Amnesty
International has confirmed its
controversial decision to back abortion in
some circumstances, replacing its previous
policy of neutrality.
The human rights group will campaign for
women to have access to abortion in cases
including rape and incest.
The initial decision was taken in April,
but Amnesty delegates meeting in Mexico
gave it overwhelming support.
Christian organisations, including the
Roman Catholic Church, have threatened to
withdraw support from the group.
The decision in April by Amnesty's
executive committee to support access to
abortion for women in cases of rape,
incest or violence, or where the pregnancy
jeopardises a mother's life or health was
greeted with an outcry by churches.
Roman Catholic leaders in particular
accused Amnesty of betraying its
commitment to human rights, and a senior
Vatican official called on Catholics to
stop funding it.
But Amnesty's international council -
meeting in Mexico - has overwhelmingly
supported the decision, insisting it was
upholding the ability of women to exercise
their sexual and reproductive rights free
from coercion and violence.
Amnesty has been working in countries
where widespread rape has been used as a
weapon of war, and others in which women
seeking abortions can be severely
punished.
|
Rodge
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 25 Feb 2006 Posts: 905 Location: , England, UK
Thanks: 1
Thanked:0
Posted: 08-22-07 09:10am
Hell yeah. I hope they stand their ground
against the Church types.
|
Georgia59
Supporter
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 Posts: 5557 Location: Along the Mississippi, USA
Thanks: 90
Thanked:32
Posted: 08-22-07 10:46am
I'm glad they did it.... but I wonder what
it will mean for them?? The Catholic
church has mucho dinero......
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 08-22-07 11:32am
I'm glad they're standing up for what they
feel is right and giving the church the
middle finger in the process. If people
remained frightened of the church, change
would never happen.
|
Jude-Love
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jun 2007 Posts: 727 Location: Williamstown, Kentucky USA
Posted: 08-22-07 13:21pm
Way to go Amnesty!
|
Georgia59
Supporter
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 Posts: 5557 Location: Along the Mississippi, USA
Thanks: 90
Thanked:32
Posted: 08-23-07 21:48pm
Interesting...
Per the New York Times......
" U.S. May Abandon Support Of U.N.
Population Accord
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JAMES DAO
Published: November 2, 2002
The Bush administration, embroiling itself
in a new fight at the United Nations, has
threatened to withdraw its support for a
landmark family planning agreement that
the United States helped write eight years
ago.
The reason for the threat is contained in
two terms that the administration contends
can be construed as promoting abortion.
The terms -- reproductive health services
and reproductive rights -- figure in the
final declaration of the United Nations
population conference in 1994 in Cairo,
which embraced a new concept of population
policy based on improving the legal rights
and economic status of women. The
declaration has since been endorsed by 179
nations."
|
Anne123
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Apr 2007 Posts: 290 Location: Canada
Posted: 08-29-07 09:38am
I have a question about the Amnesty's
stance on abortion - and also a number of
other posters' stances on abortion.
When listing the limited circumstances
under which abortion is considered "okay",
why is incest listed as one of those cases
where you consider abortion to be okay?
Rape by definition is not consentual, but
incest very well could be consentual sex -
and if it were not consentual it would
fall under the rape category. So for the
people (including Amensty International)
who consider abortion to be okay only
under certain circumstances - why is
incest one of them?
|
Jules
Moderator
Joined: 19 Aug 2006 Posts: 3795 Location: Merrie Englande, UK
Thanks: 87
Thanked:71
Posted: 08-29-07 09:44am
Anne123
wrote:
I have a question about the
Amnesty's stance on abortion - and also a
number of other posters' stances on
abortion.
When listing the limited circumstances
under which abortion is considered "okay",
why is incest listed as one of those cases
where you consider abortion to be okay?
Rape by definition is not consentual, but
incest very well could be consentual sex -
and if it were not consentual it would
fall under the rape category. So for the
people (including Amensty International)
who consider abortion to be okay only
under certain circumstances - why is
incest one of
them?
