|
SAVE WOMEN’S LIVES: MARCH FOR FREEDOM OF CHOICE MARCH FOR WOMEN’S LIVES Washington, DC – April 25, 2004 At the 2003 Fall Board of Director’s meeting of the Women’s Division, the directors of the Division voted to send $5,000 in support of an April 25 march in Washington, and to be a co-sponsor of this event. Although two directors voiced concern about this decision, the measure passed. This document contains articles and responses to this decision and references a web site that can be visited in order to obtain a complete listing of sponsors and co-sponsors, and to read a news release from the National Organization of Women pertaining to this event. This first article appeared in the March/April issue of Good News magazine. Women's Division supports abortion march At the Fall 2003 Board of Directors meeting of the UM Women's Division, the group voted to send $5,000 in support of an April 25 march in Washington, D.C. to support abortion-on-demand. The money from local UMW units was sent in order to be a co-sponsor of the "March for Women's Lives" with abortion enthusiasts such as The Feminist Majority, NARAL Pro-Choice America, the National Organization for Women, National Abortion Federation, and Planned Parenthood. Interestingly enough, an uncharacteristic debate ensued. The board of the Women's Division usually rubber stamps proposals made by the staff, but on this particular issue there was vocal resistance. When the proposal came to the floor for a vote in a plenary session, one director rose to the microphone and shared that she had a problem with supporting this recommendation and she indicated that many women she represented would as well. She went on to share that she had been an "unacceptable" pregnancy who would have been aborted if the option had been open to her mother. She felt that the women of the church should work for other alternatives. Another director also voiced concern about this recommendation. While it is unusual for directors to publicly question recommendations, the women of the church can appreciate this public stand by these two directors. Following these statements, a spokesperson that works with the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC)-an abortion-rights lobby in Washington, D.C.-said that they prefer to use the term "unintended" rather than "unacceptable pregnancy." She went on to say that RCRC presents all options impartially to women who face the problem of pregnancy. This laughable assertion is most certainly contradicted in the RCRC booklet Words of Choice which is a primer on countering pro-life arguments. Bias against adoption and Crisis Pregnancy Counseling Centers is very clear. Language choice, which includes calling an unborn child a "fetus" and claiming that life begins at birth, shows a bias favoring abortion. Our denomination reflects our nation's schizophrenia regarding this heart-rending issue-it both supports and rejects abortion. Although the United Methodist Church is America's largest religious body supporting legalized abortion, it also recognizes "the sanctity of unborn human life" and states: "We cannot affirm abortion as an acceptable means of birth control, and we unconditionally reject it as a means of gender selection." At the 2000 General Conference, United Methodism overwhelmingly voted to oppose the late-term procedure known as dilation and extraction (partial-birth abortion). United Methodism opposes birth control abortions, the March for Women's Lives does not. United Methodism opposes gender selection abortions, the March for Women's Lives does not. United Methodism opposes partial birth abortions, the March for Women's Lives does not. Despite United Methodism's opposition to the vast majority of abortions being performed in the United States, the Women's Division has chosen to drag our denomination into a narrow, rancorous, and divisive political agenda. It would be fair to say that local UMW units are not raising money to send to New York in order to support this kind of activity. -Renew and Good News editorial teams The following is an e-mail received by Good News in response to the article. You will want to visit the referenced web site for first-hand information: http://www.marchforwomen.org/cosponsors/list.php. I think the article is good, but it misses an important issue that is crucial in this the support. This march is expressly protesting the Partial Birth Abortion Ban, and that flies in the face of the Discipline, which states; "We oppose the use of late-term abortion known as dilation and extraction (partial-birth abortion) and call for the end of this practice except when the physical life of the mother is in danger and no other medical procedure is available, or in the case of severe fetal anomalies incompatible with life". The president of NOW writes on the March web site under "Why We March" that: "NOW activists are here today to bear witness to this travesty--the theft of our reproductive freedom and our constitutional rights, and this administration's complete disregard for the welfare of women across this country. The so-called Partial-Birth Abortion