Gates Foundation African Conference promotes more abortion and contraception

The relentless attack on African countries continues apace and despite the protestations of Melinda Gates that her global family planning campaign was not about abortion, the third international Conference on Family Planning (ICFP) co-hosted by the Gates Foundation which took place in Addis Ababa in Ethiopia last week had a number of abortion related sessions, such as “Efforts to Implement Policies that Expand Access to Safe Abortion,” “Access to Safe Abortions,” “Abortion and Quality of Care,” and “Abortion: Before and After.”

Obianuju Ekeocha in her BLOG, 'Culture of Life Africa', commenting on conference, raises questions in respect of the presentations and points out that the real question the world should be asking at this point is - Access to what? Choice of what?

In an excellent article which is reprinted in full below and is also accessible on this link Obianuju poignantly says,

We are thirsty and they give us condoms! We are hungry and they offer us contraceptive pills! We are sick and they offer us the most modern techniques of abortion! We are naked and they lead us into the arms of sexual hedonism! We are imprisoned by poverty and they offer us sexual liberation!!!

Silent tears roll down for Africa in a modern world that can neither see our pain nor hear our cry for help.

We mourn deeply for the destructive seeds of sexual revolution which were sown last week in Adis Ababa.

The text of complete article follows (please access the BLOG for live links in the original  text)

Last week, the heavy noose of population control was placed around the neck of Africa

as the Gates Foundation hosted what they called, the biggest family planning event in history with about 3000 attendees.

The International Conference on Family Planning Adis Ababa  was a 4-day event which had so many tentacles targeting almost every layer of the African society- women, men, youth, singles, married, professionals, academicians, politicians, celebrities,dignitaries and law makers.

They featured an impressive line-up of key note speakers that included the most influential African movers, shakers and leaders.

There were also international and western organisations who were there to support and strengthen the core purpose of the conference - population control of Africa.

Their theme was "full access , full choice"

But the real question the world should be asking at this point is - Access to what? Choice of what?

Africa is home to millions of people who have no access at all to basic education or even basic healthcare.

Most of us know or have friends or family members who have no choice in their impoverished situations.

And yet, a hand full of people who have access to the greatest material wealth in the world come to us to tell us that what Africans need most is full access to sex without attachments.

Terms like LARC(long-acting reversible contraception) were thrown around a lot during this conference.  Emergency (abortifacient) contraception was put on a pedestal. Increasing access to Abortion  was also another major area of discussion. African leaders in attendance were highly encouraged to increase their national budget and schemes  for birth control. Adolescent "friendly" contraception initiatives were also flaunted for the young and supposedly unmarried ones as some of the western speakers and officials described and labelled African societies as "judgemental" in considering sex outside of marriage.

Dearest people of the world, this is absurd! This is twisted and distorted!

To convene in Africa some of the most brilliant minds from around the world only to deliberate and discuss the best ways of getting the most effective birth control into the most remote parts of Africa. To bring in sexual and reproductive rights giants like International Planned Parenthood Federation so as to have them encourage sexual hedonism among  our African youth. To have well known pro-abortion organisations like Ipas speaking on increasing and expanding access to abortion in Africa. To bring in medical "experts" from halfway across the world so as to have them teach, demonstrate and simulate second trimester D & E abortions...

This is heart-breaking for the entire Continent of Africa!

Going through some of these presentations , I was brought to tears for my people who lack and want so much to have access to even the most basic tools of development and all they get is the neo imperialists telling them how great things will be for them if they have "full access and full choice" of the finest contraceptive paraphernalia, tools and devices that will give them unconstrained and unrestrained sexual freedom.

We are thirsty and they give us condoms! We are hungry and they offer us contraceptive pills! We are sick and they offer us the most modern techniques of abortion! We are naked and they lead us into the arms of sexual hedonism! We are imprisoned by poverty and they offer us sexual liberation!!!

Silent tears roll down for Africa in a modern world that can neither see our pain nor hear our cry for help.

We mourn deeply for the destructive seeds of sexual revolution which were sown last week in Adis Ababa.

The pain is almost unbearable to imagine the effects of a sexual revolution on a Continent that is already heavily laden with much human suffering.

And so we weep bitterly.

We weep not just for ourselves but for our children who will reap the devastating dividends of this extensive contraceptive project in the future.

