Latter-day Prophets view of the United Nation

[Teancum-Old]

I came across this topic some time ago and have not resolved it for myself yet. Hoping to see if someone on the forum has some information that can enlighten me on the subject...

Ezra taft Benson, J Rueben Clark, and many other latter-day prophets condemned the United Nations (UN) due to issues of soveriegnty, world government, disarmament, socialism, etc. Yet I found out that the general authorities of the Church were divided in their support for the formation of the League of Nations (LN) just after WWI. The League of Nations was simply a precursor to the UN so to me they are basically the same thing. Specifically, President Grant supported the LN early on while some of the 12 were openly against it for the same reasons Pres. Benson railed on the UN for.

Does anyone have more information about Pres. Grant's support of the LN to help understand his reasoning? Did he support the LN and UN the rest of his life or not? Did he ever come around to a change in opinion?

I did not think his view supporting the LN back then was the official poisition of the Church since the Brethren were not all in agreement on the issue. This would also mean, as I understand it, that this was Pres. Grant's opinion rather than revelation/inspiration from the Lord on the subject. But then, I read this in an old conference report I found online:

I have been requested, by word of mouth and by letter, on more than one occasion, to state my opinion regarding the league of nations. I received a telegram asking me to join ex-President Taft, ex-Attorney General Wickersham, President Lowell of Harvard, and other leading Americans, in signing the following manifesto:

Excerpts of the telegram now follow:

The waging of war steadied and united the American people. Peace willbring prosperity, and prosperity content. Delay in the senate postponing ratification in this uncertain period of neither peace nor war has resulted in indecision and doubt, bred strife, and quickened the cupidity of those who sell the daily necessities of life and the fears of those whose daily wage no longer fills the daily marketbasket. We beseech the senate to give the land peace and certainty by a ratification which will not keep us longer in the shadows of possible wars, but give the whole world the light of peace. But there is no possibility of doubt that amendment of the treaty, as is now proposed by the senate committee on foreign relations, would require negotiation and a reopening of all the questions decided at Paris. Months of delay would follow. The perils of the present would become the deadly dangers of the near future. All the doubt engendered would aid the plots for violent revolution in this and other lands... Peace is delayed until ratification comes. And any amendment postpones peace. Germany and England alone of the principal powers have ratified. The other principals necessarily await our action, influential and powerful as we are today, in the world's affairs. The ravages of war on more than a score of fighting fronts are continued
by our needless delay. Let the senate give the world peace by ratification without amendment.

Pres. Grant replied to the telgram as follows:

I have pleasure in joining ex-President Taft and other leading Americans in signing manifesto as outlined in your telegram of yesterday. The sentiments contained in the above manifesto express my personal position with regard to the league of nations; and since signing the telegram I have neither heard nor read anything that has in any degree changed my position on this important question. I regret exceedingly that the standard works of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have been brought into this controversy, which has now become practically a partisan controversy. It is my opinion that this important question should have been kept absolutely out of politics. On one important matter I desire to place the position of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints fairly before the people. An illustrated hand-bill has been circulated and has been widely republished in newspapers under the heading: "Mormon Bible Prophecies Become Issue in Opposition to the League of Nations." The position of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is that the standard works of the Church are not opposed to the league of nations. As stated in what I have read to you, I regret exceedingly that this great and important question has become a political issue, and I desire to ask each and all of the members of the Church, over which I have the honor to preside, that in all their controversy in connection with this great issue, they express themselves as to their views with due deference to the opinions of others.

Pres. Grant then quotes hymns and poems that basically teach that we should look at faults in our own hearts instead of finding them in others and also teaches about the ugliness of politics. To close on this subject he stated:

I am convinced in my own feelings that Great Britain, France, and the United States have common aims, common desires, common objects, and
that a league in which those three nations are combined will mean peace as far as the acts of nations can bring peace to mankind. The three thousand miles of border between the United States and Canada, maintained for over a hundred years without the slightest trouble, without any great forts, such as they have felt obliged to have between Germany and France, and other European countries, gives me the absolute assurance in my heart that Great Britain and her subjects have the same desires for the welfare of mankind, and for the liberty of mankind, that we have here in the United States. Confidence begets confidence; good will begets good will; and I believe that having fought -- for what? For our own existence, because I believe that but for the fact of our joining with the Allies in the great war, Germany would have conquered France and Great Britain, and that immediately thereafter she would have picked a quarrel with the United States, in the hope that this country, too, might be conquered. That Germany could not have conquered the United States I have no doubt. While representing you, as chairman of the Liberty loan committee of the State of Utah, I attended a banquet in San Francisco, and in the course of a little speech of ten minutes -- the limit given to me -- I announced that we were sure to sure to win the war; that there was no doubt of it in my mind, absolutely none, because I accepted the statement of an inspired prophet of the living God, who resided on this continent hundreds of years ago, who said that this is a choice land above all other lands, and that no king should rule on this land. Therefore I have no fear of Germany or any other country conquering these United States of America -- none whatever. But if Germany had conquered France and England -- which I believe she would have done but for our help -- there would have been been slain, instead of less than 100,000 of our boys, hundreds of thousands before we would have won the victory. I believe in my heart that it is our duty to stand by those nations that stood the brunt of the battle, and that saved us the loss of perhaps millions of our boys in the great struggle. I am not saying that I would not be delighted if this league of nations, or the terms of this covenant of peace, could be changed in some particulars, but they cannot be changed without submitting the treaty again to Germany. To my mind, that would be a calamity. (Conference Report, October 1919, p.15-20)

This is tough to swallow for me believing that the NWO is in control of the UN and therefore was in control of its predecessor the LN. Or was this not the case at this time? Could it be that the NWO was not in control of the LN and that it was in fact a belevolent organization? Or did it start of on the right foot but then the NWPO took control of ot later? Pres. Benson spoke harshly against the UN and therefor I believe he was also speaking against the LN (perhaps this is where I am wrong). I know it may seem I am pitting the prophets against one another, but it is something I have had on the bookshelf of my mind for a while now.

But another thing, Pres. Grant uses the same line of thinking for supporting WWI as many did in supporting WWI. That is that Germany was attempting to take over the whole world, including the U.S. But the Founding Fathers taught that we should not get involved with Europe's problems and not make any entangling alliances.

Basically, I am thoroughly confused. Please share your thought with me on this subject.

[SwissMrs&Pitchfire]

The original League of Nations charter is nothing like the UN. You have to view them as two very seperate things. The dramatized church history has a good dramatization of this period.

[uglypitbull]

This is tough to swallow for me believing that the NWO is in control of the UN and therefore was in control of its predecessor the LN. Or was this not the case at this time? Could it be that the NWO was not in control of the LN and that it was in fact a belevolent organization? Or did it start of on the right foot but then the NWPO took control of ot later? Pres. Benson spoke harshly against the UN and therefor I believe he was also speaking against the LN (perhaps this is where I am wrong). I know it may seem I am pitting the prophets against one another, but it is something I have had on the bookshelf of my mind for a while now.

But another thing, Pres. Grant uses the same line of thinking for supporting WWI as many did in supporting WWI. That is that Germany was attempting to take over the whole world, including the U.S. But the Founding Fathers taught that we should not get involved with Europe's problems and not make any entangling alliances.

Basically, I am thoroughly confused. Please share your thought with me on this subject.

Read Jack Monnett's 'Awakening to our Awful Situation' books on this. They WERE both set up for the same reason by the same people. One only needs to look at the details of Agenda 21 to understand what they are really about......and its got nothing to do with peace. Who donated the land where the UN building sits? None other than Rockefeller himself.

[awar_e]

There was quite a fervid exchange within the church during the Willson years as he tried to gain support for the LoN.
Reed Smoot was in the senate at the time and he had some interesting exchanges by letter with President Grant and BYU (not the name then) as he offered to resign from the board of BYU to prevent adverse publicity. The exchanges between Pres Grant and Reed Smoot are very interesting reading and some of the were printed in the newspapers of the day.
The years of Wilson as president caused severe damage to our constitution as the Fed Reserve, IRS, Income tax, and direct election of US senators were created under Wilson.
Reed Smoot, J Reuben Clark and men like David O Mckay held the same views regarding the LoN.

[gkearney]

Want to be more confused? The Church routinely works with and trough various UN agencies providing relief and development support.

