Pages Menu
TwitterRssFacebook
Categories Menu

Posted by on Jun 18, 2011 in Society | 4 comments

United Nations Passes First Ever LGBT Rights Resolution


Slowly but surely our governmental bodies are moving towards acceptance of what has already been culturally recognized: It’s okay to be gay.

New York is one vote away from legally recognizing same sex marriage. There are widespread expectations that the legislation will pass next week. Last week a federal judge upheld the ruling striking down California’s Proposition 8 and a U.S. Bankruptcy Court held that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional.

In the face of all of this, opponent arguments remain demonstrably bankrupt.

Meanwhile, on the global stage, the United Nations endorsed the rights of gay, lesbian and transgender people for the first time ever yesterday. U.S. ambassador Eileen Chamberlain Donahoe explains the significance:

“You just witnessed a historic moment at the Human Rights Council and within the U.N. system with a landmark resolution protecting human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people.”

South Africa, Brazil, and 39 other co-sponsors introduced the resolution. The final vote was 23-19 with China, Burkina Faso, and Zambia abstaining. European Union members, the United States, and much of South America were in favor, African and Middle Eastern countries opposed.

The single page declaration is cautiously-worded. The joint press release from 17 human rights organizations.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2011 The Moderate Voice
  • merkin

    Slowly but surely our governmental bodies are moving towards acceptance of what has already been culturally recognized: It’s okay to be gay.

    I have always underestimated the resilience of homophobia, racism, misogyny and xenophobia in society. To me it is a matter of wasting the potential of a large part of the population for no good reason. It is the engineer in me I suppose.

    I can only applaud these small, agonizing, pitiful steps toward recognizing an obvious truth.

  • ShannonLeee

    well put merkin

  • Indefatigably

    Unfortunately, the U.N. track record of actually enforcing human rights is abysmal.

    They are in fact a major violator of human rights themselves just about every place they have ever deployed or had even just a diplomatic presence.

    So while this is nice window dressing, I fail to see any substance.

  • DLS

    The UN doesn’t create or confer any kind of “rights.” Just look at the catalog of these prior to this act. Nothing more need be said (though anyone with a brain who reviews it also will snicker).

    As to its hypocrisy (not just in violating rights but in violating all other kinds of ethics as well as practicing far-left politics in addition to the ugly geopolitics it was supposed to rise above and ideally to replace, or supplant), well, that’s nothing new.

    How about that “racism conference” a while ago (typical far-left BS and tainted geopolitics), or making terrorist kingpin Arafat the recipient of a gift of legitimacy by letting him address the UN (General Assembly, the zoo) in 1974, making him a terrorist celebrity superstar (and a handy geopolitical bludgeon)?

    Wait till they get their paws in the future on something more broad, like “economic and social reform” for the globe (i.e., attack the West, with some Western dupes’ blessing, again, and seek to get an enormous income and wealth transfer, above and beyond colonial and other “reparations”).

    Embryonic or skeletal first-moves toward world government? HA

    If anything, having the UN act or state on GBLT rights only degrades their latest subject.

    As to hypocrisy again (as others besides I have noted), I’m willing to bet, for example, that the UN that did a great study on aging and has spoken on behalf of rights of older people (see below), likely practices it in hiring and staffing. (Note+warning to GBLT)

    http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/ageing/documents/Intlday/pgme08.pdf

    And of course, what of substance does UN creation of “rights” (with leftist abuse of that word to mean claims or demands upon others) mean, exactly? What consequences arise from UN “rights” declarations or statements?

    Joe, as you can see, referring to the UN statement on anything changes the subject from the “anything” to the UN, because of what that organization is and does, in reality.

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com