but to make non-life-support funding conditional on recipient self-change.
These are some dominant charities in this field.
While it would be callous to allow people to die from hunger and malnutrition, the charity donation system seems to only perpetuate welfare subsistence and not address overpopulation poverty in undeveloped countries. For time immemorial, the starving of Africa and India have been dumped on our television screens to make us feel guilty.
Why has the problem not been resolved since television was invented and before?
The starving message has become a cliché to the point that it has become a permanent human condition. This is unacceptable. The charity system needs overhaul.
Charities need to be held accountable for fixing the problem not perpetuating it.
Donations need to be channelled through independent organisations that require conditional offerings. Donations can end up anywhere and do, like in arms purchases. The charity donations must stop and be replaced with:
1. Physical shipments of emergency food, shelter and medical supplies
2. Conditional relief funding linked to population control measures - family planning and birth control measures should be advocated - female education, contraception, changing cultural traditions of excess children (more than 2), and UNHCR funded free and professional male vasectomies. Perhaps even a free dwelling could be offered to male heads of families that undertake vasectomy and have only two children. Think of this as an incentive in impoverished countries!
On issues of fundamental cultural change, financial carrots seem more effective and ethical than punitive sticks.
Until then those donating should boycott charities until donations are conditional on and accountable for birth control.
As for wealthy developed nations with high birth rates, they have the financial means to address their own population excesses. Any country over 3% annual growth rate is irresponsible and so a target priority.
According to Nation Master website, the top 20 highest ranked developed countries by population growth rate are:
We should refer to them as the G20 - 'The Greedy 20'.
Rank Country Growth Rate (2008)
1 Maldives: 5.566%
2 United Arab Emirates: 3.833%
69 Saudi Arabia: 1.954%
81 Malaysia: 1.742%
82 Israel: 1.713%
107 Bahrain: 1.337%
114 Australia: 1.221%
116 Luxembourg: 1.188%
124 Ireland: 1.133%
131 New Zealand: 0.971%
137 United States: 0.883%
139 Canada: 0.83%
140 South Africa: 0.828%
144 Iceland: 0.783%
151 Liechtenstein: 0.713%
153 Thailand: 0.64%
154 China: 0.629%
156 France: 0.574%
160 Hong Kong: 0.532%
165 Netherlands: 0.436%
These wealthy countries extravagantly impose a selfish disproportionate burden on the planet's capacity. They have wealth capacity and as global citizens and members of the UN, have an obligation to pay a Greedy Population Levy to fund underdeveloped countries in controlling their excess population growth. The wealthy with an excess problem need to be supporting the poor with am excess problem, because the poor do not have the means to do it themselves. Let's make it means tested and charge say 0.01% of each countries GDP.
As for those poor displaced peoples caused by civil unrest and arms conflict, why does not the UN with the support of developed nations impose a 10% levy on each item of weaponry sold globally, so that the revenue is channelled to allow the UNHCR manage humanitarian and peace-keeping operations for the civilians affected?
International arms sales is the world's largest and richest discretionary industry. It can easily afford such a levy.
A case in point is the plight of millions of Yemeni refugees having fled civil conflict and currently starving in al-Mazraq camp, Yemen:
• £70m needed this year and next to feed poor and hungry
• Traditional donors, including Britain, have yet to offer aid
Originally published 22 January, 2010
I wish I could be sure that including what some may see as ‘coercive’ population policies to achieve global sustainability and avoid massive human catastrophes were unnecessary.
For many decades there has been a willful blindness in recognising that human population growth is one of the pre-eminent problems we face. A problem the US-based Population Media Center and other population activist groups are well aware off. A problem that is driving the astonishing growth of fossil fuel use and its depletion, climate warming, bio-diversity loss and species extinction, the growing shortage of fresh water to meet human needs - and as a consequence of these changes – the prospect that agriculture will be unable to produce enough food to feed us.
Together, these changes are the most important immediate challenge to humankind. The threat – still largely unrecognized - transcends all the other problems that transfix our policy makers, says Lindsey Grant, former U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Environment.
Most people are unaware that as recently as 1930 world population was barely two billion, not the 6.8 billion now. Almost never do the media portray reduction in human numbers as a beneficial step away from the impossibility of endless population growth.
