Discrimination against women

Press, 19 March 1984, Page 18

Discrimination against women

Sir,—Yet again we have opposition to the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women labelled “misinformed criticism,” this time by Alix Haywood, but with no attempt to answer the detailed criticisms of the convention’s wording and intent, or to show that it would benefit society as a whole, and not just women. The failure of the convention’s proponents to provide these answers suggests that the convention cannot stand up to close scrutiny. Mrs Haywood says that the convention does not mention abortion, but there has still been no answer to the question: “Does the Government regard abortion as part of any health jcare service related

te family planning?” Or would any future government? There are certainly women’s and other groups who do so regard it, and who would insist that their view become law if the convention were ratified. —

Yours, etc., DR. M. VINEY. March 14, 1984.

Sir,—We can confidently reply to Eelen Priestley (March 9) and Arthur May (March 14) knowing that many readers share with us a God-given faith, hope and love rather than a confidence in purely man-made solutions to society’s problems. There are certainly extreme interpretations of Bible passages which have led to sorrow, but the over-all influence of the scriptures has been for good. For example, the equality of worth of male and female is clearly emphasised. Here too we find the foundation teachings leading to the moral values and sense of justice which brought about the emancipation of slaves, the founding of schools and hospitals, prison reform, the checks and balances of democratic government, help for

the weak, concepts of common law, ideals of business integrity, and lifelong faithful marriages. We challenge any feminist, or Arthur May to show how women are more equal in communist or eastern religion-dominated countries.— Yours, etc., JOHN CANHAM, GILLIAM CANHAM. March 14, 1984.