Warning!: The following article contains information about human sexuality that is not apt for minors or for other persons morally vulnerable to it.

Women fom many different countries participated in the World Women's Congress For A Healthy Planet, held in Miami last November 8-12th, 1991. The organizers alleged that its purpose was to "construct a plan of action to empower women and to send a message to the political leaders and to all the women of the world" in preparation for the United Nations Conference on Development and the Environment (UNCED). Said conference is to be held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

Among the suggested guidelines to congress participants was the statement: "compulsory sterilization or compulsory childbearing violate women's human rights". Throughout most of the talks there were three prominent themes: how terrible men are as decision makers and in general, the need to "empower women", and what a horrible mess we are making of our planet, which they called in New Age terms "Mother Earth". The new public relations term they now use is: "It's time to mother Earth". What an irony, in view of the fact that most of these women are refusing to "mother" their own children! The hatred and resentment of men was apparent constantly at this congress. The audience lit into Miami city commissioner Harvey Ruben, (who was there to welcome them) only because he used the term "mankind".

Later on, the lyrics of a beautiful song composed by a congress participant which referred to God as "He" was criticized to the point that the woman reading these lyrics had to stop and explain to the audience that she could not change them, since they had been written by the author herself.

The key note address was given by Margarita Arias, who was introduced as former First Lady of Costa Rica and its next President. Margarita seems to be very much in favor of women's liberation, and perhaps much more, but she does not come out openly. In her talk she made seemingly contradicting statements when she spoke of "a woman's right to choose", and then cautioned that "we must respect life in all its forms". Margarita is a recipient of the Audubon Society Award and is President and founder of the Arias Foundation for Peace and Human Progress in her country.

From the very beginning of the congress it was apparent that it was nothing but another strategy to push contraception, sterilization, sex education and abortion all over the world, using the United Nations, the environmentalist groups and unsuspecting governments. The emphasis of course, was on protecting "Mother Earth", regardless of what happens to women, including real mothers. Passionate denunciations by pro-abortion feminists from several countries, concerned with abuses by population controllers, went practically unheeded. This was true, even throughout the emotional plea for help from a Tibetan woman who denounced that as she spoke, women were being "butchered" through forced sterilizations and forced abortions by China's population controllers. "China's presence in Tibet has to stop" she said, and she asked congress organizers to "mobilize to put pressure on China".

Needless to say, these outcries came from the audience in almost all cases, not from the congress speakers or organizers. One exception was the testimony given during a "tribunal" by Thais Corral from Brazil, who reminded all that we should be concerned about the women who are victims of these abuses. She denounced the fact that 44% of Brazilian women of reproductive age have been sterilized under pressure and not informed that sterilization is irreversible. She also mentioned that votes are being traded for sterilizations by ambitious politicians. In other words, it appears that politicians provide free sterilizations for those women who vote for them.

During one of the first workshops, the usual diatribe of the pro-abortionists was launched about women's "basic human right" to "control their own bodies" and to "freely decide when and if to have children." They alleged that this is now a right under international law. The same speaker went on to express concern over the fact that the size of the "anti-choice" movement based in the U.S. is impressive, that it is well financed, and that they are "seeking a global reach for their message". (She doesn't know the half of it!)

Several of the statements made by the audience were to the effect that "each additional mouth has two hands that come with it" (a woman from India), that "there's an element of fear about the word "population", and thus it should not be used", that "contraceptives are more and more invasive of women's bodies", and, that "it's the first time in civilization that women are breeding below replacement" (Norway). This last one explained how in the southern part of their country, they have a red light blink in the classrooms to indicate every time a child is born, in order to put fear into people so that they will not reproduce.

Fay Wattleton (whose plane was delayed for a long time), made an appearance at the end of her workshop and was her usual cold-hearted self. Her talk did not seem to go over well with at least some of the African-American women present, as one of them indicated in the following workshop.

We were able to participate in a meeting organized by two or three members of the Women's Global Network for Reproductive Rights, and we asked them all kinds of questions about their organization. The network was formed by organizations which share "the promotion of the right of women to decide if and when to have children." A small office in the Netherlands coordinates the l,700 members in the different countries (including organizations), and provides support. They also campaign for reproductive rights in all countries, for the right to information on sexuality, as well as against unjust laws and practices that deny women's rights, including the right to contraception and so-called safe, legal abortion.