  

          Melinda Gates

Ever since Melinda Gates unveiled and unleashed her extensive and expensive contraception project in Africa more than a year ago, millions of dollars have been spent across the Continent leading to a reactive trend of events like the increased efforts among our African leaders to expand access to contraception, the launching of more population control initiatives in various parts of Africa, the stronger and more insistent push for legalised abortion in many African countries, the increased amounts of government money being diverted (from other development projects) to be channeled into providing birth control and subsequently, an undeniable increase in the usage of artificial contraception in almost all parts of Africa. And yet the lives of the African women have not improved at all. They may be having more vacuous and sterile sex which is free from conception on every day of the month and every month of the year but they are certainly not better fed, they are not healthier , and they are not even more educated than before Melinda's project and therefore they are not more empowered. This project has failed the African women on every single note!

I have begged and appealed to Melinda Gates last year when she tripped the switch of population control in Africa and I will readily do it again today with much respect where it is due.

The African women deserve so much more than this humanitarian project that promises them nothing more than sexual liberty above all else.

And as you inadvertently flood our nations with birth control pills, injectables, Intra Uterine devices and condoms, our culture is being drowned out by your own, our priority is being replaced by your own, our opinion is being eclipsed by your own and our value is being swallowed up by own.

We highly respect, and dare not define, your western sensitives and values, please mercifully respect our own African sensitives and values.

The African women deserve to stand proudly among the women of the world within the context of their own cultural sensitives and values. They deserve to be recognised in the full esteem and stature of their radiant African femininity, beauty, and dignity that is firmly rooted in a vibrant culture of life and family.

Controversial UN Development Agenda

-->

The United Nations has, over the last few of years, been working to establish the basis of the next phase of its development agenda as many of its earlier programmes are coming to an end. The International Conference on Population and Development (otherwise known as ICPD or Cairo) which commenced in 1994 will end in December 2014, the Women’s Conference (known as Beijing) and the Millennium Development Goals end a year later in December 2015.

A series of meetings and conferences have been held in different parts of the world to try to establish the different regional priorities. Needless to say this process is targeted by ideologues who are determined to ensure that the final outcome documents contain  their deadly anti-life and family agenda.

One such process known as the ICPD Beyond 2014 Review, is according to a UN website ‘an opportunity to influence the future of global population and development policy at national, regional and global levels, providing a once in a generation chance to define what needs to be done to deliver a more equal, more sustainable world for the 7 billion people - and more - who share it.’

The process is geared to identify progress and achievements towards the goals set out in the Cairo International Conference on Population and Development.

One significant attempt to include this agenda was rejected last year in the Rio + 20 Conference.

Another attempt was made during the most recent UNECA African regional conference, which took place in Addis Ababa from Sept 30^th to October 4^th, the purpose of which was to conclude a draft development agenda for the African region. A major controversy erupted as a result of attempts by sexual rights activists to include issues such as abortion and sexual orientation in the text. This resulted in 17 of the African Nations in attendance issuing strong reservations to the text which has been called the Addis Ababa Declaration but which has not yet been published in its final form.

In a press release, the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) noted that 17 countries expressed reservations on three of the commitments in the final document and one the Delegate from Chad told the meeting “It must be put on record that Chad is not party to this declaration,” which he described as being “a subtle way of introducing something which may catch some countries unawares.”. The Zambia Daily Mail reported that “the majority delegates shot down a clause that would seek to promote gay and lesbian rights,” adding that this was “a clear reflection of the position of most African countries on homosexuality.”

 The African conference was the last in a series of 4 regional conferences and discussions now move back to UN headquarters in New York

Skilled Attendance at Birth and Maternal Mortality – what the data show

My Colleague Vincenzina Santoro who is  Chief United Nations Representative for the American Family Association of New York who has researched the most recently published figures on the issue of maternal mortality writes as follows:

While maternal mortality is rare in developed countries, in poorer parts of the world many women sadly die in childbirth. When the United Nations established the eight Millennium Development Goals in 2000, one goal (MDG 5) called for the reduction by three-quarters of maternal deaths globally between 1990 and 2015 – the year all MDGs are supposed to be achieved. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon used the phrase “no woman should have to pay with her life in giving life”[1] to bring home the point.

Doctors, nurses and other medical personnel emphasize that many, if not most, maternal deaths occur because there are no trained medical personnel available before, during or after childbirth.

