Actually, no, this is the limit

The United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women, held in Beijing in September 1995, concluded by issuing a 135-page declaration and platform for action in support of women's rights. The declaration, the BBC noted on Monday,

called for governments to end gender discrimination in areas including education, health care, politics and employment.

It stated that women have the right to "decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality... free of coercion, discrimination and violence."

Now, ten years later, in the no-deviations-allowed, we-must-rule-everything world of the Shrub team, the US has been demanding an amendment to the document, one that would specifically assert that abortion is not a human right. That's idiotic enough on its face, but made even more so by the fact that neither the declaration nor the action plan said it was. But apparently, some people have been suggesting that the right to "reproductive health services" could be interpreted as including a right to abortion and by God! we have to make sure that not only is there no declared right to abortion, but that no one could even think there might be!

On the upside, opposition has been so strong that by Thursday, the Beeb could report that

[t]he US has strongly hinted that it will drop its controversial demand to add anti-abortion language to a UN declaration on women's rights.

Further revealing the split between the US and many other nations, Richard Grenell of the US mission at the UN said the intent was to make sure "everyone involved knew what the original intent of the Beijing document was" - but Nicole Ameline, the French minister in charge of women's rights, called the proposal "a step back," which is a politic way of saying "we know what the original intent was, and that wasn't it."

Footnote, Unintentional Humor Div.: Grenell also insisted that "We are hearing from many delegations that they agree with us." Sure. Saudi Arabia, Iran, I'm sure you can find a number of others.