BYU has one of the leading model United Nations which has been recognised international many times (see: http://news.byu.edu/archive08-mar-mun2008.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )

Might I suggest that we might want to take our lead from living prophets rather than constantly turn to President Benson who has been dead for almost 20 years now. If the UN were the seat of wickedness as has been suggested why would the Church work with it and why would the leadership of the Church permit BYU to play such an active role in a UN sponsored activity?

[North_Star]

Wasn't the "Proclamation on the Family" originally prepared for a UN committee? or in response to a UN committee? I'm trying to remember.

[gkearney]

Wasn't the "Proclamation on the Family" originally prepared for a UN committee? or in response to a UN committee? I'm trying to remember.

Yes it was, you can read about it here (President Packer):

http://lds.org/library/display/0,4945,8 ... -3,00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and here:

http://lds.org/library/display/0,4945,4 ... 17,00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Example of the Church working directly with the United Nations.

[Mackingster]

Want to be more confused? The Church routinely works with and trough various UN agencies providing relief and development support.

BYU has one of the leading model United Nations which has been recognised international many times (see: http://news.byu.edu/archive08-mar-mun2008.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )

Might I suggest that we might want to take our lead from living prophets rather than constantly turn to President Benson who has been dead for almost 20 years now. If the UN were the seat of wickedness as has been suggested why would the Church work with it and why would the leadership of the Church permit BYU to play such an active role in a UN sponsored activity?

I don't that necessarily a negative issue. The Church does the same with our own goverment. You do what you need to do. Unfortunately that means having to deal with the UN. It does not mean the church does not have a negative view of them. As they say. It the cost of doing business.

[gkearney]

Want to be more confused? The Church routinely works with and trough various UN agencies providing relief and development support.

BYU has one of the leading model United Nations which has been recognised international many times (see: http://news.byu.edu/archive08-mar-mun2008.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; )

Might I suggest that we might want to take our lead from living prophets rather than constantly turn to President Benson who has been dead for almost 20 years now. If the UN were the seat of wickedness as has been suggested why would the Church work with it and why would the leadership of the Church permit BYU to play such an active role in a UN sponsored activity?

I don't that necessarily a negative issue. The Church does the same with our own goverment. You do what you need to do. Unfortunately that means having to deal with the UN. It does not mean the church does not have a negative view of them. As they say. It the cost of doing business.

I have a really hard time accepting the notion that the church would expend tithes and offerings to an organization it considers to be wicked. Or permit such an organization to operate at BYU.

[Mackingster]

You may have to, if they the UN holds all the cards. With their corrosive treaties that bind these nations to follow the UNs directives. Shutting out none affiliated groups. Some times you have to work with in the system I hate to say.

The biggest issue. Do you give up your standers and morals freely to do this work. I am sure the church never has on this note. If they had. They would have joined the National Council of Churches or similar NGO.

[uglypitbull]

If they had. They would have joined the National Council of Churches or similar NGO.

We are likely the only church that hasn't. Do some research on the playwright back in the 30's era...Myron Fagan....he had a lot to say about this......and which churches were corrupted by it.

[gkearney]

I do not think that the UN is able to force BYU or the church to cooperate and work with it.

[Matthew.B]

Maybe the President of the Church doesn't always have the level of guidance we ascribe to him.

Don't want to beat a dead horse- this kind of conversation is happening all over the forum. But IMO the LoN/UN and Grant's opinions vs. his successors is, in my mind, one of the most plain statements that all is not well in Zion, and that all has not been well in Zion practically since the Church was formed.

[uglypitbull]

If the UN were the seat of wickedness as has been suggested why would the Church work with it and why would the leadership of the Church permit BYU to play such an active role in a UN sponsored activity?

Perhaps the Church is doing what it does best.....working to help other children of God. There have been examples of votes being changed, and eyes being opened after having seen how the Church works. I dont think for one second that the church wouldnt be trying to do all it could to influence people for righteous reasons......but the UN was created with one world government in mind from the beginning.

It reminds me of a video I saw of an independent reporter who was trying to get information about Homeland Security checkpoints in front of a Social Security building. He asked what was going on....the men in the Tahoe came and grabbed him and took him away. His girlfriend was sitting in the car, scared out of her wits. After a few hours he came back in the Tahoe...was released and was talking to the Homeland Security guy about the Constitution. The HS guy was asking him questions and was interested in a site the reporter told him about. It just shows, that people can be persuaded to change their minds and wake up.

