Urgent High-level UN Declaration on HIV/AIDS Under Negotiation at UN

An important high-level Political Declaration on HIV/AIDS is being negotiated right now at UN headquarters in New York and it has serious problems.

We are so concerned about this document that Family Watch hosted an
“Emergency High-Level Briefing on the HIV/AIDS Political Declaration” online for UN ambassadors and diplomats.

You can watch the 25 min. recording of that briefing revealing all the serious problems below.

We were honored that world-renowned HIV/AIDS prevention expert, Dr. Edward Green, author of “AIDS, Behavior, and Culture” and “Broken Promises: How the AIDS Establishment Has Betrayed the Developing World” agreed to present to the ambassadors.  

In the briefing, Dr. Green explained what his 30 years of HIV/AIDS prevention research including at Harvard and Johns Hopkins and on-the-ground experience in Africa show are the key elements that have been proven to bring down HIV infection rates—crucial elements that are glaringly absent from the draft. 

Proven, primary sexual behavior change strategies like promoting delay of sexual debut for children and reduction of multiple concurrent sexual partners (abstinence and fidelity) are not even mentioned in the Declaration. 

Dr. Green, who has analyzed the draft political declaration being negotiated, also drew on his vast experience to show the UN diplomats how the sexual rights approach mainstreamed throughout the current HIV/AIDS draft—an approach that prioritizes initiatives for men who have sex with men, sex workers, and IV drug users— will lead to more HIV infections not fewer.

Then I had the opportunity to present 15 Serious Problems with the Draft HIV/AIDS Political Declaration (see attached and below). Please forward this information to any government officials you know and encourage them to reject the harmful provisions we point out.  

We must protect children and the institution of the family from this harmful declaration that will exacerbate the AIDs pandemic rather than curtail it.

15 Serious Problems with the HIV/AIDS Political Declaration

1. The draft makes no attempt whatsoever to promote delay of sexual debut among children, fidelity, or reduction of concurrent sexual partners –the three main behaviors that have been proven to lower HIV infection rates. This is unconscionable. 

2. The draft as a whole takes a controversial human rights/sexual rights approach to the HIV/AIDS pandemic rather than a health approachto the detriment of the African people especially.

3. While the draft recognizes that “infections increased among gay men and other men who have sex with men by 25% between 2010 and 2019” it then seeks to legalize and destigmatize this high-risk behavior rather than curtail it, even though anal sex is known by all to be the most efficient way to spread the virus. 

4. The text prioritizes “key populations” defined as “gay men and other men who have sex with men who are at 26 times higher risk of HIV acquisition, people who inject drugs who are at 29 times higher risk of HIV acquisition, female sex workers who are at 30 times higher risk of HIV acquisition, transgender women [i.e., biological males who identify as female] who are at 13 times higher risk of HIV acquisition”without discouraging their high-risk sexual behaviors or drug use in any way. 

5. Even though the top 10 countries with the highest rates of HIV are in Africa with generalized epidemics among the heterosexual population, instead of encouraging evidence-based sexual behavioral change among heterosexuals, which is known to reduce infection rates (Uganda is a good example of this), the document focuses more on advancing LGBT rights. 

6. It hasmultiple references to “sexual orientation and gender identity,” “gay,” and “transgender,”thus establishing these terms as UN consensus terms. 

7. The text “deplores” discrimination based on “sexual orientation and gender identity” without defining what that entails and takes a position against laws requiring “disclosure” of one’s HIV statuswith no exceptions listed for disclosure to sexual partners. 

8. The text has multiple references to the controversial phase “women and girls in all their diversity,”which is a euphemism encompassing lesbians and biological males who impersonate women.

9. The text has multiple references to harmful “comprehensive sexuality education,” which in and of itself should be a reason to reject it, especially for African countries that issued a reservation on sexual education in the 2030 Agenda. See more at comprehensivesexualityeducation.org. 

10. The text has many references to “sexual and reproductive health (SRH),” “sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR),” “sexual and reproductive health care services,” etc., in most instances with no qualifiers. These terms have been interpreted by UN agencies and donor countries to encompass abortion and LGBT rights. See The SRH Agenda: “Sexual and Reproductive Health” in Negotiated UN Documentsvideo at familywatch.org. 

11. It promotes intersectionality and an intersectoral approach throughout the text which is code for LGBT non-discrimination approach.In fact, the term “intersectionality” was invented to link LGBT victim status to other victim status categories such as race, color, age, socioeconomic status, etc. 

12. The text calls for the “implementation of the Minimum Initial Services Package (MISP) at the onset of every emergency.”The MISP initiative was launched shortly after ICPD to deceptively mainstream abortion, abortifacients and abortion commodities in UN humanitarian efforts. 

13. The text reaffirms the radical “outcome documents of their review conferences” of ICPD and Beijing without critical needed qualifiers like “adopted by the General Assembly.” See The Anti-Family, Anti-Life UN Agenda as Revealed in the ICPD Review “Outcome Documents”(FWI report). 

14. The text “Takes note with appreciation of the report of the Secretary-General ‘Addressing inequalities and getting back on track to end AIDS by 2030,’” which calls for: 

15. “Takes note with appreciation of … UNAIDS ‘Global AIDS Strategy 2021–2026: End Inequalities. End AIDS’” which calls for: