Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
UN Split Over European Initiative
Share:
by Rhonda J Mangus | December 19, 2008 at 11:38 am
299 views | 50 Recommendations | 22 comments
Videos
Photos
The European Initiative received strong opposition to decriminalizing homosexuality. Only sixty-six countries at the United Nations signed the declaration, while another sixty, including the United States, failed to sign the declaration that would end execution, arrest, and detention of homosexuals and trans-sexuals.
The countries signed a declaration sponsored by France and the Netherlands demanding an end to legal punishment based on sexual orientation.
Sixty other countries of the UN's 192 member states, including a number of Arab and African states, rejected the non-binding declaration.
They said laws on homosexuality should be left to individual countries.
Gay men, lesbians and transsexuals worldwide face daily violations of their human rights.
Homosexuality is a criminal offence in more than 80 countries, while in at least seven nations, including Saudi Arabia, sex between men can be punished with the death penalty.
The Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen said it was a significant declaration.Yet there is considerable opposition to this at the UN. Socially conservative countries in the Arab world and in Africa did not want anything to do with it.
Syria spoke on behalf of 60 countries, arguing that domestic laws should be respected, and claiming the declaration could legitimise deplorable acts including paedophilia.
The US was the only major Western nation not to sign the declaration.
Thanks to NP Author Rob Walker for passing this story along.
Also on NowPublic:
French-Backed Declaration May Provoke Muslim States
European Initiative: Universal Decriminalization of Homosexuality
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Crowd Power
-1.jpg)
Rhonda J Mangus
North Tonawanda, New York, United States
Related Stories
Recommendations (50)
Jordan Yerman
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
rahul
Caracas, Distrito Capital, Venezuela
Paschen
Narita, Chiba, Japan
Amy Judd
Vancouver, Canada
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (22)
at 11:51 on December 19th, 2008
It would be interesting to list which countries supported the non-binding resolution.
at 12:12 on December 19th, 2008
Thank you, Tikun. Interesting choice of words too "...non-binding resolution." Perhaps this article will provide you with the additional information that you are seeking, "US balks at decriminalizing homosexuality"
at 12:26 on December 20th, 2008
Thanks for the link. But it does say in the article that it is non-binding. Maybe this policy will change with the new administration.
at 23:45 on December 20th, 2008
Tikun, you are very welcome! I am concerned that the use of the term "non-binding" is leading people to believe that homosexuals do not have rights. All people are born free and equal in dignity and rights and are entitled to the rights set out in the Declaration of Universal Human Rights, without distinction. The purpose of the European initiative is to draw attention to the fact that homosexuals are still being persecuted throughout the world in light of their rights as set out in the Declaration of Universal Human Rights. I wouldn't count on the United States who has also failed to ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
at 20:53 on December 21st, 2008
The US supreme court already did that.
I don't think it should be a crime but each country can set its laws, different coutures see it differently.
at 02:44 on December 24th, 2008
158, thank you for reading, commenting, and for the recommendation. United Nations' members are obligated to follow International law. Unfortunately, I am seeing countries such as China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Syria, the United States, etc., believe that they are above International law. Further, it is my opinion that "cultural differences" do not entitle anyone to degrade, torture, or even kill someone because they are perceived as different based on religious (or any other) belief system.
at 13:55 on December 20th, 2008
Personally I think this should be a unified decision and not left to each country - it's more a human rights issue than anything else - in my opinion.
at 23:47 on December 20th, 2008
Amy, thank you for reading, commenting, and for the recommendation.
at 03:56 on December 21st, 2008
I still think that individual countries should have the right to decide what is in the best interests of their country. It is also the right of countries to band together on issues and diplomacy to put pressure on those States that do not share their values. I am always suspicious of the tyranny of the majority for any reason. I am NOT speaking to this issue in particular which we all know in the West is pretty much understood. I am speaking to the need by old-white men and women of Europe that have a great need to wield their power beyond their respective countries in order to have a more powerful pulpit to push themselves and their political agendas even if the majority EU countries are not in favor.
