Abortion Giant Lies About Outcome of Recent UN Negotiation

By | March 30, 2023

WASHINGTON, D.C., March 31 (C-Fam) The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) responded to the recently-adopted document of the UN’s annual women’s conference with celebrating language that was—very intentionally—not included in the document.

The international abortion giant issued a press release following the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) claiming that “the text includes a standalone paragraph on comprehensive sexuality education (CSE).”  In fact, the term CSE was not included anywhere in the document. The paragraph referred to by IPPF included language insisting that education must be “age appropriate,” “relevant to cultural contexts” and “with appropriate direction and guidance from parents and legal guardians.”

IPPF alluded to the controversy in the press release, noting attempts to “advance on normative standards relating to CSE,” however “these proposals were ultimately dropped at a late hour due to the inability to reach consensus on suggested new language.”

IPPF expressed “regret that discussions stalled on CSE,” adding that “this is especially unfortunate, given this year’s priority theme and the focus on education.”  At listening sessions for civil society organizations prior to the two-week CSW, it was clear that progressive groups, including IPPF, were strongly prioritizing getting CSE into the agreed conclusions.  The fact that they were unsuccessful led to expressions of disappointment from civil society organizations promoting so-called “sexual rights,” as well as from the U.S. government, which lobbied for CSE during negotiations.

The U.S. government expressed its disappointment that the agreed conclusions excluded CSE, “sexual and reproductive health and rights” (SRHR), and “a direct reference on sexual orientation and gender identity.”

While it is undoubtedly a win for pro-life and pro-family organizations that language including CSE and SRHR were once again excluded from the resolution, the IPPF statement implies that both terms were adopted, downplaying how controversial they are to UN member states.

The negotiations extended into the early hours of Saturday morning after the final day, as exhausted delegates held the line on words and phrases that might seem indistinguishable to the casual observer.

For decades, the phrases “sexual and reproductive health” and “reproductive rights” have been included—with important caveats—in UN resolutions, but the phrase “sexual and reproductive health and rights” has not, as it implies the existence of “sexual rights.” In fact, “sexual rights” have been rejected by UN negotiators as far back as the Beijing Women’s Conference in 1995.

Similarly, UN delegates have adopted language referring to sex education, but will negotiate strenuously to avoid the specific formulation “comprehensive sexuality education.”

For conservative organizations and governments, words matter, as does consensus.  It is essential that controversial and harmful language be strongly contested in order to prevent the establishment of international norms in favor of mandates for CSE, rights to abortion, the redefinition of the family, and other controversial matters.

For IPPF and its allies, on the other hand, it is useful to create ambiguity.  It is through ambiguity and euphemism that they, and like-minded bureaucrats at UN agencies, continue to promote abortion, CSE, and novel “rights” on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity despite the lack of any agreed mandate to do so.

IPPF is dedicated to providing abortion around the globe for all, including minors. This commitment is illustrated by their willingness to forego U.S. funding rather than stop performing abortions when the Mexico City Policy is in effect. They also work to create and promote extreme CSE curricula and collaborate closely with UN agencies in countries around the world.