This week’s newsletter will round out the agenda 2030. series we’ve been on.
And I will be moving on to a new topic within the niche of this newsletter. There are currently some great candidates for what I’m going to write about next! I’m excited for the work to come. In the coming days and weeks, I will be talking with someone who’s an extraordinary international writer about working together on a collaboration; she’s covered many hot ticket items concerning world news. I’m betting some of you’ve read her work, and maybe some haven’t.
But enough about that, let’s get into what you came here for! The last installment of the Agenda 2030 series. For those uninformed, this is essentially an add-on or a revision and updated version of Agenda 21.
They talk about peace, justice, and sustainability, especially sustainability!
But so far, I see inadequate “legislative movements.” calling said movements and outcomes “Justice.” But is it justice for all? Or is it the people that have all the power to say, “this is justice!” And If you disagree with that, you must be a domestic terrorist or a conservative republican, which is essentially the same thing in today’s society…
And peace? Forget about their idea of “peace.”
Look at a recent clip from our supposed “commander in chief.”
Okay, Emperor Biden!
Why the blood-red background? Why the “Hate speech.”
Now let’s look at a critique from “Sky News Australia.”
Let alone the fact that. He looks like someone out of a sci-fi dystopian.
Where they’re preparing to showcase a cutscene of “enemies of the state being rounded up and thrown in a secret black site.”
How about “sustainability.”
Well, that is the crux of their whole agenda, “sustainable development.”
"The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) or Global Goals are a collection of 17 interlinked global goals designed to be a "shared blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet, now and into the future.”[1][2] The SDGs were set up in 2015 by the United Nations General Assembly (UN-GA) and are intended to be achieved by 2030. They are included in an UN-GA Resolution called the 2030 Agenda or what is colloquially known as Agenda 2030.[3] The SDGs were developed in the Post-2015 Development Agenda as the future global development framework to succeed in the Millennium Development Goals, ending in 2015.
The 17 SDGs are No poverty, zero hunger, good health and well-being, quality education, gender equality, clean water and sanitation, affordable and clean energy, decent work and economic growth, industry, innovation and infrastructure, Reduced Inequality, Sustainable Cities and Communities, Responsible Consumption and Production, Climate Action, Life Below Water, Life On Land, Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions, Partnerships for the Goals.
Though the goals are broad and interdependent, two years later (6 July 2017), the SDGs were made more "actionable" by a UN Resolution adopted by the General Assembly. The resolution identifies specific targets for each goal, along with indicators used to measure progress toward each target.[4] The year by which the target is meant to be achieved is usually between 2020 and 2030.[5] For some of the targets, no end date is given.”
Sustainable Development Goals. (2022, September 8). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_Development_Goals
Let’s look at some of the partnerships associated with agenda 2030 and the move toward sustainable development.
For example, the “UN-Women.” and what’s generally referred to as “Gender equality.”
Now gender equality has long since been considered a taboo topic among specific demographics, and it can also become a fiery debate about the ability of women to perform in “a man’s world.”
Personally, I believe that women are more than capable of finding jobs, more than capable of succeeding in a personal journey of discovery when it comes to the workforce and, generally speaking, life. The part I find fault with, and this is just me personally. But the part I find fault with is when women of specific demographics try to assert that men and women are precisely the same in their overall ability to get jobs done and often claim that men are insecure or chauvinistic, and that’s why they “won’t let women in the workforce.” No, no, and not all men.
It’s worth pointing out that there are physical differences within the male body compared to the female body that makes specific parameters Just not plausible to compete with each other. Now I should point this out. I’m not talking about the ideology of the woke crowd and “women” who are guys but are playing dress-up and calling themselves women. I’m not addressing that theory. I’m talking cold hard truths. Men are just physically stronger than women in the physique regard. However, It’s also worth mentioning that women are astronomically stronger when it comes to pushing out a tiny little human from their lower extremity and, generally speaking, different types of pain. Women are more resilient to common colds and cases of the flu. They just are! It’s a well-regarded truth that men when we’re sick, deal with what’s called “the man flu.” But rabbit trail aside, there are actual reasons why there’s been such a push for gender equality over the last few decades. And it’s not necessarily what you may think of. Especially if you have a purple mohawk and or “ask to speak to a store’s manager frequently, due to a perceived in justice.”
We look at ways in which women are worse off than men when we try to be all-inclusive and make “Gender Neutral legislation” for the benefit of Gender equality.
”One good example would be Denmark's widow pension. Historically, there was a special pension provision only awarded to women. This is natural because women naturally live longer lives than men, and women also have a tendency, due to societal expectations, to marry older men and live longer than their men as well.
Women will need additional support. Not only will they generally have lower pensions, to begin with, but they will also not have a provider for the last term of their lives. In this way, we did have a widow pension in the tax code. Then we made the tax code gender neutral and removed the widow pension because it was promoting women. We were going to apply this gender-neutral. In that sense, it actually hurt women because they got less now for the pension. This is a good example of how gender neutrality sounds good, but it's not really when you apply it in reality.
In reality, men and women are not equal. I already said, naturally, we women will live longer. Society-wise, we will marry older men. We will work less in the labor force. We will work more in the home in unpaid work. We will take care of the children. All of this will have an impact on our financial results and our economic situation.”
Gender equality interview. If you want to read more about that interview, click the underlined link. I thought it was an insightful piece and narrowed down such a tense topic.
It’s important to point out that true Equality will never happen as women have been led to believe it will. I blame the propaganda machine for that in a broad way of saying it. Because honestly, the people at the top don’t care about making you equal with men; they don’t. It’s about other factors, Like getting twice the amount of money back in taxes and then having you put it back into the system via childcare. Because now, instead of a family nucleus where the dad is working, the mom stays home watching the kids. Consequently, both parents are working now. So, who’s going to watch the kids now? Cue the daycare centers and associated programs! Now you’re paying a portion of your income to them, which by proxy, you likely need to make more money to keep up with your lifestyle. So you pick up more hours where possible. It’s an ever-revolving door. In the constant pursuit of things that you think will make you happy.
However, here’s an interesting scriptural reference, speaking of revolving doors.
1 Corinthians 11:12 ESV - For as woman was made from man, so man is now born of woman. And all things are from God.
The following is the context of the verse mentioned above. » Scriptural context.
However, with so many tangents, it’s noteworthy to express that there is a huge discussion point within this one subcategory. And I could feasibly go on and on Solely on the concept of ‘Gender equality’ with an emphasis on the women’s place in the workforce and the lie we’ve been sold on “equality,” at least the left’s version of ‘Gender equality.’
But for this article, I’ll make my departure here and say, Adieu.