“Sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex may be consensual in fact, if not in law,” claims a UN-backed group in a report titled “The 8 March Principles for a Human Rights-Based Approach to Criminal Law Proscribing Conduct Associated with Sex, Reproduction, Drug Use, HIV, Homelessness and Poverty,” known as “The 8 March Principles,” for short.
“The enforcement of criminal law should reflect the rights and capacity of persons under 18 years of age to make decisions about engaging in consensual sexual conduct and their right to be heard in matters concerning them,” reads the report, co-written by the UN-associated organizations such as the International Committee of Jurists (ICJ), with support from UNAIDS and the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
“Pursuant to their evolving capacities and progressive autonomy, persons under 18 years of age should participate in decisions affecting them, with due regard to their age, maturity, and best interests, and with specific attention to non-discrimination guarantees,” the document declares.
It should be shocking that these powerful globalists should openly be calling for “sexual conduct” with a person under the age of consent to be considered “consensual in fact, if not in law.”
But it isn’t.
As an aside, isn’t it embarrassing and revolting that the United States of America supports such organizations? Isn’t it a reflection of our own moral decline that we would not demand that the United States instantly withdraw from such an assembly?
While the report doesn’t expressly advocate for the legalization of sex with children, it does overtly declare that minors have the mental capacity to willingly have sex with adults.
This sort of semantic gymnastics does not fool people who are familiar with the rise of pedophilia in our world.
As reported by Free Beacon:
“This document advocates for a lot of troubling ideas and bad policies,” said Grace Melton, a Trump administration appointee to the United Nations who works as an analyst for the Heritage Foundation think tank. “Not only does it suggest that minors may be mature enough to consent to sexual activity, but it also asserts that ‘criminal law may not in any way impair’ the so-called right to abortion or to ‘gender-affirming care.’”
The report, Melton added, “illustrates some of the consequences of the progressive left’s expansion of what constitutes ‘human rights.’”
The document promotes the abolition of laws forbidding fornication and adultery, an obvious pursuance of a world devoid of traditional moral standards and one where the entry for the word “family” in the dictionary bears the description “archaic.” Here’s the language calling for the decriminalization of sexual infidelity and impurity:
[C]onsensual sexual conduct, irrespective of the type of sexual activity, the sex/gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression of the people involved, or their marital status, may not be criminalized in any circumstances. Consensual same-sex, as well as consensual different-sex sexual relations, or consensual sexual relations with or between trans, nonbinary, and other gender-diverse people, or outside marriage — whether pre-marital or extramarital — may, therefore, never be criminalized.
That is an assault on traditional values of many cultures, as well as an assault on family and science.
Unafraid and unabashed, the legal and policy director at the ICJ, Ian Seiderman, issued a statement on the UNAIDS website doubling down on the document’s call for crimes against infidelity to be abolished, claiming:
Criminal law is among the harshest of tools at the disposal of the State to exert control over individuals … as such, it ought to be a measure of last resort however, globally, there has been a growing trend towards overcriminalization. We must acknowledge that these laws not only violate human rights, but the fundamental principles of criminal law themselves.
This report is nothing less than the latest part of the globalist plan to force traditional family, morality, and marriage down the memory hole. They wish to redefine such words, or rather, to strip them of any definition at all. How long would it take to see a world where marriage is marginalized? How long would it take to see a world where an individual, regardless of age, is considered capable of consenting? How long until the morals of a society are disregarded and displaced by the 8 March Principles?
Finally, there aren’t many people who would be surprised to read a report published by these UN-backed groups calling for normalization of something most Americans consider evil, immoral, and unconscionable: sexual contact with minors. The main reason for the eye roll is that “peacekeepers” and other agents of the United Nations have been guilty of such abhorrent conduct for decades.
Do a google search on UN sex scandals and you’ll find that there is an entire Wikipedia page titled “Child sexual abuse by UN peacekeepers.” I won’t rehearse all the entries on that page, as it is easily accessed. Additionally, the Frontline report of the numerous accounts of UN peacekeepers and other agents is heartbreaking and infuriating.
So, as “The 8 March Principles” could undermine national age-of-consent laws, perhaps the people of the United States, if we are to save our culture and our families, should seek to get our country the United Nations.
No group has done more or for longer to achieve this now-pressing goal than The John Birch Society. Readers are advised to get in touch with a local JBS leader if they are interested in getting the United States out of the United Nations.
