"U.S. pressured to drop abortion language"

[BC-Maura]

It'll be interesting to see if the Bush Administration reconsiders its position on this:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/ar...ration?mode=PF

"U.S. pressured to drop abortion language
By Edith M. Lederer, Associated Press Writer | March 2, 2005

UNITED NATIONS --The United States came under pressure Wednesday from the European Union and other countries to drop its demand that anti-abortion language be added to a key document about women's rights.

There were indications that President Bush's administration was reviewing its position.

Delegates from more than 100 countries and 6,000 advocates for women's causes have been meeting since Monday to assess what countries have done to implement a landmark platform of action adopted at the 1995 U.N. women's conference in Beijing to achieve equality of the sexes.

The United States has proposed an amendment to the final declaration to be adopted by delegates at the two-week meeting stating that the Beijing platform does not guarantee the right to abortion.

Nicole Ameline, France's minister for parity and equality in the workplace, said any attempt to change the final declaration reaffirming the platform adopted by 189 countries a decade ago could be seen as a step backward for women's rights.

"We are extremely concerned by the U.S. position in renegotiating or opening discussion based on their anti-choice agenda," said Taina Bien-Aime, executive director of the international human rights organization Equality Now.

"We believe it unconscionable that the United States would hijack this very important meeting to talk about a very narrow issue," the fundamental right to abortion, which doesn't appear anywhere in the Beijing platform, she said.

Jessica Neuwirth, the group's president, told reporters Wednesday that the language related to abortion was painstakingly negotiated in Beijing before the platform was adopted by consensus -- and reservations expressed by nations at the time are part of the record.

"This little document of one page is certainly not the place to have that debate again," she said.

Asked if the United States would drop the amendment, Richard Grenell, spokesman for the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, said: "Discussions continue."

"We've been hearing from other governments that they agree with us on our concerns about the original intent of Beijing in the outcome document and their domestic laws reflect that," Grenell said.

At the 1994 U.N. population conference in Cairo, delegates recognized that governments must deal with abortion as a public health issue. At Beijing the following year, they went further, approving a platform that asks governments to review laws that punish women for having abortions.

Attempts for stronger language on access to abortions failed at Beijing and references to sexual rights and sexual orientation were dropped. But the Beijing platform does say women have the right to "decide freely and responsibly on matters related to their sexuality ... free of coercion, discrimination and violence."

The Vatican and a handful of Islamic and Catholic countries opposed any reference to abortion at those conferences, while the West and hundreds of women's rights activists supported them -- including the U.S. government under former President Bill Clinton.

The Bush administration has taken a much tougher stand against abortion, as reflected in the proposed amendments.

The U.S. amendments would reaffirm that the platform does not create any new human rights, including "the right to abortion," said U.S. Ambassador Ellen Sauerbrey, head of the U.S. delegation, insisting this would not "in any way" reopen negotiations on Beijing.

But Ameline said Tuesday any attempt to change the declaration's simple reaffirmation of the Beijing platform could destroy the consensus needed for its adoption."

++++++++++++++
Maura

[robine]

I find it ridiculous that theUN which is up to its rear end in rape allegations by its staff and soldiers is wagging it's finger at ANYTHING the US says about women's rights....Unbelievable...

[BC-Maura]

Originally posted by robine
I find it ridiculous that theUN which is up to its rear end in rape allegations by its staff and soldiers is wagging it's finger at ANYTHING the US says about women's rights....Unbelievable...

Maybe I'm missing something in my own post, but where is the UN wagging its finger at the U.S.?

+++++++++++++++++
Maura

[marg]

It's interesting but the headline when this story ran in my local paper was something like "US pressures EU to adopt abortion language."