Population activists point out that increase in use of modern family planning methods rose from 10 percent of the world’s couples in 1960 to 55 percent today and there has been an associated decline in average fertility rates. But they admit many people are still not using family planning and are having large families. Yes, most of the progress made to date on slowing population growth has been done through voluntary means. But will this be enough to meet the population and environmental impacts we are facing?
Funding for population and reproductive healthcare programs, as a share of global health aid declined from 30 percent in 1994 to just 12 percent in 2008. The proportional decrease is due to increasing attention to HIV/AIDS. (World Bank). Global spending on contraceptive supplies and services totaled just $338 million in 2007, considerably less than half what it was in 1995 - despite a 20-percent increase in the number of people of reproductive age in developing countries. (Worldwatch Institute)
Assumption on population growth may also be too low. The UN assumes that our current growth rate will decline, but in many countries, particularly in Africa and parts of the Middle East, populations are rising rapidly, and growth rates show no sign of decline. In addition, a growing number of developed countries, with high ecological footprints have introduced new baby bonuses in the ill-informed belief that encouraging a population ponzi scheme to maintain existing demographic support ratios and retirement pensions is a good idea. The challenge of supporting aging populations is grossly over emphasised by those with particular interests, like the pensions industry. It is a totally phoney argument that we need more young people and more immigration to support a growing number of older people. Young people generally cost society more than older people - in crime, in education, unemployment and many other ways. With typical short-term vision, we forget that all these extra young people get old too and will need support. The media and politicians do not emphasise this.
It is misleading to say that ‘coercion’ or more appropriately, ‘incentivisation’ for the wider good of society doesn’t work and there is no evidence to support the claim. Incentivisation through the tax and legal system DOES work all the time. We accept laws, fines and much more for a stable society and to discourage anti-social behavior like speeding, drink-driving, drug peddling and aggression on others. Try not paying tax and see what the government can force you to do.
What can be more important than saving the future of our planet, for ourselves our children and other species that rightfully share our world? We are already in serious ecological overshoot according to the Global Footprint Network and this is set to get much worse as China, India, Brazil and other developing nations expand their economies, resource use and populations.
The urgency of achieving fertility reductions is clear. A largely ignored UNPD news release on March 11, 2009, warned that if global fertility remains at current levels the world population could increase by nearly twice as much as projected - to around 11.1 billion by 2050. The population of the less developed regions would increase to 9.8 billion instead of the 7.9 billion projected by assuming that fertility declines and a projected 1.28 billion in developed countries. Unless we wake up and take action, it won’t stop there.
If we are to have any chance of moving to a genuinely sustainable world, we have to bring together and consider all the options at our disposal – fully accessible global contraception and advice, education about population impact and its social, economic and environmental consequences and fiscal incentives to encourage fewer births rather than perverse incentives to increase our numbers.
Just as tackling the challenge of climate change requires global action instead of blame chasing assertions that it is the developed world’s emissions that are the problem not the smaller emissions of developing countries that are set to grow their populations significantly, we need global action on population. We will sink or swim together.
The US-based Population Media Center (PMC) has been innovative in its media outreach work around the world and believes the major reason for the success of China's often criticized population policy is that they used intensive person-to-person persuasion that convinced people to comply willingly. Yet some would say this was social ‘coercion’. What could we do if some countries refused to use coercion, leading to endless population growth and resource wars?
Political or religious ‘coercion’ to prevent family planning in countries like Albania, the Philippines, Rwanda and Iran during the early years of the Khomeini regime, led to rapidly increasing populations, increasing poverty, even genocide. Iran has changed policy and fertility rates fell.
But it won’t be enough. In Europe, the United States. Canada and Australia – all places with high consumption footprints, lower fertility is being boosted by high immigration from developing countries and failing states happy to off load surplus populations they are unable to support. Developed countries are under ever increasing infrastructure pressures from immigration that impacts disproportionately on their own disadvantaged communities.
We spend billions of tax dollars every year on aid programs, which in many places have been shown to be ineffective through a mixture of corruption, a bloated and competing aid sector and other factors. Yet the aid industry consistently ignores rapidly growing populations in many recipient countries as a major factor in lack of progress in reducing poverty.
