Amnesty International Fights Torture, But Now Supports Abortion

[iverglas]

In quotation marks, of course.

Would you be surprised to find that this is the title of a post at DU? A post that then cites and quotes WorldNetDaily, no less??

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57320

Interestingly, the title of the post -- which is a flat out misrepresentation of the facts -- didn't even come from the article.

Here's what Amnesty actually said:

http://www.wnd.com/redir/r.asp?http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGPOL300192007

Amnesty International's policy on sexual and reproductive rights does not promote abortion as a universal right and the organization remains silent on the rights or wrongs of abortion. ... Amnesty International stands by its policy, adopted in April this year, that aims to support the decriminalisation of abortion, to ensure women have access to health care when complications arise from abortion and to defend women's access to abortion -- within reasonable gestational limits -- when their health or life are in danger.

-- which actually puts it pretty far over on the anti-choice end of the spectrum. And in fact doesn't square well with what it says a few sentences later:

Amnesty International finds it unacceptable for women to be imprisoned for seeking or obtaining an abortion ...

-- unless, of course, Amnesty thinks the women should just be fined and put on probation. Because if women do not have a right to have an abortion, then there's really no grounds at all for objecting to women who break laws against abortion being imprisoned (if found guilty after a proper trial).

I've always found that Amnesty prompts just enough of the ick reflex in me, in various respects, that I've never felt an urge to give it money. This is one example of the problem.

But anyhow, here's the comment by the author of the post in question:

"In other words, Amnesty now supports abortion on demand."

Well, those are definitely some other words.

I invite you to take a look around a place at DU that you probably didn't even know existed:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=275

Welcome to the DU Catholic and Orthodox Christian Group

The DU DU Catholic and Orthodox Christian Group is for those who wish to hold respectful discussions of Catholic and/or Orthodox Christian beliefs, share faith experiences, post prayer requests, discuss Catholic/Orthodox liturgies, traditions, saints, etc., talk about Catholic education or organizations (Knights of Columbus, Pax Christi, Legion of Mary, the Catholic Worker movement, etc.), or in any way positively explore issues having to do with the Roman Catholic Church or any rite of the Catholic or Orthodox Church.

Participants need not be practicing members of one of the Catholic or Orthodox rites but should be respectful of the beliefs and structures of the rites, especially in advocating any changes, such as allowing women to serve as priests.

This group is intended to be a venue for those who desire to discuss stated topics and is not intended as a forum to argue against Catholic/Orthodox belief or the Catholic/Orthodox Churches, members, or clergy.

Note that I do NOT invite you to post there; despite the fact that not being a practising member of etc. etc. is not supposed to be a bar to posting, and that disagreeing with group members about something other than RC church teachings should not be a problem, it would appear to be thin ice to skate on if one is not, or does:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=275&topic_id=5440&mesg_id=5440

(I recommend the thread "I have a question about Giuliani and Holy Communion", which contains some quite interesting discussion.)



So ... how 'bout that spineless mealy-mouthed Amnesty International bunch, eh?

[ismnotwasm]

1. Well...

Amnesty International is a GREAT resource for what is going on with violence against women around the world. They pay attention to countries no one have even heard of.

I frankly am no longer surprised someone on DU would use Worldnetdaily as a resource as it is a Libertarian site, and sometimes DU reminds me of Libertarian Underground. My brother is a anti-war Libertarian, who goes to places like WND and Antiwar.com. I'm also no longer surprised that a supposed "progressive" website would have such rapid forced birth bullshit.

That IS a bit of double speak about abortion though. But a quick browse through AI's website;


http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/ENGPOL300122007

http://web.amnesty.org/actforwomen/sexual_and_reproductive_rights-eng

http://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGAFR440072004

http://thereport.amnesty.org/eng/Regions/Americas

http://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGACT770342004

http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAFR160022007

http://web.amnesty.org/actforwomen/issues-index-eng

[iverglas]

2. actually

My post wasn't really meant to be about Amnesty International. ;)

Nothing "libertarian" about the posting of that article at DU. (And I wouldn't describe Worldwhateveritis as in any way libertarian. It's as pure right-wing as they come.)

Do check out the thread -- which I stupidly forgot the link to --

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=275&topic_id=5663&mesg_id=5663

-- and the others there I mentioned.


But while we're talking about Amnesty International doublespeak -- from this link you gave:

http://web.amnesty.org/actforwomen/sexual_and_reproductive_rights-eng

# Forced abortions or sterilizations carried out by family planning officials or others acting in an official capacity violate reproductive rights and are grave violations of physical and mental integrity amounting to torture.

# Obstructing rape survivors' access to legal abortion services is a violation of their sexual and reproductive rights.

# Women must have access to safe and legal abortion services in cases of unwanted pregnancy as a result of rape, sexual assault or incest.

# Imprisonment or other criminal sanctions for seeking or having an abortion is a violation of women's reproductive rights.

# Women must have access to safe and legal abortion services where continuation of pregnancy poses a risk to their life or grave risk to their health.

No problem condemning "forced abortions" -- which may or may not be pure myths.

And yet completely unable to come out and condemn forced continuation of pregnancy and childbearing.

Again -- how can imprisonment for seeking an abortion be a violation of women's reproductive rights unless women have the right to have abortions??

I hate mealy mouths.

It's really easy:

Forced continuation of pregnancy and childbearing is a grave violation of physical and mental integrity amounting to torture.