UN Women, the new gender entity, recently published data for skilled assistance at delivery and maternal mortality ratios to indicate where – and where not – progress has been made. Data correlate significantly between the two, as shown in the tables that follow.[2]

According to this source, “Skilled assistance at delivery refers to live births attended by trained health personnel such as a doctor, nurse/midwife or community health worker.” Maternal mortality is measured as ratio of deaths per 100,000 live births (MMR). The latter data compare 1990 with 2008 but, given the difficulty in data gathering, the percentage of births receiving skilled assistance is shown as an average for 2000-2008. This makes it impossible to see if there has been an increase over time for the latter.

As shown in the table below, globally the MMR declined by one-third between 1990 and 2008 from 397 to 264 deaths, while skilled assistance was available for two-thirds of births. Not surprisingly, the MMR was generally higher where skilled assistance at delivery was lowest and vice versa. Regional data show a drop in the MMR everywhere except in the developed countries where the very low MMR has risen slightly.

In Southern Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa, where skilled assistance is below 50%, the MMR remained in triple digits. Only Sub-Saharan Africa, where skilled assistance at delivery ranged from 6% in Ethiopia to 91% in South Africa, registered a below-average decline in maternal deaths. The Middle East and North Africa registered the largest regional decline in MMR.

                                      Maternal Mortality Ratios - MMR    % Skilled Assistance at Delivery

Region                                         (mortality per 100,000 live births)            (2000-2008 average)

                                                1990            2008            % change

Developed regions                          11              14            27%                                  99%

C & E Europe & Central Asia        63              31            -51                                    97

East Asia and Pacific                    198              88            -56                                    90

Latin Amer. & Caribbean             144              85            -41                                    90

Middle East & North Africa         210              91            -57                                    79

Southern Asia                               592            275            -54                                    44

Sub-Saharan Africa                      867            646            -25                                    47

World[3]                                      397            264            -34                                    67

The MMR improved in 143 of the 171 countries for which data were available, or 84% of all reporting countries. In 1990 there were 16 countries with a MMR of 1,000 or more but by 2008 the number had come down to four: Afghanistan with a ratio of 1,400 followed by Chad and Somalia at 1,200 then by Guinea Bissau at 1,000. Both Afghanistan and Chad had skilled assistance at delivery of only 14%.

As indicated below, there were 15 countries that had a MMR of 500 or higher in 2008, all but two located in Sub-Saharan Africa. Since 1990, some made progress but others did not. Only Laos stands out for halving its MMR.

                        Maternal Mortality Ratios – MMR              % Skilled Assistance at Delivery

Country            (mortality per 100,000 live births)                        (2000-2008 average)

                                    1990                        2008

Afghanistan                        1,700                        1,400                                                14%

Chad                                   1,300                        1,200                                                14

Somalia                              1,000                        1,200                                                33

Guinea-Bissau                    1,200                        1,000                                                39

Liberia                                1,100                           990                                                46

Burundi                              1,200                           970                                                34

Nigeria                                1,000                          840                                                39

Mali                                    1,200                           830                                                49

Niger                                  1,400                           820                                                33

Tanzania                                880                           790                                                43

Sudan                                    830                           750                                                49

Guinea                                1,200                           680                                                46

Angola                                1,000                           610                                                47

Laos                                    1,200                           580                                                20

Rwanda                               1,000                          540                                                52

The countries with the lowest MMR in 2008 were Greece with two and Ireland with three. There were six countries with a ratio of five: Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Italy, and Sweden.

Curiously, three of the most developed countries saw the ratio rise: the United States from 12 to 24, the United Kingdom from 10 to 12 and Switzerland from 8 to 10.

Other countries of interest: in Russia, known for having the world’s highest abortion rate, the MMR has declined from 74 to 39 with 100% skilled assistance at delivery. China’s MMR came down from 110 to 38 with 98% skilled assistance at delivery.

In conclusion, the one-third reduction in worldwide MMR in 18 years is notable, but the three-fourths decline targeted by 2015 appears illusory. Nonetheless, on a country-by-country basis, individual success may be within reach for at least a few countries. In the period under review, four countries already have cut the MMR by three-fourths: Estonia (from 48 to 12), Bhutan (from 940 to 200), Iran (from 150 to 30), and Maldives (from 510 to 37).

---

[1] http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=34630&Cr=maternal&Cr1

[2] The data were complied from http://progress.unwomen.org/pdfs/EN-Report-Progress.pdf

[3] Data are weighted averages by population.

Family Planning groups Spreading HIV/AIDS in Africa through hormonal contraception?

According to recent reports the most widely used contraceptive in sub Saharan Africa doubles the risk of transmission of HIV. This result is clearly indicated in a scientific research study, conducted by an international team, funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which was published on October 4th in the "The Lancet".  

