BBC: The Vatican urges end to Amnesty aid
But why would the Church endorse donations to Amnesty International in the first place? It seems, to me anyway, because the Church has to be for one extreme or the other. Yes, the Church has a history of bloodletting and general malpractice (alongside a history of doing some remarkable things). But this stance of absolute pacifism strikes me as suicidal, or at least a severe detriment to human rights.
The Church's state of mind seems to be conquer or relent - that is, take over everything or do nothing at all (except voice serious concerns that just get drowned out in a cacophony of violence - not that I really want to equate the Vatican to the United Nations). No one can reasonably say Amnesty International actually helps human rights. It's a ridiculous thought given the organization's record - like the inability to distinguish between Australia's PM, John Howard, and Robert Mugabe (3,174% inflation and Zimbabwe's fall into complete chaos within six months according to the BBC).
So why now when this sort of endorsement should have never happened in the first place? Abortion. Which makes some sense in the context of Catholic thought, but it's woefully incomplete reasoning. It's like the Save Darfur crowd - by sending cash and food. Except cash and food won't get rid of the oppressors, of the people killing innocents. If they really wanted to save Darfur, they'd have to be willing to commit to violence themselves. If the Catholic Church is to stand for human rights and be taken seriously for that stance then it must condone violence against those who violate human rights - not endorse organizations that condone mass murder by default like Amnesty International. This dedication to unborn lives is admirable, but some dedication to the already born is needed as well.
Good men doing nothing, and all that.
H/t Gateway Pundit (for both stories)