Letter from the Cambridge University Islamic Society
Dear CUSU Voters,
I write on behalf of CU Islamic Society regarding CUSU's decision to affiliate to the National Abortion Campaign. Most, if not all, of the Muslim students at Cambridge would be opposed to this. Islam condemns killling unborn children, only allowing it under certain circumstances (extreme danger to the mother's life). As Islamic Soc members are automatically members of CUSU, CUSU's affiliation to such a group would therefore put us in an uncomfortable position. Whilst we accept that we are a minority and that not all students at Cambridge share our views, we still like to feel that we are represented by CUSU, and that our sensitivities are taken into account, and it would surely be unfortunate if many of the Muslim students felt that they had to withdraw from CUSU.
Whilst we appreciate the commendable work CUSU undertakes in promoting student welfare, work in which we hope to co-operate, we cannot see how this decision can possibly come under promoting student welfare. The NAC is primarily a political lobbying group with specific objectives, to which not all students agree. It does not directly concern itself with student welfare, especially as, even with the law as it stands, abortion is more or less available on demand anyway. There is also surely validity to the argument that with more and more attention and resources devoted to making abortion more and more available, this has to mean that less effort would be made in helping those students who decide to continue with pregnancies, who are surely also in need of support.
We therefore hope that you would vote against the affiliation,
Yours sincerely,
Omar Mahroo
Cambridge University Islamic Society.
Home
Background
NAC Policy
Letters
Articles
Discussion Forum
Dear TCS - In her letter last week, Laura Timms (CUSU Women's Campaign Officer) alleged that some of the information in our flyer about the National Abortion Campaign (NAC) was misleading.
The NAC calls for "the repeal of all laws relating to the termination of pregnancy" and the intorduction of a law under which "the woman may request anyone she chooses (e.g. doctor, nurse, another woman) to perform the abortion." The quotations are from the NAC Conference Resolution cited in the NAC's The Abortion Law We Want. The NAC have since clarified their position to specify that these new abortionists should receive training in the termination of pregnancies. However, training for a single operation cannot provide a sufficiently broad understanding of the many potential complications of any minor surgery. As medical students, we believe that this NAC proposal would expose women to huge risks.
Secondly, we understand that the NAC's policy is that all doctors with conscientious objections to abortion should have to publically declare it. This proposal has been severely criticised on the grounds that it would effectively create a blacklist which could lead to these doctors being targeted with abuse. The reverse would also apply - doctors who did not concsientiously object to abortions could be easily identified. This proposal is therefore unworkable.
Thirdly, the NAC has repeatedly stated that it wants the law to be changed to allow abortion without time limits on request. Somewhat misleadingly, the Women's Officer cites risk to the life of the pregnant woman as a possible reason for abortion up to birth. The law already allows abortion up to birth under these rare circumstances, as well as when there is a risk of grave injury or if the child would be born with a disability.
We will be holding an open meeting at 8pm today (Thursday) at Sidgwick Dining Hall, Newnham College where we will be happy to answer any queries. Alternatively visit www.nacaffiliation.cjb.net.
Beata Klepacka, Rupert Beale, Anna Wilkins
CU Pro-Life Society
TCS, 19th October 2000
>>next page>>