The United Nations’ 17 Sustainable Development Goals imply that there is no longer any need to reduce global population growth, even though it is a serious problem that undermines most of what has been preached about putting an end to the "surplus population" through efforts of "depopulation, self-sterilization and castrations for the good of the planet." Meanwhile the same people pushing such things are still within the UN, NATO, WHO, CDC, WEF, and many more. While many so called "Fact Checker" sites claim to the contrary and wrap it up with all sorts of pretty language and various "ground root efforts" the facts are clear.
promotion of increased numbers of abortion, make it next to impossible to build, much less afford having a family, create irrational strife between men and women starting with girls and boys, encouraging homosexuality, using the so-called trans movement to convince people to willingly mutilate themselves and their children as so called "gender affirming care" as so much more. In fact, to these efforts it promotes that the "enemy" who is number one on the list is any heterosexual, and then to put more fuel on the fire inspire racism and acts of tokenism through various DEI policies and targeting heterosexual white men the most to the point it's no longer a fictious claim of the insane white supremacist racists and seeking to start a full on race war through acts of domestic terrorism.
This also plays off the insane extremist feminism using terms like "toxic masculinity" and "evil patriarchy" that if you changed male and patriarchy for "Black, Mexican or Jew" the putrid insanity of it all becomes apparent. And these monstrosities through such as the "Open Society Foundation" all find it convincing just in America alone 77 million brain washed goons against the some 254 million that refuse to submit to it all, so are systematically silenced and "erased" quietly in a variety of ways.
All the while the same pushing all this also add to such chaos by imposing open boarders, introduction of those who wish to impose their cultures upon everyone else, often violently and then suppress speaking up about it as "hate speech" as a gas lighting term to censor, control and silence opposition. This is real. It's not hearsay. We must not allow ourselves to submit to and fall into their traps of imposed separatism which at the core of it all is to divide everyone in every possible way and as a diverse yet divided people, implode, while they continue breeding their own offspring.
Over the past 50 years, we have seen this being slowly seeded in all areas of society and those who tried to sound the horn were smeared as mentally ill and xenophobic, and mentally ill conspiracy theorists convincing all to use the concept of "Conspiracy Theory" as the same as "Conspiracy Fiction." These are just some of various efforts have been made globally to address population growth, often with the aim of balancing environmental sustainability, resource management, and economic stability, and if necessary, through mass illness and sterilization, and intentional acts to make people sick and make everything look accidental when it has been acts of intentional murder. Here are some notable examples:
Family Planning Programs (Family reduction and elimination): Many countries have implemented family planning initiatives to provide access to contraception and reproductive health education. For instance, India's family planning program, launched in the 1950s, has evolved over the decades to promote smaller family sizes.
China's One-Child Policy (pushed in the USA and other Countries but veiled as economic reasons): Introduced in 1979, this policy was one of the most significant and controversial population control measures. It limited most Chinese families to one child, significantly slowing population growth but also leading to unintended social and economic consequences. The policy was relaxed in 2016.
Education and Empowerment of Women (and the belittlement and elimination of men): Globally, efforts to educate and empower women have been linked to lower fertility rates. Access to education and career opportunities often leads to delayed marriages and fewer children.
Public Awareness Campaigns (perpetual fear mongering propaganda veiling the previous): Governments and organizations have run campaigns to raise awareness about the benefits of smaller families and the environmental impact of overpopulation.
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs which literally is open depopulation and control): The United Nations' SDGs emphasize sustainable population growth as part of broader goals to reduce poverty, improve health, and protect the environment.
Economic Incentives and Disincentives (paid not to breed or get "fixed" but also handing out fines): Some countries have used financial incentives to encourage smaller families or disincentives for larger ones. For example, Singapore has offered tax benefits and housing incentives for families with fewer children.
These efforts have contributed to a global decline in fertility rates, particularly in developed countries. However, they have also sparked debates about ethics, human rights, and the long-term implications of population control measures. Population control measures often raise significant ethical concerns, as they touch on sensitive issues related to human rights, equity, and societal values. These are the same wackos who openly promote eating bugs, killing babies and engaging in cannibalism and necrophilia among many other truly sickening things. Here are some key ethical considerations:
Violation of Individual Rights: Policies like forced sterilization or restrictions on family size can infringe on personal freedoms and bodily autonomy. For example, China's one-child policy faced criticism for coercive practices.
Discrimination and Inequality: Population control measures can disproportionately affect marginalized groups, including women, the poor, and ethnic minorities. This can exacerbate existing inequalities.
Cultural and Religious Sensitivities: Some measures may conflict with cultural or religious beliefs, leading to resistance and ethical dilemmas.
Eugenics and Coercion: Historical instances of population control have sometimes been linked to eugenics, where certain groups were targeted based on race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status.
Unintended Consequences: Policies aimed at reducing population growth can lead to demographic imbalances, such as aging populations and gender imbalances, which have long-term social and economic implications.
Environmental vs. Human Rights: Balancing the need for environmental sustainability with respect for human rights is a complex ethical challenge.
These concerns highlight the importance of designing population policies that are voluntary, inclusive, and respectful of human dignity. Those who say this just doesn't happen are actively being deceitful. Certainly, violations of individual rights in the context of population control measures are often a major ethical concern. Here are some ways these rights can be infringed upon:
Coercive Policies: When governments or organizations enforce strict measures—such as mandatory sterilizations, forced abortions, or strict family size limits—individuals lose their right to make personal decisions about reproduction. For example, during China's one-child policy era, some people faced severe penalties, including fines, job losses, or even forced medical procedures, if they had more than one child.
Lack of Informed Consent: In some cases, sterilization campaigns or other interventions have been carried out without individuals fully understanding or agreeing to the procedures. This has occurred in marginalized communities, where language barriers or lack of education have been exploited.
Targeting Vulnerable Groups: Historically, population control measures have often disproportionately targeted specific groups, such as minorities, Indigenous populations, or people in poverty. For instance, during the 20th century, several countries, including the United States, conducted forced sterilizations on minority or low-income women without their consent.
Undermining Autonomy: Policies that incentivize or pressure individuals to have fewer children—through financial incentives, social stigma, or propaganda—can undermine an individual’s autonomy and freedom to choose their family size.
Psychological and Social Impact: The psychological distress caused by coercive or restrictive population measures, including the stigma faced by families who defy such policies, also constitutes a violation of individuals' mental well-being and dignity.
Such violations underscore the importance of population policies that respect human rights, rely on voluntary participation, and are supported by education and access to resources rather than coercion or force. These things violate many things. Things most are actively not taught in the education system, and which is denied right off despite it being known. Legal frameworks that protect individual rights in population policies are often rooted in international human rights laws and national constitutions. Here are some key examples:
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR): Adopted by the United Nations in 1948, the UDHR establishes the right to family life and personal autonomy, ensuring that individuals can make decisions about reproduction without coercion.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR): This treaty protects individuals from discrimination and coercion, emphasizing the importance of informed consent in medical and reproductive decisions.
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW): CEDAW advocates for women's rights, including access to family planning and reproductive health services, while opposing forced sterilization and other coercive practices. In reverse male and father rights are completely ignored or steamrolled out of the discussion.
National Constitutions: Many countries enshrine reproductive rights and personal freedoms in their constitutions. For example, the U.S. Constitution has been interpreted to protect reproductive rights under the right to privacy.
Regional Human Rights Instruments: Frameworks like the European Convention on Human Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights provide additional protections against coercive population control measures.
Ethical Guidelines and Medical Standards: Organizations like the World Health Organization (WHO) have established ethical guidelines to ensure that population policies respect individual rights and prioritize voluntary participation. They have since, in more recent times, turned against these things and violate these rights repeatedly.
The ethical and legal violations by agencies involved in population control measures often stem from actions that contradict their stated goals of promoting human rights and dignity. These contradictions highlight the need for stronger oversight, transparency, and accountability in implementing population policies. Here are some examples.
Coercive Practices: Agencies like the United Nations and WHO advocate for voluntary and informed family planning, yet there have been instances where coercive sterilizations or forced abortions have occurred, particularly in marginalized communities2.
Targeting Vulnerable Groups: Historical and recent reports highlight that Indigenous populations, ethnic minorities, and economically disadvantaged groups have been disproportionately affected by population control measures. For example, forced sterilizations of Indigenous women in Canada and incarcerated women in the U.S. have been documented.
Lack of Accountability: Despite international frameworks like the UDHR and CEDAW, enforcement mechanisms are often weak, allowing violations to persist without significant consequences.
Contradictory Policies: While promoting reproductive rights, some agencies have supported or funded programs in countries where coercive practices are prevalent, raising questions about their commitment to ethical standards
These frameworks aimed to balance population management with the protection of individual freedoms, ensuring that policies are ethical, inclusive, and respectful of human dignity. Let me know if you'd like to explore any of these in more detail! Now, let's cite some examples that proves this beyond just hearsay or blind accusations that have continued to be denied by so called "Fact Checkers" online who don't care about actual facts, or they twist it around to misrepresent the facts.
China's Xinjiang Region: The Chinese government has been accused of coercive population control measures targeting Uyghur Muslims and other ethnic minorities. These include forced sterilizations, abortions, and involuntary birth control implants.
However, this has also been done upon and to the general Chinese population, particularly during the enforcement of the one-child policy and its later iterations which favored boys over girls and now there are too many boys that outnumber girls creating a self-destructive mess and population decline.
Forced Sterilizations in Canada: Indigenous women in Canada have reported being subjected to forced sterilizations, with some cases as recent as the 2010s. This has been described as a form of systemic discrimination and genocide.
In the early to mid-20th century, provinces like Alberta and British Columbia enacted laws allowing the sterilization of individuals deemed "mentally unfit" or "socially inadequate." Thousands of people, including Indigenous women and individuals with disabilities, were sterilized under these laws.
A 2022 report revealed that at least 22 Indigenous women in Quebec were subjected to forced sterilizations between 1980 and 2019. These women were often pressured or misinformed about the procedures during vulnerable moments.
Despite the repeal of sterilization laws, allegations of coerced sterilizations persist in Canada, with survivors sharing their experiences of being pressured into irreversible procedures.
Eugenics Programs in Russia: Uktus Boarding House in Yekaterinburg, between 2006 and 2016, at least 15 women at this state-run assisted-living facility were reportedly coerced into sterilization. Many of these women were orphans with disabilities. Some claimed they were threatened with institutionalization if they refused.
During the Soviet era, forced sterilization was reportedly used as a means to prevent individuals with mental illnesses or disabilities from having children.
This practice has left a legacy that continues to affect vulnerable populations in Russia. In 2005, six patients at a psychiatric facility in the Moscow region accused doctors of forcibly sterilizing them. This reflects ongoing concerns about the treatment of individuals in institutional care.
Eugenics Programs in the United States: In the 20th century, the U.S. implemented eugenics-based sterilization programs targeting marginalized groups, including Native Americans and incarcerated men and women, including those deemed "retarded."
These practices persisted into the 1970s to the early 1980s in some areas of the United States, but also there were noted cases of this still occurring illegally in various mental hospitals well into the1990s along with other abuses.
Mass Sterilization Camps in India: Despite a 2016 Supreme Court ruling against coercive sterilization practices, reports indicate that mass sterilization camps continue to operate in India, often without obtaining informed consent from participants.
Court of Protection Ruling (2015): A judge ruled that a mother of six with learning difficulties could be forcibly sterilized to prevent further pregnancies. The decision was made in what the court described as "exceptional" and "extreme" circumstances, citing risks to the woman's health and her inability to make informed decisions about contraception.
Hundreds of women in the UK have taken legal action against the manufacturer of the Essure sterilization device. Many reported severe side effects, including prolonged pain and abnormal bleeding, leading to calls for better monitoring of medical devices.
Encouraging Homosexuality/Gay Agenda: Rockefeller Population Council, suggested increasing the promotion of homosexuality was listed as a strategy to reduce population growth.
This claim suggests that influential organizations might have seen homosexuality as a tool to limit reproduction.
Some of this seems to have been an idea picked up on from Anthony Burgess’s "The Wanting Seed" (1962) where overpopulation leads the state to encourage homosexuality as a means of curbing reproduction.
The fictional "Ministry of Infertility" uses slogans like "It's Sapiens to be Homo" to promote same-sex relationships, explicitly linking homosexuality to population control.
While this is a work of fiction, it reflects mid-20th-century anxieties about population growth and speculative ideas about controlling it through alternative sexual practices, along with the rise of over promotion of the so-called LGBTQ+ movements.
Denying that over promotion of homosexuality, changing characters historical heterosexually (both real and fictional) to homosexual or bisexual is not hearsay.
Just in the last few years there has been an increase in nearly every shown promoting it including in children's shows where such things simply do not belong. Much of it promotes anti-heterosexual extremism.
We have seen all this in every country being pushed in excess, especially since the 1960s along with all sorts of other insane and often violent actions that use to result in arrests yet in present times barely results in a fine. Those who speak up against this kind of one sided "specialized" exclusion and permission are often the ones silenced and arrested, fined and placed in jail or prison. We are no in a global situation where within each and every country the attacks and distortions are within, using long established franchises, twisting and perverting them and intentionally seeking to erase normal and sane culture. It's also not just religious people being attacked for it. It's rather sobering when even atheists agree with religious people that this kind of insanity for this interwoven agenda driven by complete and total insanity globally. So, let's provide some facts that are noted in videos. If you can, download them and save them because eventually they will be erased.