Tel Aviv is a haven for Palestinian Gays fleeing persecution from family, friends and their society. It is one of the most liberal and tolerant places in the world for different kinds of orientation and life styles.
Peace,
Steve
at 07:26 on December 21st, 2008
Peace to you too, Steve. However, I continue to think that there is some confusion over United Nations Declaration for Human Rights, particularly as related to its member states.
The United Nations has 192 member states, 142 more than it had in 1945 when 50 countries met in San Francisco at the United Nations Conference on International Organization to draw up the United Nations Charter. Every member state is obligated to adhere to the Charter. The United States often egregiously defies the purposes of the United Nations, of which it is a member.
"The purposes of the United Nations, as set forth in the Charter, are to maintain international peace and security; to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples; to cooperate in solving international economic, social, cultural and humanitarian problems and in promoting respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms; and to be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in attaining these ends."
In other words, the dissenting countries/states are failing to uphold the Declaration for Human Rights and, in this case, it is fact that respect for GLBT human rights and fundamental freedoms are grossly violated.
at 08:00 on December 21st, 2008
i missed this, Sorry. I just read it and some of those arguments are not very mature. Some would not even agree to a non binding declaration.
at 08:28 on December 21st, 2008
Paschen, no need to apologize:)! Thank you for reading, commenting, and for the recommendation!
at 11:09 on December 21st, 2008
Sometimes I think the USA is a third world country. Maybe Obama will CHANGE all that.
at 13:59 on December 21st, 2008
sure
at 04:15 on December 23rd, 2008
The abuses taking place because of someone's behavior is abhorring.
But there are many countries who are founded on their religious beliefs, and can not sign such an initiative without turning against what they believe.
Just as I would never tell someone else what to believe, I expect the same treatment myself, and do not want to be told what to believe.
But the abuses need to end.
The Koran condemns such behavior, and in many cases death is the punishment.
The Holy Bible also condemns the behavior, but at no time does Jesus Christ teach to punish homosexuals, let alone kill them.
Many times religion takes the blame for these atrocities, which is not a fair assessment.
We need to remember that the minority does not represent the majority, and just because you have a small group who act ignorantly in the name of the majority, does not mean they truly represent the majority.
There has to be a middle ground where both parties can agree.
I would not ask someone to go against their beliefs, and at the same time we can not allow abuses against mankind, regardless of the reason.
Equal rights includes preserving everyone's rights, not just the minorities.
We have to respect the beliefs of others while working toward a solution. Otherwise we are just working towards taking others rights away.
What a mess our hate has gotten us into in this world.
at 02:58 on December 24th, 2008
Jawa lunk, it is my opinion that religion is to blame for these atrocities and has ended "us" in this mess, as well as the fact that people are not willing to challenge their belief systems. It is also my opinion that any belief system that condones torture, degrading treatment, killing, etc. needs to be quashed. It's that simple. As concerns the "majority" opinion -- what we need to remember is that they do not represent the minority.
at 05:27 on December 24th, 2008
I understand that the majority does not represent the minority, but that street runs two ways.
I do not agree at all with any mistreatment of human beings, but to blame religion is ridiculous.
Just because there are some extremists who hide behind supposed beliefs to commit atrocities does not conclude that true faith and beliefs are to blame.
That's about as silly as saying that terrorists represent everyone from the middle east.
Come on.
I thought those who were fighting for human rights, fairness and equal treatment were against lumping a group (for what ever reason) into a lump sum and judging them all?
I for one am a follower of Christ, and have never mis treated a person because of their sexual orientation, or what ever other "reason" some of the other people who "claim" religious beliefs have.
By you throwing me into the mix, and lumping me into the masses of your judgment, you are actually acting in the detestable manner you are supposedly fighting against.
I know of many instances where very bad things were done to gay people, by people who claimed no religious beliefs at all.
