[Please Note: Portions of this letter are not suitable for children.]

August 1995

Dear Friends,

I want to talk to you this month about what could be the most important topic I've addressed in many years. This matter has profound implications for the institution of the family and for what we have called "the defense of righteousness," yet it will not be covered adequately by the secular press. Thus, I'm asking that you give particular attention to the words that follow, even if you don't often read my written comments. The events about to unfold on the world scene are almost beyond comprehension.

From Aug. 30 to Sept. 15, 1995, delegates from more than 170 sovereign nations will attend the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, China. It will represent the most radical, atheistic and anti-family crusade in the history of the world, and your own government is pulling the strings and supporting a disproportionate share of the costs. The extremists who are preparing for and promoting this conference are a million miles outside the American mainstream, and yet they will be speaking in Beijing with the authority of the United States government. The more I learn about what these radical feminists want to impose on the human family, the more appalled I am that so few churches, Christian magazines and religious radio stations have chosen to alert our citizens to the implicit danger. It is a mystery, in fact, how such enormous threats to our spiritual and cultural heritage could have slithered into our midst without due notice or alarm.

Make no mistake about it: most of what Christianity stands for will be challenged during this atheistic conference. Every good and perfect gift from the hand of the Creator will be mocked and vilified by many of its delegates. That is their agenda. That is their program. And if they have their way, the family as it has been known since antiquity will cease to exist. Let me try to spell out what is about to occur on the other side of the globe.

First, consider where this international event will be held. No country on earth has abused and oppressed more women than China, with its forced abortion policy and its "one child per family" law. This is a nation that monitors menstrual cycles so it can identify young women with unapproved pregnancies and drag them into medical clinics to have their babies killed. It is also a country that has murdered tens of millions of female infants. So effective has been its bias against the feminine gender that the sex-ratio in large regions of China favors males by 64 percent.[1] What irony, then, that the people who have annihilated their little girls will host a conference on the betterment of women. What breathtaking wickedness! And to their shame, President Bill Clinton and his First Lady, Hillary, have committed the resources of the United States government to this travesty. Indeed, at the same time of this writing, Hillary was the likely chairperson to lead the American delegation to China. [2] Sending a delegation to China should be unthinkable for two other reasons. First, Sen. Jesse Helms, chairman of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, held hearings in May to investigate a deeply disturbing practice occurring inside China. A half-dozen witnesses testified that the Chinese government is satisfying its needs for hard cash by executing young prisoners and then "harvesting" their organs while their bodies are still warm. Sue Lloyd-Roberts, a BBC reporter, and Harry Wu, who spent 19 years in China's forced labor camps, showed the senators a shocking videotape of the actual executions. (I also saw a similar videotape while in Scotland three years ago.) Standing nearby were surgical vans and medical teams waiting to cannibalize the bodies just moments after death. The organs thus extracted are sold at black-market prices to Westerners desperate for kidneys, hearts, livers, corneas, etc. Who knows how this lucrative market for body parts has influenced China's inclination to kill young men and women accused of various minor offenses? Even without this financial incentive, prisoners have been executed historically for simply disagreeing with their government. Mr. Wu reported that he witnessed such an execution of a fellow inmate in 1970 who had merely written "Down with Chairman Mao" on a cigarette pack.[3] (Late information: In early May, Wu was arrested in Northern China and charged with espionage and high treason. If convicted, he will be sentenced to death.)[4]

If that isn't enough to turn one's stomach, consider this: According to World (which also reported the practice described above), human fetuses have begun to appear on menus of Chinese restaurants as a delicacy and health tonic. This account was cited:

"To investigate widespread rumors that unborn human beings were being sought and eaten to improve complexions and promote general well-being, an Eastern Express reporter on March 1 entered the state-run Shenzhen Health Center for Women and Children and requested a fetus for a feigned illness. A female doctor told the reporter the department had run out of fetuses, but to come back.