There are already many failed and failing states on permanent food aid – in Haiti, Somalia, Afghanistan and more – all highly susceptible to instability and terrorism. Yet conditional aid seems unacceptable to many in the aid industry who would rather bury their heads in the sand. Others argue that aid should go hand in hand with donor governments ensuring countries that receive year on year aid have effective and fully accessible family planning programs in place. It is potentially a win-win situation that squeezes systemic corruption, improves long-term prospects for the countries concerned, supports women’s rights and hopes for a genuinely sustainable and more equitable world.
Japan, Iran, Sri Lanka and Brazil are countries that have achieved replacement fertility levels in a matter of a decade or so after strong persuasion campaigns were combined with readily accessible family planning services. Persuasion is vital to achieve a broad public consensus but political and personal ‘incentivisation’ is also needed if we are to have any chance of a reasonable future.
Ill-informed critics wilfully misinterpret calls for population stabilisation and gradual decline to save the planet as ‘Genocide’ and ‘Holocaust’. It is their ‘my rights only’ and forget the rest of you that is the real path to ‘genocide’ The response from some development and religious lobby groups is disgraceful. Can they not see beyond the end of their noses? The world badly needs a grown-up, rational discussion of the population issue - without blame, abuse and hysteria.
When finite and depleting fossil fuels that have supported massive population growth in the last 80 years, a one-time economic growth binge and an industrial agriculture industry to feed us, run down, the world as we would like to know it will not exist. Alternative energy sources are simply not enough to see us through. We will face chaos and immense social pressures that will be far more draconian than making relatively simple, sensible and sustainable choices now. Have we the intelligence to collectively wake up?
A blogsite called "Catholic Dialogue" sounds so extreme in its condemnation of feminism, contraception and women's choice that you wonder if it's actually a joke. The blogsite warns people not to donate to Caritas Haiti because they support condoms, the celebration of Women's International Day and present a 'negative image of the Catholic Church'!
Please DO therefore consider donating to Caritas Haiti. Their site is here. And thanks, Catholic Dialogue, for telling us about them. They have survived the earthquake, I just learned, although their bank did not. They expect to post details of where to send help tomorrow.
"The principal organization which Development & Peace has named to assist in the country, Caritas Haiti, is likely an abortion-supporting organization too. They have a “strategy” plan that says women are discriminated against in the Church and that women do not control their “reproduction”. In addition, Population Services International– which specializes in, among other things “reproductive health” is a donor to Caritas Haiti and describes them as one of their “partners”."
So, please, DO therefore consider donating to Caritas Haiti. Their site is here.
Here Caritas Haiti describes the objectives of a plan called "Strategic operational plan 2006 – 2011; Development program; Strategic sub-program: Promotion of Women's rights.
"Analysis of the Problematic situation
Feminisation of poverty;
Low participation of women in political activity in the country;
More women are illiterate;
Very few women own businesses;
Lack of services adapted or to specific training for their reproductive health;
Women don't know about their rights or the written law;
Increased violence against women;
Increase in the level of girls who leave school early;
Women suffer discrimination through laws which give men priority;
Low support for women who are victims of violence;
Men fail to assume their family responsibilities, which then increases the weight of responsibility on the women;
Discrimination against women inside the Church, in the family, and in society;
The majority of women live in de facto relationships without legal recourse in case of conflict with their partner;
Women do not control their reproductive capacity
Women do not have access to information.
Women's work is not valued.
The majority of women do not have an occupation or profession.
Women are not emancipated and refuse to enter activities which are considered masculin
They don't know their rights and are not able to properly fulfil their role in communities and exercise their political rights;
The health of women deteriorates and becomes fragile because of their difficult living condition;
Women have little access to education and training;
Women's organisations are poorly structured;
Poor standard of means and tools to permit women to look after their issues;
Poor level of salaries for women compared to men's in the same or comparable work;
Poor access to resources;
Poor access to professional training by young girls in the country;
Women have no economic power;
Women are not sufficiently trained;
Women lack good knowledge of their basic rights;
Negligence and absence of parents;
Women are not sufficiently professionally specialised;
Customs, traditions and stereotypes are unfavourable to women;
Women are systematically excluded;
Social and familial discrimination;
Lack of health infrastructure (hospitals, pharmacies, health centers)
Women lack leadership;
Poor access to health services in remote areas;
Low consideration for gender equity in families;
High rate of unemployment (55.4% of unemployed people are women)
Women's dependent situation prevents them from negotiating their sexuality and the power of birth control;
They are not able to manage to meet their needs and take control and they fall into poverty;
Women are afraid to admit to being ill (breast cancer, uterine cancer, sexually transmitted illnesses etc)
Out of proportion population growth;
Street children are increasing with mothers unable to cope;
Increasing numbers of girls in the streets and in domestic service;
Separation and division - (single parent households);
Lack of confidence and self-esteem in women;
Violence and abuse of women;
Decision-making roles are entirely occupied by men;
Gender equity is not adequately taken into account in development projects;
Increase migration of women;
Women are marginalised;
Increased women's death rate
Increasing rates of AIDS in women;
Women are excluded and exploited."
