Thursday, August 6, 2015



An African Woman's Open Letter to Melinda Gates

by Obianuju Ekeocha in it entirety by pressing HERE. The following is an excerpt:

Amidst all our African afflictions and difficulties, amidst all the socioeconomic and political instabilities, our babies are always a firm symbol of hope, a promise of life, a reason to strive for the legacy of a bright future.

So a few weeks ago I stumbled upon the plan and promise of Melinda Gates to implant the seeds of her "legacy" in 69 of the poorest countries in the world (most of which are in Sub-Saharan Africa).


Her pledge is to collect pledges for almost $5 billion in order to ensure that the African woman is less fertile, less encumbered and, yes, she says, more "liberated." With her incredible wealth she wants to replace the legacy of an African woman (which is her child) with the legacy of "child-free sex." 

Many of the 69 targeted countries are Catholic countries with millions of Catholic women of child-bearing age. These Catholic women have been rightly taught by the Church that the contraceptive drug and device is inherently divisive.

Unlike what we see in the developed Western world, there is actually very high compliance with Pope Paul VI's "Humanae Vitae." For these African women, in all humility, have heard, understood and accepted the precious words of the prophetic pope. Funny how people with a much lower literacy level could clearly understand that which the average Vogue- and Cosmo-reading-high-class woman has refused to understand. I guess humility makes all the difference.


With most African women faithfully practicing and adhering to a faith (mainly Christian or in some cases Muslim), there is a high regard for sex in society, especially among the women. Sex is sacred and private.


rcg said...

The woman is right, of course. Men love contraception and the idea of child free sex so they can have their pleasure and escape obligation. The women are liberated, another word would be disconnected, and they are deeply respected, as a commodity. The growth of society has been derailed by this mental process represented by Mrs. Gates. There is no doubt that women have not been respected as much as they should have been, but I do think there was progress. The advent of chemical contraception was seemed to have the opposit effect and is certainly destroying families, both socially and physically. The playboy, and his extended adolescence, is now the norm, thanks to this same event.

Lefebvrian said...

There is no coincidence that Africa has some of the most orthodox bishops. The people there, where the literacy rate is low, must rely on their shepherds to guide them. And they are able to do so.

In our part of the world, our bishops are mostly heterodox. But the literacy rates are high, so we still have access to the Church's teaching in print, and we can be guided by the immemorial Tradition even when we cannot rely on our shepherds.

The Holy Ghost is truly remarkable! I pray that he will continue to guide the bishops of Africa that they can protect their people from these western secularist attacks.

gob said...

The healthy, chubby child you show is perfect for the spin you're doing. But, of course millions of African children don't look like that. Millions are all head and eyes and skin and bones....crawling with flies as they wait for death by starvation. I'm sure you haven't somehow missed those. I just read a stat that said that 12 Africans die of starvation every minute. I'm sure their mothers love them, but they can't feed them.

Do you think that having a baby who will starve is better...more moral than preventing a pregnancy? I do not. I think that on contraception, you are wrong....the Church is wrong, Melinda Gates is right. God bless her.

Clueless Conservative said...

Yes, let's all move to Africa because the quality of life is so much better there.
How dare Melinda Gates try to give women there a better chance at education and a better life.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Gob and Clueless, you both are!! Did you read the original full letter which I link, not just the excerpt. At the end this astute African who knows better than your American-centric know it all approach to another culture indicates exactly what they need in Africa. It isn't your plan, which is a form of genocide.

gob said...

I read the full letter.

Africa needs health care, food programs, education programs, business support.

It does not need a population that continues to grow at an increasing rate. It needs fewer starving babies...not more

"Chastity Programs"? Yeah...right... I fear that YOU are the one who is clueless.

I fear also that some may be trying to prop up the sagging Catholic Church with hungry African children...

George said...

Who is greater in the eyes of God, a hungry,an emaciated African child or Melinda gates with all her education and wealth? May the peoples of Africa continue to respect and obey the laws of God and may they receive the charitable help they need-help which corresponds and conforms to God's Holy and Divine precepts. We should pray for those such as Ms Gates that she re-converts to the Catholic faith she was baptized and raised in.

Paul said...

Is it Ms. Gates intention to be moving the people closer to or further from God?

Does she care? Should she care?

gob said...

Oh, I'm sure God just can't get enough hungry, emaciated, African children.

Is that REALLY the kind of guy you think He is?

Paul said...

They're God's children, not yours. Each one has an opportunity for Heaven. Who are you to assist in keeping them out?

rcg said...

These are intersting, and valid questions. I am skeptical that he posters, based on their previous posts, are unfamiliar with the answers and are posing them simply in an effort to make people they don't like unhappy.