The study, which related to 3,790 couples in which one partner was HIV positive, was conducted over a two-year period with quarterly clinical trials.  The couples were selected from 8 African countries with high HIV rates, Botswana, Kenya, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia.

The results of this scientific study are clear: where one partner in a couple is HIV positive, the use by the woman of the hormonal contraceptive Depo-Provera - produced by the pharmaceutical company Pfizer and administered by injection, doubles the risk of infection of the healthy partner: the percentage of women infected rose from 3.78 to 6.61% in a year, while for men the probability of infection is raised from 1.51 to 2.61%.

This study is not the first to make the connection between Depo-Provera and increased HIV rates. A 2004 study by the National Institutes of Health, University of North Carolina and Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore (Morrison et al) found that the use of injected hormonal contraceptives increases the risk of STD’s. see LifeSite.com report

 

Depo-Provera use is widespread in Africa, due to its convenience: it is taken quarterly and does not need the assistance of a doctor. It is estimated that about 12 million African women between 15 and 49 years (6 percent) use this method of contraception.

Shockingly despite the earlier studies WHO and other associated groups including UNFPA, UNDP and the World Bank issued the following statement. 

WHO's systematic review of the evidence on whether use of hormonal contraception modifies the risk of acquiring a STI was updated.  It was reviewed by the WHO Family Planning Guideline Steering Group who concluded that this new evidence does not modify the current guidance, namely: there are no restrictions on the use of COCs and DMPA by women at high risk of acquiring a STI 

Once again despite tthe clarity the results in the current research it appears that for ideological reasons international organizations such as the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the World Health Organisation (WHO) are once again failing in their duty to take this into account and continue to allow the drug to be administered to African women, despite the apparent risks. Women's health in third world countries appears to be secondary to ideology in the priorities of these organisations, under the pretence of reducing maternal mortality the priority of international organizations is to reduce the number of children women bear rather than making pregnancy and childbearing safer for women.

The WHO instead of acting immediately to save lives by issuing a statement for women to cease using hormonal contraception it has instead issued a statement, which casts doubt on the results of the study and has arranged a meeting to discuss the issues early next year. The WHO statement reads:

“Currently, systematic reviews conclude that the weight of evidence does not indicate that use of hormonal contraception increases the risk of HIV acquisition, transmission or disease progression among the general population, but may have an impact on women at high risk of HIV infection, such as sex workers."

The statement continues 

"[…] WHO and partners have urged for more research to resolve key gaps in our understanding of the topic.  In light of the study by Heffron and colleagues, as well as the public health concerns it raises, WHO is convening a Technical Consultation on 31 January - 1 February 2012 to re-examine the totality of evidence on potential effects of hormonal contraception on HIV acquisition, disease progression, and infectivity/transmission to sexual partners.”

Maternal mortality death rate doubles in South Africa

A new report from Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life Global Outreach (MCCL GO) analyzes details concerning the maternal mortality rate, legal abortion and Millennium Development Goal 5 (MDG 5) in South Africa. The full report is available at the MCCL GO website.
In recent weeks the South African government and leading health authorities have admitted that their country will not meet MDG 5, which calls for reducing the maternal mortality rate by 75 percent.  Instead of a reduction, the latest statistics show that the maternal mortality rate has, in fact, doubled in South Africa.
The South African government legalized abortion on demand in 1997.  At that time, abortion advocates made wildly exaggerated claims that legalized abortion would greatly reduce the maternal mortality rate.  In fact, the effect of legalized abortion has been the exact opposite.
 Executive Director of MCCL GO Scott Fischbach presenting the report said.

“Africa’s greatest resource is its people,” [...]   “The South African approach of legalizing abortion not only aborts a nation’s future, it also contributes to a higher loss of life among its women.”

The MCCL GO analysis reveals that South African health authorities have been successful in pushing abortion on the women of their country.  It is estimated that in 1996 (the year prior to the legalization of abortion) approximately 1,600 abortions were performed across South Africa; by 2004 there were nearly 90,000 abortions performed. 

With this focus on abortion promotion, pre-natal and obstetric care — care that truly helps women and their babies — have not been made priorities.
According to Fischbach

“Countries on the African continent are being pressured by the U.S. Obama administration, the Center for Reproductive Rights, Marie Stopes International and the International Planned Parenthood Federation to legalize abortion,” [...]  “These nations ought to take note of the situation in South Africa.  It is only in the delivery of adequate health care to women that they will reduce maternal mortality rates — not by legalizing abortion.”

