A number of weeks ago, Development & Peace released their annual report for their 2007-2008 operating year. Interested readers can peruse they glossy, slick report here. As followers of the D&P abortion scandal already know, D&P isn’t exactly forthcoming with information regarding what their partners promote. They keep a tight lid on their partners more objectionable (i.e. anti-family, anti-life) activities. It’s quite amazing, actually, considering the breadth and depth of the depravity of some of these organizations. D&P is sponsoring approximately 40 of these anti-family organizations, and that’s only what we know of. They openly advocate their public support for abortion and other “reproductive rights” on their websites or remove them when they’ve been busted. Some of these organizations have these goals as one of their primary mandates, and they are certainly not shy in discussing their advocacy activities for abortion to the press. They don’t try and hide what they are about at all. They’re quite open about it. One of them in Nicaragua even has this huge banner in their main meeting hall plastered against their back wall, so no one can mistake what they are advocating.
So, how is it, then, that these facts have not been reported to Catholic donors in Canada? Why has D&P not reported on the pro-abortion pushing positions and activities that these groups are advocating? Where are the code phrases of “reproductive rights”, “sexual reproductive health”, “reconstruction of masculinity”, “gender training”, etc. that is so prevalent on their partners’ websites or third party reports about them? Where is the mention of abortion or contraception or condoms or the push for the legalization of the instruments of the culture of death?
They are no where to be seen in their “Annual Review” or any report that D&P issues.
Why is that? What is the management of D&P afraid of?
I’ll tell you what they’re afraid of:
EXPOSURE AND THE TRUTH
Instead of fully disclosing what Development & Peace is secretly supporting, the Annual Review is a white-washed, sanitized version of the hidden agenda. The closest they come to revealing what they are about is the phrase “gender equity”. “Gender equity” is to Development & Peacewhat “human rights” is to the Canadian Human Rights Commissions. It sounds very noble and righteous, but in reality these are merely “front phrases” to forward the marxist view of “equality” and to push for the sexual jihad in the developing countries. Below is their section on “Women’s Rights” on page 7 of their report. My comments are denoted in red.
Many of Development and Peace’s partners work to improve the living conditions and the social and political status of women. By developing the capacity to influence decision making, these women can encourage the adoption of fair social measures adapted to the needs of poor and vulnerable families.
In East Timor, our partners are working to promote women’s rights and encourage their presence in the political life of the country. Women now account for 29% of the members of parliament. Significant progress is being made towards greater equity in social policies and laws, including those on domestic violence. At least 1,300 women are now village counsellors and 29 women are the head of a village or hamlet.
They don’t tell you that the “social policies” being advanced is not only to overturn abortion in that country, but also to attack and oppose the Catholic Church there.
In Ecuador, a legal paper on gender equity has been drawn up, published and distributed among local, provincial and national authorities. The document is the result of a research project on violence against women that was carried out by a team of aboriginal women supported by the Center for Development, Communication and Social Research (cedIS). This advocacy work contributed to the adoption of constitutional amendments that give precedence to the rights of women when those rights come into conflict with traditional aboriginal rights. http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/Review/responses/ECUADOR-English.pdf
This report is consistent with what we have seen thusfar from D&P’s collaborators: “The institutionalization of a system for improving sexual and reproductive health care services has proceeded very slowly in Ecuador and is subject to shifts in the political will of the authorities in that area….”(p.16) An observant reader will notice too that D&P did not actually cite the report’s name: NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR WOMEN CONAMU, Questionnaire to Governments on Implementation of the Beijing Platform for, Action (1995) and the Outcome of the Twenty-Third Special Session of the General Assembly (2000). As everyone knows, the 1995 Beijing Platform was highly problematic for the Catholic Church.
And then there is, of course, LifeSite’s investigative reports about D&P’s funding of an Ecuadoran agency promoting abortion, contraception and homosexuality.
In Senegal, the activities of the networks Réseau africain pour le développement Integré and Réseau Siggil Jigeen led to the adoption of a law on gender equality. This act amends the electoral code to ensure greater representation of women on the candidate lists for legislative and local elections.
Réseau Siggil Jigeen was one of the groups uncovered by Socon or Bust in supporting “reproductive health”: “Besides RSJ, 25 other organizations work on reproduction health and join their forces to change things. Our goal is to increase the budget allocated in Family Planification. We also demand the instauration of a national FP Day.” (Source)
Why doesn’t D&P mention this particular activity of RSJ?
The action Group for Women and children’s Well-being (Famme) greatly appreciated the creativity and energy demonstrated by young QSF interns during their trip. Their work gave new momentum to the Famme team.
FAMME was another group discovered to be pushing contraception all over Togo through their condom distribution centres: “The condoms are ordered through the local PSI office, which delivers them to FAMME. There is an agreement between the two institutions to ensure that the expiry date of the condoms is beyond three months. FAMME has a system whereby an initial donation of condoms is made to the peer educators (PEs), enabling them later on to obtain further supplies. Once the condomsare supplied, the FAMME project management team makes packages according to the sites and number of peer educators at each site. The packages are then pre-positioned with the PE technical supervisors, who then supply the PEs they supervise. The condom price is marked up by about 50% as an incentive for the PEs and supervisors. This covers their transportation costs when they go to distribute them. For instance, the female condom is purchased at 60 FCFA with PSI and sold on the ground at 100 FCFA each. After they’ve sold the first lot of condoms, the PEs go for more supplies from the technical supervisors. The expiry date is checked during the supervision visits, and if the date has expired, the condoms are systematically withdrawn from circulation.” (Source: Promising and Best Practices in HIV/AIDS Prevention and Care for West and Central Africa, p.28-29)
I wonder what kind of “creativity and energy” D&P is talking about and what “momentum” they gave FAMME and their condom distribution centres?
In Benin, interns helped raise awareness and mobilize women in response to soaring commodity prices. They then took part in a delegation that handed a petition directly to the Benin ministry of agriculture.
Too bad that D&P didn’t raise awareness among Canadian Catholics that they were also funding AFJB (Association de développement rural intégré de l’Atacora) in Benin who were involved in drafting a report which said:
“While maternal mortality is a serious health concern for African women, it is crucial that women’s reproductive health be viewed broadly to encompass an array of issues that assure the health of a woman’s reproductive system. This holistic understanding of reproductive health was embraced by the ICPD, which reaffirmed the “right of all couples and individ-uals to decide freely and responsibly the number, spacing and timing of their children.”28 Access to contraception and safe abortions; protection from and treatment for sexually trans-missible infections (STIs), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS); and laws and policies which protect women from harmful tra-ditional practices and sexual violence, are all components ofreproductive health and are essential to any effort to reduce maternal mortality in the region.” (Source: WOMEN OF THE WORLD:LAWS AND POLICIES AFFECTING THEIR REPRODUCTIVE LIVES FRANCOPHONE AFRICA , p.17)
In Indonesia, our partner KpI has contributed greatly to the emergence of a women’s movement in the troubled post-tsunami period. At every level, women have entered the political sphere in order to represent their fellow citizens at regional, provincial and national levels.
KPI stands for “Indonesian Women’s Coalition”. Its secretary general is the editor of books on women’s reproductive rights and the empowerment of women’s reproductive health. She wrote Women, Religion and Reproductive Health in 1999. (Source: The Jakarta Post)
It is quite telling how every group named in this report that further “women’s rights” also further teachings diametrically opposed to Catholic teaching on sexual ethics. This cannot be considered a simple mistake or oversight. It is willful and it is deliberate.
And that is why we cannot expect D&P to issue an open and transparent report on their partners’ activities. They have never done so in the last 40 years of their operations, and they have repeatedly and obstinately denied any wrong doing, even though the facts prove indisputably that they are funding and enabling militant pro-abortion groups and a host of other anti-family policies of these groups.
So, what is going to be the real question when the report comes out since it is likely going to be a white-wash? The real question is this:
Which bishops want to be taken seriously by people of life and family? And which bishops prefer to ignore the evidence and continue to support the fraud of “social justice” according to Development & Peace?
The bishops cannot ignore that there will be serious consequences to their moral authority if they try and sweep this under the rug. We hope and pray that fidelity to the Gospel of Life and some good old fashioned clear thinking prevail among them.