Ugly competition for funding or pure religious fundamentalism?
Back on the Catholic Dialogue blog it all looks like an indecent scramble for the money that the earthquake will bring has suddenly erupted; the catholic dialogue is so crude:
Canada's Development and Peace Catholic organisation of "channelling Haiti emergency funding through dubious 'partner'"! And readers are crudely urged not to make their contribution through them.
And Catholic Dialogue goes on in an obscene focus on dogma minutiae while people are buried alive:
"Even though they don't use the word "contraception", the wording used here is eerily similar to the typical euphemisms used by the pro-choice crowd. The wording used above is not necessarily in contradiction with Church teaching. Indeed, the decision to have children or even to engage in sex should be a joint decision between husband and wife. That's why the Church teaches that even married couples must sometimes practice chastity. So if Haitian men are forcing themselves on their wives without their approval, that's akin to rape. But if that were the true intention of Caritas Haiti's education programs, they should have been more prudent with their wording. The way it's currently written sounds too much like feminist drivel about a woman's "right to control her body". We all know what that really means.
I contacted Caritas Haiti to obtain clarification of these statements on their website, but I still haven't heard back from them. They must be swamped due to the earthquake. May God help them."
Gee, I wonder what's stopping Caritas Haiti from answering these urgent questions.
But, wait, there's more. Apparently the US government has partners in AID who are, gasp, shock, horror...
"Distributing condoms on behalf of the U.S. government?
"On the website of the United States President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief, you can find a list of the "partners" that work with the U.S. government to prevent the spread of AIDS. Among the list I found this:
"Is Caritas Haiti only involved in the "Abstinence/Be Faithful" programs, or are they also pushing condoms? I really hope it's the former. The same website contains a document that lists Caritas Haiti among the groups promoting "Abstinence/Be Faithful" programs. I hope that's the extent of their work on this project.
"On another site, I found a detailed curriculum for Catholic high schools in Haiti entitled Instruction curriculum for education on life, family, sexuality, and HIV/AIDS for Catholic secondary schools in Haiti. Caritas Haiti helped write this curriculum with other organizations. As far as I can tell, the curriculum teaches students to practice abstinence until marriage, which is very good. There is no mention of contraception. So we don't know for sure whether Caritas Haiti is involved in distributing contraceptives under the US government program, but the statements from their own website suggest that they are probably doing so in another context."
And, finally - at least that's all I'm going to quote -
"They helped organize the 2008 International Women's Day in Haiti
"If you visit the website of the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) you'll discover that Caritas Haiti received a grant of more than $30,000 in 2008 for "Support for a Binational March to Celebrate International Women's Day - March 8, 2008". While I don't know for sure, I imagine that "Binational" refers to the two countries that share the island: Haiti and the Dominican Republic.
"In case you didn't know, International Women's Day has become an annual manifestation for radical feminists around the world to promote abortion rights and contraception. What the heck is Caritas Haiti doing supporting this event?"
Notice for International Women's Day in Rye, Victoria Australia.
And by the way folks, while we are on the subject, International Women's Day in Victoria, Australia is on the 8th of March, at 3 Lyon's Street Rye at the Women's house - that 'Purple Place'. (03) 59855955 [email protected]
Women will have the microphone all day and there will be lots to eat and lots of speakers. There will be the usual ceremony at the end of the Rye pier with a period of silence and respect for women who have died in war and through other crimes of violence against women. I think that after I send them this article, they will be talking a lot about the poor women of Haiti, who, in addition to sharing the horrors of an earthquake, must bear the injuries and indignities of Catholic Church anti-women ideology.
