United for Life

Raising greater awareness of human life issues

23rd February 2006

Ms Kate Allen
Director
Amnesty International
17-25 New Inn Yard
LONDON
EC2A 3EA

Dear Ms Allen

This is United for Life’s fourth letter to Amnesty International concerning our Make Abortion History campaign but we have received no reply from Amnesty International to any of our previous three letters.

In United for Life's previous letters to Amnesty International (one before 6th June, one on 13 August and the other dated 10th October 2005) we demonstrated that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights protects the right to life of ‘all members of the human family’, and that, since the unborn are members of the human family the UDHRs protects the right to life of the unborn.

United for Life also demonstrated that the Declaration on the Rights of the Child applies to the unborn, which states that, '...the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth.'

The UDHRs proclaims these Rights as 'a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations' and that 'every individual and every organ of society ...shall strive ...to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance ...among the peoples of Member States.'

Some human rights and anti-slavery organisations claim that they do not work on abortion and would not join the Make Abortion History campaign.  They may also claim that they work '...for the elimination of slavery [and other human rights abuses] worldwide in accordance with the definition of slavery [and other human rights abuses] in international human rights instruments.’

United for Life would like to demonstrate to Amnesty International and other human rights organisations how the killing of children by abortion, contraception, sterilisation and related activities such as human embryo experimentation, human cloning and IVF, violate international human rights instruments including instruments on slavery and therefore should be addressed by national and international anti-slavery and other human rights programmes and campaigns.

We will do this by demonstrating :

• that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and UN Conventions such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Slavery Convention apply to ‘every organ of society’ regardless of ‘remit’ or ‘mandate’



• that the definition of slavery applies to the unborn threatened with being killed by abortion, human embryo experimentation, human cloning, IVF and related activities



• that the ‘right of property over another’ and ‘non-person’ arguments used to justify slavery and the slave-trade ‘...in all their forms...’ are also used to justify the slavery of killing children by abortion, the slavery of human embryo experimentation, the slavery of human cloning and IVF, and the ‘trafficking’ of these human lives



• that the banning of child-sacrifice whether it is practiced for religious, cultural, secular or any other reason applies to the unborn including embryonic children



• that the killing of children by abortion is genocide



• that rooting out the cultural slavery of killing children by abortion is to root out the ‘culture of death’ within society and that slavery takes many forms in modern society



• that the killing of children by abortion, contraception and related activities is environmentally destructive and that Natural Family Planning is eco-friendly, woman-friendly and does not destroy a human life.

Every organ of society - regardless of remit

The Universal Declaration proclaims that '...every organ of society... shall strive by teaching and education ...to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance ...among the peoples of Member States.'  Therefore every organ of society, regardless of 'remit', shall strive to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance.  No 'organ of society' can excuse itself from the requirements and obligations under the Universal Declaration on grounds of 'remit' or any other grounds.

It is right therefore that United for Life should call upon Amnesty International and other human rights organisations to commit themselves to implement in full the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child in regard to the unborn, which states that, '...the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth.'

The definition of slavery

All United Nations Conventions must be read in the light of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights , including the Slavery Convention and Supplementary Convention , which apply to ‘all members of the human family without distinction.’

According to international human rights instruments the definition of slavery is ‘...the status or condition of a person over whom any or all the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised...’.  The exercise of ‘ownership’ includes the disposal or destruction of the object of ownership not wanted by the owner.  When a child is killed by abortion this is exactly what happens; a tiny human life is treated as ‘property to be disposed of’.  To treat human lives as if they are owned or as if they are ‘property’ is the bench mark definition of slavery.  This is what happens to the unborn when he or she is killed in an abortion and to human embryos created for research and for IVF and other related activities.  The modern slave-trade consists of such practices.

On contemporary forms of slavery  the UN claims  ‘...there are no clear distinctions between different forms of slavery...’, and declares ‘...slavery and the slave-trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.’  United for Life agrees.

Non-persons

The claim that some human lives are ‘not persons’ or ‘have no legal status’ or ‘have no rights to protect’ have been used to justify slavery and the slave-trade, the Nazi persecution of the Jews and others, the persecution of indigenous peoples and of women who, for instance in Canada, had the status of ‘non-persons’ up until 1925.  Recourse to claim that others are ‘non-persons’ is used to remove the moral and social obstacles for committing acts of violence.

In the USA in 1881 legal scholar George F. Canfield claimed ‘...an Indian is not a person within the meaning of the Constitution’, and that ‘Congress may prevent an Indian leaving his reservation, and while he is on a reservation it may deprive him of his liberty, his property, [and] his life...’.  The State, in exercising ownership over the Native American Indians, demonstrates that slavery includes depriving others of their life.

To claim that some human lives, including the unborn, are not persons or are ‘non persons’ in order to defraud them of their ‘right to life’ or to claim they have no rights or to claim they have no legal protection or for any other reason, is prohibited by Article 6 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that, ‘Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.’  All human life including the unborn are protected by the UDHRs and cannot be treated as ‘non persons’ void of the universal, inherent and inalienable ‘...right to life...’ before the law.

The Declaration on the Rights of the Child proclaims that the child ‘...needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth.’  This is because the child, before as well as after birth, needs more protection not less, because before birth the child is more vulnerable from being used or destroyed by abortion and by human embryo experimentation, including IVF and human cloning.  In fact, in March 2005 the United Nations banned all forms of human cloning as did the European Council in 1998.

Slavery - depriving others of their life

We have already illustrated above that the 1881 Native American case shows that slavery includes killing.  Anti-Slavery International claims that ‘...the word ‘slavery’ now covers many practices which would not immediately be associated with it, such as the killing of persons for organ trafficking...’  This shows that killing is an act of enslavement.

According to a Virginian Jamestown website , a 1669 law represents the loss of legal protection for a slave’s life in Virginia. The Act states in its 17th Century style of language,

'Be it enacted and declared by this grand assembly, if any slave resist his master (or other by his masters order correcting him) and by the extremity of the correction should chance to die, that his death shall not be accompted ffelony, but the master (or that other person appointed by the master to punish him) be acquit from molestation, since it cannot be presumed that prepensed malice (which alone makes murther ffelony) should induce any man to destroy his owne estate.’

This is how abortion law works, at least in the UK.  The abortionist will not be prosecuted for the killing of the unborn child.

The joint NGO statement on the draft European Convention against trafficking in human beings had, by November 2004, been signed by over 160 organisations including
Anti-Slavery International.  The NGO statement claims that, ‘Trafficking is an abuse of human rights.  It results in the abuse of the human rights of trafficked persons including... [their right to] ...life’.

Clearly, those being trafficked have a ‘right to life’ and trafficking can involve the taking of human life.  Pro-abortion law legitimises violence against the unborn as pro-slavery law legitimised violence against slaves which has included the killing of slaves.

The slave-trade today - trafficking in human lives

Modern forms of slave-trade includes among other practices :

• the killing of children by abortion whether surgical or chemical (medical)



• creation, use and destruction of human embryos for experimentation or IVF



• the use of aborted foetal tissue for experimentation



• the use of aborted foetal tissue for commercial products including cosmetics and other health care products including vaccines



• human cloning



• abortifacient 'contraceptives' such as the Pill , IUD , Norplant , Morning After Pill , Depo Provera® and abortion inducing drugs such as RU486



• child sacrifice and the sale of children including killing children by abortion, human embryo experimentation, IVF, human cloning and other related activities



• the term ‘trafficking in human lives’ includes those who deal in killing children by abortion, human embryo experimentation, IVF, human cloning and other related activities



• FGM - female genital mutilation and sterilisation

Child sacrifice and the sale of children - a form of slavery

In an abortion a tiny human life is torn apart and thrown away.  By 2006 over six and a half million (6,500,000) children have been killed by abortion in Britain since the 1967 Abortion Act came into force.  An additional 180,000 children will be killed by abortion each following year using current figures.  Every week in Britain, 3,500 children are deliberately killed by surgical or chemical abortion, including the use of RU486, and an untold number of tiny human lives are killed because they were unable to implant in their mother’s womb as a consequence of their mothers taking the Pill or the ‘morning after pill’ (otherwise known as ‘emergency contraception’), or because their mothers were using IUD’s, Norplant or Depo Provera.  Still further tiny human lives are killed during IVF and human embryo experimentation, including human cloning and embryonic stem cell research.  In the United States, since abortion became legal in 1973, over forty five million (45,000,000) children have been killed by abortion.

