IWA For Sunday 20109

"Chirica" Population Control, Pelosi's Stimulus Idea?

Hey folks,

Here is a brief history of the Chinese Population Control Program

August 1956, vigorous propaganda support was given to the Ministry of Public Health's mass birth control efforts. These efforts, however, had little impact on fertility. After the interval of the Great Leap Forward, Chinese leaders again saw rapid population growth as an obstacle to development, and their interest in birth control revived. In the early 1960s, propaganda, somewhat more muted than during the first campaign, emphasized the virtues of late marriage. Birth control offices were set up in the central government and some provinciallevel governments in 1964. The second campaign was particularly successful in the cities, where the birth rate was cut in half during the 1963-66 period. The chaos of the Cultural Revolution brought the program to a halt, however.

In 1972 and 1973 the party mobilized its resources for a nationwide birth control campaign administered by a group in the State Council. Committees to oversee birth control activities were established at all administrative levels and in various collective enterprises. This extensive and seemingly effective network covered both the rural and the urban population. In urban areas public security headquarters included population control sections. In rural areas the country's "barefoot doctors" distributed information and contraceptives to people's commun members. By 1973 Mao Zedong was personally identified with the family planning movement, signifying a greater leadership commitment to controlled population growth than ever before. Yet until several years after Mao's death in 1976, the leadership was reluctant to put forth directly the rationale that population control was necessary for economic growth and improved living standards.

Population growth targets were set for both administrative units and individual families. In the mid-1970s the maximum recommended family size was two children in cities and three or four in the country. Since 1979 the government has advocated a one child limit for both rural and urban areas and has generally set a maximum of two children in special circumstances. As of 1986 the policy for minority nationalities was two children per couple, three in special circumstances, and no limit for ethnic groups with very small populations. The overall goal of the one-child policy was to keep the total population within 1.2 billion through the year 2000, on the premise that the Four Modernizations program would be of little value if population growth was not brought under control.

The one-child policy was a highly ambitious population control program. Like previous programs of the 1960s and 1970s, the one child policy employed a combination of propaganda, social pressure, and in some cases coercion. The one-child policy was unique, however, in that it linked reproduction with economic cost or benefit.

Under the one-child program, a sophisticated system rewarded those who observed the policy and penalized those who did not. Couples with only one child were given a "one-child certificate" entitling them to such benefits as cash bonuses, longer maternity leave, better child care, and preferential housing assignments. In return, they were required to pledge that they would not have more children. In the countryside, there was great pressure to adhere to the one-child limit. Because the rural population accounted for approximately 60 percent of the total, the effectiveness of the one-child policy in rural areas was considered the key to the success or failure of the program as a whole.

In rural areas the day-to-day work of family planning was done by cadres at the team and brigade levels who were responsible for women's affairs and by health workers. The women's team leader made regular household visits to keep track of the status of each family under her jurisdiction and collected information on which women were using contraceptives, the methods used, and which had become pregnant. She then reported to the brigade women's leader, who documented the information and took it to a monthly meeting of the commune birth-planning committee. According to reports, ceilings or quotas had to be adhered to; to satisfy these cutoffs, unmarried young people were persuaded to postpone marriage, couples without children were advised to "wait their turn," women with unauthorized pregnancies were pressured to have abortions, and those who already had children were urged to use contraception or undergo sterilization. Couples with more than one child were exhorted to be sterilized.

The one-child policy enjoyed much greater success in urban than in rural areas. Even without state intervention, there were compelling reasons for urban couples to limit the family to a single child. Raising a child required a significant portion of family income, and in the cities a child did not become an economic asset until he or she entered the work force at age sixteen. Couples with only one child were given preferential treatment in housing allocation. In addition, because city dwellers who were employed in state enterprises received pensions after retirement, the sex of their first child was less important to them than it was to those in rural areas.

Numerous reports surfaced of coercive measures used to achieve the desired results of the one-child policy. The alleged methods ranged from intense psychological pressure to the use of physical force, including some grisly accounts of forced abortions and infanticide. Chinese officials admitted that isolated, uncondoned abuses of the program occurred and that they condemned such acts, but they insisted that the family planning program was administered on a voluntary basis using persuasion and economic measures only. International reaction to the allegations were mixed. The UN Fund for Population Activities and the International Planned Parenthood Association were generally supportive of China's family planning program. The United States Agency for International Development, however, withdrew US$10 million from the Fund in March 1985 based on allegations that coercion had been used.

Here is Speaker of the House Pelosi. The following exchange between Pelosi and George Stephanopoulos came on Sunday morning last week, during ABC's THIS WEEK:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?

PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?

PELOSI: No apologies. No. We have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.

You can see video of this exchange below.....


So I guess that Pelosi is not the innovator of this concept of telling the poor and undesirable of the population that they are not to have kids. She is following the Chinese Population Control Method. She is PROUD of it. Why do these people, the LWL {Left Wing Loons} LOVE Communism so much? Power, control, and money.

Seriously folks, Pelsoi's plans are those of one of the biggest human rights violators on the planet. China. She wants the "Chirica" China / America Population Control Program here in our country.

No to his credit, President Obama asked that this be cut from the Pork Bill, however, he DID sign an Executive Order saying that YOUR tax monies CAN go back to China to help them with their programs. It will go to Planned Parenthood, who DOES operate in China. He also did not say that this was wrong. He said, "Now is not the time for this."

"While [Obama] agrees that greater access to family planning is good policy, the president believes that the funding for it does not belong in the economic recovery and reinvestment plan," said White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs according to Steve Erlet of LifeNews.com

Congratulations Pelosi, for once again showing us who the New Liberal Party really is, you ARE the Idiot of the Week. Aren't you glad that your Mother did not chose to put you off, or kill you, because she would have saved money? Sorry Nancy, but I would prefer China be China, and America continues to be free.
Peter

Sources:
Country Studies US / China - Chinese Population Control
The Moral Collapse Of America - The Economic Stimulus: Nancy Pelosi's "Birth Control" Bailout

Hillary Backing Pelosi's "Chirica" Plan

Transcript of Hillary's ICPD Speech

Hey folks,

You really can't make this stuff up. I know, I know, it's Transcript Weekend here, but you have to hear this, and you HAD to understand what it really means. Hillary delivered a major speech Friday to mark the 15th anniversary of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD). Here is Hillary.

Thank you very much. (Applause.) Thank you all. Thank you. Thank you all very much.

My goodness, thank you. Wow, this is a wonderful occasion. Several of us were quite nervous when we saw the snow start last night, so I’m delighted the sun is out and shining on all of you here as we gather for this commemoration of the 15th anniversary of the groundbreaking gathering and agreement in Cairo.

When I think about that and the thousands of people who were part of it who came together to declare with one voice that reproductive healthcare is critical to the health of women, and that women’s health is essential to the prosperity and opportunity of all, to the stability of families and communities, and the sustainability and development of nations, it makes me nostalgic for conferences that are held that actually produce results – (laughter) – and give us a framework for moving forward. There is no doubt in my mind that the work that was done and the commitments that were made in Cairo are still really the bulwark of what we intend to be doing and are expected to do on behalf of women and girls.

The year 2015 is the target year. Part of the reason we wanted to have this commemoration is not only to look backwards, but to look forward. What is it we will do between now and 2015? Remember what was expected of us. All governments will make access to reproductive healthcare and family planning services a basic right. We will dramatically reduce infant, child, and maternal mortality. We will open the doors of education to all citizens, but especially to girls and women.

OK STOP! Translation, ABORTION. Continue

It is somewhat hard to believe in retrospect that Cairo was the first ever global forum that recognized the connection between women’s health, the quality of women’s lives, and human progress on a broader scale. So I am delighted to join you in marking this landmark event, but more importantly, to asking you to join with us in rededicating ourselves to the goals that we embraced 15 years ago. They remain critical and they remain unfilled.

We have not made it a Legal RIGHT for Women to get abortions at will, at any time, for any reason. Funding for Abortions is still in Obamacare folks.

I’ve had the honor and privilege as I look around this audience of knowing many of you, some of you for a very long time. And I know how committed many of you have been and continue to be. We have made measurable progress since 1994 in improving the health and the lives of women and children, especially girls. For example, the use of modern contraceptives worldwide has increased from under 10 percent in the 1960s to 43 percent in 2008. We have greater access to neo-natal care, including medicines that prevent the spread of HIV from mother to child. We’ve significantly increased child survival rates. The number of girls enrolled in schools around the world has gone up. And we’ve come closer to a less measurable but still critical goal: The integration of gender into a range of global programs, including our efforts through the United Nations to bring an end to sexual and gender-based violence in places of conflict.

