Concerned Women for America - Conservative Groups Excluded From U.N. Interactive Hearings

Search for on

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Home

Click here

Conservative Groups Excluded From U.N. Interactive Hearings 7/2/2005
By Lindsey Douthit

Meetings become forum for liberal agenda.

A person approaches you and asks for your opinion. Then, before you can get a word out, he launches into a breathless and passionate discourse of what he thinks. When finished, he smiles, thanks you politely for your time, goes about his merry way, and leaves you puzzled as to why he asked for your input in the first place.

Such a scenario occurred recently at the United Nations, with conservative groups left wondering if they were completely invisible.

On June 24-25, in New York City, the United Nations General Assembly met for the first time with representatives from nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), civil society and the private sector. Mr. Jean Ping of Gabon, president of the General Assembly, hailed the “informal interactive” hearings as a “monumental moment” in U.N. history. The two-day session consisted of dialogues between speakers, chosen by a U.N. task force, and representatives from member countries.

The United Nations welcomed input from outside actors, it asserted, in preparation for the U.N. Millennium +5 Summit, scheduled for September 14-16, when world leaders will meet to discuss the implementation of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Approved in the United Nations Millennium Declaration in 2000, the MDGs declare eight essential goals for the U.N. to pursue, such as the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger, universal primary education and environmental sustainability.

Notably absent from the list was the goal to “provide access for all who need reproductive health services,” which was removed after member states failed to reach consensus on the controversial issue. Radical groups such as International Planned Parenthood, which adamantly supports universal "reproductive rights" (i.e. international legalization and government funding of abortions), vowed to resuscitate the issue during the interactive hearings.

Prior to the hearings, the U.N.-selected task force reviewed applications from various organizations to give presentations or actively participate in the sessions. None of the socially conservative groups that applied were accepted. Instead, they were granted permission only to observe the hearings. The task force consisted of Mr. Ping’s staff plus 10 lobby groups, including the radical feminist group Women’s Environment and Development Organization (WEDO), which circulated pamphlets promoting issues such as universal "reproductive rights."

WEDO pamphlets attacked conservatives, claiming that “right-wing forces everywhere invoke culture and religion to deny women’s rights” and “rising fundamentalist movements seek to roll back women’s gains and to limit their freedoms and opportunities in all spheres of life, particularly reproductive and sexual health and rights.”

With the participant list dominated by WEDO-selected groups, it is no surprise that the hearings served as a forum for the liberal agenda. Speakers repeated constantly the issue of universal reproductive rights, as well as demands for universal rights of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender persons. Speakers from organizations such as MADRE (an “international women human rights organization”), International Center for Research on Women, Population Action International, Family Care International, and Concerned Women for Family Development spurred the arguments. Other topics were approached, such as rights for the elderly and indigenous persons, but the war cries for universal "reproductive rights" quickly drowned them.

Sadly, conservative groups were forced to stand by and listen while radical feminist and homosexual groups promoted their agenda to the U.N. Thanks to the generosity of CWA donors, however, we are able to tell what really happened when the media hails the hearings as “representative of all organizations.”

It is not clear how much input the General Assembly will consider for the September Summit, but one thing is clear: Some voices were encouraged, and others were suppressed. While labeled “interactive hearings,” the two days of hearings did not prove so “interactive” after all.

Lindsey Douthit is a recent graduate of Baylor University and a Ronald Reagan Memorial Intern with CWA.