Prominent atheists whose whole world view has been solely within actual sciences and not psychological gibberish have also been suppressed and whole careers destroyed. One, for example, was Richard Dawkins who was stripped of his "Humanist of the Year" award by the American Humanist Association (AHA) in 2021. The decision was made following controversial comments he made on social media about transgender identities that someone who was born male with a penis is still male even if its removed and made the justifiable statement it is as delusional in comparison to Rachel Dolezal, a white woman who identified as Black. The AHA stated that his remarks were inconsistent with humanist values, as they were seen as demeaning to marginalized groups. In otherwise, it's literally a widespread forced and imposed culture being financed by insane billionaires.
What Soros twisted:
Bottom line, 2 genders (male or female as in genitals), Sex is simply an alternative term of distinction (male or female contribution to reproduction). Not complicated. Sexual preferences are not "genders." Sexual Orientations are not "genders" and only break down to three in number: Heterosexual, Homosexual and Bisexual. Get over it. Look at all the bullshit claimed to be "different genders" and it's obvious to someone who isn't brain dead stupid. If someone is born with both genders reproductive organs that are visibly pronounced, they are a hermaphrodite. If they are ambiguous, they are androgynous. If they are "non-binary they are sexless." These other three conditions in a human are birth defects of various degrees caused by all sorts of errors. Also, if you are unaware of facts, the Soros family is behind all of this internationally. Watch carefully.
Soros literally presents a playbook of his own by Verbal Trickery
Soros' has tied to and investments in Over 30 Major News Organizations including The New York Times, Washington Post, the Associated Press, MSNBC and ABC, several game development companies including the Unity Game Engine paying for "Woke" propaganda through them and their 6 main CEOs of these Conglomerates, which is son inherits all of it continuing the madness.
Soros has often intentionally spent millions at a time to overthrow elections and more such as when he spent $27 million trying to defeat President Bush in 2004. Prominent journalists like ABC’s Christiane Amanpour and former Washington Post editor and now Vice President Len Downie serve on boards of operations that take Soros cash. This despite the Society of Professional Journalists' ethical code stating: “avoid all conflicts real or perceived.”
The investigative reporting start-up ProPublica is a prime example. ProPublica, which recently won its second Pulitzer Prize, initially was given millions of dollars from the Sandler Foundation to “strengthen the progressive infrastructure” – “progressive” being the code word for very liberal. In 2010, it also received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from the Open Society Foundations. In case you wonder where that money comes from, the OSF website is www.soros.org.
A 14-person Journalism Advisory Board, stacked with CNN’s David Gergen and representatives from top newspapers, a former publisher of The Wall Street Journal and the editor-in-chief of Simon & Schuster. Several are working journalists, including:
Jill Abramson, a managing editor of The New York Times;
Kerry Smith, the senior vice president for editorial quality of ABC News;
Cynthia A. Tucker, the editor of the editorial page of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
ProPublica is far from the only Soros-funded organization that is stacked with members of the supposedly neutral press. Those saying they don't know where all this insanity is coming from are throwing everyone off. They do know as insiders and often have mysterious laps in memories. They are all rolled into one another as media partners like The Washington Post, Salon, CNN and ABC News. CIR received close to $1 million from Open Society from 2003 to 2008. The evil is real, and it's interwoven as a consideration of the wore kinds of "power." Consider such articles pushed on MSNBC "Soros and liberal megadonors behind nonprofit group that added US to human rights watchlist" with the goal to remove and overthrow Donald Trump once again.
President Donald Trump also signed an executive order targeting a law firm, Perkins Coie, that represented Hillary Clinton and has worked with others, like George Soros, to what he says was interference with fair and free elections in the U.S., according to the order. Trump also accused the law firm of discrimination, saying it used racial and other quotas in its employment practices. Here's the crazy part, Soros never denied it, and again, go back to 2004 where it was openly made known he did and does use financial leveraging to pull such strings (27 million in strings, and you can bet he has never reported his total net worth, much less all the things he has engaged in such as inside trading which is a major crime.
To show how he manipulates everyone his own quote during those efforts were: "I mean, I saw it very clearly that I ought to oppose President Bush. It was clear to me that that's the best thing I could do. Now that he's been re-elected, exactly how to get America back to its founding values, it's not so clear." Translation? Screw the voters, those with the money make the rules. Now his son is, having been groomed for all this, poised to inherit it all. Interesting setup, isn't it? Well, he already has, his second son Alex who tried to openly shut down Trump's election having inherited $25 billion from the old man with an admitted Messianic God delusion.
This should suffice and should be a wakeup call to everyone to set aside their differences, fight this insanity together, regardless of our differences of religious or non-religious views and put all these criminals for crimes against all of humanity and those who have willingly funded terrorist organizations.