[awar_e]

We have reached a point where much can not be determined when it comes to reasons behind certain Church positions and involvements with govt. Most of us expect to have some serious problems with govt persecution, and I suspect that we are very close to that time. The main concern of the Lord is furthering His work. Other smaller churches have been invaded and shut down in recent years for standing fast on constitutional grounds. This happened in CA and Indiana if I recall correctly. Actions that we see as being suspect in nature, may in fact be part of the reason we have not yet been persecuted.
I see in this forum that many understand the agenda and inner workings of the UN, while others think it is benevolent in nature. I was in High School when the clamor was created to form the UN and I have watched it evolve for 65 years since it was formed by gadiantons. It has been the plan of the adversary from the start The only difference between the League of Nations and the UN is that not enough honest men were in power in 1945 to stop the second attempt at world slavery.

[7cylon7]

Don't forget that it was the UN and all its EVIL that pronounced Israel as a nation in 1947. The LORD will use whatever means he wants for his purposes even evil organizations.

The other point is we have to be as crafty as a serpent not to be snatched up by the owl. We are meek and meager now but once the Lord comes we will bloom into full glory.

[lundbaek]

I'm glad to know that someone else here (awar_e ) was around and remembers the organization of the United Nations and its betrayal of freedom and promotion and support of communism. I began to notice it bigtime by 1949, but it was the prosecution of the Korean War and the UN betrayal of the forces fighting the communist forces that really opened my eyes. But It was years before I figured out, with coaching of certain others, that it was globalism that was behind all that.

[buffalo_girl]

One can hope that being involved within the UN will bring about a righteous outcome. I sure hope so.

The example of Daniel & the three Hebrew youth who refused to kowtow to Babylonian 'politics' along with the total conversion of King Nebuchadnezzar after wallowing upon all-fours for seven years is a perfect example of change agents working within the system.

I'm also hoping BYU students & faculty are as committed to representing the Lord as those four Hebrew youth so many years ago.

[awar_e]

Hoping something to be factual, is hardly in the same class as the WISE virgins. We can not be saved in ignorance and ignorance is in abundance currently.
Perhaps the words of prophets, spoken at BYU, might shed some light on the plight of those. Boyd K Packer has shed some light there in recent years. Ezra Taft Benson made reference to the communist influence there. Spencer Kimball wanted to cease having sports at BYU and in the rest of the church, and was nearly tarred and feathered him for his stance.
The opiates of the masses (sports) must have their role in the second fall of Rome (Babylon)

[buffalo_girl]

Hoping something to be factual, is hardly in the same class as the WISE virgins. We can not be saved in ignorance and ignorance is in abundance currently.

Indeed.

I wasn't talking about wise virgins, though. I was talking about Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego in Babylon some 600 years before the advent of Christ. We should probably include Esther in this company as an example of living righteously in 'the same house' as the NWO.

http://lds.org/manual/old-testament-tea ... ery=esther" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Getting back to our present dilemma, I do not know the thoughts and intent of those who 'glad hand' the UN or Dick Cheney at Brigham Young University. I'm no longer close to the action.

And yes, IGNORANCE abounds in and out of the Church. We are in grave danger of being suffocated by it into final unconsciousness as a people, a nation, and a Church.

It only takes one fearless girl or four truly righteous individuals who are NOT ignorant of the situation to make all the difference in the world where they stand. I guess it's our individual responsibility to be worthy and ready to 'stand' when called upon by the Lord - just like Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego in Babylon some 600 years before the advent of Christ and the Jewish Queen of Persia a few years later.

And, you know what? I actually believe those stories to be absolutely 'factual'.

http://lds.org/manual/old-testament-stu ... 22+babylon" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Jnewby]

If the church only worked with a supported righteous causes and governments, the work of the Lord would come to real quick halt. Just because the church works with the UN and other government officials doesn't mean they aren't wicked - it only means the Lord plays the hand he is dealt until he decides to shuffle the deck and deal a new hand once again.

The UN and our government is as wicked as the day is long, anyone that argues otherwise falls under the scripture reference of those that are deeply deceived in the last days. One need not be a rocket surgeon (as Bush mentioned) to understand this.

[awar_e]

Right on.

[awar_e]

D&C 123

12 For there are many yet on the earth among all sects, parties, and denominations, who are blinded by the subtle craftiness of men, whereby they lie in wait to deceive, and who are only kept from the truth because they know not where to find it—

13 Therefore, that we should waste and wear out our lives in bringing to light all the hidden things of darkness, wherein we know them; and they are truly manifest from heaven—

14 These should then be attended to with great earnestness.

15 Let no man count them as small things; for there is much which lieth in futurity, pertaining to the saints, which depends upon these things.

[Teancum-Old]

Don't forget that it was the UN and all its EVIL that pronounced Israel as a nation in 1947. The LORD will use whatever means he wants for his purposes even evil organizations.

The other point is we have to be as crafty as a serpent not to be snatched up by the owl. We are meek and meager now but once the Lord comes we will bloom into full glory.

Hoping something to be factual, is hardly in the same class as the WISE virgins. We can not be saved in ignorance and ignorance is in abundance currently.

Indeed.

I wasn't talking about wise virgins, though. I was talking about Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego in Babylon some 600 years before the advent of Christ. We should probably include Esther in this company as an example of living righteously in 'the same house' as the NWO.

http://lds.org/manual/old-testament-tea ... ery=esther" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Getting back to our present dilemma, I do not know the thoughts and intent of those who 'glad hand' the UN or Dick Cheney at Brigham Young University. I'm no longer close to the action.

And yes, IGNORANCE abounds in and out of the Church. We are in grave danger of being suffocated by it into final unconsciousness as a people, a nation, and a Church.

It only takes one fearless girl or four truly righteous individuals who are NOT ignorant of the situation to make all the difference in the world where they stand. I guess it's our individual responsibility to be worthy and ready to 'stand' when called upon by the Lord - just like Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego in Babylon some 600 years before the advent of Christ and the Jewish Queen of Persia a few years later.

And, you know what? I actually believe those stories to be absolutely 'factual'.

http://lds.org/manual/old-testament-stu ... 22+babylon" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If the church only worked with a supported righteous causes and governments, the work of the Lord would come to real quick halt. Just because the church works with the UN and other government officials doesn't mean they aren't wicked - it only means the Lord plays the hand he is dealt until he decides to shuffle the deck and deal a new hand once again.

The UN and our government is as wicked as the day is long, anyone that argues otherwise falls under the scripture reference of those that are deeply deceived in the last days. One need not be a rocket surgeon (as Bush mentioned) to understand this.

Thank you all (especially cyclon, jnewby, and as always, buffalo girl) for your great comments. You have helped clear this issue up for me. The Lord is in control. Follow His living Prophets.

[EmmaLee]

Tuesday, 05 December 2017
UN Bullies Catholic Nation to Accept Abortion, Normalize LGBT
Written by Alex Newman

Highlighting its commitment to death and abortion, the dictator-dominated United Nations is once again bullying pro-life Latin American nations and governments to legalize and even facilitate the slaughter of unborn children. The UN is also demanding that governments actively normalize and promote homosexual activity and gender confusion. Meanwhile, one of the supposed “experts” on the disgraced UN “Human Rights Committee” demanding abortion and LGBT propaganda is himself under fire for, among other abominations, openly promoting the extermination of pre-born babies with disabilities such as Down Syndrome.

Pro-life activists, disabled people, religious leaders, and human-rights advocates, though, are fighting back against the UN’s extremist push. Indeed, critics of the UN’s pro-abortion, anti-family jihad are calling on the global body to end its advocacy on behalf of abortion, perversion, and the systematic elimination of disabled children. Whether that will happen depends on the Trump administration’s willingness to stand firm, as well as the level of pushback the UN receives for its pro-abortion, pro-LGBT antics.

As part of the sixth periodic report on the Dominican Republic, a small Catholic nation in the Caribbean, the UN’s self-styled “Human Rights Committee” demanded an immediate end to criminal sanctions for the murder of unborn children. The UN Committee expressed “worry” that there are strict criminal penalties associated with slaughtering babies that can include up to 20 years in prison. The result of these statutes is that there is an “elevated number of unsafe abortions,” the UN bureaucrats said. The UN did not make clear how it thought the brutal destruction of a human life could ever be considered “safe,” at least for the innocent victim to be brutally “aborted.”

“The State must modify its legislation to guarantee access to legal, safe, and effective voluntary termination of pregnancy,” the report declared without specifying whether tax-funded abortions were required to comply with UN demands. Of course, the UN tries to make abortion seem reasonable, pretending to be concerned about cases where women might “suffer substantially” if they are not allowed to murder their children. The report goes on to claim that Dominican authorities “must not regulate pregnancy or abortion in all other cases in a way that violates the obligation to guarantee that women do not have to resort to unsafe abortion,” as if that were the only option.

In light of that supposed “requirement” promulgated by the dictators club, the UN claimed, the government “must revise its abortion laws accordingly.” The report also demanded that murder of the unborn be decriminalized completely in all cases, so that butchering unborn children does not result in criminal sanctions of any kind. “Penalties must not be imposed on women and girls who submit to an abortion nor on medical service providers who assist them in that, because such measures obligate them to undergo unsafe abortions,” the UN claimed, without explaining how not being able to legally kill children forces somebody to kill the children in an “unsafe” manner.

One of the members of the UN committee that attacked Dominicans, Tunisian lawyer Yadh Ben Achour, made headlines last month for advocating that babies with Down Syndrome and other disabilities be exterminated via abortion as a “preventative measure.” “If you tell a woman, your child has Dow — what is it called? Down syndrome, Dawn syndrome — if you tell her that, or that he may have a handicap forever, for the rest of his life, you should make this woman, it should be possible for her to turn to abortion to avoid the handicap as a preventive measure,” he said. “We defend the right of the handicapped, but, but we can avoid the handicaps, and we must do everything we can to avoid them.” People with Down Syndrome were mortified by what they slammed as the “horrible,” “hateful,” “evil,” and even “genocidal” comments by the radical UN functionary.

But the UN report goes far beyond demanding the legalization of pre-natal infanticide. Another matter of concern to the UN, the report said in the same section, is that there is not enough “information” about sex and perversion given to young people. The state must “ensure full access to sexual and reproductive health services and education to sensitize men, women and adolescents throughout the country,” the UN committee concluded. UN agencies such as UNESCO have long advocated sexualizing children at four years old, with international guidelines demanding “sex education” at younger and younger ages. Indeed, as The New American reported exclusively this year, the UN’s new “LGBT” czar, speaking on the indoctrination of children to accept the agenda, said “the younger the better.”

The UN “human rights” committee also complained about alleged discrimination against people involved in homosexual activity or who claim to be confused about their gender. “The state must adopt necessary measures to guarantee protection against discrimination and to eradicate stereotypes against … people who are lesbian, homosexual, bisexual, transgender, and intersex, including through more education programs for state officials and more sensitivity campaigns promoting tolerance and respect for diversity,” the report declared. “Similarly, [the state] must adopt legislation that prohibits discrimination and hate over sexual orientation or gender identity, and guarantee the full recognition of equality of homosexual couples and the identity of transgender people.”

The UN report also condemns the Dominican Republic for the fact that many mothers remain at home to raise children, rather than participate in the workforce or in government. “The State must intensify its efforts to increase the participation of women in political and public life, as well as their representation in the public and private sector, especially in decision-making and high-level posts,” the document demands, as if Dominican authorities existed merely to carry out UN decrees and social-engineering demands. The UN report goes on to blast the national government for failing to hand over enough statistical information on women, demanding the creation of a national registry of statistics to help gather and compile data.

The report had a broad range of other, seemingly unrelated attacks, too. For instance, the UN committee said it was worried about the “high number of deportations of people of Haitian origin.” Haiti, which has suffered from a brutal occupation by UN troops infamous primarily for the widespread rape of children and the murder of unarmed protesters, shares an island with the Dominican Republic. But the two countries are a world apart, featuring vastly different cultures and religious values, and a different language. The UN also blasted the Dominican Republic’s refusal to allow unlimited numbers of “refugees” in to their nation, lambasting what the UN committee described as the “extremely low number of people who have received asylum.”

Of course, the harangue against the Dominican Republic is only the latest UN effort to bully a nation on everything from abortion and the LGBT agenda to open borders and even gun control. Last year, the UN exploited the hysteria over the Zika virus to bully Latin American governments that have resisted UN demands to legalize the killing of the unborn. “Laws and policies that restrict [women’s] access to these services [contraception and abortion] must be urgently reviewed in line with human rights obligations in order to ensure the right to health for all in practice,” demanded UN “Human Rights” boss Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein of Jordan, a totalitarian-minded Islamic prince currently embroiled in scandal for trying to destroy a whistleblower who exposed UN troops raping African children.

Before that, the UN was even exposed collaborating with the mass-murdering Communist Chinese dictatorship in perpetrating forced abortions as part of its brutal population-control regime. “Our conclusion is that the UNFPA [UN Population Fund] is directly responsible for forced abortions and forced sterilizations in China,” Population Research Institute (PRI) President Steven Mosher told Congress in 2012, citing an investigation carried out over three years. Other experts came to similar conclusions. Indeed, in 2010, the vice-minister of the communist dictatorship’s “National Population and Family Planning Commission” thanked UNFPA for “its constant support to China’s population and family planning undertakings during the past thirty years and more.”

In short, it seems the UN really, really loves abortion — even if the woman has to be strapped down against her will so that the baby can be butchered. It is not even about “choice,” then, as the pro-abortion mantra is famously marketed, but about death and depopulation.

Ironically, considering the fact that a human is being deliberately and viciously deprived of his or her right to life, the UN justifies its rabid abortion advocacy by citing “human rights.” Obviously, though, the UN means something very different with the term “human rights” than, say, Americans who believe, as America’s founders did, that God endowed each person with the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and property. In fact, the UN makes its perversion of the term “human rights” perfectly clear, even in the text of its “Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” Among other absurdities, the UN claims in Article 29 of the document that “rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.”

The fact that the UN’s disgraced “Human Rights Council” is literally controlled by some of the world's most savage autocrats — including multiple communist and Islamist mass-murdering regimes — also exposes the UN’s true view of “human rights.” At this council, the United States and other relatively free nations are regularly condemned for their freedoms — gun rights, free speech, and so on — while psychopaths and murderous tyrants praise each other for their stellar “human rights” records. Indeed, the late mass-murdering Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi was once elected to lead the UN's top “human rights” body. Seriously.

Rather than helping to subsidize one of the planet’s most fanatical promoters of prenatal infanticide, President Donald Trump decided to cut funding and even withdraw from multiple UN agencies and bureaucracies including UNESCO and UNFPA. But that is not nearly enough. To truly preserve God-given rights, human freedom, national sovereignty, and respect for life, Americans must demand a complete U.S. government withdrawal from the UN. Fortunately, a bill to do that, the American Sovereignty Restoration Act (H.R. 193), is already sitting in Congress. Now it is up to grassroots Americans to make sure Congress pushes it through.

Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is normally based in Europe but has lived all over the world. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU or on Facebook. He can be reached at [email protected].

Related articles:

UN Exploits Zika Virus to Push Abortion in Pro-Life Nations

UN Slammed for Its Forced Abortions in China Using U.S. Funds

UN Body Attacks Nicaragua's Abortion Ban

UN LGBT Czar on Indoctrinating Children: "The Younger the Better"

Obama, UN Pushing Radical LGBT/Abortion Agenda for Sustainable Development Summit

Obama “Science” Czar, a Forced-abortion Advocate, Hides E-mails

UN Feminists Slam U.S. on “Gender,” Push Amending Constitution

UN Women Pushes Global Abortion for “Sustainable Population”

United Nations Exploits Pseudo-“Human Rights” to Attack U.S.

Ruthless Tyrants Win Seats on UN “Human Rights” Council

UN Pushes Population Control Agenda

UN Unleashes LGBT Czar to Promote Homosexuality, Transgenderism

UN Boss: U.S. Gay Marriage Ruling a “Great Step for Human Rights”

UN Demands More Globalist Propaganda in School Textbooks

UN Child-abuse Whistleblower Skeptical That Ethics Can Return to UN

https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/ ... alize-lgbt