Date: Sunday, February 08, 2009
Author: Anna Coren and Tim Schwarz
Dateline: Manila, the Philippines
Thanks to Bill Ryerson of the US Population Media Center for having advised me of this - JS
A debate is stirring in the predominantly Roman Catholic country of the Philippines: should the government provide contraceptives to the public?
More than 100 members of the House of Representatives have co-authored a bill that would allow government funds to be used to promote artificial contraceptives -- which is now prohibited in the Southeast Asian nation.
"The bill is not about religion. It is not about morality," said Edcel Lagman, a congressman. "It's about rights, health and sustainable human development."
Some one-third of the country's 90 million people live in poverty. The Asian Development Bank said that problem will persist until the country curbs its birth rate -- one of the highest in the world.
The nationwide Pulse Asia Poll found nearly two-thirds of people support the bill. But the Catholic Church is fiercely opposed, and is pressuring lawmakers to vote against it.
"Why should we use contraceptives, teaching our children the use of contraceptives," said Ed Sorreta of Pro-Life Philippines. "It's totally against the teaching of the Catholic Church. The poverty is really caused by other issues, moral values."
"When you talk about natural family planning, it needs discipline, that's where many couples fail. They lack the discipline."
Abortion is illegal in the Philippines, except in cases to save a mother's life. But the United Nations estimates that half a million illegal abortions are performed in the country every year.
Sheila Villanueva, a 25-year-old maid earning $2 a day, has five children.
"I married at eighteen. I had my first baby by the time I was nineteen. Then the babies came, one after the other," she said.
"Life is so hard, kids get sick easily, prices of goods are so high. That's one of the reasons why I don't want them to have too many kids," she said.
Still, Villanueva said she would not use contraceptives.
"Even if they say you'll end up with too many kids, I don't get swayed by their persuasions, I won't use those contraceptives," she said.
The legislation will go before the nation's Congress in the next few months.
"This bill, once it becomes a law, it will give information and access to those who want it," Lagman said. "But I will also underscore that central to this bill is the freedom of choice. ... (W)e compel women to make their own choices."
"(T)he government should be there to give them free information and free access to the products, particularly to the poorer of the poor," he added.
"As a nurse, I was in contact with the ill and the infirm. I knew something about the health and disease of bodies, but for a long time, I was baffled at the tremendous personal problems of life, of marriage, of living, and of just being. Here indeed was a challenge to “build beyond thyself.” Where was I to begin? I found the answer at every door. [...]
For these beliefs I was denounced, arrested, I was in and out of police courts and higher courts, and indictments hung over my life for several years. But nothing could alter my beliefs. Because I saw these as truths, I stubbornly stuck to my convictions."
See also: "Progress ideology, colonial racism, right to life and family planning"
Image source was http://www.nwhm.org/ProgressiveEra/birthcontrol.html
Only in 1965 did the practice of contraception become legal between married couples in the United States, through a 1965 Supreme Court decision, Griswold v. Connecticut. Only a few months later, on September 6, 1966, Margaret Sanger, a nurse, and the founder of the US birth control movement, died at the age of 86.
(See bottom of article for details of summer internships at the Margaret Sanger institute.)
Margaret Sanger's 1953 speech about standing up to the authorities to defend her convictions
This I believe, first of all: that all our basic convictions must be tested and transmuted in the crucible of experience–and sometimes, the more bitter the experience, the more valid the purified belief.
As a child, one of a large family, I learned that the thing I did best was the thing I liked to do. This realization of doing and getting results was what I have later called an awakening consciousness.
There is an old Indian proverb which has inspired me in the work of my adult life. “Build thou beyond thyself, but first be sure that thou, thyself, be strong and healthy in body and mind.” To build, to work, to plan to do something, not for yourself, not for your own benefit, but “beyond thyself”–and when this idea permeates the mind, you begin to think in terms of a future. I began to think of a world beyond myself when I first took an interest in nursing the sick.
