19/12/08

In the company of bigots: US opposes gay rights at UN

The death rattle of the Bush administration puts it, once again, in the company of great defenders of human rights such as Russia, China and Saudi Arabia. This time, it breathes its sickness on gays.

The US is one of nearly 60 countries which stamped its feet in opposition to France’s declaration (made in the United Nations general assembly) that homophobia is a bad thing. The New York Times reports that 66 nations supported France as it called for homosexuality to be decriminalised around the world — some 80 countries still forbid people with similar genitals from having sex with one another.

Needless to say the Vatican and the Organization of the Islamic Conference, well known bastions of tolerance and human kindness, were at the forefront of the bigotry. They said allowing people who love one another to have sex “threatened to undermine the international framework of human rights by trying to normalize pedophilia”. Merry Christmas to you, too.

Be Sociable, Share!

This post was published on 19/12/08 in Ideology and HIV.

Send this post to a friend Send this post to a friend

4 comments

You can follow the comments on this post via this RSS feed.

Tags: , , , , , , , .

  1. Comment by Lee Rudolph, 20/12/08, 08:32:

    “Needless to say the Vatican”…

    It would be interesting to know nation-by-nation figures for the proportion of homosexuals in the population. Presumably for most nations the proportion is pretty much the same (at least, by some measures). On the other hand, a nation which is 100% a nation of immigrants, with no natural-born residents at all, might have a very atypical proportion. I can only think of one such nation at the moment.

    Do you think we could get a grant to study this?

  2. Comment by Paddy, 20/12/08, 08:43:

    On the other hand, it’s something of a good sign that the issue was even raised at the UN general assembly – even ten years ago, it would be hard to imagine anybody putting this forward, and impossible 20 years ago.

    Also, note the usual weasel words and slippery slope arguments on the part of the opposing document: http://uk.reuters.com/article/usTopNews/idUKTRE4BH7EW20081219.
    The fact that they are trying to shift the battleground to making this about states’ rights and paedophilia points up that they can’t morally defend this discrimination on its own “merits”.

    Maybe things will be brighter yet in another 20 years…

  3. Comment by elizabeth, 21/12/08, 08:55:

    Hmmm, let’s see. What if we picked a nation with no natural-born residents, with just a single gender that dresses like the other gender? I’ll write to NIH…

  4. Comment by Roger, 22/12/08, 07:42:

    Immigrants tends to takes with them their prejudices. They become exacerbated as soon as they turn “ex-pats”, so what when they become national values?

Comments are closed at this time.