Family planning top priority for Melinda Gates
This week, Melinda Gates announced that family planning will be one of her top priorities this year and into the future….
Yet, family planning remains under-funded and under constant threat by potential budget cuts in the United States– one of the largest international family planning donors.
~ Jaime-Alexis Fowler reporting on billionaire philanthropist Melinda Gates and her announcement at the International Conference on Family Planning, Care 2, December 2
Dec.07, 2011 6:00 am |
Population |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Since when did the a United States become a “donor” to international family planning? That just seems like such strange wording.
It’s like the world is addicted to the “family planning” drug. Soon the world will OD and people will finally see the affects of unmitigated usage in lower populations and declining economies. No, no, the United States is not simply a “donor” it’s the enabler.
Substitute “population control” for “family planning.” Bill Gates, Warren Buffet et al. – They want just enough poor people to work for slave wages, but not enough to actually take over said industries, or obtain enough power to threaten these megalomaniacs. How I wish that the phony “occupiers” and the press that supports them had the courage to investigate and report the actual “fat cats” that are pulling the strings and causing misery to millions of exploited people.
“They want just enough poor people to work for slave wages, but not enough to actually take over said industries, or obtain enough power to threaten these megalomaniacs.”
Ok conspiracy theorist. Find me a high-GDP country where women and men don’t have access to reliable family planning methods.
Show me a country whose GDP has grown due to outside population control measures.
Family planning has become synonymous with pregnancy prevention and/ or termination. There is no family planning going on there…They should call it family prevention and then try to raise funds for it.
This Economist article sums thing up nicely. The list of references for the article can be found in the second link.
http://www.economist.com/node/14743589
http://www.economist.com/node/14745126
Plus, the stats make sense at face value. More intentional childbearing=more resources for each family’s existing children, including education=more time women have to devote to their various livelihoods=greater family well-being. Avoiding unwanted pregnancy means that women also avoid the considerable health risks that come with each pregnancy, especially if they aren’t adequately spaced.
It seems the Gates’ have decided it was time for them to come back to their original “population control” sentiments.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2011/11/02/the-second-coming-of-bill-gates
FTA: ” “It goes against common sense,” [Bill] Gates says. Most parents don’t choose to have eight children because they want to have big families, it turns out, but because they know many of their children will die.
FTA: “In terms of giving, Gates did a 180-degree turn. Rather than prevent births, he would aim his billions at saving the kids already born. “We moved pretty heavily into vaccines once we understood that,” says Gates.”
Oh the world can’t afford more kids… because I need all my wealth for XBOXes, movies, television, and other various forms on entertainment… it’s all so clear there’s not enough money to go around. I mean despite the most advanced food production techniques and technology in the history of mankind the world surely must take all this free labor generated by getting off the farm to update our Facebook statuses. We can’t afford CHILDREN! Ahhhh! </sarcasm>
Sorry David, but you’re wrong. Global poverty isn’t simply an issue of wealth transference–a developing country can’t rely on humanitarian assistance forever because it kills domestic development and production, and eventually donor countries will lose interest in/funding for the aid program. Countries need to become economically self-sufficient. Healthier mothers and children who have access to adequate nutrition and education are extremely important for a functioning labor force. It’s in a family’s best interest to have fewer children if they can’t afford to send eight kids to school.
That’s how it rolls in even the most developed nations. Wasn’t there an article a few days back on this site about a woman in Pennsylvania who had 15 children she could barely feed? Yeah, the contempt readers here displayed for that woman was astounding. Curious how the argument changes when it’s somehow being used to discredit or criticize prochoicers.
This is a crazy day. Megan and I are actually going to agree. Megan? Remember December 7, 2011!
EXCEPT FOR ABORTION ( and I emphasize that exception), family planning can be a very very good thing. God gave us reason, judgment and wisdom, and this can absolutely apply to the size of women’s families.
Haha, Courtnay! Merry early Christmas :)
…says the childless woman
Merry Christmas to you too, Megan!
Courtnay says:
December 7, 2011 at 11:38 am
This is a crazy day. Megan and I are actually going to agree. Megan? Remember December 7, 2011!