Ban is a dangerous piece of legislation that ultimately seeks to outlaw even the safest abortion procedures." She goes on at great length about the Partial Birth Abortion Ban; this march is for the purpose of repealing the Ban and that purpose almost exclusively. The fact that her letter is written on the "March for Women" website under the heading "Why We March" makes the purpose of this march clear and irrefutable. The article says the march does oppose the Partial Birth Abortion Ban, that simply doesn't express that this March is all about Partial Birth Abortion! For BOTH the Women's Division & General Board of Church and Society (your article does not mention GBCS) to attach the name of the United Methodist Church to an event that is in direct opposition to the Discipline of the church is outrageous. The GBCS is listed as a Co Sponsor http://www.marchforwomen.org/cosponsors/list.php , along with some really fascinating company. Please make the point of the conflict with the discipline and this march in your article & on your website. The following e-mail response was sent to a United Methodist woman who wrote to the Women’s Division expressing her concern about the support given by the Division for the March for Women’s Lives. Becoming a co-sponsor of the Save Women's Lives: March for Freedom of Choice, April 25, 2004 is responding to the United Methodist Book of Resolutions mandate to "expand their health and wholeness public policy advocacy to include this critical issue." The Social Principles of the denomination states: "Our belief in the sanctity of unborn human life makes us reluctant to approve abortion. But we are equally bound to respect the sacredness of the life and well being of the mother, for whom devastating damage may result from an unacceptable pregnancy." The principles go on to say that there are tragic conflicts in life that may justify abortion and that the Church supports legal options. In 1973, the Supreme Court struck down laws that criminalized abortion because of the number of women suffering from self induced or back alley abortions. With options not available to low income or rural women who choose abortion, advocates are concerned about women turning to unsafe and illegal methods to obtain them. Also of concern to the Women's Division is the availability of contraception, reproductive counseling and hospital mergers that, as our United Methodist Book of Resolutions #102 on page 277 states, "Whereas such mergers often put the availability of AIDS prevention information, fertility services, artificial insemination, tubal ligations, vasectomies, condom distribution, contraceptive medication and devises, 'morning after' pills, and abortion services at risk...Whereas, the effect of these mergers is most severe in poorer communities that have limited health care options to begin with..." The Women's Division understands that certain groups will misinterpret their action. In their literature, the Division states that it has to work collaboratively with coalitions to achieve purposes like the health and safety of women who choose this option. "To work in coalition with an organization does not constitute an endorsement or embracing of every aspect of that organization or the establishment of some permanent relationship with coalition partners/co sponsors."
Mary Gates,
director of the Women's Division, recognized that there is As you know, much of the work of the Women's Division involves their support of national and international mission projects which address the needs of women, children and youth. These include teen pregnancy prevention programs, adoption services, family counseling, youth centers, shelters for families suffering from domestic violence and child care facilities just to name a few. In regards to your question about funding, the Women's Division voted to give $5,000.00 to defray expenses of the March. This amount will be paid from The Designated Temporary Funds Account. The Designated Temporary Fund is, as the name implies, a temporary fund which is invested with monies that have been given with specific designations such a Supplementary Gifts, Call to Prayer, bequests, etc. The investment income on the fund are the only discretionary funds available to the Women's Division. All other funds including Undesignated Giving by United Methodist Women must be expended according to established policy. There is no Undesignated Giving in the Designated Temporary Fund. I hope that helps to answer some of your questions.
Grace and
peace, Closing Comment: This response claims that funds for this event came from Designated Temporary Funds such as Supplementary Gifts, Call to Prayer, bequests, etc. United Methodist Women who give to the Call to Prayer and Self Denial offering probably do not realize that some of this fund can be used for pro-abortion purposes. It would also seem that those who leave money to the Women’s Division through estate giving or bequests would not likely consider this an acceptable use of their funds. And, inquiry needs to be made as to what “Supplementary” gift category supports abortion rights.
|
|
|