The Network has, like our Council, divided the world into regions. It was started primarily for the same reasons that HLI started its activities with pro-life groups, that culminated in the formation of the World Council. We were amazed to hear that, like us, they saw the need, according to their leaders, "to stop the isolation of members in their own countries, to exchange information, and what is most important, to maintain union".

Some of the support activities for the Network members include letter writing - "International Solidarity Action" - to provide international support. The coordinating office in the Netherlands is a facilitator to bringing in all members. Regional seminars are conducted, and one is planned for Nicaragua in December. The Network members actively supported the Chiapas, Mexico campaign for abortion legalization, and generated countless letters from many countries to Mexican legislators, which were acknowledged by high Mexican officials.

A pro-abortion feminist from the Dominican Republic confirmed during this meeting, what I had told Cardinal Freire Falcao of Brazil in my report on Latin America: that since pro-abort feminists cannot use the same arguments as in the United States ("a woman's right to control her own body" and "the right to choose"), because of "machismo", the strategy for Latin America is the campaign to supposedly reduce maternal mortality (from illegal abortions and pregnancies), by legalizing abortion.

The Global Women's Network for Reproductive Rights campaigns against unsafe contraceptives and abortifacients including the IUD, and has denounced these abuses before legislative bodies. The Network "receives and reproduces good information and news items and sends it to other members upon request", pretty much what HLI has been doing on the other side.

In response to my questions, one of the network leaders acknowledged that there is a division between her organization and IPPF, because according to her, "IPPF and the other population control organizations put the emphasis on reducing the amount of births, and give no importance to the health of the women." When I asked her what she thought of this Congress she explained that "the environment is going to be used as another false excuse for pushing down the throat of women, another population policy." In my opinion, since the network groups have so many valid concerns, it could be most effective in pushing abortion legalization throughout the world. The Network even has a professional-looking magazine which it prints for its members, both in English and Spanish. In issue #34 they explain in detail how lesbians can practice "safe sex".

The most disturbing statements made at the congress as far as I am concerned, came from the "New Agers", who spoke of the need to go back to the "old spirituality" which made people equal to nature and not superior. A native Indian woman from the U.S. gave a list of reasons during her talk why "native societies" are better than "technological societies", and pointed out that the Indian way is better because man is equal to nature. The speaker from Japan said pretty much the same thing about her society, and all I could think of were the many missionaries who gave their lives to bring Christianity to Japan, yet this woman wanted to revert back to paganism!

It seems to me this new paganism is worse than the ancient one, which was born out of ignorance. Today's paganism seems to have been born, to a great extent, out of convenience and selfishness.

One of the congress speakers started her talk with a question to the audience: "Does anyone here know who their spirit is?" She explained that "it could be a turtle, a grisly, a cloud," etc. She ended by saying that if mankind is to survive, it has to "re-kindle that spiritual flame". She certainly wasn't talking about the Holy Spirit!

In lieu of prayer, the invocation was a New Age rite by a native American Indian, who also conducted "meditation exercises" every morning, and which included self-hypnosis and "out of body experiences". The emphasis again was on self, feeling good with oneself in order to "attract all of the positive powers". What a great way to evade guilt and responsibility! New Ager Shirley McLaine, who was scheduled to speak, did not show up.

I was amazed at the number of lesbians present, who for the most part did not say much, possibly because the issues of abortion and reproduction do not affect them. However, since hatred is a very strong bond, they had plenty of common ground with the other men-hating feminists, who were also seeking to be "empowered".

About 50 feminists from Latin American countries met during the congress to strategize and appoint a committee. They complained that they were being discriminated against because they were not provided with enough opportunities nor the facilities to be able to speak. Most of this group seemed to be very militantly pro-abortion.

The Hispanic "star of the show" put on by congress organizers was Senator Blanca Esponda (now ex-Senator). She is president of the Inter-American Parliamentary Group for the Western Hemisphere, active in 26 countries. The groups in each of those countries hold meetings with legislators, "train" them and provide them with "information", according to Esponda.