"The next day, according to the paper, the reporter returned at lunch time. The doctor eventually emerged from the operating theater holding a fist-sized glass bottle stuffed with thumb-sized fetuses. She said, 'There are 10 fetuses here, all aborted this morning. You can take them. We are a state hospital and don't charge anything. Normally we doctors take them home to eat--all free. Since you don't look well, you can take them."'[5]

It is incredible that the Clinton administration has not only approved U.S. support for a conference on women's rights in such a country, but it has also granted "most favored nation" trade status to it as well. According to the President, there is no connection between China's abuse of human rights and our economic policies. All that matters, apparently, is that we profit financially from the relationship.

Since the issue of whether or not to go to China is no longer debatable, we must ask what the conference organizers hope to accomplish while they are there? What is their agenda? What can we anticipate during those 17 fateful days? To answer these questions, we should look first at who is representing us. The official U.N. Document which will be promoted in Beijing was written by a virtual who's who of radical feminists. Chief among them is that veteran sexist warrior, Bella Abzug. Abzug headed the infamous International Women's Conference in Houston which was designed to destroy the family back in 1977. We can thank President Jimmy Carter and his wife, Rosalyn, for turning that government-sponsored event over to the likes of Abzug, Gloria Steinem, Jane Fonda and Betty Friedan. Watching them on television as they ripped into everything I believed actually motivated me to join the pro-family movement. When President Carter announced his follow-up White House Conferences on the Family two years later, I said to myself, "Not this time, sir. Not this time!" So what a surprise, 18 years later, to see many of the same revolutionaries making even more outrageous plans for the family.

Abzug is a strange choice to be in charge of anything these days. The Washington Times referred to her as "a fixture in old left activism." She was an avid supporter of Soviet dictator Josef Stalin during her days at Hunter College, and she led rallies for the Viet Cong during the Vietnam War.[7] Referring to the election of Bill Clinton in 1992, she said, "God forbid, or Goddess forbid, [that] he should lose."[8] She resigned as a congresswoman to run for the U.S. Senate, and lost.[9] She ran for mayor of New York City and finished third in a primary race.[10] Then she ran again for Congress and lost.[11] Her views are so far off base even the liberal media often ignore them. Nevertheless, this woman, a radical to the core who represents only her leftist cohorts, has become our official spokesperson on morals and the family. She has told us what kind of person she is. Writing in her book, Bella, she said, "I have been described as a tough and noisy person, a prize fighter, a man hater, you name it. There are those who say I'm impatient, impetuous, uppity, rude, profane, brash and overbearing. Whether I'm any of these things, or all of them, you can decide for yourself."[12] I have decided for myself, but it makes no difference. Abzug will soon be off to China to wreck the family and reconstruct human relationships throughout the world.

Let me share a portion of what Abzug and her cronies at the United Nations hope to sell to--or impose on--other countries. (Note: Most of the concepts that follow are also taught in university "women's study programs," which would shock the parents who are struggling to give their sons and daughters "a good education.")

  1. At the heart of the draft document is enormous hostility to the institution of the family. Marriage is seen as the root of all evil for women, and hence, it will be largely ignored in the deliberations. Everything related to traditional male and female relationships is despised. Men are seen as oppressors and exploiters whom women should regard as lifelong enemies. The family is also blamed for most of the violence suffered by women and girls. Nowhere is it acknowledged that men and women should be partners in the procreation, care and nurturing of children. Clearly, the age-old institution of the family is in for hard times in China.[13]

  2. Of great significance to the framers of the conference is a concept known as "gender feminism." Please read carefully, now, because this is the basis for the Beijing Conference. What is being proposed is a new way of looking at human sexuality. The notion that babies come into the world as male or female based on the size and shape of their genitalia is anathema. Sexual identification, they say, is something society imposes on children and then expects them to play out in their behavior ever after. One feminist writer expressed it like this, "Although many people think that men and women are the natural expression of a genetic blueprint, gender is a product of human thought and culture, a social construction that creates the 'true nature' of all individuals."[14]

    In other words, the only biological differences between men and women are relatively insignificant, external features. Therefore, if we protect children from social and religious conditioning, people will be free to move into and out of existing genders and gender roles according to their preferences. Taking that concept to its illogical conclusion, the radicals want to dissolve the traditional roles of mothers and fathers. They also hope to eliminate such terms as wife, husband, son, daughter, sister, brother, manhood, womanhood, masculine and feminine. These references to sexual identity are being replaced with gender-neutral terms, such as parent, spouse, child and sibling. The ultimate goal of those who drafted the document, although they tried to hide it, is a plan to get rid of traditional sexuality in order to destroy patriarchy. Men can't have male privileges if we deny the existence of males and females.[15] This political objective is called "the deconstruction of gender."