United for Life believes that any nation, charity, organisation or individual that supports, advocates or carries out the killing of children by abortion violates the human rights of the unborn, violates the Declaration and Convention on the Rights of the Child, violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention on Slavery and a number of other Conventions.

The Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) protects the child ‘before as well as after birth.’  Article 24 (3), goes on to declare, ‘States Parties shall take all effective and appropriate measures with a view to abolishing traditional practices prejudicial to the health of children.’

The killing of children by abortion is a traditional practice exercised both in ancient and modern times.  The killing of children by abortion is ‘prejudicial to the health of children’ - the child is killed.  The unborn are by definition ‘under 18 years of age’ and the unborn are defined as children both before as well as after birth by the Convention.

With the unborn being defined as children both before as well as after birth by the Convention, the UN’s Convention of the Sale of Children , Article 2 (a), goes on to define the sale of children in the following way :

‘Sale of children means any act or transaction whereby a child is transferred by any person or group of persons to another for remuneration or any other consideration.’

Killing children by abortion is clearly an ‘...act ...whereby a child is transferred by, ...[a] ...person or groups of persons to another for remuneration or any other consideration.’  In addition, killing children by abortion for ‘economic reasons’ is the economic exploitation of the unborn and such exploitation applies likewise to other grounds on which the killing of children by abortion are applied.

Article 7 of the Convention on the Sale of Children provides for the ‘...seizure and confiscation ...of ...goods, ...materials, assets and other instruments used to commit or facilitate offences under the present protocol ...[and to] ...take measures aimed at closing, on a temporary or definitive basis, premises used to commit such offences.’  Clearly this outlaws all facilitation of all forms of killing children by abortion as described and listed by United for Life in this document.

Child sacrifice and the sale of children, including the killing of children by abortion and the sacrifice of unborn embryonic children, whether for religious, cultural, secular or any other reason, is a violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other UN Conventions.

How the slavery of killing children by abortion is genocide

We have already established that slavery includes the act of depriving someone of their life.  The UN Convention on Genocide describes genocide as the intention ‘...to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.’  To destroy part of a national group is defined as genocide.  The unborn are part of a national group.  The unborn are also a group within a national group.

Clearly the killing of children by abortion destroys part of that unborn group.  The UN Convention defines genocide as ‘...killing members of the group...’ and ‘...imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.’  The killing of children by abortion is a measure ‘intended to prevent births within a group.’  Clearly the UN Convention on Genocide protects the right to life of the unborn from acts of being killed by abortion or any other acts intended to prevent the birth of the unborn.  In addition, contraception and sterilization are also ‘...measures intended to prevent births within the group.’

Rooting out cultural practices

The Baltimore Anti-Slavery website states that ‘Contemporary slavery is not always easy to identify or root out because much of it is accepted within a culture.’  Killing children by abortion, contraception, human embryo experimentation, IVF and related activities are claimed by some to be cultural practices now imbedded in society.  Such practices form the ‘culture of death’ gripping Britain and the rest of the world.  This means that since the killing of children by abortion is ‘rooted’ and even ‘accepted within [our] culture’, it will be difficult to root it out.  However, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child and other UN Conventions, including the Slavery Convention, call for such cultural changes to take place.