EXCEPT FOR ABORTION ( and I emphasize that exception), family planning can be a very very good thing. God gave us reason, judgment and wisdom, and this can absolutely apply to the size of women’s families.
(Denise) And that’s why people need to get busy with a Planned PREGNANCY organization that will reject abortion and embrace other methods to limit problem pregnancies.
I would think that people who regularly object to government funding for family planning initiatives (or, more broadly, charitable endeavors in general) would be happy to see philanthropists step in and use their own privately accumulated wealth to do so in its place.
Sorry everybody, maybe I should not have posted on a day I am so busy. The short answer to some of the comments made:
1.Fertility rates fall off due to economic stability happening first – not imposed upon the populace.
2. Population controllers often forcibly sterilize populations, and/or give birth control instead of real help (food, clothing, etc.)
3. If people want to help poor people meet economic goals, offer health-care, housing, elect fair governments etc, I am all for that. I object to the paternalistic, imperialistic imposition of their standards for who should have children and who should not.
4. It is a myth that women on hormonal contraception (I understand not all birth control is hormonal) are healthier than women who have been pregnant or given birth. Remember the statistics used by many pro-aborts are estimated (fabricated out of whole cloth) and include induced ABORTION related deaths.
5. Eight children etc. is extremely rare if women are encouraged to breast feed instead of formula feed their children. Ironically, the use of hormonal contraception has led to the false belief that women cannot bf their children – therefore their children die off earlier, and the woman’s fertility may actually return sooner than if she was not on hormonal contraception.
Sorry this is so fast. Again, next time I will try to post only when I can respond a little faster.
Gee, sounds like Melinda and Bill are “single issue” persons. So am I. My foundational issue is to stop the baby killing. You know, that “procedure” they call abortion. The Gates contribute a lot of $$ to Planned Parenthood and their ilk.
dm60642, I am not sure who you were referring to, but what does the amount have children someone has have to do with their opinions on this subject?
I agree with Megan and Courtnay <— Never thought I would type that sentence lol. Women should be able to plan how many children they want to have. Except for abortion, of course.
Well, any babies that don’t get wiped out by Melinda’s abortion pushing can get their immune systems and neurological systems thrown out of whack by Bill’s vaccine pushing. At least they’re using their own money.
“Fertility rates fall off due to economic stability happening first – not imposed upon the populace.”
Again, stats?
“Eight children etc. is extremely rare if women are encouraged to breast feed instead of formula feed their children.”
And who do you propose will do the “encouraging”? Community-based family planning programs.
Family planning, yes. Culling out family members, no.
That is right, Cristina! If only Melinda threw some of her coin behind *real* family planning; not the kind that the abortion industry wishes was real *family planning*.
Yes, Hans!
Jack: you, me and Megan can be the three horsemen of the Apocalypse!
No abortion, and no Planned Parenthood.
:) Er… Courtnay, you do know that the fourth horseman of the apocalypse whom you’d be inviting to join you is “Death” (bringing Hell with him), right? (That’s aside from deciding which of you would want to be “military conquest”, which would be “war and slaughter”, and which would be “famine”!) Perhaps you all might want to pick a friendlier metaphor…?
Death to sin, slaughter, war, etc. PARTICULARLY abortion.
I think I’m harsh enough to be Death. I’ll agree with Courtnay, Jack, and Megan. ;)
Far be it from me to challenge the four horsemen! :)
I call famine. I’ll starve PP out of public funding. :)
See, you guys are getting into the apocalyptic spirit! Love it!
If you’d like the REAL information on the so-called “population explosion”, take a look at the website of the Population Research Institute at:
http://www.pop.org/
I wish the Gates would check it out.
Never mind Planned Parenthood. Get going with Planned PREGNANCY!
. Population controllers often forcibly sterilize populations, and/or give birth control instead of real help (food, clothing, etc.)
I have no problem with safe, affordable, non-abortifacient family planning programs, but too often they are coercive and used to weed out the “undesirables.” I posted a link awhile back about the terrible forced sterilizations of poor women in North Carolina. The majority of them were AA, but some were white. That sort of thing really upsets me.
What happened to feeding, clothing, and educating people? If I were a billionaire’s wife, that would be my top priority.