Amnesty says there are several new restrictions on abortion coming in Poland. Why then do they build their campaign (exclusively) around the abortion of “severely or fatally impaired” foetuses? Having the means and right to safely abort a pregnancy is in my opinion very important. But for me aborting foetuses bc of an impairment is not better than aborting a foetus based on their genitalia. And who says what will be “severe” or “fatal”?

@naimoe It possibly has to do with disagreements among the different international sections of Amnesty. I was an active member a few years back, and since AI is defining its campaigns on meetings of all the international sections, especially sections from countries with a strong christian influence often block a clear stance for the universal right to abortions, not necessarily because they are of that opinion, but because they're afraid it would damage their other human rights work if the churches in their countries went against them.

[1/2] @distelfliege I think I don’t understand you here? The AI campaign is overtly against the Catholic churches opinion (which seems to be pro raising restrictions?). So they are not making this campaign this way bc they are afraid to oppose the church, I guess. I don’t know the other restrictions that are planned. I just guess that I would be against most of them, like AI. But…

@naimoe read my toot again please, i haven't said that. I said that AI used to be unable to find an international consensus for any unconditional right to choose abortion.

@distelfliege okay, now: There is no “but” behind your sentence. They would have done a campaign in favor of unconditional abortion if they had a consensus on this. Full stop. That would mean no ableist campaign for a right to abort impaired foetuses.

(I hope this doesn’t sound ridiculing, I really try to understand you 🙂 and actually like this reasoning. I hope, I get you right now?)