Youth Blog

Nothing could’ve prepared me for my time at the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women 70 (CSW70). There was no amount of training or readings that I could have done to prepare myself to be exposed to the evil that was experienced in the different events. 

During the side and parallel events I attended, I was exposed to terms such as Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (SRHR) and Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE). On the outside, these terms seem like things I would support. I think everyone should have the right to their own reproductive health, and I think that children should be taught about how their bodies work, as it is appropriate for their age. What I don’t agree with at all is the hidden agendas these terms encompass. 

Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights pushes for abortion to be legalized and even praised. But not once did I hear someone actually say that. Comprehensive Sexual Education does more than just teach teenagers about puberty and the reproductive system. It promotes promiscuity and sexual initiation at a young age and doesn’t teach the risks associated with sex outside of marriage. But did I ever hear that mentioned? No. 

I believe that all the panelists know deep down that abortion is wrong, that sex is a soul-tying act, and that children shouldn’t be sexualized at young ages, but they refuse to acknowledge and recognize it. They mask these horrors with terms like SRHR and CSE to make themselves feel better about the agendas they are pushing. 

Having participated in pro-life street activism, I understand that not everyone wants or is willing to have a conversation. What I didn’t expect was for professional panelists and panelists representing their countries to so blatantly ignore and shut down people who had different views from them. I attended an event where a pro-life question was raised, but before the question could be finished, the panelists essentially shut down the question and told the person to stop talking. 

I have heard about the corruption in the UN and that it has changed from what it was created to be, but I didn’t realize just how far it had gone. I thought it would be a place for discussion. I knew that not everyone would agree with me or would even want me there, but I didn’t expect a complete dismissal. The only discussion that was encouraged was the one that would continue to fill the echo chamber. 

When attendees would ask long questions and just share their thoughts, they would be encouraged by the panelists and other attendees. There would be clapping, or the feminist version – snapping, and obvious nods. When delegates who attended with CLC and other pro-life groups brought their concerns forward, they were met with loud sighs, eye rolls, and shaking heads. If a panelist ignored a pro-life question or gave a very pro-abortion and anti-life answer, the crowd would again snap and clap. 

I am so grateful for the opportunity to attend CSW70, but am even more grateful for the many pro-lifers who have experienced this for many years. I could feel the mental and emotional toll after just one week; I can’t imagine what it does to a person who has attended for years. I genuinely think that the only way I stayed sane, apart from God, was the pro-life community I built around me, not only in CLC but through the other pro-life organizations that also attended CSW70.