Evil, and acting against mankind is not necessary based on so called religious beliefs.
I would rethink my stand if I were fighting for the fair treatment, and human rights if I were judging people just as harshly as the ones I stood against.
at 15:05 on December 24th, 2008
Jawa Lunk, please accept my apology for the reason that it seems my comment offended you. Perhaps I should rephrase my comment:
I don't disagree that there are people of many faiths that reject the misuse of religion. It is the case however that
"In the post cold war world, ethnic conflicts are legion and religion is often involved since it forms part of group identity. The ravages of ethnicity and nationalism with a "religious" tinge are simply the biggest political problem of our time. There are many causes, but many groups cannot cope with a plural world and religious fundamentalism is, alas, a part of this."
Consequently, The Geneva Spiritual Convention Appeal, signed in October 1999.
at 17:48 on December 24th, 2008
No need to apologize, I am not offended at all!
I truly enjoy conversing with others about their passions, and I in no way am trying to incite an argument or "heated debate"... I much prefer to speak our hearts.
I do think however, that many people who have a cause in which they fight for sometimes lose sight of the real battle, and in classifying a certain "enemy" of their cause, they may blind themselves to the real issue.
I think you can agree that we can witness this in our very government taking place all the time.
By focusing aggression, angst and feelings of oppression upon any one group (ie religion, science, whites, blacks, east side, west side, Jews, Russians, etc...) as the "source", regardless of what the group is or stands for, of oppression can actually harm their cause.
You are passionate about the humane treatment of gays... and I am passionate about the humane treatment of all, regardless of race, religion, or beliefs.
Why? Because my "religion" instructs me in this way, and I have studied and found that Christ is about humanity.
And the very "religion" that leads me down a path of fighting for the humane treatment of all peoples, is that same religion that is being blamed by you for the mistreatment.
Sometimes in our blind rage, we make our greatest allies our enemies.
It is unfortunate for humanities sake that my system of beliefs have been scapegoated as the cause for your oppression...because it makes it that much more difficult for me, or others who are true followers of Jesus Christ, to help those who want nothing to do with me because they have been "taught" that I am the cause of their oppression, and I and my beliefs are their enemy.
I will continue to serve my Lord, and if it is in my power to help another, I will do so.
Whether my help is received, or denied, my Lord is unchanging, and His love is unending, and my mission as long as I am on this earth is to reach people who are oppressed, and set them free from their oppressors.
at 18:22 on December 24th, 2008
Jawa Lunk, I am glad to learn that you are not offended. I am also glad to learn that you are in no way trying to incite an argument or "heated debate". And, I am also glad to know that whether your help is received or not, your "...Lord is unchanging, and His love is unending, and [that your] mission as long as [you are] on this earth is to reach people who are oppressed, and set them free from their oppressors." I find this all very encouraging and thank you for your efforts on behalf of the oppressed.
To the balance of your comments, I would refer you again to The Geneva Spiritual Convention Appeal and to my Channel.
Thank you.
at 06:37 on December 25th, 2008
I have read it, but I am not really sure what you are wanting me to comment on about it?
Sorry.
at 18:41 on December 25th, 2008
Jawa Lunk, I simply wanted you to review and fully reconsider The Geneva Spiritual Convention Appeal for the reason of your comment, "And the very "religion" that leads me down a path of fighting for the humane treatment of all peoples, is that same religion that is being blamed by you for the mistreatment.
Sometimes in our blind rage, we make our greatest allies our enemies.
It is unfortunate for humanities sake that my system of beliefs have been scapegoated as the cause for your oppression...because it makes it that much more difficult for me, or others who are true followers of Jesus Christ, to help those who want nothing to do with me because they have been "taught" that I am the cause of their oppression, and I and my beliefs are their enemy."
And, I directed you to my Channel for the reason of your comment, "You are passionate about the humane treatment of gays... and I am passionate about the humane treatment of all, regardless of race, religion, or beliefs."