    After maleness and femaleness have been disenfranchised, everything related to sex will change. All household responsibilities will be divided 50/50 by governmental decree. Every business will be governed by strict 50/50 quotas. The military will also be apportioned equally between men and women, including ground combat assignments and any future selection of draftees. There will be absolutely no differences tolerated between the sexes. In short, the distinction between masculinity and femininity will utterly disappear from the cultures of the world.[16]

    There is a thorny little problem with this unisexual view of mankind, of course. It contradicts Genesis 1:27, which reads, "So God created man in His own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them." It also ignores the words of Jesus, who said, "Haven't you read that at the beginning the Creator made them male and female...." Then He said, "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh" (Matthew 19:4-5).

    In this instance and so many others, the draft document to be promoted in Beijing is utterly disdainful of the King of kings and Lord of lords. But before casting Him aside as irrelevant, our delegates should take a look at the Scripture that warns, "Do not be deceived; God cannot be mocked." (Galatians 6:7).

  3. The primary objective in Beijing will be the same as a similar event held last year in Cairo, Egypt. That conference was designed to promote safe-sex ideology, condom usage and "reproductive rights"," (i.e., free and unrestricted access to abortion) in every nation of the world. That was another scary time for the family. It looked as though the Clinton administration and the radical feminists would spread their revolutionary idea around the world. Indeed, there was very little opposition to them. Leaders of most evangelical denominations sat on the sidelines, 6,000 miles away, and ignored the storm clouds gathering in Cairo. Thanks almost entirely to the opposition of Pope John Paul II and many other Roman Catholic leaders, the goals of the radicals were not achieved. Rather than giving up, however, they simply regrouped and began preparing for a final putsch in Beijing.

    In coercing reluctant countries to adopt feminist ideas about abortion and safe-sex ideology, a carrot-and-stick approach will be used. United States aid programs for underdeveloped nations will be linked to the willingness of foreign governments to implement these "population control" measures. Those that balk, including predominately Islamic and Catholic nations, will be threatened with reduced foreign aid. This coercion is deeply resented in many areas of the world where people perceive the United States as the 800 pound gorilla throwing its weight around. They also complain that they can't get help in developing clean water supplies and medical support, but they can get condoms by the millions--whether they want them or not.[17] Indeed, President Clinton has requested $635 million in the 1996 budget for international population control and another $400 million at home![18] And, that's your tax money they're using to kill babies and give condoms to kids.

    By the way, President Clinton recently repeated his campaign statement that "abortion should be safe, legal and rare." How can he utter those farcical words at the very moment he is involved to his eyeteeth in the promotion of abortion in every nation on earth?

  4. Homosexual and lesbian rights are central to the philosophy driving the conference. The Lesbian Caucus played a prominent role during meetings of the "preparation committee" at the United Nations. The Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission also issued a declaration which reads, in part, "We, the undersigned, call upon the Member States to recognize the right to determine one's sexual identity; the right to control one's own body, particularly in establishing intimate relationships; and the right to choose if, when, and with whom to bear or raise children as fundamental components of all human rights of all women regardless of sexual orientation."[19]

    Relating again to "the deconstruction of gender" described above, the goal is to give members of the human family five genders from which to choose instead of two. When freed from traditional biases, a person can decide whether to be male, female, homosexual, lesbian, or transgendered. Some may want to try all five in time. Homosexuality is considered the moral equivalent of heterosexuality.[20] For women, however, the preferred love relationship is lesbian in nature. In that way male oppressiveness can be negated. Artificial insemination is the ideal method of producing a pregnancy, and a lesbian partner should have the same parenting rights accorded historically to biological fathers. [21]

  5. Finally (and there is much more I can't cover in this letter), the official draft document is extremely hostile to religion--especially that which gender feminists have demonized as "fundamentalists." By fundamentalists, they refer to Catholics, Evangelicals, Orthodox Christians, Orthodox Jews, Muslims, and any other persons whose religious views contradict feminist dogma. Nothing, they say, has done more to oppress women or limit their aspirations than these patriarchal religious beliefs and teachings. Unbelievably, the people who are representing our great nation in Beijing are openly antagonistic to what most of you and I believe with all our hearts.[22]

Now, some of my readers might ask, "So what? Why does it matter if a group of radical feminists assemble in faraway China to discuss their kooky ideas? What harm can they do?" The danger associated with the conference is linked to the unprecedented influence of the United States in world politics. Remember that 170 nations will be represented there. Imagine the damage that can be done around the globe if the credibility of this wonderful country, with all its resources and power, is used to undermine the family, promote abortion, teach immoral behavior to teenagers, incite anger and competition between men and women, advocate lesbian and homosexual behavior, and vilify those with sincere religious faith. This is Satan's trump card if I have ever seen it.

Remember, too, that people from underdeveloped nations don't understand that the Clinton administration does not represent the majority of the American people on these radical positions. They will see Madeline Albright, our representative to the United Nations, Timothy Wirth, our assistant secretary of state, Vice President Al Gore, and perhaps the First Lady herself leading the parade to Beijing. What is the international community to assume but that the most powerful and respected nation on earth has endorsed a new understanding of human relationships. Furthermore, they will quickly recognize that foreign aid is dependent upon going along with the politically correct program.

Knowledgeable conservative writers are beginning to recognize the scope of the threat at our door. One of them, Dale O'Leary, has studied gender feminist ideology extensively. She wrote the following:

To the average person the Gender Feminist agenda appears as pure nonsense. How could anyone sincerely believe that society could do away with family, impose 50/50 quotas on all activities, eliminate motherhood, and institute polymorphous perversity? Five years ago people laughed at the suggestion, but those who have been exposed to the influence of the Gender Feminist agenda aren't laughing anymore.

Many mothers, who sent their lovely daughters off to college to prepare for careers, are weeping, because their daughters have come home with lesbian lovers. An April 26, 1995, article entitled 'Dating Game Today Breaks Traditional Gender Roles,' which appeared in the Wall Street Journal reported on a growing number of young women coming out of U.S. universities where they have been indoctrinated in women's studies programs who are engaging in sexual relations with women and men. Included is a report on Ms. Anji Dickson who can't decide whether to marry her boyfriend or grow old with a woman.

...in Ms. Dickson's generation young women openly enter into intimate relationships with both genders that are more than just experiments. They resist being described as straight or gay--or even bisexual, which some think suggests promiscuity and one-night stands. Instead, they use words like 'fluid' and 'omnisexual.'

The deconstruction of gender is mainstream America. Many U.S. television series have included episodes promoting the Gender Feminist agenda, homosexuality and choosing one's own sexual identity. These include the popular 'Roseanne,' 'Northern Exposure,' 'Star Trek: the Next Generation' and 'Star Trek: Deep Space Nine.' The message that sexual identity can be deconstructed and the vocations of manhood and womanhood are nothing but socially constructed gender roles can be found in children's books and on the popular children's television series 'Sesame Street.'

Unfortunately, there has been no effective voice to challenge the gender feminists within academia or within the mainstream media. The power of the U.S. entertainment industry and the U.S. universities, not only at home but around the world, means that the nonsense of Gender Feminism may soon become an international tragedy.[23]

Well, the obvious question to ask is, "What can we do to derail this gender feminism juggernaut?" I would make four suggestions which I sincerely hope my readers will implement.

First, pray diligently about this conference. Pray especially for our staff members who will be on the front lines in Beijing. By great effort and patience, Focus on the Family has obtained approval from the United Nations to attend the conference as what they call a "Non-Governmental Organization"--an NGO. That permits us to send five colleagues (two men and three women) as our representatives. They will not be voting delegates, of course. That honor is reserved for people who will support the outrageous party line, such as the Ms. Foundation, which is sponsoring 120 delegates.[24] But our team will be able to get the inside story and file reports which we will air on our broadcast and on "Family News in Focus." We know from the Cairo Conference that the few conservatives who are in Beijing will be under considerable pressure and harassment. They need your prayerful support as they attempt to function in such a hostile atmosphere.