In her congress talk, Senator Esponda explained the work of the Global and Interamerican Parlamentarians. Although she did not really mention IPPF's involvement, these groups were founded by IPPF in order to change existing legislation and introduce laws in accordance with their objectives. Information has reached us (from Mexico) that Senator Esponda was instrumental in getting abortion legalized (for family planning and other reasons) recently in Chiapas, her state, which means indirectly IPPF also had a hand in it. The Mexican abortion law was "frozen", for the first time in Mexican history, thanks to Comite Nacional Pro-Vida (which has many branches), under the capable leadership of Jorge Serrano. The Mexican Bishops also had a very large part.

Senator Esponda, perhaps without realizing it, put the Interamerican Group of Parlamentarians publicly in favor of abortion during her talk, something that they had been careful not to do up to now, at least in countries where abortion is still illegal. She called on governments to "influence and reconcile those interests opposed" to "freedom of choice". She also spoke of "respect for women's freedom of choice" as "a human right that must be recognized in the constitutions." IPPF's Western Hemisphere Region promised to respect the Mexico City policy and thus has lost none of its USAID funds. Are they now publicly in violation of this policy?

Chiapas' Senator Esponda said in her presentation at the congress that "if we women are the recipients of human life, we have the obligation to preserve it". Talk about a "double standard!"

She made us laugh when she stated that she "believes in the power of genuine democratic expression". Chiapas' abortion law was introduced and passed without the people even knowing about it! Esponda also spoke of the "need" to implement "sex education (which should include contraception, according to her), in all Mexican schools, at the earliest levels."

MEXFAM, the Planned Parenthood affiliate in Mexico, already has two terrible films that are shown to children 9 years and up. It recently added a new weapon to their arsenal of corruption: "Musica Para Dos" (Music for Two), a cartoon. I viewed this film sent to us by Mexico's Comité Pro Vida President Jorge Serrano, and it is pure pornography! A young girl is shown having several sexual fantasies. One of them is about marriage, and it shows her exhausted and prematurely old, taking care of several children, while her husband ignores her and watches TV. Typical Planned Parenthood anti-marriage propaganda! The last fantasy (or is it now a fantasy?), is the one that really makes the girl happy. She is shown having an affair with a young man, there are scenes which show her "preparing" him for so called "safe sex" and then having sex. At the end she goes away smiling. The very strong message is that in order to be happy, all you really need is a condom and sex, in that order. The film is followed by class discussion.

This is what Senator Esponda wishes to push on Mexican children, using our tax funds! No wonder we have the image of the "ugly American"!

The two very capable and beautiful young pro-life Mexican girls sent by Comité Pro Vida president Jorge Serrano to participate with us at the congress, (Maricarmen and Aracely), did an excellent job. Maricarmen was interviewed (in English!) by the Voice of the Americas TV Network. She denounced the congress as one more strategy for population control, under the guise of protecting the environment, and explained that population control abuses denounced by attendants (including forced sterilizations and abortion in China), were virtually ignored by the organizers.

It was ironic that the right to abortion, which congress organizers called "a basic human right of all individuals", was included in the final resolutions along with a plea for "the protection of all species".

A number of presidents and other public officials from many nations are expected to attend the World Conference on Population and the Environment in Rio, Brazil. Resolutions will be approved and later implemented for population control. Because of this, it is important that groups and individuals that defend life and family inform themselves about the possible repercussions of this conference in their country.

Here are some of their resolutions:

"Aware that the right to reproductive health and choice is a basic human right of all individuals, we point out that the World Fertility Survey estimates that there are 500 million couples who wish to plan their family and who have no access to the means to do so..."

"We condemn any attempt to deprive women of reproductive freedom or the knowledge to exercise that freedom."

"We demand women-centered, women-managed comprehensive reproductive health care and family planning, including the right to prenatal care, safe and legal voluntary contraceptives and abortion (fertility regulation)."

Recommendations to agencies of the United Nations: That non-governmental organizations (NGO's) should publicize the positions of candidates for public office, in terms of their consistency with issues of women and environment.