Hmm...interesting point.
I think it's probably because of the
increased risk of genetic abnormalities.
Mind you, I'd have thought that if it was
a wanted child then the foetus could have
the usual scans to check for physical
soundness, so really any abortions
wouldn't be because of incest but because
of poor foetal health.
|
Georgia59
Supporter
Joined: 11 Apr 2007 Posts: 5557 Location: Along the Mississippi, USA
Thanks: 90
Thanked:32
Posted: 08-29-07 10:39am
Anne123
wrote:
I have a question about the
Amnesty's stance on abortion - and also a
number of other posters' stances on
abortion.
When listing the limited circumstances
under which abortion is considered "okay",
why is incest listed as one of those cases
where you consider abortion to be okay?
Rape by definition is not consentual, but
incest very well could be consentual sex -
and if it were not consentual it would
fall under the rape category. So for the
people (including Amensty International)
who consider abortion to be okay only
under certain circumstances - why is
incest one of
them?
I was always under the impression that it
wasn't consensual incest. Never really
thought about it.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 08-29-07 11:59am
I was under the impression also that
incest is normally between an adult and a
minor which automatically makes it
statutory rape.
|
Anne123
Experienced User , Rather EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Apr 2007 Posts: 290 Location: Canada
Posted: 08-29-07 13:49pm
Ah, but if it's rape, then it falls under
the category of rape.
Why is the extra category of incest
needed?
Isn't it still incest if adult
brother/sister have consentual sex?
Cousin? Half-siblings?
Why would that make it okay for them to
have a theraputic abortion (from the
perspective of those who list certain
circumstances under which abortion is
okay)?
I wonder if people have really thought
about it when they just list off the
criteria: rape, incest, severe
abnormality, serious danger to maternal
health (or some subset of that list).
Edited to add: I'm not trying to start an
argument here, I just honestly don't
understand.
|
amethyst eyes
Extremely EHEALTHy
Joined: 04 Nov 2006 Posts: 1339
Posted: 08-29-07 14:03pm
I think with incest it goes more towards
the health of the child. Also in most of
these cases it does involve a person who
is young and under the influence of the
person who impregnanted her so giving them
a choice is the matter is beneficial to
there overall health.
|
Jude-Love
Active User, Really EHEALTHy
Joined: 17 Jun 2007 Posts: 727 Location: Williamstown, Kentucky USA
Posted: 08-29-07 17:43pm
I don't think there is any real reason
behind it, other than some people who got
pregnant that way (either through
consensual relations or not), might not
want a child that would result from it.
|
Tylanas
Especially EHEALTHy
Joined: 13 Jul 2005 Posts: 12985
Thanks: 3
Thanked:0
Posted: 08-29-07 18:15pm
Anne123
wrote:
Ah, but if it's rape, then
it falls under the category of rape.
Why is the extra category of incest
needed?
For the reason stated before; because
rape-incest is just as horrible as
"normal" rape, if not worse because it's
often a loving family member that does it
to the poor child. And of course because
incest just isn't conducive towards making
healthy babies.
Quote:
Isn't it still
incest if adult brother/sister have
consentual sex? Cousin?
Half-siblings?
If any of them are under age it's rape AS
WELL. It doesn't automatically become
"just rape". It is incestual rape.
Quote:
Why would that
make it okay for them to have a theraputic
abortion (from the perspective of those
who list certain circumstances under which
abortion is
okay)?
I'm not sure what pro-lifers think about
it, but I think it's because of the rape
aspect of it, and because it leads to more
genetic abnormalities.
Quote:
I wonder if
people have really thought about it when
they just list off the criteria: rape,
incest, severe abnormality, serious danger
to maternal health (or some subset of that
list).
Edited to add: I'm not trying to start an
argument here, I just honestly don't
understand.
I personally think incest is a completely
different category and I don't see why
it's so hard to understand... Does it
sometimes include rape? Yes, but that
doesn't mean you can just say "Oh well
then it just fits in the rape category",
that's a little disrespectful...