Second, I implore you to contact your representatives in Congress. Call or write your two senators and your district congressman. Tell them you are extremely displeased with the use of federal money to support such a radical, anti-family agenda. Ask them to help defund the programs that ensue from it. Especially, tell them to stop giving nearly one billion dollars per year to Planned Parenthood and similar organizations for use at home and abroad. Killing babies and promoting the lie of "safe-sex" is no business for Americans to be supporting!

Third, I hope you will use the alternative media aggressively in coming days. Call local talk shows. Call national talk shows. Call your Christian radio station. Write letters to the editors of your hometown newspaper. Write to secular and Christian magazines. Inform your pastor and ask him to mobilize your church. Post messages on computer bulletin boards. Let your voices be heard. Turn out in force at rallies sponsored by those who are seeking the presidency. Ask the candidates where they stand on the moral issues--abortion, homosexuality, safe-sex ideology, radical feminism and the family. Press them to give you straight answers about what they will do with the moral concerns if elected (or re-elected) in 1996.

Fourth, remember that this assault on traditional values originated with Bill and Hillary Clinton, who adopted and promoted the feminist and homosexual agenda from the third day of the Clinton administration. The President forced the military to accept homosexuals and lesbians; he appointed the most radical people--such as Joycelyn Elders and Roberta Achtenberg--to key government positions; he permitted abortion in military hospitals; he authorized fetal tissue experimentation, and so on. These executive decisions have been widely reported.

Let me tell you about a less publicized outrage which also concerns another abuse of women's rights. In May 1993, 180 Chinese women boarded a ship, the Golden Venture, which was secretly bound for the United States. It arrived and ran aground in New York Harbor on June 6, 1993.[25] These women had made the long and perilous journey to our shores to escape forced abortion in their homeland. They requested asylum as permitted by an existing U.S. immigration policy which granted shelter to those who had fled from forced abortions, forced sterilization, or other forms of persecution associated with coercive population control programs. These 180 frightened women clearly met the provisions of this long-standing policy, but the Clinton administration was unsympathetic to their plight. After all, the President favors population control efforts around the world, and he had no intention of harboring refugees from its oppression. Thus, he reversed our immigration policy in August 1994 and placed the women in various prisons and jails around the country.[26] They remain there to this day, except for 15, who were scheduled on June 23, 1995, to be granted temporary asylum in Quito, Ecuador. Presumably, the remaining women will soon be returned to China where they will face an angry and embarrassed government. (A late development: Our State Department has denied, at least temporarily, permission for the 15 Chinese women to be sent to Ecuador![27] And... the Immigration and Naturalization Service has just torpedoed Rep. Chris Smith's (R-N.J.) efforts to invite the Chinese women to testify at Congressional hearings.[28] How do you spell C-O-V-E-R U-P?)

The civil rights organization Voice for Life recently issued the following statement about the immigrants: "While all the Chinese refugees had hoped to live in freedom in the United States, they are all exhausted from their extended period of incarceration, and they are tired of being treated like criminals."[29]

Let me see, now--what are the words engraved on the Statue of Liberty standing a short distance from where the Golden Venture ran aground? Don't they say, "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free..."?

This travesty reminds me of the large contingent of desperate Jews who sailed away from Nazi Germany in 1939, only to be denied immigration in the United States. No country would accept them, and they were eventually shipped back to Germany to face Hitler's gas chambers.[30] It was one of the most shameful acts in U.S. history. The rejection and incarceration of 180 Chinese women today is almost as reprehensible. But... support for world population control is the official policy of this administration, and it has no sympathy for those who flee from it! So onward to Beijing we go!

A footnote to the sordid story related above: Can we forget that in 1993, just before the immigration policy was changed to exclude those fleeing forced abortion, the Clinton administration fought hard for HIV-infected patients to be granted admittance to this country. Congress overruled the President by an overwhelming vote. I guess it comes down to this: Contagious HIV patients: "Yes." Oppressed Chinese mothers: "No way!"

