Urge U.S. to support Millennium Development Goals

[Matt25]

home.maryknoll.org/index.php?module=MKArticles&func=display&id=490&office=alert

From September 13-15, heads of states will gather at the United Nations to attend the UN World Summit which will focus primarily on the five-year review of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and UN reform. The current draft of the Summit outcome declaration contains strong statements on fighting poverty. Currently, 1.2 billion people around the globe live on less than one dollar a day and half the world’s population three billion people live on less than two dollars every day. The U.S. has proposed deleting key wording on tackling global poverty and disease. The proposed changes include cutting all references to the Millennium Development Goals, which are the internationally-agreed upon targets for halving world poverty. The U.S. also wants to cut all references to small arms controls, and to weaken wording on the responsibility of all governments to protect civilians in cases of mass killing, such as the Rwandan genocide. The summit could go down in history as the meeting where the most powerful people in the world turned their backs on the poorest if leaders refuse to even mention the commitments they made at the Millennium Summit in 2000.

To those who live outside the U.S., please contact your heads of state to encourage them to continue to support the MDGs and to not bend to U.S. pressure to control the agenda against poverty. For those who are U.S. citizens, please write to your congressional representatives to support two pieces of legislation now pending in the House of Representatives and Senate that affirm the MDGs: House Con. Res. 172, sponsored by Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN); and Senate bill 1315, sponsored by Sen. Richard Lugar (D-IN). (Go to thomas.loc.gov for more information.)

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

It’s not the goal of fighting poverty that bothers me, it’s the equating of “empowering women” with making abortion on demand a right.

I’m all for sharp razors. I’m also for placing them in the hands of skilled barbers, and keeping them out of the reach of the unskilled.

The goals may be fine, but the UN is too morally bankrupt to implement them.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[Scott_Waddell]

Gerry Hunter:

It’s not the goal of fighting poverty that bothers me, it’s the equating of “empowering women” with making abortion on demand a right.

I’m all for sharp razors. I’m also for placing them in the hands of skilled barbers, and keeping them out of the reach of the unskilled.

The goals may be fine, but the UN is too morally bankrupt to implement them.

Blessings,

Gerry

No doubt. Giving this group any kind of power is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.

Scott

 

[MikeWM]

Scott Waddell:

No doubt. Giving this group any kind of power is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.

Strange then that the Vatican is supporting the UN’s millennium goals (see other thread).

Mike

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

MikeWM:

Strange then that the Vatican is supporting the UN’s millennium goals (see other thread).

Mike

Well, who wouldn’t support the goals, as presented in a simple list?

It’s how those who control the operations of the UN seek to implement them that’s the problem.

I’m aware of the Vatican’s support for the UN as an organization, and note that since that support is a question of politics, not faith and morals, it is not afforded the protection of infallibility. But perhaps there is a goal of making the UN as it should be, rather than what it now is.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[MikeWM]

Gerry Hunter:

Well, who wouldn’t support the goals, as presented in a simple list?

It’s how those who control the operations of the UN seek to implement them that’s the problem.

I’m aware of the Vatican’s support for the UN as an organization, and note that since that support is a question of politics, not faith and morals, it is not afforded the protection of infallibility. But perhaps there is a goal of making the UN as it should be, rather than what it now is.

Indeed, well it certainly isn’t perfect. The conference going on right now is all about reform and changing many things about the UN. Hopefully good things will come out of it.

Mike

 

[Matt25]

news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-09/12/content_3481470.htm

On the eve of the UN World Summit, European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso on Monday reaffirmed the European Union (EU)'s commitments to the Millennium Development Goals( MDGs). “The 2005 UN World Summit is a unique opportunity to show Europe’s determination to keep our promises to the developing world and to bring others with us,” Barroso said at a press conference. ** He said the EU is the world’s biggest aid donor, responsible 55percent of all development aid in 2004.**The EU is determined to reaching the long-standing target of 0.7 percent of GNP for the official development assistance (ODA) by 2015, he added. With the EU’s interim target of 0.56 percent GNP/ODA by 2010, Barroso also challenged other wealthy nations to follow the suit.

The EU is the United Nations biggest financial backer. EU member states provide 38 percent of the UN regular budget and, together with the EU’s executive Commission, they account for 50 percent of voluntary contributions to UN funds and programs.

Initiated during the UN Millennium Summit in 2000, the MDGs include halving extreme poverty, reducing child deaths by two-thirds and achieving universal primary education by 2015.

 

[Matt25]

newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/September2005/13/c8977.html

While the politicians and policy-makers prepare to the discuss the MDGs and the future of the world’s poorest people, one child will die every three seconds as a result of extreme poverty. If this scale of child poverty is not addressed now it will have a serious impact on the future of developing countries because poor, malnourished and uneducated children will grow up to
be poor, unhealthy and uneducated adults. The Millennium Development Goals have so far failed children, whose opinions have not been taken into account. A new magazine Our future; our say, produced by Plan and written by children, calls on world leaders to make the MDGs a reality. Children are among the most vulnerable members of society and are the most affected by poverty.

By the year 2015, all United Nations Member States have pledged to meet

the Millennium Development Goals but,

-   On present rates of progress in sub-Saharan Africa, basic schooling
    for every child will not be achieved by 2015. It will not be achieved
    until 2129;

-   On present rates of progress, the elimination of avoidable child
    deaths will not be achieved in 10 years by 2015. It will take 100
    years to achieve this goal; and,

-   The average aid to developing countries, from developed countries,
    currently stands at approximately US$80 billion or 0.25 per cent of
    gross national product (GNP) per year. In order to achieve the MDGs,
    an average of US$220 billion or 0.7 per cent of GNP is needed.

 

[2shelbys]

That all sounds great. It is unfortunately nothing more than a dream. There is absolutely no chance of “ending poverty” unless you are prepared to militarily remove all of the corrupt governments all over the world that stand in the way of getting aid to their impoverished citizens and replace them with occupation forces to make sure aid gets to those who need it. It simply can not be done.

Even God’s church can not do away with evil. The U.N. certainly can not do it either, especially since that same evil has so permiated the U.N.

 

[Matt25]

usccb.org/comm/archives/2005/05-204.shtml

Attainment of human development and poverty reduction goals articulated in 2000 should be a high priority for the United States during discussions at the United Nations World Summit this week, according to the chairman of the bishops’ International Policy Committee. The leaders of more than 170 nations will meet at U.N. headquarters in New York, September 14 to 16.

“We urge the Administration to make the World Summit an occasion to build on the Administration’s strong record by working with Summit colleagues to adopt new initiatives that enable poor countries, particularly in Africa, to break the cycle of poverty and achieve the human development goals of the Millennium Declaration,” said Bishop John H. Ricard, SSJ, in a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

The U.N. Millennium Declaration, adopted in September 2000 by leaders of more than 180 nations, set specific human development and poverty eradication goals to be achieved by 2015. They include halving extreme poverty and hunger; assuring that all children, boys and girls alike, are able to complete primary education; halting and reversing the spread of HIV/AIDS, malaria and other major diseases; and reducing sharply maternal and child mortality.

Bishop Ricard, of Pensacola-Tallahassee, acknowledged that a single meeting of leaders “will not overcome poverty and despair,” but he urged Rice to ensure that “due attention” be given to the needs of the world’s poorest people.

 

[krokal]

2shelbys:

That all sounds great. It is unfortunately nothing more than a dream. There is absolutely no chance of “ending poverty” unless you are prepared to militarily remove all of the corrupt governments all over the world that stand in the way of getting aid to their impoverished citizens and replace them with occupation forces to make sure aid gets to those who need it. It simply can not be done.

Even God’s church can not do away with evil. The U.N. certainly can not do it either, especially since that same evil has so permiated the U.N.

So because it is “unachievable”, that just means we give up? What kind of attitude is that? Striving to be perfect like Christ is “unachievable”, should I just give up because I know it is only a dream?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Kaleb Kroger:

So because it is “unachievable”, that just means we give up? What kind of attitude is that? Striving to be perfect like Christ is “unachievable”, should I just give up because I know it is only a dream?

It depends. Have you in the past given huge sums to brutal, corrupt dictators, who syphoned most of it off into their own pockets and used the rest to buy more chains for their people?

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Matt.

CONDUCT RULES

1. Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of…innuendo.

I certainly think asking me if I know where places such as Scotland and Wales are when I have given you no reason to believe that I might be ignorant of this information is innuendo serving the purpose of put-down.

Such questions are rhetorical, the underlying assumption of which is that I am too ignorant to know such things.

Since you do not know me and since I have neither – as yet – demonstrated my ignorance nor received an apology from you, I am drawn to conclude that your demeanor toward me is gratuitous and lacks courtesy .

CONDUCT RULES
6. Do not view the discussion area as a vehicle for single-mindedly promoting an agenda.

It is my view that these forums are for discussion. You, however,have conducted yourself as if they were for the purposes of lecturing us.

We have responded to many variants of your unchanging position which I would sum up as being the Social Gospel minus Jesus. Catholic teaching allows for legitimate self-defence, just war doctrine, and the principle of double effect.

Yet you have not responded to our attempts to bring Catholic teaching into the discussion. This would be the 7th reminder that an application of JWD and PDE is pending from you.

The Pope’s teaching is, in some cases, infallible. In all other cases his teaching is transformative and worthy of respect, but is not meant to be misappropriated and misapplied. You seem to be of the view that, if you quote the Pope, that the matter is settled.

The matter is not settled because, in quoting the Pope, you do not draw the necessary connections to your thesis and you do not take into account the impact on your thesis of Catholic teaching not directly associated with the specific passage you have appropriated from the Pope; Catholic teaching which I have mentioned above.

Rather than respond in good faith, you throw out rhetorical questions designed to evade our responses and you throw out still more quotes and you throw out thread after thread after thread all along the same theme, all of which amount to one big tautology.

What is the purpose of that? Do you think that, if you repeat an unsupported ideology often enough then it will become truth?

There is no further point in throwing out quotes at us unless you demonstrate your ability to apply those quotes – along with Catholic teaching – to the questions at hand. The applicable Catholic teaching, in my opinion, would be just war doctrine, legitimate self-defence, and the principle of double effect.

 

[koda]

Gerry Hunter:

Well, who wouldn’t support the goals, as presented in a simple list?

It’s how those who control the operations of the UN seek to implement them that’s the problem.

I’m aware of the Vatican’s support for the UN as an organization, and note that since that support is a question of politics, not faith and morals, it is not afforded the protection of infallibility. But perhaps there is a goal of making the UN as it should be, rather than what it now is.

Blessings,

Gerry

A couple of comments here.

1. Jesus’ goals were often presented in pretty simple lists too - the Beatitudes for instance. And then we have the Ten Commandments in the OT.

1. My perception is that the Vatican is the only surrpoting the UN because of faith and morals and it is the US that doesn’t support it because of politics.

Jesus in not an American. He is interested in the good of all people, not political expediency and who might win the next election. Sometimes we need to take on a wider view of his teaching and not have tunnel vision on how this affects the US.
Just a suggestion.

Peace

 

[KathleenElsie]

From LIFESITE.com

How these great sounding UN Millennium Development Goals are being used by pro-abortion groups.

Powerful Groups Aim to Promote Global Abortion through UN Millennium Development Goals

…pro-life analysts on the international scene warn that this laudable initiative is being hijacked by pro-abortion groups which are using the event to universalize abortion as a supposedly acceptable way to eradicate poverty. Euro-fam, a pro-life groups which monitors the European parliament, notes that in order to do this, abortion advocates are aggressively lobbying to introduce a ‘right’ to sexual and reproductive health (a euphemism for abortion and fertility regulation, according to the World Health Organisation) in several of the goals. …

lifesite.net/ldn/2005/sep/05091204.html

Please read the whole story.

GOD BLESS

 

[JackmanUSC]

The problem with the upcoming summit is the same one that has plagued us for the last 50 years. Every government and NGO has promised to send money to help end poverty around the world, but the governments they give the money to are corrupt and usually end up hording the money for weapons or palaces. To end poverty the Capitalist System and Democratic Governments must spread to all corners of the Earth. Without them, there will be no solution, just corruption.

 

[rlg94086]

koda:

A couple of comments here.

1. Jesus’ goals were often presented in pretty simple lists too - the Beatitudes for instance. And then we have the Ten Commandments in the OT.

1. My perception is that the Vatican is the only surrpoting the UN because of faith and morals and it is the US that doesn’t support it because of politics.

Jesus in not an American. He is interested in the good of all people, not political expediency and who might win the next election. Sometimes we need to take on a wider view of his teaching and not have tunnel vision on how this affects the US.
Just a suggestion.

Peace

I’m sorry? Are you comparing the UN to Jesus? That seems like a stretch.

 

[krokal]

JackmanUSC:

To end poverty the Capitalist System and Democratic Governments must spread to all corners of the Earth. Without them, there will be no solution, just corruption.

How ironic, you want to implent the leading cause of poverty (capitalism) to end poverty.

I’m sorry? Are you comparing the UN to Jesus? That seems like a stretch.

He pointed out one similarity, what’s your problem?

 

[rlg94086]

Kaleb Kroger:

He pointed out one similarity, what’s your problem?

I have a lot of problems, but I save those for confession.

Koda implied that americans who don’t support the UN don’t care about the rest of the world. He emphasized the point by saying Jesus isn’t an american. And compared the UN’s list of goals to the Beatitudes. To me this implies that Koda thinks the UN is acting more like Jesus than americans. Do you mind if I take offense to that?

As a previous poster explained, most people agree with the list of goals. It’s the UN and it’s methods that many of us disagree with. There are many ways to love your neighbor. Unfortunately the UN’s implentation is of “love your neighbor” often ends up breaking a couple of commandments.

 

[Taliesin52]

At this point, the UN should have only ONE goal: reform. I cannot in good conscience urge my government to support the UN in anything at this time. Unfortunately, the UN is a completely morally bankrupt organization that to my knowledge has cause far more harm in the world than it has prevented.

In the UN, we have the embodiment of moral relativism. This can be seen in their complete inability to distinguish between Free societies (the US, the UK, Canada, etc…) and Fear societies (PRC, DPRK, Sudan, most of the Middle East, much of Africa). How can an organization be trusted to help anyone when they believe that the US president or the Pontiff himself are no different than Mugabe, Kim Jong Il, the Iranian Mullahs, or various petty despots and should be treated on an equal level?

How can we work with the UN on human rights, when the UN Human Rights Commission is run by nations such as Sudan, Vietnam, Togo, or Guinea? A commmission that in the past has been LEAD by Libya, a country well known for abuses. Fortunately for Sudan, this body of mostly non-democratic dictatorships well known for killing their own people has declared that the ethnic cleansing of tens of thousands of people and the displacement of 1.8 million (and counting) people is not genocide, even though Sudan itself has (proudly) declared that it is. (edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/africa/01/31/sudan.report/). I wonder how many more people will have to be raped and killed before we reach the magic number where it becomes genocide.

What else have the accomplished? Disarmament is certainly a goal of the UN. However, why is disarmament always focused on Free societies such as the US or Israel (a nation surrounded by countries that have vowed many times that their goal is to destroy Israel)? What’s more, going back to their moral relativism, why should Syria or Iran be allowed to sit on this commission when they seem interested in gaining weapons of mass distruction, while the best choice to CHAIR the commission was Iraq? (globalsolutions.org/programs/glob_engage/Legislation/H.CON.RES.29.html). Further, let’s look at North Korea. The DPRK begged for nuclear power. Begged and begged, and when the UN (through the US) decided there was no harm in it, the DPRK immediately sets to work on nuclear weapons. Now, we have a the world’s LEADING sponsor of terrorism, a nation full of oil and natural gas, with open plains and high mountains (good for wind power) and bright sunny days (good for solar power) demanding nuclear power and promising not to create nuclear weapons. Why on earth should they even be entertained?

And then there’s the Oil for Food Scandal. While investigations are still underway, some things are clear. First, the UN failed in it’s largest aid program in history. They allowed corruption and nepotism to reign, allowing an evil dictator to secretly buy weapons (such as French missiles) and build palaces (can’t use the same rape room every day ya know!) and allowing Iraqis to starve and go without medical attention.

UN officials are always quick to point out that although the US gives more money and carries the largest burdeon in most peacekeeping operations (unless you consider the EU a single nation and not a group of nations), it doesn’t give enough. Why is it every time poverty comes up it seems to be a code word for “America must pony up even more money to give to petty dictators who will allow their people to starve and die anyways”?