Reproductive rightists.

Kate O'Beirne's article "Agendas All Their Own" (Jan. 26) accuses international nongovernmental organizations that engage in advocacy--including ours--of covertly seeking "to impose their policies through undemocratic means." There are two key fallacies in her argument.

First, ensuring that governments respect human rights is a precondition of--not an anathema to--free and open democracies. As world history has demonstrated with chilling frequency, majority rule can be used for good or ill. The touchstone of a true democracy is when the power of the majority is limited by the protection of rights, such that a nation's citizens may live in freedom and equality.

Second, we do not "prefer" to act covertly. The dictionary defines advocacy as "defending or maintaining a cause." That's what we do: use our freedom of speech to publicly and openly advocate for the recognition and protection of women's reproductive rights. We're certainly not hiding our views. Our briefs in courts and human-rights bodies around the world are publicly filed. Hundreds of thousands of people each year, from more than 150 countries, visit our website and download over half a million documents--legal analysis, fact sheets, issue statements--that articulate our positions.

By advocating the rule of law--both constitutional law in the U.S. and international human-rights law--we argue for the creation of free and fair societies. What O'Beirne calls "eschew[ing] democratic processes," we call putting our faith in the highest ideals of democracy.

Finally, for the record, the Center receives no government funding. We are funded wholly by private donors, who are listed in our annual reports.

Nancy Northup

President

Center for Reproductive Rights

New York, N.Y.

KATE O'BEIRNE REPLIES: The CRR makes no secret about what it seeks as self-appointed arbiter of what constitutes a fundamental human right, i.e., abortion on demand in every country on earth. To avoid the consent of the governed, the "power of the majority" Nancy Northup fears must be constrained by undemocratic international tribunals that seek to impose their interpretations of treaties and accords on democratic states. No wonder CRR's leaked memos (neither publicly filed nor available to its worldwide website visitors) note the "stealth quality" of their work.

Why slug it out in democratically elected legislatures when the U.N provides one-stop shopping sans the pesky necessity of persuasion, compromise, and consensus?

Finally, for the record, while my article explained that many NGOs are publicly funded, it also noted CRR's private funding.