However, vast inequities remain. Too often, still today in 2010, women and girls bear the burdens of regional and global crises, whether it’s an economic downturn or climate change or political instability. They still are the majority of the world’s poor, unschooled, unhealthy, and underfed. They are rarely the cause of violent consequences, but increasingly – of violent conflicts, but increasingly they bear the consequences of such conflicts. We’ve seen that from the Congo to Bosnia to Burma. And 15 years after the Cairo conference, far too many women still have little or no access to reproductive health services, including family planning and maternal healthcare.

Sounds good, but they do not really care about these Women's daily lives, with the exception of Abortion. Why? I'll get to that in a second.

When we look at this deficit in healthcare for women, we can see what it means in terms of lost productivity, lost resources, and lost lives. Nearly half the women in the developing world deliver their babies without a nurse, a midwife, a doctor, or access to crucial medical care. Global rates of maternal mortality remain perilously high; one woman dies every minute of every day in pregnancy or childbirth, and for every woman who dies, another 20 suffer from injury, infection, or disease every minute.

Sounds compassionate. Doesn't it?

More than 215 million women worldwide lack access to the modern forms of contraception, and this contributes to the nearly 20 million unsafe abortions that take place very year. Sexually transmitted diseases, of course including, but not limited to, HIV and AIDS, claim millions of lives annually among women. Fistula destroys the lives of millions, and it is often the result of pregnancies that occur when a girl is too young. An estimated 70 million – that is 70 million women and girls worldwide – have been subjected to female genital cutting, a procedure that is not only painful and traumatic but is also the source of infections and increased risks of injury during childbirth.

Now, as those of us gathered in the Ben Franklin Room on the eight floor of the State Department know very well, the topic of reproductive health is subject to a great deal of debate. But I think we should all agree that these numbers are not only grim, but after 15 years, they are intolerable. For if we believe that human rights are women’s rights and women’s rights are human rights, then we cannot accept the ongoing marginalization of half the world’s population. We cannot accept it morally, politically, socially, or economically. (Applause)

So we’re here today to examine the distance that remains to be traveled before the world fully realizes the ICPD goals. This is a journey that the Obama Administration and the United States Government will travel with you. But we need to travel quickly, because we only have five years to meet our original goals.

For the health statistics that I just mentioned point to a broader impact. There’s a direct connection between a woman’s ability to plan her family, space her pregnancies, and give birth safely, and her ability to get an education, work outside the home, support her family, and participate fully in the life of her community.

Typical Feminist Liberation BS. Women are to important to give Birth. It is BAD to be a Mother. It hinders Women. ETC. But that's not it.

When a girl becomes a mother before she becomes literate, when a woman gives birth alone and is left with a permanent disability, when a mother toils daily to feed her large family but cannot convince her husband to agree to contraception, these struggles represent suffering that can and should be avoided. They represent potential that goes unfulfilled. And they also represent an opportunity to extend critical help to women worldwide and the children who depend on them.

Investing in the health of women, adolescents, and girls is not only the right thing to do; it is also the smart thing to do. That is why we are integrating women’s issues as key elements of our foreign policy agenda and in, especially, our Global Health Initiative and our Global Food Security Initiative. That is why we saw the first appointment of an ambassador for global women issues, and it didn’t take me long to decide who should fill that position. It is why we are launching women’s entrepreneurial efforts through Pathways to Prosperity in Latin America, to ensure that prosperity is spread more broadly, including to women. It is why we are working with religious leaders in Afghanistan and Pakistan to increase access to information about family planning and preventive healthcare.

We are doing all of these things because we have seen that when women and girls have the tools to stay healthy and the opportunity to contribute to their families’ well-being, they flourish and so do the people around them.

Consider this one story from Uganda, where USAID works with the International Planned Parenthood Federation to provide reproductive health services, education, and skills training to low-income women. Among their clients are a group of teenage girls who call themselves the “Moonlight Stars.” Their parents are dead, leaving them the sole providers for their younger brothers and sisters, without any other options, they were working as prostitutes. Through this USAID-funded program, they gained access to condoms and comprehensive sex education to protect themselves from disease and pregnancy. They also began taking classes in sewing and knitting and other kinds of skills that could be used to help support their siblings without endangering their physical or emotional well-being. And thanks to this job training and the support that accompanied it, many of the Moonlight Stars have left prostitution behind and embarked on a new path of opportunity for themselves and their families.

Which is GREAT.

While investing in women lifts many lives, the inverse is also true. In societies where women’s rights and roles are denied, girls are forbidden from attending school or they pay a very heavy price to try to do so. Few have the right to decide whether or when to get married or become mothers. Poverty, political oppression, and even violent extremism often follow.

Maternal and child health are particularly important indicators of broader progress. In recent years, we’ve learned more about the conditions that accompany political unrest. It turns out that one of the most constant predictors for political upheaval is the rate of infant mortality. In places where the rate of infant mortality is high, the quality of life is low because investment in and access to healthcare are often out of reach. And that breeds the kind of frustration, hopelessness, and anger that we’ve seen. We also know that child mortality is closely connected with maternal mortality. When a mother dies, her children are at much greater risk of dying as well.

These struggles can’t be separated, and neither can their solutions. In the Obama Administration, we are convinced of the value of investing in women and girls, and we understand there is a direct line between a woman’s reproductive health and her ability to lead a productive, fulfilling life. And therefore, we believe investing in the potential of women and girls is the smartest investment we can make. It is connected to every problem on anyone’s mind around the world today. (Applause.)

Again, Motherhood is bad. Doesn't come right out and say it, but that is exactly what she means.

So we are rededicating ourselves to the global efforts to improve reproductive health for women and girls. Under the leadership of this Administration, we are committed to meeting the Cairo goals. We’re committed to working in partnership with all of you. One of President Obama’s first actions in office was to overturn the Mexico City policy, which greatly limited our ability to fund family planning programs. (Applause.)

Abortions.

We have pledged new funding, new programs, and a renewed commitment to achieve Millennium Development Goal Five, namely a [three-fourths] reduction in global maternal mortality, and universal access to reproductive healthcare. This goal is, again, critical to and interconnected with every other millennium development goal. But the world has made less progress toward fulfilling that goal than any other.

This year, the United States renewed funding of reproductive healthcare through the United Nations Population Fund, and more funding is on the way. (Applause.) The U.S. Congress recently appropriated more than $648 million in foreign assistance to family planning and reproductive health programs worldwide. That’s the largest allocation in more than a decade – since we last had a Democratic president, I might add. (Applause.)

That's $648 Million of YOUR money to pay for Abortions in other Countries.

In addition to new funding, we’ve launched a new program that will be the centerpiece of our foreign policy, the Global Health Initiative, which commits us to spending $63 billion over six years to improve global health by investing in efforts to reduce maternal and child mortality, prevent millions of unintended pregnancies, and avert millions of new HIV infections, among other goals. This initiative will employ a new approach to fighting disease and promoting health. It will address interrelated health challenges together, for example, by integrating family planning, maternal health services, and HIV/AIDS screening and treatment, so that women receiving reproductive care will also receive HIV counseling, and will be referred to an HIV clinic if they need one.

Another $63 BILLION of your money. That we do not have.

We’re now seeing the rise of the largest youth generation in the history of the world. They need and deserve to know how to stay healthy, and through this initiative, we will be providing critical information to them. The Global Health Initiative will also focus on helping countries strengthen their own health systems. We want to build sustainable health systems in countries. And it will ensure that all of our global health programs, including nutrition, malaria, TB, HIV/AIDS are designed to meet the needs of women and girls, including by taking into account the many social and economic factors that have an impact on their health from sexual coercion to domestic violence to pervasive gender inequities.

You know that HIV/AIDS is now morphing into a women’s disease, and increasingly younger and younger women in many, many poor countries are infected. We know that expanding access to contraception helps only if women are empowered to use it, that protecting oneself from HIV is harder when one’s life depends on staying in a man’s good favor, and that all the prenatal care in the world won’t protect a mother and child from an abusive home. Promoting women’s health and children’s health means improving the quality of their lives on many levels, and it also means reaching out to men and boys to encourage them to become advocates and allies.

