As many may already know, Amnesty International has been reconsidering its neutral stance on abortion over the past few years. This summer, as part of the "Stop Violence Against Women" campaign, Amnesty International took a stand: Amnesty now states that as part of their sexual and reproductive rights, women must have access to safe and legal abortion services in cases of unwanted pregnancies, resulting from rape, sexual assault, or incest.

During Respect Life Month, which is observed in October, it is only appropriate to ask how anti-abortion advocates and Christians, specifically Catholics, should respond to Amnesty's change in policy.

I have never been directly involved in Amnesty International, but I have always greatly admired its work in promoting human rights and justice across the globe. In our world, where people in the United States are killed via capital punishment, women in the Congo are being raped and mutilated at an unprecedented rate, and teenage girls from Asia and Latin America are being trafficked and used as sex slaves, we must cry out for justice and for the help of organizations like Amnesty International that seek to promote and protect human rights. But what do we do now that Amnesty fails to protect the right to life, the most basic and fundamental human right? Should we still continue our support?

In 2006, when Amnesty was raising the issue of changing its stance on abortion, Father John Kavanaugh S.J., professor of philosophy at St. Louis University, stated in America magazine (Oct. 30, 2006) that if Amnesty did in fact change its stance, he hoped that "no Jesuit high school or university [would] encourage students to join [Amnesty International]."

Now that Amnesty has in fact changed its position, Cardinal Renato Martino, president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, echoes Kavanaugh and asks that Catholics discontinue support for Amnesty International.

One Catholic human rights activist who has been heavily involved in Amnesty, Rev. Daniel Berrigan S.J., has already announced that Amnesty will no longer receive his support. In addition, the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Bishop William S. Skylstad, released a statement in August on behalf of the conference protesting the recent action of the Amnesty International Council. In the statement, Skylstad wrote, "To some, the action of Amnesty International may appear to be compassionate responses to women in difficult situations of pregnancy, but this is false compassion.

True commitment to women's rights puts us in solidarity with women and their unborn children. It does not pit one against the other but calls us to advocate on behalf of both … a far more compassionate response is to provide support and services for pregnant women, advance their educational and economic standing in society, and resist all forms of violence and stigmatization against women."

As a Catholic who highly regards human rights and human life, I cannot support an organization like Amnesty International that contradicts and diverts its own mission.

I echo the U.S. Catholic bishops in saying that I will continue to seek to end human rights abuses and injustices; I will continue to oppose the death penalty and dehumanizing poverty; I will continue to stand with and support refugees, migrants, and all oppressed people. But I don't think I'll be doing these things with Amnesty International.

However, I do not respond to Amnesty International with anger, hate, or disrespect. Amnesty International will continue to carry out important and much-needed work, and I cannot deny the good that the organization will perform. But, at the same time, I cannot support an organization that will only protect select rights.

Amnesty International's new policy seems to result with much disunity in the community of those concerned for human rights, and it is my hope and prayer that the lost unity is restored soon.

Christopher Rakovec is a sophomore in the College of Arts & Sciences.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools