Amnesty’s credibility on the line

SUPPORTERS of Amnesty International’s new policy of promoting abortion often refer to international law and human rights.

They usually forget about or are just ignorant of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the UN general assembly in 1948.

Article 3 states: “’Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person”, while Article 6 states: “’Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law”,

Abortion advocates will claim that the baby in the womb is not human (so the Universal Declaration does not apply universally), but isn’t that what the Nazis said about the gypsies, homosexuals, the Slav races and the Jews?

They will claim that the baby in the womb is not fully human and is equivalent to a piece of property, but isn’t that what the slave traders and the apartheid regime said about black Africans. Amnesty would protest about a possible death penalty for any convicted rapist or person involved in genocide, but now it will promote and encourage the termination, killing and death of the most innocent of all life. How does Amnesty expect to have any moral credibility when its new policy now implies that the innocent baby in the womb has less right to life than any convicted rapist, anyone convicted of genocide or anyone guilty of the most heinous violence against women.

As the Amnesty website states, “the death penalty is the ultimate cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. It violates the right to life. It is irrevocable and can be inflicted on the innocent … Amnesty works for an end to executions and the abolition of the death penalty everywhere”.

The promotion of the violent act of abortion is not the answer to the plight of innocent female victims of the most heinous of human rights violations.

As Mahatma Ghandi said, “I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil is permanent”.

Ray McIntyre

Dublin Road

Mullingar

Co Westmeath