The situation with the poor in Africa does not originate with Humanae Vitae. The point of conflict lies with the identification of a woman as a source of labor for the state and pleasure for others. The society wants her to resign herself to this false dilemma. God loves her regardless, we force this choice on her. God wants us to respect women not only as individuals but as members of the body of Christ.

It is also a little bit racist, although understandable, that people cast Africans in the role of pathetic people. A sad child, with sunken eyes and flacking skin can be healed, in more ways than one. Our desire not to see them is our willful blindness to their plight and its causes. Not all Africans are so. None need to be.

Jusadbellum said...


Those who rejected Humane Vitae are a) not terribly bright and b) not standing on the moral high ground. But for nearly 50 years they've smugly presumed their superiority. Largely by ignoring the Church's teaching and avoiding at all cost any open debate on the merits.

Now, before I get some peoples' ire up with respect to the majority view of the panel on HV, I'd like to make a simple little point about dissent from HV: if it's so damn brilliant and insightful, why can't the same hermeneutic be applied in EVERY OTHER moral area of life? Like, say, how we treat workers, the environment, criminality, etc.?

Too clever by half is what the dissenters where. Too stupid to realize that in their argument against HV they were giving up the entire moral law by their convoluted theories on how people can eat their cake and have it too. How they can simultaneously be chaste while pursuing ego-centric lustful behaviors.

To intentionally and with malice aforethought divide the procreative from the uniting aspects of coitus for the sake of a dozen "noble" ends always results in really doing it for lust. The mindset doesn't militate towards respect for nature, the environment, reality, fruitfulness, life....but towards solipsism, egotism, and a dualist presumption about human nature. It's absolutely no wonder men went from contraception in marriage to porn and adultery...and their children started with fornication and worse and worse forms of de-humanizing porn and finally sodomy.

If being "in love" is reduced to the frisson of emotional high and not the classic definition of 'seeking the good of the other' then the 'unitive' aspect is de-spiritualized. The covenant aspect is lost and it becomes about two individuals getting their kicks off with each other for the sake of the kicks, not the kids or the communion.

But these geniuses, these 'wizards of smart' put more stock in their THEORY of how things would go than in the 2,000 years of experience we had of how life really is and what sin does to the intellect and interpersonal relationships and so were dramatically wrong about what would happen.

THIS is why we need public debates or "dialogues" in our Church, especially among theologians... we need to put our cards on the table and duke it out rather than passive-aggressively slide one school of theology into mass publication without this peer review and review by the people.

Thank God Pope Francis and the synods seem to be doing this - let the heretics come out of the woodwork promoting adultery and sodomy as "mercy".

Jdj said...

Jusad, yes indeed, bring it on for the good of all! And let the chips fall where they may do the most good.

Rood Screen said...

It seems that Gob's solution is for there to be fewer Africans. He would have found many allies back in the 1920's and '30's.

Most African states rightly sought their independence from the rule of democratic nations, and independence came with constitutional democracy. But for the most part, the constitutions failed within a few years. So, the troubles in Africa could simply flow from a lack of democratic fervor, and from a lack of armed citizenries capable of resisting dictators and errant armies.

gob said... idea to reduce the number of starving babies is to have fewer babies.

Dialogue's idea is to have more babies....and more guns.


Jusadbellum said...

It doesn't make sense for Africans who work in the fields to have fewer children. Ever wonder why Americans in the 18th and 19th century had huge families? Most worked on small family run farms. Having a large family was a blessing not a curse. If you didn't have a dozen boys you'd need to hire some.

Ditto in Africa or anywhere else for that matter.

As for guns, the problem with guns is whose hands they are in. The solution to the problem in the Middle East and Africa is not too many guns....IT'S TOO FEW. Who thinks ISIS would have steamrolled into Mosul had the general population had firearms? Who thinks the Tutsis would have been massacred in Rwanda had they all had firearms?

The reason all our US inner cities are as dangerous as they are is largely due to the fact that the law keeps the law abiding disarmed and thus allows the criminals to run rampant. There's a reason why Detroit or Pontiac's murders don't happen in Oakland county a mere 1 mile away.... the ubiquitous ownership of firearms among the white population in Michigan. 1 out of 10 people in Oakland county has a CCW. It's just not worth it for a gangbanger or would-be thug to risk crime outside of 'gun free' Detroit.

Reality - current and historic utterly prove the Conservative position to be the most humane and workable.

Rood Screen said...


Victim-blaming is not helpful. When children starve because their mothers are poor, these mothers and children are victims, not culprits. The solution is not to eliminate the poor, but to eliminate poverty.