As a nurse
As a nurse, I was in contact with the ill and the infirm. I knew something about the health and disease of bodies, but for a long time, I was baffled at the tremendous personal problems of life, of marriage, of living, and of just being. Here indeed was a challenge to “build beyond thyself.” Where was I to begin? I found the answer at every door. For I began to believe there was something I could do toward increasing an understanding of these basic human problems. To build beyond myself, I must tap all inner resources of stamina and courage, of resolution within myself. I was prepared to face opposition, even ridicule, denunciation. But I had also to prepare myself, in defense of these unpopular beliefs, I had to prepare myself to face courts and even prisons. But I resolved to stand up, alone if necessary, against all the entrenched forces which opposed me.
Supported by patients; harassed by authorities
I started my battle some forty years ago. The women and mothers whom I wanted to help, also wanted to help me; they, too, wanted to build beyond the self, in creating healthy children and bringing them up in life to be happy and useful citizens. I believed it was my duty to place motherhood on a higher level than enslavement and accident. I was convinced we must care about people; we must reach out to help them in their despair.
For these beliefs I was denounced, arrested, I was in and out of police courts and higher courts, and indictments hung over my life for several years. But nothing could alter my beliefs. Because I saw these as truths, I stubbornly stuck to my convictions.
Something had to be done
No matter what it may cost in health, in misunderstanding, in sacrifice, something had to be done, and I felt that I was called by the force of circumstances to do it. Because of my philosophy and my work, my life has been enriched and full. My interests have expanded from local conditions and needs, to a world horizon, where peace on earth may be achieved when children are wanted before they are conceived. A new conciousness will take place, a new race will be born to bring peace on earth. This belief has withstood the crucible of my life’s joyous struggle. It remains my basic belief today.
This I believe–at the end, as at the beginning of my long crusade for the future of the human race.
From a speech made by Margaret Sanger, a population activist, in November 1953, known as "This I believe".
The original electronic source is at http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/news/this_i_believe.html
Listen to an
mp3 recording of Margaret Sanger's November 1953 broadcast
on Edward R. Murrow's This I Believe radio program, provided to the Sanger Project by the National Public Radio. The text of the speech below comes from Margaret Sanger's Papers at the Library of Congress (130:620). Several earlier drafts of the speech appear on the Sanger microfilm, but this version is the closest to the one spoken by Sanger.
Summer Internships at the Margaret Sanger Papers Project in New York
Contact: Cathy Moran Hajo [mailto:cathy.hajo[AT]nyu.edu] Sent: Fri 16/01/2009 15:54 Subject: Summer Internships at the Margaret Sanger Papers Project in New York The Margaret Sanger Papers Project is pleased to announce its summer internship program for 2009. We seek applications from graduate or advanced undergraduate students to work with the editorial staff at the Project's offices in New York City. This is a wonderful opportunity for students to become proficient in primary and secondary research, and the process of editing historical documents for publication. Interns can apply for internships working with the book or digital edition.
BOOK INTERNSHIP: Interns will be working on Volume IV of the Selected Papers of Margaret Sanger, covering the years 1920-1966 and focusing on her efforts to create a global birth control movement. Interns will work under the supervision of editors on specific topics, tracing people, places, events and issues covered in the documents. The research will be used to produce annotation and introductory material for the volume. Research will be conducted in the Project's offices, using the comprehensive microfilm edition and other primary sources, as well as at local libraries and with resources available on the Internet.
DIGITAL INTERNSHIP: We have two digital projects available for interns this summer.
1) We are preparing a digital edition on Margaret Sanger's 1922 trip to Japan for the Women and Social Movements web collection. Interns will transcribe, encode, and conduct research for essays and interpretation on the documents for this small collection.
2) We are also continuing work on our digital edition of Sanger's speeches and articles, focusing on texts written by Margaret Sanger in the 1930s.
Interns will be proofread the texts, add XML encoding, and draft subject index entries for the documents. Interns will conduct research as needed to verify dates, titles, and publication information, or to identify the names of people, organizations and books mentioned in the documents.
More information and application information can be located on our website, at:
http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/aboutmspp/internships.html The deadline for applications is March 1, 2009.
Cathy Moran Hajo, Ph.D.
Associate Editor/Assistant Director The Margaret Sanger Papers Project Department of History, New York University
53 Washington Square South New York, NY 10012 (212) 998-8666 (212) 995-4017 (fax)
[email protected] Visit our website at: http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger