Endangered: A World in Peril

Man-made dangers of war, poverty, environmental destruction and hunger entrap the human species, threatening to eradicate the species. But one peril jeopardizes the human race more than all other threats combined—abortion.

Each year, the lives of 56 million children in the womb are snuffed out by the gruesome act of abortion—153,424 babies per day.1 The following is a breakdown of the numbers:

>> >> >>

At least 6,392 abortions are executed around the globe every hour—an average of 106 children a minute—enough to empty five kindergarten classrooms in just 60 seconds.2 Most abortions occur in developing countries (about 49 million each year) while only seven million occur in developed nations.3 In the majority of countries a preponderance of abortions are performed through surgical procedures, leaving mothers at risk for multiple complications ranging from infections resulting in hospitalization to death.4 2

humanlife.org

>>

For developed nations, the use of medical, or chemical, abortions are on the rise. Mifepristone (see page five) has been registered in at least 59 countries5. In the United States 22.6% of all abortions are now medical abortions6 but many European countries have a significantly higher use of chemical abortions (70% in Switzerland, 83% in Sweden to as high as 94% in Finland).7 Can the world afford to continue the wholesale slaughter of innocent children and expect to perpetuate the human race? Can it continue this blatant disregard for the future?

To do so endangers the survival of the human race itself.

We challenge you to read on & learn the truth of what threatens humans.

Human Life Alliance (HLA) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to creating a culture in which all human life, from the process of fertilization to natural death, is respected and cherished.

Distribution of HLA’s compelling informational materials to high school and college students, medical and community organizations around the world have reached 224.6 million people in 88 countries and on all seven continents since 1990.

humanlifealliance 1614 93rd Lane NE | Minneapolis, MN 55449

humanlife.org | 651-484-1040 citations on back

0

5

Day 1=1 cell. Hair and eye color are set.1

Baby may jump in reaction to sound and suck her thumb.6

A Child from the very beginning

Monthly Fetal Development

The images to the right illustrate developmental stages of the child in the womb by month. Each week brings with it unique milestones, but from the moment of fertilization, the entire genetic makeup of a new human being is present. Nothing new will be added to support the baby’s growth but oxygen, nutrition, and time.

1

Today abortion is the number one killer of human beings. Globally, the next two causes of death, heart disease and stroke, account for 15.2 million deaths each year,1 a small fraction compared to the 56 million abortions each year.

While there’s no doubt abortion has a global effect on the population, it also has a more personal impact. Each mother of an aborted child has her own unique story to tell: “I chose an abortion because I mistakenly thought that the baby was the problem when, in fact, it was the circumstances I found myself in at the time. Situations change as I later learned, but the consequences of abortion, its pain and regret, remain forever. I wish I could prevent other women from making the same mistake. I wish I could tell them that the baby is not the problem.

Yes, the situations into which they are born are often difficult, but like all things in life these constantly change. On the other hand, abortion—promoted as the easiest solution to these complicated circumstances—is irreversible and carries with it the possibility of a lifetime of regret." – Suzanne “I bought into the lie that an abortion would be the best, the easiest and the quickest way out of a difficult situation. I bought into the lie that my baby was just a blob of cells, a mass of tissue, nothing that even remotely resembles a human being. When I awoke from the abortion procedure in the hospital I began crying, “I want my baby. Where is my baby?” When I was told to shut up because I was upsetting other people in the recovery room, I was so ashamed I remained silent for the next 19 years.” –Debbie

6

The heart begins to beat.2

Oil & sweat glands function.7

Brain waves can be detected.3

The baby can now recognize her mom's voice.8

2

3

7

8

Unique fingerprints form.4

The skin begins to thicken.9

Baby’s ears are functioning.5

1/2 pound is gained per week, the baby is getting ready for birth.10

4

“I had an abortion at 21 years old, at 10 weeks, and I have regretted it ever since. I was upset before I went through with it, and I came away from the hospital safe but feeling upset and empty. I have experienced depression for years, in part because of this.” – Easlyn

9

Read other stories of women and their abortions

www.silentnomoreawareness.org/testimonies/ Image credits: Month 0 by David Marchal, Months 1-2 by Steven O'Connor M.D. / Months 4-6 © Life Issues Institute.

3

In 1974, the U.S. National Security Council, promulgated a highlyclassified document entitled National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM-200), also called The Kissinger Report. Its subheading was “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” This document, published shortly after the first major international population conference in Bucharest, was a collaborative effort among the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Departments of State, Defense and Agriculture. NSSM200 became official American foreign policy on November 26, 1975.

NSSM-200 laid out a detailed strategy by which the United States would aggressively push population control in developing nations in order to regulate (or have better access to) the natural resources of these countries. The document cited factors that could interrupt the flow of materials from lesserdeveloped countries to the U.S., one of which was a large population of “anti-imperialist youth,” which therefore must be limited by population control. NSSM-200 identified 13 nations that would be primary targets of population control efforts because they accounted for 47% of the world’s population increase at the time.

The United States has spent over 75 billion dollars since 1965 to control the number of children born in developing nations through the widespread imposition of abortion, sterilization and birth control. Tragically, population abuses have been committed by U.S. funded organizations in a number of nations. These abuses include forced abortions and sterilizations, mandatory birth control, and follow-up healthcare so shoddy that it has led to a number of fatalities.1

The time has come not only to eliminate population control abuses, but population control itself. Because of rapidly changing world demographic trends, the concept of “population control” is not only outdated, but actually contributes to conflict in the world at large. Decelerating regional population growth rates are causing severe economic and social problems in Europe, the former Soviet Union, Japan, Singapore and Hong Kong.

NSSM-200 specifically declared that the United States was to cover up its population control activities and avoid charges of imperialism by inducing the United Nations and various non-governmental organizations to do its dirty work.

While the CIA and Departments of State and Defense have issued hundreds of papers on population control and national security, the U.S. government has never renounced NSSM200, but has only amended certain portions of its policy.

NSSM-200 therefore remains the foundational document on population control issued by the United States government.

NSSM-200 does not emphasize the rights or welfare of individuals or of nations, just the “right” of the United States to have unfettered access to the natural resources of developing nations.

The U.S. and the other nations of the developed world, as well as ideologically motivated population control NGOs, should be supporting and guiding authentic economic development that allows the people of each nation to use their resources for their own benefit, thereby leading to an enhancement of human rights worldwide and healthier economies for all.

To read the entire summary of The Kissinger Report by Dr. Clowes, visit www.humanlife.org 4

humanlife.org

citations on back

e id w d l r o W Abortions by the Millions

1

Per Year

North America

1.2 Europe

4.3

Latin America & Caribbean

6.5

Asia

35.5

Africa

8.2 Oceania

0.1

Abortion Methods VACUUM ASPIRATION The uterus is emptied by a vacuum or syringe, the baby is torn into pieces as he or she is pulled through the hose. 1,2,3 DILATION AND SUCTION CURETTAGE (D&C) The baby is fatally sucked out, a looped knife is used to dice up the placenta before the pieces are removed. 4 DILATION AND EVACUATION (D&E) The abortionist tears the baby's body apart with forceps. The spine is snapped, the skull is crushed and the remains are sucked out. 5,6,7,8

INDUCTION OR PROSTAGLANDIN Labor is induced in the 2nd or 3rd trimester. Saline or urea are injected to kill the child in the womb. Digoxin or potassium chloride are directly inserted into the baby’s heart to guarantee the child’s death. Other times the baby is delivered alive and left to die. 9 RU-486 (THE ABORTION PILL) The baby dies when Mifeprex (mifepristone) blocks the production of progesterone—the hormone that helps provide important nutrients and oxygen to the baby. Cytotec (misoprostol), taken two days later, causes uterine bleeding and strong contractions to expel the remains of the baby. 10

5

Ominous warnings of millions starving to death in a world overcrowded with people were prevalent in the late 20th Century.

Panic struck. It was no coincidence that family planning programs—including abortion procedures—were developed and accepted at the height of this scare.

n o i t a l u Pop The Myth

However, the 21st century brought the realization that the increase in population was actually due to dramatically increased life expectancies.

Earth Report 2000 acknowledged that, “World population increased not because people were breeding like rabbits, but because they stopped dying like flies.”1 Although the world’s population has continued to grow, the number of children has decreased drastically and will therefore cause an eventual population decline.

Global fertility rates are half what they were in 1964.2 To merely maintain its population, a nation’s fertility rate must be at least 2.1 children per woman.3

In order to maintain its population, a nation’s fertility rate must be at least 2.1 children per woman.3 Highlighted here the countries below that rate.

6

humanlife.org

Unfortunately, every developed country is currently at or below this level.4 While the average fertility rate of the U.S. is 1.87,5 the current rate in the European Union is a dismal 1.61.6 In addition, consider 87 percent of U.S. population growth came from immigrants and their children between 2010 and 2014.7 With the acknowledgment of looming economic disaster, governments in Russia,8 Japan, Australia,9 and most European countries10,11,12 have initiated monetary “pronatal” incentives for having children—incentives that have not yet proven effective in raising fertility rates.

Global demographic trends continual to be studied at the highest levels of leadership dominating any discussion of long-term fiscal, economic or foreign policy direction.13 These

Central Intelligence Agency, 2017, www.cia.gov/library/ publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2127.html.

citations on back

studies show that population growth, which supplies an increasing source of workers and consumers, is vital to maintaining a stable economy, national strength and security and ultimately a free society.14 However, this information isn’t getting to the average citizen.

Maintaining sufficient workers to share the economic burden of providing Social Security or pension benefits for the elderly proves crucial to a population that exhibits increased life expectancy.

When considering there are currently 14 elders (those 65 and older) for every 100 working-age adults (20–64), the future looks bleak. Predictions show 28 per 100 by 2050 and 41 per 100 by 2100.15 Carl Haub, of the Population Reference Bureau, believes tinkering with the economy and adjusting the retirement age will not solve the problem. He says, “You can’t keep going with a completely upside-down age distribution...you can’t have a country where everybody lives in a nursing home.”16

n

7

Most of us have heard about some of the headline-grabbing international abortion providers such as Women on Waves, the floating abortion mill that plies its grisly trade in the waters off the shores of prolife nations. Much larger groups such as the International Planned Parenthood Federation, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) push abortion in nearly two hundred countries. While these groups bask in the limelight, many other giant multinational population control corporations continue their lethal work almost unnoticed.

Not many have heard about giant single-purpose population control groups such as the Academy for Educational Development, CONRAD, DKT International, EngenderHealth, Family Health International, the International Medical Corps, IPAS, JHPIEGO, John Snow, Marie Stopes International, MCDI, PATH, Pathfinder and dozens of others, perhaps because their names cleverly conceal their real purpose ― to do nothing more than make large poor families into small poor families.

THE PLAYERs Perhaps even more dangerous are the many international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that do much good work, but which aggressively integrate "family planning" and "reproductive health" into their activities. These trusted groups include CARE, Heifer International, Helen Keller International, HOPE, Medecins Sans Frontieres (Doctors without Borders), the International Red Cross, Rotary International, UNICEF, World Vision and the World Wildlife Fund.

According to UNFPA, about $120 billion has been spent on population control in the developing nations since 1995 alone. More than half of this colossal figure has been contributed by the United States government and American NGOs. If these billions had been spent on authentic economic development activities such as rural electrification, better roads, health care (including attended childbirth), clean drinking water and schools, this money could have lifted more than fifty million of the world's poorest people out of their poverty and provided them with a decent standard of living. In fact, it could have provided clean drinking water and basic sanitation for the more than 330 million Africans who still do not have these necessities of life.

The great irony is that all of this population control has actually worsened the standard of living of the world's poorest people because it has taken away from them the only treasure they have ― their children.

Inevitably, population control programs have frequently led to horrible human rights abuses. Forced abortion programs have been documented in more than a dozen nations.

"Family planning" personnel in Uganda and Sri Lanka give women Depo-Provera shots and tell them that it is a malaria or infertility

treatment. A "safe motherhood" program in the Philippines inserted IUDs into hundreds of women without informing them of the fact.

More than 200 newborn babies were stolen from poor women in Ukraine, butchered and sold as beautifying treatments to such facilities as Barbados' Institute for Regenerative Medicine. These types of human rights abuses are to be expected when a philosophy or activity is inherently evil.

The “population management” mentality is incurably racist as well. We constantly hear of Africa being overpopulated, but Western Europe is five times more densely populated.

When was the last time you heard the call to force Europeans to stop having babies?

Babies are a gift in more than one way. As demography will soon demonstrate, Africa, with its large, young population and vast store of natural resources, will take over the leadership of the world from Europe, with its small, aging population and scanty resources.

As it always has been, as it always will be, the nations that treasure their next generation will inevitably overtake and overcome those that selfishly discard theirs.

For an extensive list of domestic and international anti-life organizations and the groups that cooperate with them, including financial information and activities, e-mail Brian Clowes at bclowes@hli.org.

Dr. Brian Clowes holds a PhD in Civil Engineering and Systems Science and works as Director of Research for Human Life International. Brian is the author of nine books, over 300 scholarly and popular articles, and has traveled to 65 countries on six continents as a speaker, educator and trainer.

e v i t r o Ab

g n i d n Fu

In May, 2009, some of the world’s wealthiest men and women met in New York to conspire on how to control the world’s population.1 Why? Because they believe that over-population is the greatest threat to mankind. Without exception, those involved are deeply influenced by the Malthusian philosophy that population growth will occur until finite natural resources create a world that can no longer sustain its inhabitants and chaos ensues. They believe the environment is being damaged beyond repair by an ever increasing population. They are also influenced by the social philosophy of eugenics which advocates improvement of the human race through limiting childbearing to only the “best and brightest.” Their means to accomplish this is through prenatal testing and screening, genetic counseling, birth control, in vitro fertilization, genetic engineering and abortion.

Bill and Melinda Gates gave over $57 million to the UN Population Fund in 2000.4 Through their foundation, they have continued this funding over the years and by July 2017 announced an extra commitment of $375 million for family planning through 2020.5 In 2006 Warren Buffet joined the Gates Foundation as a Trustee and committed to contribute at least $31 billion6 to the foundation to further his causes: IPAS, a global nongovernmental organization dedicated to ensuring women can obtain comprehensive abortion care and contraception, Family Health International with a focus on reproductive health and the inventors and patent holders of Norplant, and RU486. Photo Credit: Kjetil Ree (CC BY-SA 3.0) Other funders of the population control movement, but not mentioned above are David and Lucille Packard. Their foundation, with 7.1 billion in assets,9 almost exclusively funds population control and reproductive health organizations.

Ted Turner, George Soros, Warren Buffet, Oprah Winfrey, Bill Gates, Michael Bloomberg and David Rockefeller were present at the “Billionaires Club” meeting,2 each of them committed supporters of the population control movement.

Ted Turner through the Turner Foundation, infused the United Nations’ health agencies and population control organizations with over one billion dollars from 1997-2015.3 He has repeatedly called for a world-wide one-child policy like China’s and openly regrets having five children of his own.

8

humanlife.org

citations on back

David Rockefeller patriarch of the Rockefeller family and trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation passed away on march 30, 2017. His family has long been entrenched in the population control movement. The foundation, started by his parents, was at the forefront of the birth control movement. They began as the Bureau of Social Hygiene with the task of researching and promoting education on birth control, maternal health and sex education beginning in 1911.7 David Rockefeller, in a speech at the United Nations Ambassador’s Dinner, urged the world to curb population growth and implement control measures via global regulatory bodies such as the United Nations.8 His family and foundation are responsible for millions of dollars being funneled into population control.

The Ford family and Ford foundation, established in 1936, has had a pioneering role in championing population control. Between 1952 and 1965 they promoted, through various national and international agencies, birth control programs in developing countries. They funded the Population Council, a central population control organization that was subservient to national and international agencies and aided them in accomplishing their goals.

They still fund organizations with a focus on abortion advocacy and contribute millions yearly to International Planned Parenthood Federation.10

Abortion rights and reproductive health rights are all rooted in the population control movement which is born out of an unfounded fear that the earth can only sustain 2 billion people, a figure that Paul Ehrlich developed in the 1960’s. In his 1968 work The Population Bomb, Ehrlich stated: “The battle to feed all of humanity is over.

In the 1970s the world will undergo famines–hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.”

This is only one of his dire predictions that have proved false.

What has happened to Support for abortion rights is generally believed to be a fundamental tenet of feminism. However, considering that feminism is founded on the larger principle that all human beings, including women, have innate worth, dignity and inalienable rights, abortion advocacy is, in fact, contrary to the very roots of feminism. During the early years of the feminist movement, women fought to be recognized as equal persons in society. Ironically, many self-proclaimed feminists now advocate against these same rights of a different group of human beings— the preborn.

Elizabeth Cady Stanton, an early prominent American feminist, once said, “When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit.”1 Other famous American suffragists, including Susan B. Anthony2 and Alice Paul3, were strongly and vocally pro-life. They recognized that authentic feminism is based on the belief that the inherent worth of all human beings cannot be conferred or denied by someone else4.

They rejected abortion because they rejected the notion of the powerful oppressing the weak and the use of violence to solve a prob-

lem. Supporting women’s rights and opposing abortion uphold the consistent principle that every individual is deserving of respect.

Pro-abortion feminism has been damaging to women’s empowerment. Most of these feminists frequently express a weak view of women with regard to the abortion decision. They insist that women should be shielded from the biological facts and moral issues surrounding abortion, implying that women are too fragile to handle the truth. A new misleading language has been adopted in order to distract women from the reality of abortion’s impact on their mental and physical health and on what it does to their preborn babies. Phrases like “reproductive health,” “products of conception” and “right to choose” are rhetoric that serve the purpose of covering up important facts deemed too “offensive” or “upsetting.” This is a disservice to women, who have a right to know and the strength to deal with all the facts when facing a crisis pregnancy decision.

True feminism is about respecting women for their uniqueness and this includes their unique ability to give life. When women feel they must undergo an invasive and traumatic “procedure” in order to be “equal” politi-

9

cally, socially and in the workplace—can we really call this feminism? One feminist writer stated, “A woman wants an abortion as an animal caught in a trap wants to gnaw off its own leg.”5 The need to abort in order to achieve “equality” does not liberate women but instead, implies that women must adopt the characteristics of men, people who cannot become pregnant, in order to compete in a man’s world. Abortion is a symptom of sexism within our society—it is not the cure.

Abortion, in the final analysis, works to the advantage of the exploitative male.6 Abortion liberates men from sex without consequences and responsibility, under the guise of “support for women’s rights.”

By accepting abortion, women have accepted their own oppression. Feminists should be working for a society that supports the unique life-giving capacity of women by providing them with the resources they need and deserve, so that no woman feels driven to abortion. We should not settle for anything less.

By Sarah Hudson Western Canada

Feminism?

“When we consider that women are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit.”

—Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Feminist

A Romanian Woman

The reason I had the abortion was mainly due to the pressure of family and medical staff. I already had a two year old daughter, and we wanted another child, very much. However, during the first trimester screening, an ultrasound followed by a double test, the results indicated possible chromosomal abnormalities. These included a nuchal fold of 7 mm, two fingers missing from one hand, a possible lack of nasal bone, and a swallowed chest and abdominal area. The blood test came back positive with a high risk for Down syndrome, while a very experienced ultrasound doctor said that it was a girl, and there were big chances for Turner syndrome.

After going to the doctor twice, and as the pressure from my family increased to give her up, I decided I could not give her up because I loved her too much and I wanted her no matter how ill she would be or how difficult it would be for us. My husband wanted the same, and we even planned to give her to a specialized institution if we could not take care of her on our own. That was my last good day when I felt proud and happy.

We were pressured by the doctors and offended by my family. I was repeatedly told that my daughter was a piece of meat, not a baby, that there was no purpose in her life to be born, and that I would ruin the life of my other daughter and our marriage. The prenatal screening works only as an instrument of choosing the good and strong ones so that the others must be eliminated. There was not even one doctor ready to talk to us about other possible solutions or options we would have had if we kept her.

So I made the last appointment in a private and expensive hospital where I got a reservation, and I waited with my husband for three hours so that the specialist would make time for me. I had an advanced pregnancy so it had to be quickly resolved. I cannot tell you more than this: I got full anesthesia because, otherwise, I could not have done it. I remember only screaming afterwards that I wanted my baby.

The doctor came in afterwards because I could not stop crying for my child. He softly said I should calm down. I wished I had the power to scream at him, but those words hurt so much, they cut like a knife. I kept crying with my husband for an hour, and then I just could not stay a second more. I signed a document and left for home.

Strangely, there were no physical pains, only inside my heart. Nothing changed around us, except us. Life immediately moved on for everybody else.

Regrets her abortion Read countless stories of women and how they dealt with the aftermath of abortion:

silentnomoreawareness.org

10

humanlife.org

citations on back

Despite going to a psychologist, I cannot overcome the desperation, sadness, and void inside. I should have protected my baby from all that is bad, and instead I killed her. This is all that crosses my mind. Sometimes I have the feeling that things are improving. However, it is only a false impression that lasts for some days, at most a week.

I miss my daughter. I want to take back that day and, despite being only a short time since then, it kills me inside every second to know I will not see her, kiss her, and tell her how much I love her.

