DavidJS has summed up the key issues very nicely.

Individuals have the right to make their own choices about fertility. That makes imprisoning people for having abortions and the enforced abortions under China’s one-child policy both repugnant, and both legitimate targets for a human rights group. Similarly, people persecuted for their sexuality or religion or ideology (shame you find religion repugnant though, David!).

Far from weakening AI’s authority, this decision will strengthen it. Groups like Amnesty weaken and compromise their moral authority if they are silent on some forms of persecution and discrimination but not others.

Regardless of your stance on abortion, I think it is counterproductive to argue that the de-criminalisation of abortion. It does nobody any service for a woman in the developing world to be imprisoned because she has attempted to terminate a pregnancy. It does nobody any service for her to seek the services of a "back-ally butcher" and terminate her pregancy in an unsafe manner. I think Amnesty is being completely sensible.

A group with a diverse membership like AI will always have internal differences. Members (of which I am one) should seek to remember their shared ideals over their disagreements. Certainly there should be internal debate, and this adds to the strength of the organisation. But there also needs to be unity on the issues we agree on.

Foyle, If you really think killing the unborn is a legitimate response to the world’s human population crisis, why stop at the unborn? Why not take out mature people who are already consuming far more resources than your average foetus is?

Col Rouge, I don’t know why you rely on the law (birth certificates) to support your argument. The law is an ass. It is a compromise. It is fickle. We can do better here on OLO, where we are thinking freely.

The “human spirit”. What’s that Col? Does it arrive at birth? When the head is out? Before or after the umbilical cord is cut?

Jordan147, I don’t think the writer is suggesting AI should adopt Christian, or more specifically Roman Catholic, beliefs. There just happen to be a lot of Christians in AI, that’s all, and many of them now have a problem.

DavidJS, Interesting that there are so many “offensive” Christians in AI, don’t you think? If you were running AI, would you expel them because they are offensive or make use of them because they are so highly motivated to help the oppressed?

Pax,

The rights of women to make their own decisions about abortion or any other issue, is once again being challenged predominately by men.
Amnesty is attempting to take this issue away from the Law, churches, and politicians. I personally support Amnesty.
The rights of women world wide are struggling to have equality with men, men still want to dominate and have power over women.
Within the catholic church this stance continues ad infinitum, the clergy have no personal life experiences in male female relationships, resulting in offspring, apart from their manipulation of people by the use of a god, they are unqualified to comment about women's business.
There are hypocritical men who call abortion murder, these men are mostly ignorant and unqualified medically, to make any serious comment. These same men have no concern about the killing by military action of pregnant women, in the killing fields of Iraq.
Members of the catholic church in many countries have committed crimes against children under their care. The catholic church has to clean itself up, not denigrate women, who are the most undervalued people in any society.

Goodthief “Col Rouge, I don’t know why you rely on the law (birth certificates) to support your argument. The law is an ass. It is a compromise. It is fickle. We can do better here on OLO, where we are thinking freely.”

I will rely on a birth certificate simply because it is there and I would note you have no “conception certificate” to support any social recognition of “existence”.

We are free thinking, here we talk and can disagree but in life we “compromise” all the time, on matters which effect “all”.

I have no desire or need for an abortion, never have done.

My absence of need does not diminish my faithfulness to one of my primary moral value: the right of people to decide for themselves and live with the consequences of their decisions.

I am “libertarian” by nature, vehemently anti-socialist as well as vehemently against the attempts by a minority to dictate to the rest of society how that society will dis-respect a woman’s right to choose how her body will be used.

“The “human spirit”. What’s that Col? Does it arrive at birth? When the head is out? Before or after the umbilical cord is cut?”

My human spirit grows with me, it develops over time, hopefully when I reach some distant point it will have equipped me to deal with the reality of (inevitable) death of the body. My spirit is “me”, my essence, the reason for being. Its growth is why I am here.

It embodies my ethical and social values as well as my individuality, my inventiveness and creativity,

My spirit is not crippled by, say, the Catholic Church, a particularly vindictive denomination lead by a bunch of control freaks who demand “serf” like obedience from their congregants and the sublimation of freewill to a dictatorial dogma and authority, instead of God.

I find it strange that as supposedly a “religious” person (Pax on the end of your posts), you do not understand more about the “spirit”, why it and what it is.

In response to goodthief, here is the last part of my previous post:

"Finally, although I find all religions offensive I support Amnesty and others in their efforts to free religious dissidents. Why? Because human rights is the main issue not the individual's belief or lifestyle. If we start cherry-picking on human rights on the basis that someone has been a 'good' person (not a lesbian, not someone who's had an abortion, not etc, etc) Amnesty and similar groups would have to wind up."

Please read my posts carefully so as to avoid inaccurate assumptions.