So we have our work cut out for us, but we have an excellent roadmap in the Cairo program of action and a worthy target in the Millennium Development Goal Number Five. And we’re going to need your help. In everything that we’re doing in the Department and at USAID, we are injecting the needs and the roles of women and girls. We’re asking for how women and girls can play more of a role in their societies, be more involved in peacemaking and peacekeeping, assist in mitigating against and preventing climate change. Just across the board, we are making it clear that there has to be special attention paid to the needs of women and girls. It’s in America’s national security interests to do so.

OK. HERE is the real meaning behind all this. I know we are going to go REAL Long here. Sorry to all my friends out there that love to repost. You have to pay attention to the following.

I want to close with the story of one woman whose life was transformed by the work that the people in this room do every single day. Caroline Ditina is a young woman from the Democratic Republic of Congo who for years endured the shame and ostracism caused by obstetric fistula. Eventually, she found her way to a clinic supported by the UN Population Fund, and she finally received the surgery, care, and emotional support she needed to heal. Then she started speaking out about her experience to fight the stigma and to let other women know that even in isolated places, treatment is possible.

Her message has traveled the world. Two years ago, she came to Washington and urged members of Congress to support maternal health programs worldwide. And today, the United States is proud once again to support the work of the UN Population Fund. But one advocate, even one with such passion and commitment, can only do so much. Every woman everywhere deserves high-quality care not only at her most vulnerable hour, but at every single stage of life. That’s our goal and that’s our responsibility.

Our responsibility? UN Population Fund?

It is also a matter of simple equity and fairness. I’ve been in many places in many parts of the world where the rich, the educated, the well off, the connected, the powerful, the elite had access to every single form of healthcare. And yet it was denied – denied by law, denied by culture, denied by taboo, denied by regulation, denied by resources to the vast majority of women in the same societies. That is unacceptable.

So part of what we need to do is not only provide services to those who need them, but to change the minds and attitudes of those who can be responsible for delivering those services in countries around the world. I have said in many different settings on, I guess, every continent except Antarctica that the rights that women who have a position in society are able to command cannot, therefore, be denied to the women who live down the street or care for their children or clean their homes or plant their crops, and that we have to do a better job of making the equity argument on behalf of girls and women, and particularly on behalf of the Cairo agenda.

I’m very optimistic and very committed that we can do this together, and I am very grateful for what so many of you have done for so many years. You have ridden the ups and you have survived the downs. You have worked in favorable political environments and unfavorable ones. You have seen the Mexico City policy come and go, and you have stayed true. You’ve stayed true to your commitment, your passion, your belief that every single child in this country – boy or girl – deserves a chance to live up to his or her God-given potential.

I just want to urge that we do not grow weary. I don’t about you, but sometimes it can seem a little bit hard to take. It is also self-evident; it seems so obvious to the rest of us that this needs to be done, and we keep encountering obstacles of every shape and size. But please, stay with us and let’s try to create institutional and structural change that does not get wiped away when the political winds blow. Let’s try to create markets for these goods and ways of funding them and educational and instructional programs along with our commitment to serve that will give women everywhere a chance to take their own lives and their own futures into their own hands.

It is now my great pleasure – you’ve met two of my wonderful team members. I want to introduce two more whom I see. One is Raj Shah, Dr. Raj Shah, our new superb Administrator of USAID. (Applause.) Raj, come here. Come here, Raj. (Applause.)

We want you to get to meet him if you don’t know him. We want you to support him as he makes the changes that are necessary to put USAID back in the forefront of world development agencies.

And now it’s my honor to introduce our Under Secretary Maria Otero. And maybe, Maria, you and Raj could say a few words to close out the program. (Applause.)

Blah, blah, blah. It sounds great doesn't it? But it's really only about one thing here. Abortion. Why? It will save Governments money, and it will save the Planet. Of course the ICPD is happy.

WASHINGTON, Jan. 8 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton delivered a major speech today to mark the 15th anniversary of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD). Her strong message showed top-level U.S. Government support for the ICPD and other such UN goals, including the Millennium Development Goals, by 2015. These include achieving universal access to reproductive healthcare (RH) and education (especially for girls), and reductions in maternal and child mortality.

But Secretary Clinton's address today indicated much more - a commitment to women and girls' health and progress worldwide, which in turn relates to development and climate change. "It signals a critical five-year window to not only achieve the ICPD objectives, but also make tremendous gains on global environmental and climate sustainability," said Vicky Markham, Director of the Center for Environment and Population (CEP).

Are you getting this?

This is because the world's environment and development issues are inextricably linked so new, strong U.S. commitment to the ICPD's principles is also critical to achieving environmental sustainability worldwide. Now, changes to global climate, water and forest resources, species' habitat and biological diversity are all occurring in unprecedented ways from human activities. "Strong, clear U.S. leadership to achieve the ICPD goals for women's health and equality is one sure way to maintain an important balance between people and nature on our finite planet," said Ms. Markham.

Secretary Clinton paved the way for renewed U.S. leadership on the ICPD for the development reasons mentioned above and as a viable means to achieving environmental sustainability - that is, to help curb climate change, provide clean water to the 1 billion that lack access to it, restore forests as "carbon sinks" and habitat to numerous plants and animals, and begin to alter land use and rapid sprawling development which leads to increased use of fossil fuels and climate change.

While many international forums have reaffirmed the ICPD "Cairo Consensus", including the 1995 Fourth World Conference on Women and the UN Millennium Development Goals, the U.S. has fallen behind in its leadership on these reproductive health issues. Paralleled with this is the lack of strong U.S. leadership on key environmental treaties on climate, water and biodiversity.

But, change is in the air. Secretary Clinton's compelling support now indicates the U.S. is poised to take a leadership role on critical RH/FP, education and maternal and child health issues. The U.S. needs to show similar leadership on global climate, water, forests and biodiversity issues. "When combined, U.S. leadership on the ICPD and major environmental treaties and commitments to sustainability are all mutually reinforcing, representing renewed commitment to these cornerstones of population and development policies for the international community," said Ms. Markham.

Recent polls show that a majority of Americans across the ideological spectrum strongly support the principles in the worldwide consensus reached at the ICPD, including providing voluntary family planning and reproductive health services. Likewise, polls show they support environmental sustainability.

That is COMPLETELY untrue. Completely untrue.

Millions of lives have been improved and saved through effective and affordable reproductive health programs, which have proven to prevent the deaths of women and children, reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS, grow economies, and preserve natural resources.

"Secretary Clinton today provided a much needed boost to a decade's lag on promoting women's and girl's issues as key components of international development and environmental stability. Now let's join her, and take it down the home stretch to 2015," Ms. Markham said.

For more information go to www.ICPD2015.org and www.cepnet.org.

Reuters had a story Fri Sep 18, 2009, Contraception vital in climate change fight: expert This is what Liberal REALLY think.

Leo Bryant, a lead researcher on a World Health Organisation study on population growth and climate change, said the stigma attached to birth control in both developing and developed countries was hindering vital progress.

"We are certainly not advocating that governments should start telling people how many children they can have," said Bryant, an advocacy manager at the family planning group Marie Stopes International, who wrote a commentary in the Lancet medical journal on Friday.

You would LOVE to. Pelsoi even said so. It will save money if these poor and undesirable people would just stop having kids. Now we learn, it will also save the planet.

"The ability to choose your family size...is a fundamental human right. But lack of access to family planning means millions of people in developing countries don't have that right," he told Reuters.

Bryant's study of climate change adaptation plans by governments in the world's 40 poorest countries showed that almost all of them link rapid population growth to environmental impact, but only six had proposed steps to tackle it.

"Acknowledgement of the problem is widespread, but resolve to address seems to be very much a minority sport," he said.

Bryant said 200 million women across the world want contraceptives, but cannot get them. Addressing this need would slow population growth and reduce demographic pressure on the environment.

In most countries with good access to birth control, average family sizes shrink dramatically within a generation, he said. But policymakers in rich donor nations are wary of talking about contraception for fear of being accused of advocating draconian ideas like sterilization or one-child policies.

Bryant's comments echo those by the head of Britain's science academy Martin Rees, who told Reuters this month that the stigma holding women back from getting access to birth control must be removed to reduce the impact of rising populations on climate change.

The world's population is forecast to rise by one third to more than 9 billion people by 2050, with 95 percent of this growth in developing countries.

In a study to be published in the WHO Bulletin in November, Bryant and colleagues said that population growth in poorer nations was unlikely to increase global warming significantly, as their carbon emissions are relatively low. But overpopulation combined with climate change would worsen living conditions by degrading natural resources, they said.

Climate change can also not only cause more natural disasters such as storms, but force people to live in areas at risk of floods, drought and disease.

Bryant said health policies targeting family planning must be combined projects to educate people about sustainable farming and land management.

"Then the gains that you make in environmental sustainability in the immediate term are going to be protected in the long term against a rapidly growing population," he said.

"Chirica" Population Control, Pelosi's Stimulus Idea?

Here is a brief history of the Chinese Population Control Program

August 1956, vigorous propaganda support was given to the Ministry of Public Health's mass birth control efforts. These efforts, however, had little impact on fertility. After the interval of the Great Leap Forward, Chinese leaders again saw rapid population growth as an obstacle to development, and their interest in birth control revived. In the early 1960s, propaganda, somewhat more muted than during the first campaign, emphasized the virtues of late marriage. Birth control offices were set up in the central government and some provinciallevel governments in 1964. The second campaign was particularly successful in the cities, where the birth rate was cut in half during the 1963-66 period. The chaos of the Cultural Revolution brought the program to a halt, however.

In 1972 and 1973 the party mobilized its resources for a nationwide birth control campaign administered by a group in the State Council. Committees to oversee birth control activities were established at all administrative levels and in various collective enterprises. This extensive and seemingly effective network covered both the rural and the urban population. In urban areas public security headquarters included population control sections. In rural areas the country's "barefoot doctors" distributed information and contraceptives to people's commun members. By 1973 Mao Zedong was personally identified with the family planning movement, signifying a greater leadership commitment to controlled population growth than ever before. Yet until several years after Mao's death in 1976, the leadership was reluctant to put forth directly the rationale that population control was necessary for economic growth and improved living standards.

Population growth targets were set for both administrative units and individual families. In the mid-1970s the maximum recommended family size was two children in cities and three or four in the country. Since 1979 the government has advocated a one child limit for both rural and urban areas and has generally set a maximum of two children in special circumstances. As of 1986 the policy for minority nationalities was two children per couple, three in special circumstances, and no limit for ethnic groups with very small populations. The overall goal of the one-child policy was to keep the total population within 1.2 billion through the year 2000, on the premise that the Four Modernizations program would be of little value if population growth was not brought under control.

The one-child policy was a highly ambitious population control program. Like previous programs of the 1960s and 1970s, the one child policy employed a combination of propaganda, social pressure, and in some cases coercion. The one-child policy was unique, however, in that it linked reproduction with economic cost or benefit.

Under the one-child program, a sophisticated system rewarded those who observed the policy and penalized those who did not. Couples with only one child were given a "one-child certificate" entitling them to such benefits as cash bonuses, longer maternity leave, better child care, and preferential housing assignments. In return, they were required to pledge that they would not have more children. In the countryside, there was great pressure to adhere to the one-child limit. Because the rural population accounted for approximately 60 percent of the total, the effectiveness of the one-child policy in rural areas was considered the key to the success or failure of the program as a whole.

In rural areas the day-to-day work of family planning was done by cadres at the team and brigade levels who were responsible for women's affairs and by health workers. The women's team leader made regular household visits to keep track of the status of each family under her jurisdiction and collected information on which women were using contraceptives, the methods used, and which had become pregnant. She then reported to the brigade women's leader, who documented the information and took it to a monthly meeting of the commune birth-planning committee. According to reports, ceilings or quotas had to be adhered to; to satisfy these cutoffs, unmarried young people were persuaded to postpone marriage, couples without children were advised to "wait their turn," women with unauthorized pregnancies were pressured to have abortions, and those who already had children were urged to use contraception or undergo sterilization. Couples with more than one child were exhorted to be sterilized.

The one-child policy enjoyed much greater success in urban than in rural areas. Even without state intervention, there were compelling reasons for urban couples to limit the family to a single child. Raising a child required a significant portion of family income, and in the cities a child did not become an economic asset until he or she entered the work force at age sixteen. Couples with only one child were given preferential treatment in housing allocation. In addition, because city dwellers who were employed in state enterprises received pensions after retirement, the sex of their first child was less important to them than it was to those in rural areas.

Numerous reports surfaced of coercive measures used to achieve the desired results of the one-child policy. The alleged methods ranged from intense psychological pressure to the use of physical force, including some grisly accounts of forced abortions and infanticide. Chinese officials admitted that isolated, uncondoned abuses of the program occurred and that they condemned such acts, but they insisted that the family planning program was administered on a voluntary basis using persuasion and economic measures only. International reaction to the allegations were mixed. The UN Fund for Population Activities and the International Planned Parenthood Association were generally supportive of China's family planning program. The United States Agency for International Development, however, withdrew US$10 million from the Fund in March 1985 based on allegations that coercion had been used.

Here is Speaker of the House Pelosi. The following exchange between Pelosi and George Stephanopoulos came on Sunday morning last week, during ABC's THIS WEEK:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?

PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?

PELOSI: No apologies. No. We have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.

Not only would Pelosi and the Libs HERE love to enact something like this in America, they want to do it around the world. {Laughing} Want to save the Planet? Wear a Condom, or if need be, get an Abortion. What ever you do, just do not have any more kids. Don't worry, if you can't, others will pay for it. Even if you live in another country.
Peter

Sources:
White House Press Office
Center for Environment and Population
Reuters - Contraception vital in climate change fight: expert

Clinton Says Screw Human Rights

Why is this a shock?

Hey folks,

I'm serious here. Why is this a shock? The new Liberal Movement cares NOT about Human Rights. They really do not. I have proven this during the election by posting their own words and actions.

Clinton is a Supreme Leader Wannabe, who is now working for someone that came right out and say that the US Constitution would hinder some of the things he WANTS to do. He really said that. Obama WANTS a Centralized Controlling government. Controlling every aspect of your Private lives. He is actively working towards that direction. So Clinton comes right out and says this, when talking about Human Rights.

"But our pressing on those issues can't interfere on the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis and the security crisis,"

So do not let Human Rights stand in the way of money, power, and control. We just can not have that. We have agendas to follow you know. We can not be bothered by the little people thinking that THEY matter.

This is the same person that said that Collage is over rated and we need to push for more trade schools for people to learn trades that will better suite the Collective Good. We do not need people that are smart and can think for themselves. We need good little drones that will work for the King and Queen. The Elite need Plumbers and Electricians you know. Auto Mechanics to work on the cars that only they can drive.

T. Kumar of Amnesty International USA said the global rights lobby was "shocked and extremely disappointed" by Clinton's remarks.

"The United States is one of the only countries that can meaningfully stand up to China on human rights issues," he said.

"But by commenting that human rights will not interfere with other priorities, Secretary Clinton damages future US initiatives to protect those rights in China," he said.

They do not care about Human Rights Mr. Kumar. They LOVE these Dictators. They LOVE people that have absolute power. Nancy Pelosi wants us to follow China's One kid policy. It will save money, according to her. The Elite will have more money to keep for themselves. Instead of all that waste in food stamps and baby care. According to them, those that have the most babies are the poor and stupid that the States will have to pay for. So why not force them to limit themselves to only one child. Makes sense. Right? Pelosi's "Chirica" Policy makes perfect sense to them.

PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.

Folks, these people IDOLIZE Dictators and Tyrants. The LOVE Centralized Governments. They LOVE Socialism. The HATE that the US Constitution hinders the sort of things they want to do. They couldn't care less about our OWN Bill of Rights. So WHY would anyone be surprised that they could not care less about other Human Rights in the World? They just don't.
Peter

Sources:
AFP - Activists 'shocked' at Clinton stance on China rights

Asia Energy, Just One Aspect Of Beneficial Relations With US

From the energy Front 111009.

Hey folks,

Back in 2005, McKinsey Quarterly reported this. Securing Asia's energy future

As Asia's appetite for energy surges, the desire of the region's leaders to ensure a reliable flow of reasonably priced oil and natural gas will also intensify. If they fail, Asia's fast-growing economies could stumble. A race is now under way—between China and India, in particular—to buy energy reserves in such far-flung places as Iran, Russia, and Sudan.

The magnitude of Asia's future energy needs explains this urgency: the region's share of global consumption will nearly double in the next 20 years, to about 48 percent for oil and 22 percent for natural gas. By 2010, the region's oil consumption will surpass North America's. Such rapid growth has led world energy markets to their most critical juncture in more than two decades: today's tight supply and hefty prices could conceivably spark an energy boom and bust like the one that shook the world economy in the 1980s.