Please, all you who go through such an ordeal, first try to get an objective opinion on what your alternatives are and seek help from qualified persons, even if the ones dear to you do not understand or support your decision. Do not be afraid. The pain and suffering after killing your child is unbearable, no matter what pills you are given or what kind of extraordinary, rewarding life you have. The consequences cannot be avoided but only postponed. I believe from the deepest of my heart that no matter the severity of her illness it would have made us stronger. Now I am mourning a child I killed, a girl I will never see or love, a baby who had no fault but the one to be my child.

Luciana

Recently, the small country of Iceland has been getting positive attention for eliminating Down syndrome. On average there are one to two children born with the disorder a year. With the introduction of prenatal screening tests in the country, nearly 100% of mothers who received a positive Down syndrome test decided to abort their children.1 According to the most recent data, in other countries, more than half of the babies diagnosed with Down syndrome are aborted. In the United States the abortion rate stands at 67 percent2, the rate in France is 77 percent and in Denmark it is 98 percent.

People who support the practice of killing children with Down syndrome in the womb, justify it by claiming they are just trying to have healthy children. The founder of Iceland’s deCODE Genetics, Kari Stefansson, calls the screening, “heavy handed genetics” indicating that abortions were being performed for personal preference, not for health reasons.

THE REAL REASON THERE

Down Syndrome AROUND THE WORLD p

11

98

ICELAND NETHERLANDS FRANCE U.S.A.

100

77

67

The term “healthy child” is something that is up for debate. Some would argue that if a severe fetal anomaly is present, the child is not healthy. In 2010 a French fetal anomaly study revealed that 93.6 percent of children with clearly lethal or physically/mentally debilitating conditions were aborted. The striking part of the study is that there is no clear definition of what actually makes an anomaly “severe.”3 It is a sobering reality that most people feel that the best way to deal with the challenges of Down syndrome is to eliminate those who have it prior to birth.

However, there is a strong case to be made for caring for those with this genetic disorder. People with Down syndrome can live long, meaningful lives. In 1983 life expectancy was 25 years old, currently it has risen to 60 years old.4 Those are lives that are full of happiness. According to a 2011 study, 99 percent of adults with Down syndrome reported that they were happy with their lives, 97 percent liked themselves and 96 percent liked their physical appearance. Parents and guardians were also surveyed; 79 percent claimed that their outlook on life was more positive because of their child.5 The reason there are less babies born with Down syndrome is that there is a worldwide attitude that the disorder should be dealt with by eliminating people instead of caring for them. This dangerous attitude is not only killing children, but their potential and their contributions to society as well.

Citations on back

% of abortions on babies with Down syndrome

L

o n e g -cide INTE

R

ONA I T A N

EN ST E V

For over half a century, the population control movement has waged war on human fertility and now includes major international organizations like the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and the United Nations Population Fund, as well as the foreign aid bureaucracies of most of the wealthy countries of the world.

Many governmental recipients of foreign aid object to population reduction targets and coercive contraception and sterilization policies, but often they can do little against the U.N. Population Fund, the IPPF, and the foreign aid agencies of the developed nations, who insist on population control programs as a condition of foreign aid.

In January 1998, for example, Population Research Institute (PRI) sent researcher David Morrison to Peru to investigate reports that women were being forcibly sterilized. What he discovered was a nationwide campaign, aimed specifically at sterilizing poor and working class women, especially ethnic minorities. Sterilization campaigns are one of the common features of the population control movement and have been used in at least 24 countries around the world. All these campaigns have, to a greater or lesser extent, used coercion to reach sterilization targets, even though the practice of using targets or setting goals has been condemned by international agreement.

A common feature of these campaigns is an unwillingness to provide informed consent or, in incidences like Brazil's, to obtain consent at all.

In many instances the medical staff and workers who take part in the campaign in a local area are not from that area but are assembled and brought in from elsewhere.

12

humanlife.org

citations on back

OS W. M

HER

These campaigns often use some form of payment or prize to induce workers to bring in more women to be sterilized. In India, for example, the inducements were often popular electrical appliances. In Peru, food was an inducement. Because the sterilization staff are not trained obstetricians and gynecologists, and because the surgeries are often performed rapidly in very unhygienic conditions, the numbers of women dying or suffering permanent injury in these campaigns is often high. Postoperative care is patchy and often insufficient in most of these campaigns.

Forced abortion is also common in population control programs. I was in China when the one-child policy began 30 years ago. In 1979, I was the first American social scientist allowed to go to China and do research. What I saw then, living in an agricultural commune in rural Guangdong, rivals anything that happened in Nazi Germany. One day in 1980 several hundred young mothers, all pregnant with second or higher-order children, were ordered to attend population control meetings. They were told that they would all have to abort their pregnancies. Those who refused were arrested for the “crime” of being pregnant and locked up until they buckled under the pressure and submitted to an abortion.

At that point they were taken to the local medical clinic and given a lethal injection into their uterus.

If their bodies did not expel their dead or dying babies within two days, they were subjected to a cesarean section abortion. Most horrific of all, babies born alive were killed by means of an injection of formaldehyde into the “soft spot” on the crown of their heads. Those few women who managed to escape arrest and had their babies in secret were assessed heavy fines.

In 1979, I was the 1st American social scientist allowed to go to China ...Everything that I witnessed then, from the forced abortions of women in the 3rdtrimester of pregnancy to government-sanctioned infanticide, continued unabated until 2015 Everything that I witnessed then, from the forced abortions of women in the third-trimester of pregnancy to government-sanctioned infanticide, continued unabated until 2015, when the government realized that its brutal policies were creating a labor shortage. The two-child policy that followed failed to generate the expected baby boom, so Beijing is now moving towards mandating pregnancy.