Female genital mutilation - FGM - a form of enslavement

Dr John Fleming, a foundation member of UNESCO’s International Bioethics Committee which developed the Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights (adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO on 11 November 1997), shows in his paper entitled ‘What Rights, If Any, Do The Unborn Have Under International Law?' , that it is a UN principle of international law that no-one may place themselves or their dependence into slavery because this would legalise the slave-trade.  This is important because it relates to all forms of slavery and is reflected in Article 6 of the Supplementary Convention on Slavery.

As a form of enslavement female genital mutilation (FGM) is a traditional practice of mutilating the genitals of females and is carried out in many parts of the world.

United for Life opposes all forms of FGM.  Sterilisation whether surgical, chemical or by device (i.e. contraception) is female genital mutilation - an act of violence against women and their bodies whether self-inflicted or inflicted by others.  The activity of removing or incapacitating normal healthy organs or body parts is not only unethical in itself but bad medicine whatever part of the body is being mutilated.  Self-mutilation is always unethical and no-one may place themselves or their dependence into this or any other form of slavery.

The UN’s lack of care for women

Despite years of international activity and funding for contraception and abortion the care of women giving birth has little priority.  Dr Robert Walley , founder and director of MaterCare International ‘...blames lack of international funding for maternal care for high rate of death among Third World women.  While billions are spent on birth control programmes, very little goes to the provision of emergency obstetric care.’  A  C-FAM article about Dr Walley shows that the UN cares little about women and that UNICEF confirmed this as a ‘...conspiracy of silence...’.

Natural Family Planning is eco-friendly, woman-friendly, human-life-friendly

Contrary to popular myth contraception and sterilization are not required for the number and spacing of children.

WOOMB International , the natural family planning organisation, in its statement to the United Nations in June 2001 , states that,

'Women have embraced the Billings method regardless of their socio-economic status, culture or religion.  It is easily understood by all - the blind, the illiterate, those living in absolute poverty and those members of vulnerable and disadvantaged groups identified in the Habitat Agenda.  There is no cost to health or purse in the teaching or practice of this natural, eco-friendly method.  Women and governments are free of the costly complications of contraception.'

Contraceptives treat women’s natural menstrual cycle as if it is a disease to be prevented by attacking her body with carcinogenic environmentally destructive chemicals.  However, natural family planning is eco-friendly, woman-friendly and does not destroy a human life.  United for Life has produced a leaflet entitled: The Natural Environment  which shows how the killing of children by abortion, contraception and related activities destroy the environment.

United for Life encourages Amnesty International and other human rights organisations to embrace WOOMB's eco-friendly outlook on human life which is in keeping with the environmental claim of Friends of the Earth to ‘make life better for people.’

For further information on how family planning helps people to live with nature view the following web links :   WOOMB,   NAOMI,   Billings Ovulation Method
The London Center for NaPro Technology  &  FCCA - NaProTECHNOLOGY®.

For further information on the impact of the Pill on implantation, and the concern of the Pill as an abuser of human rights, view research by Prof. John Wilks B.Pharm. MPS MACPP entitled : Impact of the Pill on Implantation  and  The Pill - How it Works and Fails , also view his book : A Consumer's Guide to The Pill and Other Drugs.

In addition to abortion destroying the unborn, research by Professor Joel Brind, (President of the Breast Cancer Prevention Institute) and others over the past 50 years or so shows that abortion is linked to breast cancer.  The effect on the environment from chemotherapy and other drugs used in the treatment of cancer has to be considered.

For further on the link between abortion and breast cancer view : Abortion and Breast Cancer - Is There A Link?  by Dr Greg Gardner of the Christian Medical Fellowship .

Conclusion

United for Life believes that it has demonstrated to Amnesty International and other human rights organisations that the killing of children by abortion, contraception, human embryo experimentation, IVF, human cloning, sterilisation and other related activities are modern forms of slavery and should be addressed by national and international anti-slavery and other human rights programmes and campaigns.

We therefore ask Amnesty International whether or not they are committed to implementing in full the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child in regard to the unborn, which states that, ‘...the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth.’?

We await your considered response.

Yours sincerely

Chris Mason
Co-ordinator
United for Life
www.unitedforlife.com
info@unitedforlife.com