US Abortion Activists Forcing Abortion on Mexico

How important is it to have a justice system the that respects the sovereignty of the nation and its founding documents? When the left uses international courts to inflict their vision of society on everyone throughout the world it is an absolute necessity. International bodies are not immune to nonsense or rulings that are politicaly motivated. This case in Mexico is illustrative of the twisted zeal that is the left.

MEXICO CITY, March 8, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Yesterday, the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy, the legal arm of the U.S. pro-abortion movement, won a case at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights when the Mexican government agreed to guarantee access to abortion in the case of pregnancies due to rape.

The Mexican case was built around the 1999 rape of a then-13 year-old Mexican girl, Paulina del Carmen Jacinto Ramírez. Paulina and her family were convinced by doctors and pro-life counselors at Mexicali's General Hospital not to abort her child.

Hospital director Dr. Ismael Avila Iñiguez and other physicians at the hospital refused to perform the abortion on the grounds that it violated their moral principles. Avila Iñiguez was briefly detained by authorities for his refusal, and later threatened by the district attorney with 36 hours in jail and a fine. Pro-life groups paid for the delivery and provided the family with additional money for childcare.

Six months after the birth, Paulina was approached by feminists affiliated with the international abortion lobby who had launched a human rights complaint claiming that Paulina had been denied her "right" to an abortion. Critics charged that Paulina had been the victim of "closed mindedness" and "pro-life fanatics." Since then, Paulina has been made a cause celebre for abortion zealots working to overturn legal protections for the unborn especially in predominantly Catholic countries.

In the Mexican case, the pro-abortion group, Human Rights Watch, has recommended punishing those who obstruct legal abortions, including revoking the medical licenses of doctors who refuse to perform the procedure on moral grounds.

Even though pro-life groups paid for the delivery and provided child care funds this was insufficient for the abortion people. They wanted to punish the state for allowing a child be born that could have been aborted. They finally forced the state to compensate the girl for not killing her child. What is most revealing is the demand that doctors who object to abortion on moral grounds be punished by having their medical licenses revoked. These people would see a diminished health care system with fewer doctors as preferable to one that had doctors who could object to abortion because of conscience. They would prefer a system with less ability to provide basic health care than one that allowed doctors to exersize moral convictions.

Typical of the left they do not extent any conscientious objection to issues they support. They want tolerance of their rigid morality while extending no tolerance of any other. They complain about the narrow mindedness of those who disagree with them but relentlessly dog others to adopt their views. They champion "Human Rights" unless those rights would hinder their model of society. In this case they demonstrate that any consideration of having an abortion is absolute and efforts to convince to do otherwise is a denial of rights, there is no room for presenting options. No room for choice.