SECRETS OF PRO-ABORTIONISTS EXPOSED

The Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR) is a feminist, non-profit legal advocacy organization dedicated to promoting abortion world-wide. For example, it successfully managed to have feminist ideology and policies included in the International Criminal Court (ICC) treaty when it was set up in Rome in 1998.

By a stroke of luck, however, internal secret memos of CRR were recently obtained by the Catholic Family and Human Rights organization (C-FAM) in New York, which monitors the UN on behalf of international pro-life/family organizations. These memos disclose CRR's strategy in all its bare ugliness.

According to these documents, CRR's strategy includes the following:

a. International

CRR plans to produce an international right to abortion-on-demand by way of a Trojan Horse of deceit and deception by twisting words and definitions referred to in international treaties to be interpreted as requiring abortion to be a human right. According to the CRR documents, "there is a stealth quality to the work; we are achieving incremental recognition of values without a huge amount of scrutiny from the opposition. These lower profile victories will gradually put us in a strong position to assert a broad consensus around our assertions we have to fight harder, be a little dirtier." By doing this, CRR hopes to become what they describe as the "midwife to the global choice movement." In short, CRR plans to arrange pro-abortion interpretations of UN treaties which, when repeated by international bodies will establish the legitimacy of these "rights" under international law. This result will be achieved due to the fact that international law is developed not by way of direct or specific language, but rather by broad language that is "interpreted" and becomes the law by way of custom or usage. If an interpretation is applied a sufficient number of times, it then evolves into "law." International law, therefore, is not really "law" at all, but is actually only applied politics.

This memo confirms long-standing fears of some legal scholars that international negotiations on human rights laws are no longer being conducted in good faith, and are jeopardizing national sovereignty.

b. Domestic Goals

CRR plans to bring legal challenges to:

  1. Oppose any parental involvement in abortion decisions, by removing those parental rights currently recognized.

 

  1. Force hospitals to perform abortions and force taxpayers to fund abortions by way of state and federal funds. So far in the U.S., courts have ordered 13 states to provide abortion coverage.

 

  1. Challenge laws mandating the reporting of child abuse of children being engaged in sexual activities with adults, which CRR labels as "non-abusive sexual relations." That is, it plans to initiate legal challenges to reduce the age of consent laws.

 

  1. Overturn by court order any standard medical regulation of abortion clinics that CRR refers to as TRAP laws (Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers). According to CRR, TRAP laws impose burdensome requirements on abortion clinics that, in truth, are put in place to protect women from harm and possible death at the hands of abortion clinic workers. Some examples of regulations include those requiring abortionists to hold valid medical licences; abortions to be conducted under supervision of registered nurses; and abortionists to have staff privileges at local hospitals in order to allow a quick response to life-threatening complications that may arise during an abortion.

 

  1. Bring legal challenges against "Choose Life" licence plates, which are used as fundraising for Crisis Pregnancy Centres, etc. These licence plates for cars have been legal in Florida since 1998, raising over $70,000 per month for maternity clinics, counselling services, non-profit adoption centres, and pregnancy counselling centres.

The above objectives are all to be carried by an aggressive campaign of lawsuits. In fact, the strategy of threatening a lawsuit was applied against C-FAM itself by CRR because it claimed that disclosure of its secret memos would cause CRR "irreparable harm." CRR has demanded that C-FAM return all copies of memos, and "cease and desist from any further dissemination, and identify all persons and organizations, including e-mail addresses to which C-FAM has disseminated this information." Focus on the Family (U.S.) and Canada's Life-Site News have also been contacted and have been warned of legal consequences for publishing the contents of these memos. So be it. However, in truth CRR's threats of legal action are not alarming, because on December 8, 2003, CRR's internal secret memos were read into the permanent U.S. Congressional Record by pro-life Congressman Christopher Smith (Republican) of New Jersey. Hence, this material is now a matter of public record and information.