Imagine what we could do if we were to be able to participate in this with our OWN resources. Then again, if they do, which they are near now, surpass us in their Energy needs, that would be that Supply and Demand would then shift to THEM and in which case, Raise costs for all.

Then you have to look at the possibility of new and tighter relationships being formed with our LONG time Allies and the Extremist Governments that already do not like us that much. We are losing Allies all over the place, thanks to Obama.

As a matter of fact, according to AOL News - Obama confronts an Asia reshaped by China's rise By CHARLES HUTZLER, AP

BEIJING -Days after coming to power in September, Japan's new prime minister broached forming a new East Asian trading bloc with rival China — one that would exclude the United States.

Some in Washington took it as a snub from the nation that has been America's rock in Asia for decades. Even more, Tokyo's new rhetoric underscored how China's rapid rise to power is challenging Washington's once-dominant sway in the region.

Thank you Obama. "No country is greater than any other. We are all Citizens of the World." Blah, blah, blah.

This is the reality President Barack Obama confronts as he departs Thursday for his first Asia trip, perhaps his most challenging overseas journey yet. He'll find a region outgrowing a half-century of U.S. supremacy and questioning America's relevance to its future. More so than Obama's previous foreign trips, this nine-day, four-country tour has the president on something like a salvage mission.

The trip also comes at a delicate time for Obama at home.

You see, Obama is going to try to fix what Bush messed up. NOPE! He is going to try to bring back the TRUST that they had WITH Bush. This piece admits it in a second.

He is wrestling with one of the toughest decisions of his 10-month presidency, a war strategy for Afghanistan, {Our men and women are DYING at record high numbers. SEND MORE TROOPS!} and is urging Congress to approve his biggest domestic priority, health care. {Socialistic take over of one Sixth of the US Economy}

Those pressing concerns make it notable that he is spending so much time away — a sign of Asia's importance to the U.S. and the need to tend to relationships there without delay — though he put off his original departure by a day over the weekend because of Thursday's deadly shooting spree at the Fort Hood military base in Texas. Obama will speak to U.S. troops in Alaska and South Korea, with his much-awaited decision on more troops for the Afghanistan war probably still pending.{Idiot}

Obama stops first in Japan, a traditional U.S. stalwart now looking toward closer engagement with China and the rest of Asia. He makes a two-city stop in China, where leaders proud of their country's one-generation leap to prosperity seek a bigger say in shaping the region's affairs.

The president also visits Singapore for a summit of Asia-Pacific leaders, where his participation is being cut by a day, and wraps up his trip in South Korea. Those countries are having to accommodate a more muscular China while wondering whether a U.S. weakened by financial crisis is in decline.

Thank you Obama for the out of control, FAILED Spending.

"Asia is changing very fast. It's undergoing a fundamental transition," said Huang Jing, a Chinese politics expert at the National University of Singapore. "This is not the kind of Asia or Asia-Pacific of America's traditional understanding. That old understanding is that America is dominant but friendly to the developing nations and Japan, America's perpetual ally, is No. 1. Asia is now totally different and China is the No. 1, not Japan."

Throughout his travels, starting with a scene-setting speech in Japan, Obama is expected to deliver a message of staunch U.S. commitment to old friends and newer partners alike, promising to help keep what for decades has been one of the fastest growing regions of the world secure and thriving, according to U.S. officials.

In Tokyo, he's likely to call for a reinvigorated alliance with Japan while insisting that new Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama live up to a pending agreement on reconfiguring U.S. military bases. He's scheduled to take part in Beijing in the kind of pomp that Chinese leaders crave as a sign of respect, but also plans an event with Chinese university students aimed at telegraphing U.S. values to a broader Chinese audience.

On the sidelines of the gathering of Asia-Pacific leaders, he'll hold a first-ever summit with Southeast Asia's 10-nation alliance, a grouping whose economies are increasingly tied to a growing China but still are anxious about Chinese power.

Included in that meeting will be Myanmar's leader — the first such meeting between a U.S. president and the head of a repressive government formerly shunned by Washington, though now part of a new outreach by the Obama administration.

Throughout, issues like North Korea's and Iran's nuclear programs are likely to be raised repeatedly, though little concrete progress is expected.

While popular in some parts of the region, Obama does not have the rock-star appeal in Asia that he has in Europe and elsewhere. He will have to overcome strong suspicions among Asian leaders that he is more concerned about domestic battles over health care and the economy than about matters like freer trade that are so crucial to Asian nations and U.S. businesses.

He IS!

Obama comes to Asia "bringing absolutely nothing to the table" on trade, said Michael Green, a White House Asia adviser during the Bush administration and now an analyst at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. Without American leadership on trade, the fear is that the U.S. will be left behind while other nations roar ahead with their own agreements, Green said.
"There is a risk that he will come to Asia for just a star turn and photo opportunities while reserving his strength for other battles. But more is needed and should be expected of him," Simon Tay of the Singapore Institute for International Affairs said.

What you mean a Smile and a well delivered pre-written Speech will not be enough?

After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the Bush administration gained a reputation in Asia for distraction and an overemphasis on security. Meanwhile, China has supplanted the U.S. as the top or leading trading partner of Japan, South Korea and the ASEAN nations. The Chinese economy, a decade ago only slightly larger than Italy's, is on track to next year surpass Japan's, the world's No. 2.

Chief among Obama's goals on the trip will be to make "vividly clear to the peoples of Asia that the U.S. is here to stay in Asia," Jeffrey Bader, Obama's top Asia adviser, said at a public event in Washington on Friday. "As Asia continues to grow and as new groupings and structures take shape, the U.S. will be a player and participant on the ground floor, not a distant spectator."

In Japan, where Obama and his election inspired the public, it looks like the president will have his most difficult stop.

Yup. Because now THEY are seeing him for who and what he really is as well.

Prime Minister Hatoyama won election on an Obama-like message of change. But he's begun rethinking the U.S.-Japan alliance in which Tokyo has often felt itself the junior partner. He proposed the East Asian community that initially excluded the U.S., though he has since sidestepped the issue.

His government plans to end Japan's Indian Ocean refueling mission that supports U.S.-led forces in Afghanistan.

Thank you Obama.

His review of the agreement on basing 47,000 U.S. troops in Japan has caused particular tension, chiefly over relocating Futenma Marine air field on Okinawa. The U.S. has agreed to a more remote location on the island while Hatoyama has suggested moving the forces off the island. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates last month demanded Tokyo not put off resolving the issue until next year as Hatoyama has hinted.

In China, sizable distrust over trade tensions, Tibet and other human rights issues and Beijing's robust military buildup are likely to be papered over.

The Obama administration has tried to set a more constructive, cooperative tone for relations, calling Beijing a needed partner in tackling global issues like the economic downturn and climate change. The governments have identified clean energy as ripe for cooperation.

Chief among Obama's tasks in Beijing will be to establish the kind of trust that President Hu Jintao had with George W. Bush, according to Chinese scholars. China reacted angrily to recent U.S. moves to impose punitive tariffs to stem surging imports of low-cost Chinese-made tires, seeing it as reneging on Obama's promise earlier this year not to resort to protectionism during the economic crisis.

Folks, once again we see a Child, Obama, PLAYING President and doing it BADLY. All he cares about is his agenda here. All he cares about is OUR own Government taking over OUR own Country. All he cares about is Obamacare, Cap and Tax, which WILL effect more than just us as well, and taken even more control of our and OTHERS Economies with the nonsensical Global Warming Bunk.

Others see what Obama is doing. Other do not like nor trust what Obama is doing. What happen here in America, effects ALL that deal with America. So whatever the out come, as you can see, others are seeking alternatives. We DO have to deal with our issues, no doubt about it, but if we forget the rest of the World, the rest of the World will forget about us. With no means to take care of our own basic energy needs, WE will be the one that loses.
Peter

Sources:
AOL News - Obama confronts an Asia reshaped by China's rise
McKinsey Quarterly - Securing Asia's energy future

Chirica Revisited, Pelosi Say Catholic Church WANTS Government Intrusion

"Don't you wonder why people that have no clue about Religion love to tell us what Religion is all about. But then again this does fit into what you have warned us about. "Chirica." This could be a step in that direction."

Hey folks,

Happy Friday to ya. Time to check in from the Emails. opntalk@gmail.com. Chirica? For those of you who do not know,,, OPNTalk - IWA For Sunday 20109 The then Speaker of the House Pelosi, was talking to George Stephanopoulos on ABC's THIS WEEK. Here is the way it happened.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Hundreds of millions of dollars to expand family planning services. How is that stimulus?

PELOSI: Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.

STEPHANOPOULOS: So no apologies for that?

PELOSI: No apologies. No. We have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.

Yup. Pelsoi's plans are those of one of the biggest Human Rights violators on the planet. China. She wants the "Chirica" China / America Population Control Program here in our country. One Child per Family. But she is not alone. OPNTalk - Hillary Backing Pelosi's "Chirica" Plan. This is where she talks about giving birth is bad, and Women are too important to be Mothers. This is also where she says we are responsible for WORLD Population Control.

So now the Former Speaker of the House, Pelosi, is saying that the Catholic Church WANTS Governments to enforce Contraceptives. I kid you not. According to this Link - CNSNews -
Pelosi: Catholic Church 'Has Not Enforced' Its Teaching on Contraception By Eric Scheiner

(CNSNews.com) - During an event at Texas A&M University on Monday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) claimed the Catholic Church has not enforced its teaching on contraception and that the church now wants the federal government to enforce that teaching for it.

{Laughing} I know I know. But she SAID it.

“Ninety-eight percent of women in childbearing age that are Catholic use contraception. So, in practice the church has not enforced this and now they want the federal government and private insurance to enforce it. It just isn’t consistent to me,” Pelosi said.

The statement came after Pelosi was questioned about the conflict between the Catholic Church and the Obama administration over a regulation, set to take effect on Aug. 1, that will require all health-care plans in the United States to cover sterilizations, artificial contraceptives and abortifacients, and thus would force Catholic institutions and individuals, in complying with the Obmacare mandate to buy health insurance, to act against their consciences and the teachings of their faith.

“Whatever my personal beliefs or my personal upbringing are on this subject everyone has their own responsibility in terms of the size and the rest of their family. So, I think this should be removed from the debate, it’s inflammatory--misrepresentations are made,” Pelosi added.

All 181 Catholic bishops in the United States oppose and have publicly denounced the regulation issued by the Obama administration, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops have called it "an unprecedented attack on religious freedom."

"Everyone has their own responsibility in terms of the size and the rest of their family." One Child. According to this Twit, it will save us all money, especially if Poor and Stupid People only have one kid. Less people on the Government Payroll. It is even good for the Environment too. So since the Catholic Church can't come out and say it, they want others to do it for them. They understand. They AGREE. But because of this stupid, outdated, Dogma, they HAVE to allow Government and Insurance Companies in to give their Females Free Contraceptives. {Sigh} This IS who these people are folks. It just IS.
Peter

Obamacare All About Abortion and "Chirica"?

It all seems to be coming together to point in one direction.

Hey folks,

We all know that Obamacare is all about Control. Power, Control, and of course, all that Money. It is the biggest Government intrusion and takeover in our Country's History. Many, including I, believe that this is completely unconstitutional. The Supreme Court is set to look at it this Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday.

As of late, we have learn many things that are in the Law. First, Contraceptives WILL be paid by all Insurance Companies, including Religious Organizations that are against promoting Sexual Behaviour.

Then we learned that, not only will Contraceptives be "free" for all Women, regardless of age, now a $1.00 will go to pay for Abortions. One Dollar for EVERY Premium payment paid will go directly to pay for Abortions. Again, no exceptions. So YOU, regardless of what you believe, WILL be paying for Contraceptives and outright Abortions.

By wait. Not only that, not only Contraceptives and OUTRIGHT Abortions, YOU will pay for young Women to be STERIALIZED. Yup. Sterilization will now be "FREE" for any Female that seeks it.

What does this mean? This means, those on the Left, who seek a "Chirica" policy will now be able to fill these young, impressionable, immature girls, heads with garbage like this. "You know, kids are bad. They hold you back. They cost the States and Federal Government Money. Study after study PROVES that Families with more than one kid are less intelligent, poorer, and less productive. {Not kidding} Kids are just a burden on Society in General. Hey, you want a Career? You want to have all the Sex you want without worry of this Sickness called Pregnancy? You don't want to be Punished with a Baby? Now you can get Sterilized. It's FREE." {Sigh}

Like clockwork, the ignorant Sheeple out there will fall in line and call this a "GOOD THING." Besides, if Sterilized, it will also cut down the cost on Contraceptives and Abortions. So it's a "GOOD THING." Now be a good little Citizen and go get Sterilized.

Think I'm way off base? It all seems to be coming together to point in one direction. We already know that the whole Abortion thing in Obamacare is nothing more than an attempt to secure the Legalization of Abortion. If all these thing in association with Abortion is in the Law, than it will be even that much harder to overturn Roe vs Wade. They are attempting to integrate it as much as possible into Law and normalcy in people's everyday lives. They hope that in time, people will simply accept it.

We already know that Pelosi, Clinton, and a few others, have come right out and said China's one Child Policy makes sense for us here. Now Females everywhere can be Sterilized for "Free." We can't have poor people having kids. Costs too much.

No folks, Obamacare, if even for no other reason than pure Cost, NEEDS to be overturned, defunded, found unconstitutional, or whatever. It needs to be wiped out. Period. Once fully implemented, they can come out and "DICTATE" anything they want. Contraceptives, Abortion, Sterilization, denial of Care, what you eat, don't, how you live, ANYHTING. They can just Dictate and it becomes Law, no process, no discussion, no Vote. Nothing. They can just come out and say "Due to the Cost of Healthcare, Fast Food is now deemed Illegal. All McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's, ETC, will be closed down." That's it. It will happen. That is simply too much power for ANY one person to have. You have to remember something. Even if Obama and Crew get thrown out, as they should, in November, if Obamacare is NOT wiped out, and it goes into full effect, someone else will have the Power. Picture someone like George W. Bush coming in. You want someone like HIM having this power? Think about it.
Peter

Sources:
NYT - U.S. Clarifies Policy on Birth Control for Religious Groups By ROBERT PEAR Published: March 16, 2012
The Daily Caller - $1 abortion surcharge in Obamacare
The Cypress Times - OBAMACARE MANDATES PAID STERILIZATION FOR WOMEN Ethan Edwards, TheCypressTimes.com Published 03/19/2012 - 11:42 a.m. CST

Children the Enemy of Productivity

According to the Lib Left.

Hey folks,

Happy Friday. Time to go to the Emails. Again. {Smile} Remember this? Hillary Backing Pelosi's "Chirica" Plan For years the Liberal Loons have told us "Kids are bad." They keep Women barefoot and pregnant, and prevent Women from being equal to men. That the whole concept of Women giving birth is that of the Chauvinistic White Christian Male. What about Muslims? Uh, we don't talk about that. But YOU, you White Christian Male. YOU are a Chauvinistic Pig.

The Left tells us that Children are a drain on Government, a hindrance to Women's "Rights" and YOU should only be allowed to have one at most, if that. Some here would LOVE to impose China's One Child Rule. If you are "wise enough" to KILL your child, before it is born, they will praise you and fight for your "Right" to do so. They would LOVE to FORCE you.

John Holdren, whom Barack Obama has recently appointed Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, and Co-Chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology -- informally known as the United States' Science Czar. In a book Holdren co-authored in 1977, the man now firmly in control of science policy in this country wrote that:

• Women could be forced to abort their pregnancies, whether they wanted to or not;
• The population at large could be sterilized by infertility drugs intentionally put into the nation's drinking water or in food;
• Single mothers and teen mothers should have their babies seized from them against their will and given away to other couples to raise;
• People who "contribute to social deterioration" (i.e. undesirables) "can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility" -- in other words, be compelled to have abortions or be sterilized.
• A transnational "Planetary Regime" should assume control of the global economy and also dictate the most intimate details of Americans' lives -- using an armed international police force.

Did you know that Liberals Abort more of themselves than ANY other group in existence? Children are evil. They hinder creativity. They hold Women down. They drain the Economy. ETC.

But like most things of the Liberal Left. That is simply OPPOSITE of REALITY. Here is a quote at the top of this that was sent in.

The barren Left argues that children are a nuisance and a distraction. The truth is that men and women with children are more, not less, productive than their childless counterparts.

Steve Mosher

Yes. In order to be a good citizen, and be productive to the Collective Society, you need to KILL your unborn. Or better yet, just sterilize yourself so that you do not have an ACCIDENT. Here is the TRUTH. As the Sender said,

"Wise words to all dads and moms"

I couldn't agree more. Sorry, but I could find a link to this. Here it is.

Are Children the Enemy of Productivity?
by Colin Mason

Cyril Connolly once said that “there is no more somber enemy of good art than the pram in the hallway.” Connelly is here suggesting that the distractions implicit in rearing a child will undercut an artist's attempt to create, so children are to be avoided insofar as possible.

I have long believed that Connelly is wrong in opposing children to art. So I was pleasantly surprised, recently, to see my view validated by Frank Cottrell Boyce, a successful British screenwriter, novelist and actor. Boyce's article, entitled “The Parent Trap: Art After Children” and appearing in Britain's Guardian, makes the case that children, far from inhibiting or destroying an artist's creativity, are actually a creative boon. He has this to say about fatherhood and art:

What is "me", if not the sum of all my relationships and obligations? A customer, that's what. The more you give, the more you are. Think of Chekhov, with his patients and his crowds of dependent relatives, whose living room became such a public space that he had to put up no smoking signs. His advice to young writers was "travel third class". Ralph Waldo Emerson's was to "buy carrots and turnips" …

There's a belief that to do great work you need tranquility and control, that the pram is cluttering up the hallway; life needs to be neat and tidy. This isn't the case. Tranquility and control provide the best conditions for completing the work you imagined. But surely the real trick is to produce the work that you never imagined. The great creative moments in our history are almost all stories of distraction and daydreaming — Archimedes in the bath, Einstein dreaming of riding a sunbeam — of alert minds open to the grace of chaos.

I totally agree with this wonderfully articulated sentiment.

Children are distractions from creative work, as Boyce recognizes, but they are emphatically the right type of distractions.

Children see things that we cannot see, they remind us of truths and insights that we long ago forgot. And they remind us that the greatest insights in the world were discovered not while ponderously meditating, but while delighting in the simple pleasures and pains of life.

In fact, I would go even farther than Boyce. Being a father of two young boys myself, I believe that children actually increase one's productivity in all sense of the word. I have a powerful memory of the moment my older son was born. He came into this world, tiny and rosy-pink, by caesarian section. As I held him, swaddled tightly to about the size of a nerf football, I remember staring into his screwed-shut eyes and thinking: “It's official. It's time for me to grow up.”

I was seized by a heady combination of feelings. There was an overwhelming sense of wonder conjoined with a steely determination to care for this little bundle of life as best as I could. I knew that if I failed to man up, there would be no one to blame but myself. And I also knew that, if I didn't start accomplishing my life goals now, I never would.

I am certain that every new father worth his salt has had a similar experience.

Children are a great blessing to grown-ups not simply because of the joy, the wonder, and the incredible privilege of caring for a young soul that they provide. Children are also a blessing because they are a kind of living alarm clock, telling us that it is time to wake up and seize the day. The chain of generations has added another link, the cycle of life has come round again, and it is time to get busy. They remind us, just by being there, that time is irrevocably passing by—time that we can never get back again.

By reminding us that we are mortal, children concentrate the mind, and galvanize us to accomplish the tasks that are set before us. Because if we don't have all the time in the world, how are we going to spend the time we do have?

This is why children are not merely a boon to creativity, they are, in many ways, a boon to life itself. The dystopia portrayed in the film Children of Men is correct in this, that a world without children is a world without a reason to live.

Children are not just the next generation, they are, in many ways, the life-blood of this generation. The fact that a child is born and grows so quickly in maturity and needs, demands a refocusing of ourselves and our energies. It demands that we make decisions about what is really important to us. The responsibility of raising children translates easily into more discipline, more focus, and more of a determination to succeed in what we do.

In other words, children don't just help us be creative or productive. In many cases, they are the very reason we succeed at all.

Colin Mason is the Director of Media Production at Population Research Institute

Being the Proud Papa I am of a 5 Year Old Boy, and another Child on it's way, I FULLY understand this. Children are not the enemy to Productivity, Creativity, or a drain on ANYTHING. They ARE the Future, and THEY are the reason to live.

Have a great Weekend folks. See you Sunday.
Peter

Sources:
OPNTalk - Email
OPNTalk - Hillary Backing Pelosi's "Chirica" Plan
John Holdren, Obama's Science Czar, says: Forced abortions and mass sterilization needed to save the planet

Note: From The Emails is a weekly Segment every Friday, or occasionally anytime, that appears here at the OPNTalk Blog. Please feel free to Email any Articles, Comments, Thoughts, Whatever, that you may like to share to opntalk@gmail.com As always, you never know what you may see here.

CPS and DCF Revisited

Hey folks,

A friend of mine set me this email that they receive regularly from Chuck Murth.

Chuck Muth is President and CEO of Citizen Outreach and a professional political consultant. He also is a former executive director of the American Conservative Union, a former National Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus, a former county GOP chairman (Clark County, Nevada), Nevada state party executive director, communications director, press secretary, direct mail fundraising consultant and Nevada State Senate candidate.

I believe I may have even used his stuff in the past. you can check out his blog Here.

Well, the person that sent this to me, KNOWS what I went through myself, in dealing with CPS. So first I'm going to post Murth's piece, then share with you my story, for those that are new and may not know.

ATTACK OF THE CHILD SNATCHERS

I don't tend to believe in coincidences, nor do I consider it paranoia when somebody really is out to get you. And especially when my children are involved.

For new readers who may not yet fully understand my political views and philosophy, I think they are best summed up by the immortal words of late Reagan press secretary Lyn Nofziger, who famously said, "I don't like government; it's just that simple."

Oh, and I don't like labor unions any more than I like government.

Politically speaking, I've made a lot of enemies over the years.

So there I was around three o'clock yesterday afternoon - writing my national Muth's Truths weekend column on the Westboro Baptist Church in the back room - when somebody knocked on our front door. A few minutes later my eldest daughter came back and said Momma Gia wanted me to come talk to the lady.

I walked outside - allowing our "vicious" puppy to scoot out the door and begin running around in circles chasing her tail in the driveway - and found my wife holding our baby in her arms with our daughter by her side talking to an older woman. My wife began explaining: "This lady is from Child Protective Services and she's investigating an anonymously filed report that our kids were playing in the street with no shoes on and she wants to see the kids and inspect our house and..."

WHOA! Stop...right...there!

Gia, into the house. Kristen, into the house. Cujo-puppy, into the house.

If there's one government agency that strikes more fear into the hearts of parents in this country than the Internal Revenue Service (which I've also had some unpleasant experience with), it's Child Protective Services. These people have the power to take your children away from you, and their actions are often triggered by anonymous "tips."

This is not to say there aren't children out there who truly need the intervention and protection of CPS (in Nevada it's actually CFS, for Children and Family Services), but they are nevertheless a government agency with an enormous amount of power. That someone sic'ed CFS on me anonymously was a threat I took DAMNED seriously.

So I told the woman, who was pleasant enough and just doing her job, that the conversation was over; that I had nothing further to say without my attorney present; and that no one was going to inspect my home or question my kids without a court order. End of discussion. Thank you for stopping by.

First things first: Call the lawyer. He said not to worry; just email him the contact information for the CFS investigator and he'd take care of it first thing Monday morning.

Next, remind the kids that they are not to talk to or go anywhere with strangers, ESPECIALLY if they say they're from the government. With that, back to normal life.

Dropped the frightened 7-year-old off at Boys & Girls Club after assuring her that I wouldn't let the government take her to "juvy hall." Then took the 5-year-old, her friend and the baby to the Children's Museum to get them out of Momma Gia's hair for a couple hours. While there I read a few chapters of Jack Goldsmith's book, "The Terror Presidency," about how lawyers are gumming up the war on terrorists and inhibiting our soldiers' ability to win.

Back home around 5:30 p.m. for a meeting with the lovely and talented Randi Thompson - the woman who made sure our recently-concluded Conservative Leadership Conference ran like clockwork - after which she'd be staying for dinner with the Muth clan.

Momma Gia left with the 5-year-old, her friend and the baby to Boys & Girls Club to pick up the 7-year-old and her friend, all of whom would be staying overnight at our humble abode for one of those slumber party things young girls seem to enjoy so much.

I had no sooner opened a bottle of Cabernet Sauvignon and poured Randi and I both a glass when there was a knock on the door. I figured it was another of the neighborhood kids who was coming over for the slumber party, but to my shock and surprise there were two uniformed sheriff's deputies on the porch instead.

Nothing like answering the door and finding two police officers investigating a child welfare complaint with a glass of liquor in your hand!

Anyway, the officers informed me that the CFS woman had reported me to them and that they were there to see my kids and inspect my home to see if they had clothes, shoes and beds to sleep in. I was even told they wanted to look in my refrigerator to see if I had milk and food in the house.

OK. Now this...was...serious.

I informed the officers that the kids weren't home; that my wife was out picking them up. I also informed them that I wanted to talk to my lawyer before letting them into my house. I knew I had the right to stop them from entering without a court order, but I also knew that in a matter dealing with children they would surely obtain one with no problem. It was simply a matter of letting them in now or letting them in later. Still, my inclination was to force the issue and wait for a court order.

As I was explaining that I suspected this was all a politically-motivated investigation due to my work, Momma Gia pulls up in the driveway with the kids. So much for waiting for a court order before letting the law see and inspect the children. Fortunately, when they emerged from the van they all had their shoes on for a change.

"Well, you may as well come in the house now," I said.

As luck would have it, my wife had already pre-set the dinner table with our "fine china" because of the slumber party and because we always "put on the Ritz" when Aunt Randi comes over for dinner. There was a pot-roast in the slow-cooker on the counter and pots of corn on the cob, potatoes and gravy on the stove. And since Thursday was payday, we'd just come back from buying a couple hundred dollars worth of food and beverages from Costco. So Mother Hubbard's cupboards were anything but bare when I opened them and the fridge for the deputies.

The girls' room looked like a typical girls' room - which, of course, means it looked like, in my mother's words, a pig sty. But yes, my kids do have beds and there were even sheets, blankets and pillows on them.

Needless to say, the police officers were completely satisfied and let me know they would report positively back to CFS. On the way out the door, one of the officers noticed the picture of Ronald Reagan I have hanging in our entrance hallway and remarked, "What a great man." That made me feel a little better. Not much. But a little.

I fully understand that the CFS worker and the police officers were just doing their jobs, and that any report involving child welfare needs to be taken seriously. But that doesn't mean the whole incident didn't scare the hell out of me. God help whoever filed this frivolous report thinking it was funny or an appropriate payback - whether it was politically motivated or just some busy-body neighbor - if I ever find out who it was. Even the mafia draws the line at going after someone's children.

OK, I'm outta here. Taking the kids for a LONG walk DEEP into the woods today. And this time, I'm going to make SURE none of them bring any doggone bread crumbs with them!

I can more than relate to what Mr. Murth went through. I did as well. Here is what I posted, I believe it was at Ethepeople, a over two years ago.

I Can Honestly Say,

Hey Folks,

I’ve been sitting on this for about 5 days. Going back and forth as to if I was going to post it. I decided to so the tale can be told. It can be discussed. It has to be put forth for debate.

Joshua is doing great. He seems to be increasingly ever hungry. He is up to 4 to 4 ½ ounces of formula and breast milk a feeding. He also seems to be quite advanced. I know, I know, but it’s not just proud papa talking. The Doctors, nurses, and all that have dealt with him are saying the same thing. He is now on record as “extremely advanced”. He is now 20 days old. He is FULLY aware of EVERYTHING. He is already getting out of anything we put him in, unless we strap him in. He is already able to instantly turn himself over. He holds his head up. He is already, if placed on his belly, able to “scoot” himself across the floor. He is ALMOST CRAWLING. It is truly an amazing thing to watch.

But it DOES have draw backs. I can now honestly say I understand why some parents take their kids and run. I can honestly say, I understand why so many people HATE the CPS. Here’s my story. Yes, MY story.

Before we truly knew how active he was, I put him in this little jumper seat. I sent Laura to bed and was watching him. I did not even imagine he could get out of the seat. Well, he did. Because Joshua is so mobile and active this early, he then started to scoot himself across the carpet. This caused a minor rug burn on his right knee. We took care of it, and took him to the doctor for a standard check up. The next day? Yup, CPS at the door. “We have to investigate possible abuse of your Son.” So it began..

We had to go to their doctors and give interviews. It all came down to the same thing. “NO 15 day old child can get out of a chair, and NO 15 day old child can give himself a carpet burn. They cannot craw, and we do not believe this is how it happen.”

So, the doctor and two other “experts” placed Joshua on his belly. He scooted himself across the exam table. Doctor? “Uh OK.”. Then we placed him in the chair in question. In less then 5 minutes, he got himself out of it and was heading to the floor again. The Doctor? “Uh OK.” After three and a halve hours of this ordeal, the “experts” decided “No abuse found.” It was one of the most stressful things I’ve ever been through. Strangers coming to our house and accusing us of abusing our kid. When all was said and done, we got a “no abuse found, thanks for your time.”

I understand that in some cases CPS may do a good job, but I feel in most cases they destroy good families, then at the same time let kids under THEIR care be abused and killed. Great track record they have.

I guess it was kind of a good thing that this happened. We now KNOW how Joshua is. We need to keep an eye on him. The “experts” were so impressed with him that they started giving us advise on advanced behavior. Yeah, I’m going to listen to these people.

I wasn’t going to post this, but I NEEDED to tell the tale. If you have children, be VERY careful. If CPS can show up at my door, they can show up at yours. It is NOT a pleasant experience. Even being found innocent. Needless to say, we will be finding another Pediatrician. That was who contacted CPS. You know, another “expert” who said “it is not possible”.
Peter

Joshua is doing just find now over two years later. No more intervention by CPS, no more questions about abuse. Everyone is happy and healthy.

On January 21, 2007, in the Just My Thoughts segment, "Attack on Family" I said this.

So what is the government’s answer? Create an organization that monitors and protect kids. DCF Department of Children and Families, CPS Child Protective Services. It may be known as or DFPS, ETC in your area. This is a government organization with "good intentions" but WAY too much power to destroy healthy families. For just some examples Check THIS out. More examples here.

This you have story after story of missing and abused kids in Foster Care There are a THOUSAND missing in Florida alone.

There is story after story of Foster Care failings. But yet, with a phone call, they can come to your house, rip your kids right out of their own bedrooms, and destroy the family. WITH NO EVIDENCE. No trial. Nothing. Just an anonymous complaint. Yet where these, possibly happy and healthy kids go, they are really abused and turn up missing. So you fight to get them back, when you are "found innocent," the damage is done to your kid. If they can find them.

So is THIS who will be enforcing the "Spanking laws." There are those that believe that "Time Out" works. There are even some that are making money selling "Time Out" merchandise. "Time Out" doesn’t work. It may have an effect the first or second time, but in the long run, it really does not deter the behavior that causes the need.

Spanking on the other hand DOES. I’m not justifying nor promoting "beating" the child. No one is. We all ready have laws that enforce that. But a spanking when deserved, does work. Has worked for thousands of years.

From the new smoking laws, to this moron attempting to make it a misdemeanor to spank your child, the Liberals are stripping you of right after right, in the name of "protecting the children." I’ve said before as to dealing with the school system, the reason is simple. He who controls the youth, controls the future. If the Liberals and the Government can take the rights away from those parents that they do not agree with, they can raise up a whole new breed of Liberals. In turn, destroy what they deem "problematic" to the furthering of Liberalism itself. You know, Christianity, morals, or anything anti-Liberal.

Generation after generation of stripping away rights, morals, and increasing the grey area, the "anything goes" crowd has given us what we have today. They want to continue, even now some, do not even understand that this is more wrong than they can possibly believe.

Parents need to stand up and say, enough is enough. WE are the parents. They are OUR kids. WE will raise them how we see fit. They will be the people we teach them to be. WE are the final authority. WE do not care what you think. WE do not care what the school says. WE know what is right and just. WE will teach our kids. STAY OUT OF OUR FAMILY.

Only then, will we start making progress in returning morals, right and wrong, and truly protecting our children.

Like Mr. Murth said, and as I have shared, here are two happy and healthy families that were basically invaded by an outside, government run, "Child Protection" agency. Meanwhile? Those that they actually take? They do NOT care for. They have bigger problems then we do, who is investigating THEM?
Peter

Sources:
Chuck Murth
Opntalk- "Attack on Family"
Wikipedia - Chuck_Muth">Chuck Murth