First Things on "Amnesty International’s Dirty Little Secret"

There has been much written in the blogosphere today about Amnesty International's decision to join the pro-abortion ranks, yet keep its decision under wraps so as not to alienate some of its allies in places like the Catholic Church.

A frequently asked question has been: "Why the change, and why now?" One former AI member commenting over at Amy Welborn's blog had this to say:

"A friend of mine who is also a former AI member said that the focus of AI has changed alot since 2001 or so. This is due, in his opinion, to new leadership of the organization... He said that in the 1990s AI was not so partisan and attributed this new focus to a change in leadership [at AI]."

More likely a change of leadership in Washington. To be considered sufficiently "progressive" these days, one must be against everything Bush is for, and for all the things Bush is against. The Bush Administration opposes efforts to push the legalization of abortion on the developing world; ergo, Amnesty International must favor it in order to maintain its "progressive" street creds.

I have no idea if that's the real reason. But this blog has a political focus, and I thought I'd just try to find a political angle that might explain the indefensible.