Christian and pro-life groups have rejected a report by Amnesty International accusing them of being “anti-rights”.
The report, titled “A growing threat: the anti-rights movement in the UK”, was widely condemned in the days following its publication. It has been "temporarily" withdrawn while Amnesty carries out an internal review, the organisation said in response to the backlash.
It drew anger over the inclusion of an extensive list of civil society organisations that supposedly “form part of a wider anti-rights ecosystem - a network of groups that work on different issues but share similar goals and often support each other's efforts to roll back human rights protections”, specifically the rights of women and LGBT+ people.
The report claimed that “anti-rights” organisations are “fostering moral panic”, and “often create or amplify fears about minority and marginalised groups”.
The organisations were assigned to a specific category "based on their main characteristic or specialism” but these categories are “not watertight”, the report says.
“For example, the Christian Institute is classified as an ultra-conservative Christian policy and advocacy organisation, however, their focus encompasses abortion, trans rights, education as well as other issues,” the report reads.
The Christian Institute was one of dozens of Christian organisations to be blacklisted by Amnesty.
Others included the Evangelical Alliance, Christian Concern, the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales, the Christian Medical Fellowship, the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC), Christians in Parliament, CARE (Christian Action, Research and Education), Premier, the Centre for Bio–Ethical Reform (CBR UK), the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF UK), and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association UK.
Other organisations included crisis pregnancy centres (CPCs), a support service for female victims of sexual violence founded by JK Rowling, and gender critical organisations campaigning to protect single-sex spaces for women and girls.
Of crisis pregnancy centres, the report said, “They are established by anti-abortion organisations and seek to discourage women and pregnant people from accessing abortion care.
"Many present themselves as providers of impartial information and support. However, they are not affiliated with the NHS, are not subject to a specific regulatory framework, and have the objective of discouraging abortion.”
The report called on the Charity Commission to review the charitable status of the listed organisations and said that the NHS should not signpost patients to crisis pregnancy centres.
Christian and pro-life organisations have rejected Amnesty’s characterisation of them as “anti-rights”.
Peter Lynas, UK director of the Evangelical Alliance, said: “If standing up for religious freedom, women and the rights of the unborn puts you on Amnesty's naughty list, then we are happy to be there."
He added, "It’s sad to watch Amnesty abandon rights in favour of the latest ideologies.”
CARE’s Director of Communications and Engagement, James Mildred, said: “Our vision at CARE is to see politics renewed and lives transformed.
“We engage in politics for the sake of some of the most vulnerable in society, believing that every life, from conception, has equal dignity, worth and value.
“From championing age checks to improve online safety, to advocating for better human trafficking laws, stronger palliative care, a fairer tax system to help low-income families, help from those impacted by gambling related harms, laws to protect pre-born babies and their mums.
“It is sad to see an organisation that claims to champion human rights spend valuable time and effort on this sort of report.”
Others expressed sadness that Amnesty has drifted from its roots - the organisation was founded in 1961 by Peter Benenson, a devout Catholic, to campaign on behalf of prisoners of conscience, including those imprisoned for their religious or political beliefs.
Ciarán Kelly, Director of The Christian Institute, said: “Amnesty has fallen a long way from its origins defending prisoners of conscience. Now it has a pick ‘n’ mix approach to human rights.
“Tragically, this doesn’t include the right to life for babies in the womb, the rights of women being exploited through prostitution, or the rights of freedom of conscience and speech.”
Pro-life advocate Fleur Elizabeth Meston said: “It is rather sad to see Amnesty International, founded by a devout Christian to defend prisoners of conscience, now branding people with the ‘wrong’ consciences as ‘anti-rights’.
“Its founder, Peter Benenson, built Amnesty around freedom of thought, conscience, religion and expression. Today, Amnesty treats disagreement on abortion and sex-based rights, and even belief in Christian teachings, as though they were a threat to humanity.
“Saying biological sex matters is not anti-rights. Campaigning to protect unborn children is not anti-rights. In fact, those of us who hold these beliefs just want human rights for women and babies too.
“Amnesty can waste its time creating these reports, rather than helping those in real danger around the world, but smearing lawful, mainstream organisations as ‘anti-rights’ is completely unworthy of its founding mission.”
Michael Robinson, executive director of SPUC, said the report “conflates faith with being anti-choice and bizarrely part of some large Machiavellian conspiracy”. He said Benenson, having been motivated by his faith to set up Amnesty, would be "shocked" by the report.
“I am sure he would also be alarmed at branding groups which champion single sex spaces, religious liberty, the rights of the unborn, and defend the rights of disabled people at the end of life, as anti-right in this way," he said.
He continued: “It is a shame that Amnesty, which claims to champion human rights, remains silent on so many issues, such as Christians being arrested for silent prayer if they are deemed to be standing in an abortion centre buffer zone.
“But should we be surprised? Amnesty has long since abandoned any pretence of defending the ultimate human right - the right to life.
“In recent years, Christians have faced growing hostility and, as a former Archbishop of Canterbury said, being forced out of the ‘public square’. And ideologically captured campaign groups pick and choose which rights they think are important and worth defending. It is so sad that they never appear to be those of Christians.”
Christian pro-life group CBR UK said it was “remarkable” it had been labelled an “anti-rights” group.
“We are standing for the right to life of babies in the womb and for the right of their mothers - and society as a whole - to know the facts about the humanity of the unborn child and the reality of abortion,” it said.
“Meanwhile, Amnesty International campaigns for babies to be killed by abortion throughout the whole nine months of pregnancy - a far cry from its original mission.”
Other organisations singled out in the report were the Core Issues Trust and the International Foundation for Therapeutic and Counselling Choice (IFTCC), which support therapy for those with unwanted same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria. The report accused the IFTCC of promoting “conversion practices”, something it denies, and said it should face increased scrutiny.
IFTCC founder Dr Mike Davidson said, “A genuinely rights-based society should protect freedom in both directions.
"It should protect those who seek identity-affirming care, and it should equally protect those who voluntarily seek other lawful forms of therapeutic or pastoral support.
“Human rights should safeguard individual conscience and choice, not privilege one contested ideology while excluding all others.”
Christians were not the only ones denouncing the report.
JK Rowling said it suggests “Amnesty believes certain kinds of humans don’t deserve rights”.
For Women Scotland (FWS), which won the Supreme Court ruling establishing a biological definition of sex under the Equality Act, accused Amnesty of defaming women’s organisations.
“FWS is only ‘anti-rights’ if you don’t consider women to be entitled to any rights in law or public life. It’s a sad state of affairs that Amnesty has sunk so low as to defame prominent women’s organisations, including a rape crisis centre and support networks for abused wives and children,” it said.
Scottish Conservative deputy leader Rachael Hamilton told The Scotsman: “It is astonishing that Amnesty International has chosen to brand organisations defending women’s rights and supporting female survivors of sexual violence as ‘anti-rights’.”
Murdo Fraser MSP said he was "appalled and disgusted" by the report and had written to Amnesty to demand "an urgent explanation and apology".
"I fully intend to raise this matter with the Charity Commission. You should be ashamed," he said.
A spokesperson for Amnesty said, “We have temporarily removed this briefing while it undergoes an internal review.
“Amnesty International UK remains committed to researching and campaigning on human rights issues, including our vital work defending trans rights.”