Shock report: Hundreds of foetuses, newborns dumped in South Africa

According to a report in the Irish Sun, a South African radio station reported last Friday that hundreds of aborted babies and dead newborn babies are being dumped in the Johannesburg and Pretoria area each year, .

The report by Johannesburg's private 702 radio station highlights a report by the South African Medical Research Council and the Pretoria-based University of South Africa as saying at least 446 bodies of foetuses and babies under one years of age were turning up in drains, gutters and rubbish bins in Gauteng province.

According to the report at least part of the problem was thought to stem from the proliferation of illegal abortion clinics. In addition to the dumping of aborted preborn babies the statistics also included the bodies of some newborn babies.

Dumping of newborns is apparently a well-documented problem in the South Africa and the report says that the South African media regularly carries stories of desperate, often hard-up teenagers and young women disposing of their babies in toilets following unplanned pregnancies.

Gauteng, where Johannesburg and Pretoria are situated, is South Africa's most populous province.

U.S. Taxpayer Funding Kenyan Referendum to the tune of $23 Million

U.S. taxpayers are now footing the bill to push a new constitution in Kenya to the tune of $23 million, far above previous estimates, according to a Christian Newswire press release on behalf of Congressman Chris Smith

The Inspector General (IG) for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Donald Gambatesa, has provided information that the US Government is spending over $23 million for activities in Kenya to influence the voter to pass a highly contentious constitution which includes overturning Kenyan's current life of the mother only restriction on abortion.

As part of ongoing discussions with the IG's office, Rep. Chris Smith, Ranking Member of the Africa and Global Health Subcommittee, and other key U.S. lawmakers recently received a chart listing recipients of USAID-funded activities related to the proposed constitution and a summary of their agreements. Previous estimates had indicated that $2 million was being spent, then that was updated to $11 million and now the figure identified by the IG's office exceeds $23 million.

"The Obama Administration should not be spending $23 million in American tax dollars on the specific 'Yes' campaign, pushing a determined outcome on the proposed constitution in Kenya,"

Smith said.

"The U.S. government can be supportive of the process, helping to secure a free and fair referendum. But we must respect the Kenyan people and let them decide for themselves. U.S. dollars should not be used to tell the Kenyan people how to vote."

In addition to information that the Obama Administration is funding the "Yes" campaign in Kenya, (link to a list of organizations paid with U.S. funding to support the new constitution), the chart reinforces concern that the US is financially supporting groups and activities that are advocating for abortion in the context of the draft constitution.

Smith said the IG's list shows that

"U.S. tax dollar monies are flying out the door to pro-abortion groups committed to overturning pro-life laws in Kenya."

He pointed to the Kenyan Federation of Women Lawyers (FIDA-Kenya), which as a member of the Kenyan Reproductive Health and Rights Alliance (RHRA), is committed to increasing the availability of abortion and the decriminalization of abortion in the country. FIDA-Kenya helped to draft controversial legislation and launched a campaign in 2008 to liberalize Kenya's abortion law. Under the U.S. law, such actions should make FIDA-Kenya and similar organizations ineligible for civic education assistance related to the draft constitution.

The list includes the following:

The Committee of Experts on Constitutional Review in Kenya, which drafted the abortion-related provisions in the proposed constitution, received over $180,000 of US taxpayer monies for office equipment and networking capability. The Committee rejected the life of the mother only exception to abortion inserted into the draft constitution by a Parliamentary committee, and added a "health" exception to abortion. It is commonly known that health exceptions to abortion often lead to abortion on demand owing to the broad definition of health that includes socio-economic reasons as exemplified in the US Supreme Court decision on abortion in 1973.

The Kenyan Federation of Women Lawyers (FIDA-Kenya) is a member of the Kenyan Reproductive Health and Rights Alliance (RHRA), which is supported by the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA). According to the PPFA website, the RHRA's activities include "drafting reproductive health provisions for the revised constitution." PPFA's work in Kenya includes "increasing the availability of affordable safe abortion services and supporting advocates to decriminalize abortion in the country." FIDA-Kenya helped to draft controversial legislation and launched a campaign in 2008 to liberalize Kenya's abortion law. It is receiving assistance not only from PPFA through the RHRA, but also $85,363 from USAID for advocacy activities related to the draft constitution.