[BC-Maura]

Marg, That's interesting! Anyway, I saw today that Bush has agreed to stop pushing for the language:

http://www.boston.com/news/world/art..._words?mode=PF

"US drops demand for antiabortion words
March 3, 2005

The United States plans to drop its insistence that a UN document on women's equality make clear that abortion is not a fundamental right, US officials said yesterday. The Bush administration had demanded that a final draft document include an antiabortion statement, a proposal that plunged into controversy a two-week review session of the landmark 1995 women's conference in Beijing. ''Our original goal was to make sure that everyone involved knew what the original intent of the Beijing document was," said Richard Grenell, a spokesman for the US mission to the United Nations. (Reuters)"

++++++++++++++++++
Maura

[Suebee]

I find it interesting that this argument is taking place in Beijing, China, known for its abuse of the family and the right to life by insisting on abortions. Personally I think it was the right place to try to push for wording against abortion in a country that has long issued mandated abortions. I think even the pro-choice advocates will agree that China does not provide a free choice in pregnancy matters. If you have more then one child in most parts of the country (farming areas have a larger quota of allowable children) you are harassed, loose your job quite often and life is made extremely difficult for you. I think we needed to make a stand even if we knew we would have to give in to pressure.

Sue

[BC-Maura]

Sue: I see your point about the location of the debate on the abortion language being somewhat ironic, but as you yourself note, abortion is often not a matter of choice in China. And the U.S. was not arguing against "mandated abortions"; it was saying that women don't have a guaranteed right to an abortion. So, while China's policies can be viewed as taking away a woman's right to reproductive freedom, so can the stated policies of the Bush Administration. The two are at opposite ends of the spectrum, but they both (in my view) deprive women of the right to control their reproduction.

I also see your point about making a stand on an issue even if you ultimately acquiesce, but the Bush Administration was not speaking for many people in this country when he made his stand. Plus, I don't think the U.S. was so sure that it would end up having to give into pressure. I think it was a real stand and not just a rhetorical one.

+++++++++++++++
Maura

[marg]

"I also see your point about making a stand on an issue even if you ultimately acquiesce, but the Bush Administration was not speaking for many people in this country when he made his stand. Plus, I don't think the U.S. was so sure that it would end up having to give into pressure. I think it was a real stand and not just a rhetorical one."

Good point Maura. Public opinion polls repeatedly show that a majority of Americans believe abortion should remain legal in this country.

[Suebee]

Maura,
Yes I was trying to point out how ironic the location was for any human rights issue to be discussed.

I also am not sure you are correct in stating: but the Bush Administration was not speaking for many people in this country.
There is a large fraction of the US public that feels strongly about the Right to Life issue. I personally abhor abortion, but I also see the need for it in a number of circumstances both medically and psychologically. So I can't place myself in the pro-choice camp because of my feelings of sacredness of life, yet at the same time I am not completely comfortable with the extreme right to life camp. I don't think I am alone in this feeling among the citizens of our nation. I do feel that the majority of people on the street would be quick to say that abortion as family planning or birth control is wrong and I strongly feel it is used that way in many nations including ours around the world.

I recognize it is a tough issue in countries where birth control is not available as well as education on using birth control, to say nothing about the lack of food. I would hate to see a return to babies being thrown down wells in China, but at some point I would want it said that I was willing to say abortion is not right and certainly is not the only option.

Adoption is not even considered an acceptable option in many nations, at least we need to put forth the idea that there are options available. I feel orphanages are preferable to no chance at all. I am rambling.

Sue

[BC-Maura]

Originally posted by Suebee
I also am not sure you are correct in stating: but the Bush Administration was not speaking for many people in this country.

You'll notice that I generally avoid terms like majority and minority because I don't trust polls and don't think that you can capture the views of Americans unless you ask ALL of us! That's why I used the word "many." The Bush Administration WAS speaking for "many" Americans at the same time that it was NOT speaking for "many" Americans (people with my views).

Originally posted by Suebee
I do feel that the majority of people on the street would be quick to say that abortion as family planning or birth control is wrong and I strongly feel it is used that way in many nations including ours around the world.

I agree that most (and not just "many") people in the U.S. would be quick to say that abortion should not be used as family planning or birth control. I believe that and I am pro-choice.

Originally posted by Suebee
I recognize it is a tough issue in countries where birth control is not available as well as education on using birth control, to say nothing about the lack of food. I would hate to see a return to babies being thrown down wells in China, but at some point I would want it said that I was willing to say abortion is not right and certainly is not the only option.

Again, the debate was not about forced abortion in China. It was about women's rights globally. Although I agree that people should be looking at options other than abortion to keep the population in China down.

+++++++++++++
Maura