Friday, December 19, 2008

U.S. Joins Muslim Nations In Refusing To Sign UN Declaration To Decriminalize Homoseuxuality

WTF?


UNITED NATIONS – Alone among major Western nations, the United States has refused to sign a declaration presented Thursday at theUnited Nations calling for worldwide decriminalization of homosexuality.

In all, 66 of the U.N.'s 192 member countries signed the nonbinding declaration — which backers called a historic step to push the General Assembly to deal more forthrightly with any-gay discrimination. 

More than 70 U.N. members outlaw homosexuality, and in several of them homosexual acts can be punished by execution.

Co-sponsored by France and the Netherlands, the declaration was signed by all 27 European Union members, as well as Japan, Australia, Mexico and three dozen other countries. 


There was broad opposition from Muslim nations, and the United States refused to sign, indicating that some parts of the declaration raised legal questions that needed further review.


"It's disappointing," said Rama Yade, France's human rights minister, of the U.S. position — which she described as in contradiction with America's long tradition as a defender of human rights.

According to some of the declaration's backers, U.S. officials expressed concern in private talks that some parts of the declaration might be problematic in committing the federal government on matters that fall under state jurisdiction. In numerous states, landlords and private employers are allowed to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation; on the federal level, gays are not allowed to serve openly in the military.

Carolyn Vadino, a spokeswoman for the U.S. mission to the U.N., stressed that the United States — despite its unwillingness to sign — condemned any human rights violations related to sexual orientation.

Gay rights activists nonetheless were angered by the U.S. position.

"It's an appalling stance — to not join with other countries that are standing up and calling for decriminalization of homosexuality," said Paula Ettelbrick, executive director of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission.

She expressed hope that the U.S. position might change after President-elect Barack Obama takes office in January.

Also denouncing the U.S. stance was Richard Grenell, who until two months ago had been the chief spokesman for the U.S. mission to the U.N.

"It is ridiculous to suggest that there are legal reasons why we can't support this resolution — common sense says we should be the leader in making sure other governments are granting more freedoms for their people, not less," said Grenell, who described himself as a gay Republican. "The U.S. lack of support on this issue only dims our once bright beacon of hope and freedom for those who are persecuted and oppressed."

More than 50 countries opposed to the declaration, including members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, issued a joint statement Thursday criticizing the initiative as an unwarranted attempt to give special prominence to gays and lesbians. The statement suggested that protecting sexual orientation could lead to "the social normalization and possibly the legalization of deplorable acts" such as pedophilia and incest.

The declaration also has been opposed by the Vatican, a stance which prompted a protest in Rome earlier this month.

A Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said the Roman Catholic Church opposed the death penalty and other harsh repression of gays and lesbians, but he expressed concern that the declaration would be used as pressure against those who believe marriage rights should not be extended to gays.

A new Vatican statement, issued Thursday, endorsed the call to end criminal penalties against gays, but said that overall the declaration "gives rise to uncertainty in the law and challenges existing human norms."

The European nations backing the declaration waged their campaign in conjunction with the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Dutch foreign affairs ministerMaxime Verhagen, said countries that endorsed that 1948 document had no right to carve out exceptions based on religion or culture that allowed discrimination against gays.

"Human rights apply to all people in all places at all times," he said. "I will not accept any excuse."

He acknowledged that the new declaration had only symbolic import, but said it marked the first time such a large number of nations had raised the cause of gay rights in the context of General Assembly proceedings.

"This statement aims to make debate commonplace," he said. "It is not meant to be a source of division, but to eliminate the taboo that surrounds the issue."

Although the declaration's backers were pleased that nations on six continents had signed it, there were only two from Asia and four from Africa.

There may be more to this than I understand at this point, but from the information presented in this article, I have a very hard time understanding how we could have opposed such a non-binding resolution. The issues or whether landlords have a right to discriminate against gays, of whether gays can serve in the military, etc. have very little to do with whether homosexuality is considered to be criminal or non-criminal.

I will read more on this UN resolution, and I would not be surprised to find that AP is purposefully avoiding some very real issue in their article. However, as the information is presented, I find it appalling that the United States could not have done more.

The criminalization of homosexuality in Muslim nations, and the fact that the death penalty is often handed down for the crime of being gay, is one of the central issues of our time. The United States ought to be taking the lead on this issue, not citing technicalities in justifying opposition to such a resolution.

The truth of the matter is that the United States is actually at the forefront of "gay rights". There are only seven nations in the entire world where gay people can get married. One of those seven nations is the United States.

Same-sex marriage

Belgium
Canada
Netherlands

Norway (2009-1-1)
South Africa
Spain

Recognized in some regions

United States (CTMA)


It will be interesting to see whether the AP has buried some very reasonable American objection to this resolution.

5 comments:

The_Editrix said...

"The criminalization of homosexuality in Muslim nations, and the fact that the death penalty is often handed down for the crime of being gay, is one of the central issues of our time. The United States ought to be taking the lead on this issue, not citing technicalities in justifying opposition to such a resolution."

I wonder why the UN (and largely the rest of the world) didn't (and don't) consider it a "central issue" that in a Muslim country like Iran little girls are hanged. It seems it needs an extremely power-conscious pressure group like the gay lobby to shed some light on the inherent cruelty of that culture. Children have no lobby at all and feminists are rather yacking about the "glass ceiling" at home and give a shit for their "sisters" in Muslim countries and the third world generally.

Pastorius said...

Great point.

Ultimately, the UN is as useless as the United States allows it to be.

I'm beginning to think that our allowing the UN to continue to exist is criminal in and of itself.

The_Editrix said...

I agree about the UN.

I had this debate before with Islam-critics who are supporting any depravity if it only alienates Muslims. I don't think that we are doing ourselves and our culture a service that way. If conservative Westerners HAPPEN to find something offensive that offends Muslims as well (as, for example, the lewd display of sexuality) it is for different reasons and it would be madness to give something of cultural value up just to spite Muslims.

I have posted here about the hypocrisy in Islamic societies where homosexuality is widely practised yet heavily punished. (And guess what: it's OUR fault!)

Anonymous said...

How did China and Russia vote?

Perhaps the US was just taking an opposite position to those guys to, you know, take an opposite position to those guys.

Sounds infantile, sure, but we ARE talking about the UN here - an organization fucked-up beyond all repair.

I'd be tempted to show up at the UN with a fracking lampshade on my head and two or three feet of toilet paper trailing behind my boot. I'm sure John Bolton would understand.

Anonymous said...

"Islam is peace"...we are a peaceful nation who has, for two decades, marched along with the Ummah..fought their wars, and accepted their dictates.

It's far to late to start complaining at this late date.