FIDA-Kenya together with two other USAID funding recipients were facilitators at a "National Women Constitution Conference" held on April 30- during the USAID grant period for each organization. The conference agenda included "demystifying" the "contentious issue" of abortion.

The African Woman and Child Features Service, a media non-governmental organization ("NGO") that seeks to increase media coverage about abortion and "comprehensive reproductive health rights" in Kenya, is receiving nearly $157,000 for constitution-related activities, including "advocacy and lobbying meetings with reform bodies at national level."

Development Alternatives, Inc. (DAI), which is receiving almost $3 million as a primary grant recipient, advised USAID in 2000 that USAID/Kenya would benefit by supporting civil society organizations that are advocating for "efforts to eventually legalize abortion in Kenya." While acknowledging that such activity would be "politically sensitive," DAI suggested that USAID might support local advocacy groups in their efforts as part of USAID's democracy and governance strategic objectives component that supports civic society organizations.

Smith stressed that the US can and should be supportive of "a fair, free and non-violent" process and civic education, but not work for a specific outcome. Despite US Embassy claims to the contrary, U.S. taxpayers are paying to promote passage of a foreign referendum which is viewed by many in Kenya as interference and meddling in a sovereign Kenyan matter.

Smith said that one of the most controversial items in the proposed constitution is a provision that would in effect overturn Kenya's long-existing laws outlawing abortion.

"We should be embracing the health and welfare of both mothers and children in African while respecting sovereign prolife laws. Instead, the Obama Administration is trying to change Kenya's existing restriction on abortion through the referendum. Such actions constitute a violation of U.S. law and is an affront to both the pro-life people of Kenya and the US, an overwhelming majority of whom do not support abortion, and in the case of the US-do not want their tax dollars to pay for abortion activities,"

Smith added.

In a May letter to the IGs at the State Department and USAID, Smith, and Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-18), the Ranking Member on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and Darrell Issa (CA-49), the Ranking Member on the House Oversight Committee, called for investigations into potentially illegal funding to promote the proposed pro-abortion Kenyan constitution. Such promotion would violate a statutory restriction that no USAID and State Department funds "may be used to lobby for or against abortion."



To: National & International Desks
Contact: Jeff Sagnip, Public Policy Director, Congressman Chris Smith,
609-585-7878

Condoms and HIV/AIDS

In the days since Pope Benedict XVI responded to a question by a French journalist on HIV/AIDS the media in most cases have been very critical of his comments. Support for Pope Benedict has come from many different places and from people in many walks of life including science. The Washington Times published a very interesting editorial on the topic. To place the issue in context I have first included the text of the exchange between the French Journalist and Pope Benedict and added a link to the Washington Times article.

En Route to Cameroon a French journalist asked Pope Benedict: "Holy Father among the many evils that affect Africa there is also the particular problem of the spread of AIDS. The position of the Catholic Church for fighting this evil is frequently considered unrealistic and ineffective.

Pope Benedict replied "I would say the opposite,” and he continued,

"It is my belief that the most effective presence on the front in the battle against HIV/AIDS is precisely the Catholic Church and her institutions. I think of the Community of Sant' Egidio, which does so much, visibly and invisibly to fight AIDS, of the Camillians, of all the nuns that are at the service of the sick.
"I would say that this problem of AIDS cannot be overcome with advertising slogans. If the soul is lacking, if Africans do not help one another, the scourge cannot be resolved by distributing condoms; quite the contrary, we risk worsening the problem. The solution can only come through a twofold commitment: firstly, the humanization of sexuality, in other words a spiritual and human renewal bringing a new way of behaving towards one another; and secondly, true friendship, above all with those who are suffering, a readiness - even through personal sacrifice - to be present with those who suffer. And these are the factors that help and bring visible progress.
"Therefore, I would say that our double effort is to renew the human person internally, to give spiritual and human strength to a way of behaving that is just towards our own body and the other person's body; and this capacity of suffering with those who suffer, to remain present in trying situations.
"I believe that this is the first response [to AIDS] and that this is what the Church does, and thus, she offers a great and important contribution. And we are grateful to those that do this."

Link to Washington Times article

Colonialism disguised as Aid

Aid to the Church in Need has criticised western aid agencies operating in Africa for importing their own ideologies regarding sexuality and family life to the continent, with little respect shown for the pro-family and pro-life values at the heart of many African countries. Christine du Coudray of ACN, who has recently returned from a fact-finding trip to Africa, praised African Family Life Federation for its work in support of families and the building of a culture of life in Africa.