Abortion Activists Want the UN to Investigate America’s Pro-Life Laws

On July 7, 2026, the United Nations Human Rights Council adopted a resolution condemning “reproductive violence” in humanitarian situations. The text names actual atrocities, including forced abortion, forced sterilization, forced contraception, and forced pregnancy.

Whether they missed the point or chose to ignore it, International Big Abortion looked at a resolution condemning forced abortion and forced sterilization and somehow decided the real villain was an American pregnancy center handing a mother diapers.

And of course they did because that’s how they roll.

Follow LifeNews.com on Instagram for pro-life pictures and videos.

As China spent decades terrorizing women under its population-control regime, and women were dragged into clinics, threatened, fined, detained, sterilized, and forced to abort children they wanted, Big Abortion said nothing.

When Peru targeted poor and Indigenous women for sterilization, often absent genuine consent, Big Abortion was quiet.

And when in Greenland, Danish authorities inserted contraceptive devices into thousands of Inuit women and girls, some barely teenagers, without their knowledge or permission, again, they said nothing.

Those things were all reproductive violence. It is brutal, calculated, state-sponsored violence against women, children, families, and entire communities. Yet those who profit billions of dollars a year stayed silent.

That history does not seem to hold the abortion lobby’s attention for long, or even at all. They acknowledge forced abortion and forced sterilization just long enough to seize the language, then sprint toward the real object of their obsession: American laws that protect unborn children, because they know that America is where the big money is.

And their argument is almost too absurd to state plainly. When a government forces a woman to abort, that is reproductive violence. When a government refuses to let someone kill an unborn child, that is also reproductive violence.

The woman forced onto an operating table in China, and the woman offered diapers at a pregnancy resource center now occupy the same moral universe. A sterilization campaign in Peru and a law protecting a child with a beating heart somehow become variations of the same offense.

They consider this a human rights analysis. It is not; it’s no more than ideological bunk.

The attack on pregnancy resource centers exposes the whole game.

These centers provide pregnancy tests, ultrasounds, baby clothes, cribs, prenatal referrals, parenting classes, food, counseling, housing help, and transportation. They help women who feel cornered. They serve mothers whose boyfriends have disappeared, whose families are pressuring them, or whose bank accounts cannot absorb one more bill.

Pro-abortion activists look at that and see danger.

Not danger to women. Danger to abortion.

A woman who receives practical help may decide she does not have to abort her child. A mother who sees her baby on an ultrasound may refuse to believe the lie that nothing human is there. A frightened woman who finds food, shelter, friendship, and support may discover that the abortion clinic was never her only option.

That is why pregnancy centers enrage them.

The centers do not profit from abortion. They do not need a woman to remain frightened. They do not send her home to bleed alone after taking pills. They do not collect money when her child dies.

They help her keep the baby.

That now requires United Nations scrutiny.

One must admire the audacity, if nothing else. Governments that forced abortions on a massive scale receive a footnote. Volunteers handing out baby formula and diaper bags become suspected human rights offenders.

A crib becomes coercion. An ultrasound becomes abuse. A parenting class becomes ideological violence. A woman offering another woman help becomes part of some dark international conspiracy against “reproductive freedom.”

They have lost their minds.

Their misuse of “forced pregnancy” follows the same dishonest pattern. In international criminal law, forced pregnancy refers to a grave atrocity involving unlawful confinement, coercion, and criminal intent. It does not mean that every woman denied an elective abortion has endured the equivalent of rape, imprisonment, or genocide.

Pro-abortion profiteers know the distinction. They find it inconvenient.

They want “forced pregnancy” to mean any pregnancy that continues after legislation begins to save babies’ lives. They have erased the unborn child, recast the baby as an invader, and described the law’s refusal to authorize killing as an act of violence.

Once the child disappears, anything becomes possible. The abortionist becomes a liberator. The pregnancy center becomes an oppressor. The law protecting innocent life becomes the crime.

It is moral inversion polished into UN jargon.

The July 7 resolution does not create an international right to abortion. It does not condemn American pro-life laws. It does not authorize attacks on pregnancy resource centers. It does not hand UN bureaucrats power over state legislatures or local charities.

What it offers is a phrase, and pro-abortion advocates intend to squeeze it for every political advantage they can find.

They will insert “reproductive violence” into NGO reports. They will repeat it before treaty bodies. They will press special rapporteurs to use it. They will feed it into media campaigns, litigation, legislative hearings, and international reviews. Then, after enough activists have cited one another, they will announce that the United Nations has declared pro-life laws a human rights violation.

The UN says no such thing, but truth has never slowed this crowd when a useful slogan was available. But the world will know that: Forced abortion is violence. Forced sterilization is violence. Forcing contraception on women and girls is violence. Killing an unborn child is violence.

Helping a mother find housing is not violence. Giving her diapers is not violence. Showing her an ultrasound is not violence. Protecting her child under law is not violence.

The abortion lobby’s outrage at pregnancy resource centers reveals its real priorities. It does not simply want abortion available. It wants abortion unopposed. It wants every alternative discredited, every protective law condemned, and every person who helps a woman choose life treated as a threat.

That is why the activists rush past China, Peru, and Greenland. Those crimes expose what reproductive coercion actually looks like, and the comparison does them no favors.

They would rather place a target on the backs of American pregnancy centers.

After decades of forced abortions, forced sterilizations, and state control of women’s fertility, the new enemy is the volunteer handing a struggling mother a box of diapers. The proposal would be laughable were the consequences not so deadly.

Big Abortion has little to do with protecting women from violence. It seeks to protect abortion from opposition. And the United Nations should not lend its name to the fraud.

LifeNews.com Note: Raimundo Rojas is the Outreach Director for the National Right to Life Committee. He is a former president of Florida Right to Life and has presented the pro-life message to millions in Spanish-language media outlets. He represents NRLC at the United Nations as an NGO. Rojas was born in Santiago de las Vegas, Havana, Cuba and he and his family escaped to the United States in 1968.