Despite the distressing news I have shared, I hope you won't get discouraged. This band of left-wing radicals that is heading up our delegation to Beijing does not represent the great American people. The insanity of their agenda is not on the ascent--it's on its way out. Our country is becoming increasingly conservative, not more liberal. Indeed, the conference in China may represent the twilight of an outrageous idea that has run its course at home. If we can just keep the ultra-liberals from exporting their failed policies around the world, there may be light at the end of the tunnel.

Before resorting to panic, therefore, we must remember Whom we are working for! I was reminded of that good news after a church service Shirley and I attended last Sunday. A man I didn't know came up and shook my hand. Without even introducing himself he said, "I just attended a reunion of my family, and so many of my relatives said they were praying for you." With that, he began to cry and walked away. I was overwhelmed to realize that this man and his family had been on their knees, asking the Lord to bless and protect me and this ministry. I know there are thousands of other wonderful folks who are holding us up in prayer day after day. That is what keeps us going in these times.

In conclusion, let me remind you that it is expensive to send a delegation to China and to support all that Focus on the Family is committed to doing. We need your help to get the job done. And we'd like to hear from you when time permits.

God's richest blessings to you all.

Sincerely,

James C. Dobson, Ph.D.
President

P.S. For the benefit of the skeptical, let me assure you that every word in this letter has been carefully documented. Nothing has been exaggerated or overstated. A quick examination of the official U.N. draft document will confirm the mess our government has created.

Endnotes

  1. "Pre-Natal Tests in China Threat to Girl Babies," San Francisco Examiner, April 24, 1994, p.A7
  2. United States Department of State, "Background on the U.N. Conferences on Women Leading to the Fourth United Nations World Conference on Women: Action for Equality, Development, and Peace"
  3. Mindy Belz, "Unspeakable Delicacy," World, May 20. 1995, p.20
  4. "China Charges Jailed American With Espionage," Associated Press, July 2, 1995
  5. Mindy Belz, "Unspeakable Delicacy, World, May 20, 1995, p.20
  6. John Waller, "Abzug Molded Conference Agenda," Washington Times, Sept.2, 1994, p.A1
  7. Ibid.
  8. "Abzug Seeking Vacant House Seat in New York," Associated Press, Sept.20, 1992, p.A8
  9. Associated Press, Jan.19, 1978
  10. Associated Press, Sept.8, 1977
  11. "On the Hill - Some Retirement Surprises," The National Journal, Feb. 18, 1978, p.282
  12. Evelyn Leopold, "Fiery U.S. Politician Gets Ready for Beijing Conference," Reuters World Service, March 30, 1995
  13. Dale O'Leary, "Gender: The Deconstruction of Women: Analysis of the Gender Perspective in Preparation for the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, China," p.21
  14. Ibid., p.6
  15. Ibid.
  16. Ibid, p.23
  17. John Leo, "Playing Hardball at Cairo," U.S. News and World Report, Sept.19, 1994, p.26
  18. Congressional Research Report, July 1995 19. O'Leary, p.7
  19. Ibid., p.6
  20. Ibid., p.7
  21. Ibid., p.25
  22. Ibid., p.27
  23. Karen Abbott, "Christian Leader Rips Women's Conference," Rocky Mountain News, July 7, 1995
  24. Roy Maynard, "The Golden Adventure," World, Jan. 7, 1995, p.20
  25. Rep. Christopher Smith and Rep. Henry Hyde, "Please Oppose the Forced Repatriation of Forced Abortion Victims to China," Open Letter to U.S. Congress, April 20, 1995
  26. Life Coalition International Press Release, June 26, 1995
  27. Carole Landry, "Chinese Asylum--Seekers Denied Voice on Population Control," Agency France Presse, June 22, 1995
  28. "Local Chinese Refugees Testify in Washington Thursday," Voice for Life Press Release, June 20, 1995
  29. Joan Connell, "Split on Refugees Widens as They Seek U.S. Shelter," Chicago Sun-Times, Feb. 7, 1992, p.24

This letter may be reprinted without change and in its entirety for non-commercial purposes without prior permission from Focus on the Family.

Copyright © 1995, Focus on the Family. All Rights Reserved.
International Copyright Secured.


Prev Next Up