In a First, Gay Rights Are Pressed at the U.N.

In a First, Gay Rights Are Pressed at the U.N.

By NEIL MACFARQUHAR
Published: December 18, 2008


UNITED NATIONS — An unprecedented declaration seeking to decriminalize homosexuality won the support of 66 countries in the United Nations General Assembly on Thursday, but opponents criticized it as an attempt to legitimize pedophilia and other “deplorable acts.”

The United States refused to support the nonbinding measure, as did Russia, China, the Roman Catholic Church and members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. The Holy See’s observer mission issued a statement saying that the declaration “challenges existing human rights norms.”

The declaration, sponsored by France with broad support in Europe and Latin America, condemned human rights violations based on homophobia, saying such measures run counter to the universal declaration of human rights.

“How can we tolerate the fact that people are stoned, hanged, decapitated and tortured only because of their sexual orientation?” said Rama Yade, the French state secretary for human rights, noting that homosexuality is banned in nearly 80 countries and subject to the death penalty in at least six.

more...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/world/19nations.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper

It's not a surprise, but it's sickening and shameful.

we might be at a turning point for human and civil rights.
All the talk about Warren, Prop 8, etc., has got to be opening some eyes. I'm trying to keep the faith.

Obama's skeeved out by teh gays.

Because you're from Illinois, right?

You know exactly what he did and did not do for people that he considers morally inferior.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

And I'm really impressed with you calling names on a message board. Tough guy. Sticks and stones...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8006388&mesg_id=8006410

And, Obama was not the sponsor for the Illinois ENDA when it passed. It wasn't a priority, he didn't push for it. But he wanted his name because the political opportunist in him said it was a good thing.

Oddly enough, his BFF Rev. James Meeks voted against it. That's right. The whole time he was oozing charisma and leadership in the Illinois legislature, he couldn't convince his good friend to even accept the Illinois legislative copout--voting "present".

so much and think he's such a political opportunist, why are you here? We're supposed to be supporting the Dem nominee around here last I heard.

There must be someone out there who has done more who you can go cheerlead for. I just don't know who that would be.

As for the rest, be as heterosexist as you want.

what Rick Warren says. He equates my family with pedophiles other criminals. He's going to open the new administration with prayer! What century is this?

it will get reintroduced and the US will support it. I think there are going to be a lot of things reintroduced after Jan 20th

Nice going, Bush. Of course he wouldn't want to support anyone's human rights. God Forbid.

And the RCC, well...that's just...so hypocritical.

What year is this??? Unbelievable.

What the hell?

So they don't get to vote or sign things, but can shoot their mouth off when they feel like it.

Surprise, surprise.

The United States, China, Russia, and the Islamic Conference finally agree about something.

How noble.

People, it seems, need to die to defend heterosexual marriage.

The official American position was based on highly technical legal grounds. The text, by using terminology like “without distinction of any kind,” was too broad because it might be interpreted as an attempt by the federal government to override states’ rights on issues like gay marriage, American diplomats and legal experts said.

“We are opposed to any discrimination, legally or politically, but the nature of our federal system prevents us from undertaking commitments and engagements where federal authorities don’t have jurisdiction,” said Alejandro D. Wolff, the deputy permanent representative.


Funny. I thought the Feds did have jurisdiction over capital punishment.

And recommended