Official Communist Party documents call on all Communist Party members to “take the lead in responding to the Central Committee’s call” to have a second child. Younger members are ordered to lead by example (the Chinese phrase used literally means “doing it starts with me”), while older comrades were told to “educate and supervise their children” with the obvious intent of encouraging grandchildren. In language reminiscent of China’s Maoist past, but still used in internal Party documents today, Party members of all ages were urged to “take various measures to mobilize the masses to actively achieve a ‘full two children policy.’ ” If China has gone too far, and is now moving towards increasing its birth rate, many other countries in Asia and Africa are still trying to force their's down. India currently has a two-child policy, and influential world leaders, such as Ted Turner have called for a global one-child policy.

For true believers of the population control agenda, population growth is the root of all mankind's problems. They wrongly calculate: More people equals less . . . of everything: Prosperity, food supply, economic growth, social order—all are jeopardized by any increase in human numbers. Those who would reduce our numbers forget that people are ingenious producers and problem-solvers, not just inert consumers. They forget that people are the ultimate resource, the one resource you cannot do without.

Steven W. Mosher is the President of the Population Research Institute and the author of Bully of Asia: Why China’s Dream is the New Threat to World Order (Regnery). He frequently testifies before the U.S. Congress on China, population and human rights issues.

ender

20 YRS.

Sex-selective abortion has displaced infanticide as the primary method for eliminating baby girls, although infanticide is still practiced.1 Currently, about 2 million baby girls per year are eliminated by sex-selective abortion and female infanticide combined.2 In 2013, there were 1.33M sex-selective abortions.

There were also about 65M girls born last year.

For every 200 girls born, one is refused the chance to see the light of day just because she is a female, HOWEVER, in India and China the situation is much worse.

4

BABY GIRLS EVERY MINUTE

FOR EVERY

100

7

Over the last 14 years, there was an average of 4,575 abortions motivated by gender every day. That's about one abortion every 18 seconds.

GIRLS IN THE TWO MOST POPULATED COUNTRIES...

China

India

e d i w d rl rcide Won ge de

Eastern Europe Albania, Romania, Montenegro, Kosovo, and e iv select 3 x e s Macedonia ur ere es wh bortions occ c a l P a The East Asia – China, Vietnam, Singapore, and Taiwan South Asia – India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and Afghanistan

Citations on back

abortion alone

LAST

abortion/infanticide

IN THE

Of G e s u a c e ...B

West Asia – Turkey, Syria, Iran, Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Georgia

9

...here are the number of girls who are aborted just because they are girls

U.S.A. and Canada AsianAmerican communities4

North Africa – Egypt, Tunisia, and Algeria Sub-Saharan Africa most countries

14

humanlife.org

citations on back

L A C I G O L O H PSYC PROBLEMS

PHYSICAL NS O I T A C I L P M O C

SUICIDE RATAEBSORT

FOR THOSE WHO

6 10 X

PREGNANT WOMEN TEENAGE GIRLS

X HIGHER HIGHER

s

n of Perforatio the uterus

ging Hemorrha est Cardiac arr

1

Endotoxic

Major nded te in un surgery

2

women Compared to th, women who gave bir were who aborted

d Undiagnose al) b u ectopic (t cy n a pregn Cervical laceration

pture

Uterine ru 4

Death

Infection

PoAnIR. S E D D N A N IO SS E ti R r DEPe common after abo ar

shock

Convulsion

65

%

k of longto be at ris 3 ly e k li e r o m pression. e d l a ic n li term c

S K S I R E R U FUT abort Women who their own not only put lth at risk; lives and hea danger the they also en current lives of their ildren. and future ch

Women who 4% abort are 14 to ly e k li more buse a y ll a ic ys ph n.6 re d their chil have Women who vious re p e n undergo a e abortions hav sk ri r e 60% high 7 e. g ia rr ca of mis

abort Women who ly to ke are more li ture fu ce n experie nancy, g re p ic p ecto infertility, my, hysterecto , th ir stillb e and miscarriag birth re prematu who have en om w than 5 tions. not had abor

Women who 44% abort have a of sk increased ri 8 r. ce n breast ca

Help After an Abortion Abortion Recovery International 866-721-7781 | abortionrecovery.org Rachel’s Vineyard – 24 hour 877-467-3463 | rachelsvineyard.org Project Rachel 888-456-HOPE (4673) | hopeafterabortion.com Concepts of Truth - 24 Hr. Helpline – 866-482-LIFE (5433) | internationalhelpline.org

15

Around the World Alarms Sound 1 Guttmacher Institute. “Facts on Induced Abortion Worldwide.” March 2018. http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_IAW.html | 2 Ibid. | 3 Ibid. | 4 Warren Hern.

