I don’t really care about how Trudeau wastes the money of Canadian taxpayers, but why do this? Why not global birth control methods instead of murdering millions of babies?
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau plans to spend $650 million over the next three years to promote third-world abortions and other “reproductive health” issues, he announced Wednesday, to commemorate International Women’s Day.
It’s money for programs that women in developing countries don’t even want, say critics of Trudeau, Canada’s first self-described “feminist” prime minister who has promised to expand abortion services across Canada and around the world.
Trudeau told reporters Wednesday afternoon that Canadian taxpayers will be doubling Canada’s current funding of international “reproductive health services,” family planning and “sexuality education.” He did not mention “abortion” in his remarks, except by euphemism.
“My friends, our ambitions can’t be bounded by our borders. Women and girls around the world are counting on countries like Canada to help lead the way.”
But Gwen Landolt, vice-president of REAL Women of Canada called the initiative “bizarre” and “a colossal waste of taxpayers’ money” and suggested it will not help women in developing countries to deal with real issues like poverty and access to clean drinking water.
For Trudeau, the program is primarily about providing abortion “choice.” He insisted that “like men, women should be able to choose; to choose when they want to start a family, how big their family should be and who they want to start that family with.”
But Landolt, in an email to The Daily Caller, said that Trudeau is pushing contemporary liberal values on cultures that value life more than our own does. She suggests that Trudeau should “have first tried actually talking and listening to women before making the grant. Instead, he arrogantly patronized women in the developing world by pushing funds at them for purposes for which they have little interest. This grant is a colossal waste of taxpayers’ money and will do little to change the lives of women in developing countries,” she said.
Landolt contends that abortion and and contraception are “contrary to the culture and religion of women living in such countries. They regard their children as their wealth, not a deficit, and unlike many women in the western world, welcome motherhood.”
She also references a June 2, 2010 statement by The Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada, stating that “80 percent of maternal deaths in low resource countries” are the result of complications that occur during labor and childbirth.
“This is where Canadian aid money should be primary focus of any Maternal and Child Health Initiative.”
This is where Canadian aid money should be applied,” Landolt writes, adding that “only eight percent of women in Africa when asked why they did not use contraceptives, attributed their non-use to lack of access.”