Cardinal Martino announces end of Church’s financial contributions to Amnesty International

[Bennie_P]

Cardinal Martino announces end of Church’s financial contributions to Amnesty International

Rome, Jun 14, 2007 / 10:41 am (CNA).- In response to the recent decision by Amnesty International to support abortion as a human right, Cardinal Renato Martino, president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, announced this week that the Catholic Church will stop making financial contributions to the organization. More

Its a shame how people cannot see the importance of supporting life and the rights of even those that are unable to speak for themselves.

 

[melensdad]

Its a shame how people cannot see the importance of supporting life and the rights of even those that are unable to speak for themselves.

Generally I find that many of the pro-abortion people have very odd views about “basic human rights” that seem to be inconsistent. I suppose it is no different than the folks who support the death penalty but oppose abortion? Or support human rights and assisted suicide/mercy killing of the elderly? All these things seem to be contradictory yet people justify them in their own minds.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

I went through all of AI’s website and I am unable to find any abortion stances anywhere. It appears to be a interpretation of the omission implies a difference, which should not be the automatic assumption.

 

[rlg94086]

I went through all of AI’s website and I am unable to find any abortion stances anywhere. It appears to be a interpretation of the omission implies a difference, which should not be the automatic assumption.

It has been in the news…here’s their response to the Vatican:
news.amnesty.org/index/ENGPOL300112007

Defending the right of women to sexual and reproductive integrity in the face of grave human rights violations, Amnesty International recently incorporated a focus on selected aspects of abortion into its broader policy on sexual and reproductive rights. These additions do not promote abortion as a universal right and Amnesty International remains silent on the rights and wrongs of abortion.

“Amnesty International’s position is not for abortion as a right but for women’s human rights to be free of fear, threat and coercion as they manage all consequences of rape and other grave human rights violations”, clarified Kate Gilmore.

Yesterday Cardinal Martino through an interview encouraged Catholics to withdraw support for Amnesty International, claiming that Amnesty International is “promoting abortion rights”. Amnesty International’s actual policy, however, standing alongside its long-standing opposition to forced abortion, is 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 human rights are in danger.

 

[estesbob]

AI is just the latest of organizations that started off serving a useful purpose but has sionce been hijacked by the extreme left. Samething happened to the ACLU, the NEA, the NAACP and numerous other organizations.

 

[Dale_M]

I went through all of AI’s website and I am unable to find any abortion stances anywhere.

The news is old enough that it has largely fallen off of Google’s news engine, but here is one article about Amnesty’s decision.

The possibility of Amnesty International adopting a pro-abortion stance has been on the radar for more than a year. Originally, the news reports were that AI would decide one way or the other during the international conference in Mexico in August 2007. But apparently the decision was made early.

 

[frommi]

You know…this is kind of interesting to me.

First…I don’t think its good for an organization like amnesty to take a stance like this that obscures the important work they do for people who are unjustly put in prison, etc.

Now…if I’m reading it right…AI has no intention of funding abortions or helping any one get one…they just think its wrong to put a woman in prison for getting one.

I guess I’m wondering out loud…can you be prolife (anti abortion) but believe people should not be imprisoned for having an abortion?

 

[rlg94086]

The way they worded it is…

…to support the decriminalisation of abortion…to defend women’s access to abortion, within reasonable gestational limits, when their health or human rights are in danger.

So, if it’s not a crime, that means it’s legal, yes? What are reasonable gestational limits? First trimester? Second trimester? What qualifies as a danger to health or human rights?

To me it reads as more than just thinking it’s “wrong to put a woman in prison for getting one (abortion).”

You know…this is kind of interesting to me.

First…I don’t think its good for an organization like amnesty to take a stance like this that obscures the important work they do for people who are unjustly put in prison, etc.

Now…if I’m reading it right…AI has no intention of funding abortions or helping any one get one…they just think its wrong to put a woman in prison for getting one.

I guess I’m wondering out loud…can you be prolife (anti abortion) but believe people should not be imprisoned for having an abortion?

 

[Holly3278]

Good! We should not support an organization that takes a pro-abortion position.

 

[under_the_dome]

Generally I find that many of the pro-abortion people have very odd views about “basic human rights” that seem to be inconsistent. I suppose it is no different than the folks who support the death penalty but oppose abortion? Or support human rights and assisted suicide/mercy killing of the elderly? All these things seem to be contradictory yet people justify them in their own minds.

Exactly!

Read chapter 6 of Alasdair MacIntyre’s After Virtue if you are at all interested in a philosophical explanation/discussion of how we have arrived at such an inconsistent state of moral debate. It is not for everyone (as it is somewhat dense), but I have yet to read anything else which comes close to giving such a thorough and plausible account of the history of morality.

 

[Bennie_P]

The way they worded it is…

So, if it’s not a crime, that means it’s legal, yes? What are reasonable gestational limits? First trimester? Second trimester? What qualifies as a danger to health or human rights?

To me it reads as more than just thinking it’s “wrong to put a woman in prison for getting one (abortion).”

What it means, is that AI will target countries where abortion is illegal and try to put politcal pressure/campaigns on them to change thier laws to make them pro-abortion. That means money you donate to them will be used for so-called “pro-choice” propaganda which should be used in educating the world about legitimate human rights abuse claims. Otherwise, it would be like giving Planned(Klan) Parenthood monies for thier education programs aimed at the third world.

Countries that will most likely be targeted will be third-world Catholic countries of color. Which is where Christianity is having the most growth.

 

[childofmary1143]

Generally I find that many of the pro-abortion people have very odd views about “basic human rights” that seem to be inconsistent. I suppose it is no different than the folks who support the death penalty but oppose abortion? Or support human rights and assisted suicide/mercy killing of the elderly? All these things seem to be contradictory yet people justify them in their own minds.

There is a BIG difference between supporting the Death Penalty and supporting Abortion. The Infallible teachings of our Catholic Faith support this.

 

[Evanescence]

The school I attend (A catholic school) focuses strongly on Social Justice and in particular supports Amnesty International. Does this then mean we should no longer support Amnesty International?

---

Evanescence