Abortion Practice. (Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company, 1990). p. 175-193. | 5 “Where Is Mifepristone Registered?” The Medication Abortion Website, Apr. 2016, www.medicationabortions. com/registered. | 6 Jatlaoui TC, Shah J, Mandel MG, et al. Abortion Surveillance — United States, 2014. MMWR Surveill Summ 2017;66(No. SS-24):1–48. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/ mmwr.ss6624a1 | 7 Shane, Charlotte. “The Medical Abortion Works - so Why Aren't More Women Using It?” The Verge, 25 Aug. 2015, www.theverge.com/2015/8/25/9174769/abortion-pillshot-surgery-medical-women-healthcare. A Child From the Very Begininning 1 The top 10 causes of death” World Health Organization, 24 May 2018, web. http://www.who.int/newsroom/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death. Monthly Fetal Development 1 “The Drama of Fetal Development”, American Baby. Jan. 1989. p. 45. Print. | 2 Moore and Persaud, The Developing Human-Clinically Oriented Embryology. 2nd ed. W.B. Saunders Company 1973 p. 310. Print. | 3 Hamlin, H. “Life or Death by EEG,” JAMA. Oct. 12, 1964, p. 113 Print. | 4 Moore, Keith L., Persaud, T.V.N. The Developing Human. Clinically Oriented Embryology p. | 5 Flanagan, Geraldine Lux, Beginning Life DK Publishing , 1996 Limited p. 68. | 6 Health & Wellness Resource Center, “Normal Growth of a Baby During Pregnancy.” Clinical Reference Systems Annual. 2001. p.1391. | 7 Gordon, Debra MD. “Pregnancy.” The Gale Encyclopedia of Medicine. 2nd ed., pp. 2694-2695. | 8 Ibid. | 9 Ibid. | 10 Ibid. Exporting Death to the World 1 National Commission on Materials Policy, April 1972; NSSM-200, Chapter III, “Minerals and Fuel.” Abortions Per Year Worldwide by the Millions 1 Abortion incidence between 1990 and 2014: global, regional, and subregional levels and trends, The Lancet, Sedgh G et al., 2016.

Abortion Methods 1 Marshal, Sarah, MD, Rebecca H. Allen, MD, MPH and Kirtly Jones, MD. “Manual and Vacuum Aspiration for Abortion.” Women’s Health. WebMD, 14 Nov. 2014. Web. | 2 Ibid. | 3 Ibid. | 4 “An Abortion Doctor Describes a D&E - ClinicQuotes.” ClinicQuotes. 31 Aug. 2012. Web. | 5 Ibid. | 6 Ibid. | 7 Ibid. | 8 Ibid. | 9 United States. Cong. House. U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice. Testimony of Jill L. Stanek , RN HR 1797, Pain - Capable Unborn Child Protection Act U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice May 23, 2013. 113th Cong. H. Bill. Print. | 10 “RU486Facts.org - Medical Information about RU-486 (Mifepristone).” RU486Facts.org - Medical Information about RU-486 (Mifepristone). Web. Population Collapse: The Myth 1 Bailey, Ronald. Earth Report 2000: Revisiting the True State of the Planet. 2000., 1999 Edited by: Ronald Bailey. McGraw-Hill (ISBN-13: 978-ISBN-10: 0071342605). | 2 Roser, Max. “Future Population Growth.” Our World in Data, 2018, ourworldindata. org/future-population-growth. Web. | 3 “World Population Prospects: The 2004 Revision Analytical Report” United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs Population Division 2004. Web. | 4 Roser. | 5 “COUNTRY COMPARISON :: TOTAL FERTILITY RATE.” The World Fact Book. Central Intelligence Agency, 2017, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/ resources/the-world-factbook/fields/2127.html , Web. | 6 Ibid. | 7 Camarota, Steven A, and Karen Zeigler. “Immigrants in the United States.” Center for Immigrations Studies: A Profile of the Foreign-Born Using 2014 and 2015 Census Bureau Data, Oct. 2016. https://cis.org/sites/cis.org/files/immigrant-profile_0.pdf | 8 Graham, Stephen “Germans Get Incentives for Having Babies” The Washington Post. Jan. 4, 2007. | 9 Chivers, C. J. “Putin Urges Plan to Reverse Slide in the Birth Rate.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 10 May 2006. Web. | 10 Murphy, Clare. “The EU’s Baby Blues.” BBC News. BBC, 27 Mar. 2006. Web. | 11 Bryant, Elizabeth. “European nations offer incentives to have kids” San Francisco Chronicle. August 10, 2008. | 12 Meyer, Michael. “Birth Dearth” Newsweek, Inc. Sept. 27, 2004. www.newsweek.com | 13 Jackson, Richard, Neil Howe and Tobias Peter. The Global Aging Preparedness Index.

Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2013. | 14 Longman, Phillip. The Empty Cradle: How Falling Birthrates Threaten World Prosperity and What to Do about It. New York: Basic , a Member of the Perseus Group, 2004. Print. | 15 United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2017). World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision, custom data acquired via website. https://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/DataQuery/. | 16 Shorto, Russell. “No Babies?” The New York Times. The New York Times, 28 June 2008. Web. Abortive Funding 1 Harlow, John. “Billionaire club in bid to curb overpopulation.” The Sunday Times. May 24, 2009. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/billionaire-club-in-bid-to-curb-overpopulationd2fl22qhl022 Ibid.3 Daniels, Alex. “As Ted Turner's $1-Billion Pledge Ends, U.N. Fund Builds New Relationships.” The Chronicle of Philanthropy,10 Feb. 2014, www.philanthropy.com/article/ As-Ted-Turner-s-1-Billion/153601.4 UNFPA, “UNFPA Annual Report 2000” https://www.unfpa.org/publications/unfpa-annual-report-20005 “Gates Foundation Commits $375 Million for Family Planning Through 2020.” Philanthropy News Digest (PND), 12 July 2017, philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/gates-foundation-commits-375-million-for-family-planning-through-2020.6 Friedman, Zack. “Why Warren Buffett Just Donated $3.4 Billion.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 19 July 2018, www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2018/07/19/warren-buffett-bill-gatescharity/#1ad0e3803e36.7 The Rockefeller Archive Center. Rockefeller Related Organizations. Bureau of Social Hygiene Archives, 1911-1940. Organization History. http://www.rockarch. org/collections/rockorgs/bsh.php8 U.N. Ambassador’s Dinner. “David Rockefeller speaks about population control.” C-SPAN. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClqUcScwnn89 “Packard Foundation 990-PF.” 13 Dec. 2016. https://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2016/942/278/2016-942278431-0eb79990-F.pdf10 Wooster, Martin Morse. “Ford Foundation: Founder of Modern Population Control.” C-Fam July 9, 2004. https://c-fam.org/white_paper/ford-foundation-founder-of-modern-population-control/ What has Happened to Feminism? 1 Letter to Julia Ward Howe, October 16, 1873, recorded in Howe’s diary at Harvard University Library.│2 The Revolution, 4(1):4 July 8, 1869.│3 Author of the original US Equal Rights Amendment (1923) opposed the later trend of linking the ERA with abortion.│4 “Abortion Does Not Liberate Women,” Feminists for Life. www.feministsforlife.org.│5 Frederica Mathewes-Green (contemporary writer and feminist) Policy Review Magazine.│6 Feminist Susan Maronek, excerpted from Pro-life Feminism: Different Voices edited by Gail Grenier Sweet. The Real Reason There are Less Babies Born With Down Syndrome Around the World 1 Lajka, Julian Quinones Arijeta. “‘What Kind of Society Do You Want to Live in?": Inside the Country Where Down Syndrome Is Disappearing.” CBS News, CBS Interactive, 14 Aug. 2017, www.cbsnews.com/news/down-syndrome-iceland/. | 2 Natoli, J. L., Ackerman, D. L., McDermott, S. and Edwards, J. G. (2012), Prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome: a systematic review of termination rates (1995–2011). Prenat Diagn, 32: 142-153. doi:10.1002/pd.2910 | 3 Dommergues, M. , Mandelbrot, L. , Mahieu‐Caputo, D. , Boudjema, N. , Durand‐Zaleski, I. and , (2010), Termination of pregnancy following prenatal diagnosis in France: how severe are the foetal anomalies?. Prenat. Diagn., 30: 531-539. doi:10.1002/pd.2510 | 4 “Down Syndrome Facts | National Down Syndrome Society.” NDSS, www.ndss.org/about-down-syndrome/down-syndrome-facts/. | 5 Taylor, Kimbery Hayes. “Down Syndrome's Rewards Touted as New Test Looms.” NBCNews.com, NBCUniversal News Group, 29 Sept. 2011, www.nbcnews.com/id/44703812/ns/health-health_care/t/ down-syndromes-rewards-touted-new-test-looms/. Marked for Death 1 Valarie M. Hudson and Andrea M. den Boer, Bare Branches: The Security Implications of Asia’s Surplus Male Population; Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press, 2005, pp. 109-113, 171-172. See also, Mara Hvistendahl, Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys over Girls, and the Consequences of a World Full of Men; Philadelphia, PA., Public Affairs (in the Perseus Books Group), 2011. | 2 Bare Branches, pp. 112-113, 157. | 3 “Protect Girls from Sex-Selective Abortion.” Population Research Institute, 2018, www.pop.org/project/stop-sex-selective-abortion/. | 4 “Gender-Biased Sex Selection.” United Nations Population Fund, 23 July 2018, www.unfpa.org/gender-biased-sexselection. Abortion is Harmful to Women 1 Gissler,M, Karalis, E, Ulander,V.M. “Suicide rate after induced abortion decreased in Finland after Current Care Guidelines” The European Journal of Public Health, DOI: First published online: 31 October 2014. Web. | 2 Garfinkel,B. et al. “Stress, Depression and Suicide: A Study of Adolescents in Minnesota,” Responding to High Risk Youth (University of Minnesota: Minnesota Extension Service, 1986). | 3 Cougle, Jesse R., Reardon, David C., Coleman, Priscilla K. “Depression associated with abortion and childbirth: a long-term analysis of the NLSY cohort.” Med Science Monitor 2003; 9(4): CR105-112 ID: 4701 Published: 2003-04-23. Web. | 4 “Abortion Risks: A list of major physical complications related to abortion” Afterabortion.org. Web. | 5 Ibid. | 6 Coleman, P.K., Maxey, C.D., Rue, V.M., Coyle, C.T. “Associations between voluntary and involuntary forms of perinatal loss and child maltreatment among low-income mothers.” Acta Paediatrica. 2005 Oct;94(10):1476-83. Web. | 7 Lee,S.J., Steer,P.J.,Filippi, V. “Seasonal patterns and preterm birth: a systematic review of the literature and an analysis in a London-based cohort” British Journal of Medicine, DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2006.01055.x. Web. | 8 Huang Y, Zhang X, Li W, Song F, Dai H, Wang J, Gao Y, Liu X, Chen C, Yan Y, Wang Y, Chen K., “A meta-analysis of the association between induced abortion and breast cancer risk among Chinese females.“ Cancer Causes Control. 2014 Feb;25 (2):227-36. doi: 10.1007/s10552-013-0325-7. Epub 2013 Nov 24.