Radical Homosexuals Outline Strategy for Advancing their Agenda at UN

Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute | Samantha Singson | July 19, 2007

(NEW YORK — C-FAM) Claiming that “the tide has turned” in favor of homosexual rights at international institutions, University of British Columbia professor Douglas Sanders’ recent paper on “Sexual Orientation in International Law” published by the International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA) includes a detailed history on how homosexual rights have advanced in Europe and how the European example could be followed at the United Nations.

Sanders, the first openly gay individual to address the UN and deliver a speech on homosexual issues, concedes that “sexual orientation” and “gender identity are not mentioned in any of existing international human rights instruments” but that “through invoking provisions on personal privacy and general provisions on equality,” homosexuals have been able to gain some recognition in the international human rights arena. Many Member States of the UN would disagree with Sanders analysis. The European Union is another story, though.

According to Sanders analysis of the EU, two essential elements have laid the foundation for the advancement of the homosexual agenda: the repeal of any anti-homosexual criminal laws and the prohibition of discrimination. With these two elements in place, Sanders details a progression of homosexual rights in the realms of parental custody, inheritance laws, immigration rights for same-sex partners, government-sponsored educational programs against any criticism of homosexuality in schools as well as paving the way for cases challenging laws against same-sex unions and homosexual adoption.

Homosexuals have not been so successful, however, at the United Nations. After repeated attempts, homosexual rights activists have failed to gain inclusion of “sexual orientation” on the non-discrimination category list in UN documents and conferences. Only one UN resolution, on extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary executions, includes an explicit reference to the term.

While no existing international human rights instrument explicitly recognizes “sexual orientation,” UN bodies such as the Human Rights Committee have interpreted terms such as “other status” and “sex” to include it. Activists have brought discrimination cases before the committee in attempts to secure recognition of same-sex unions using the “right of men and women of marriageable age to marry and to found a family.”

The most high profile attempt to introduce “sexual orientation” into the UN system, a resolution on “Human Rights and Sexual Orientation” introduced by Brazil at the 2003 Commission on Human Rights, failed after strong opposition. In condemning it, the Pakistani delegate, on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), called it an attempt “to develop norms which directly contradict fundamental value systems.” The incident is indicative of the deep divide on the issue between the EU, Canada and Brazil on one hand, and the OIC, Africa, and much of Latin America on the other.

Pro-family groups note that “sexual orientation” is not part of any binding UN document and warn that homosexual activists would use a non-discrimination clause in a UN document to argue for recognition of same-sex “marriage” and for hate crimes legislation. Muslim and Christian groups fear that accepting the term “sexual orientation” could deny religious faiths the freedom to criticize the homosexual lifestyle.

For more news visit us at www.c-fam.org

Copyright 2007 – C-FAM (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute).
Permission granted for unlimited use. Credit required.

Comments

  1. Meona Goodday says:

    Ugh.

  2. Unfortunately, throughout the world, gays are still targeted for physical violence, often with the implied (and sometimes expressed) consent of the government in which they reside. In Moscow recently, gay citizens who were gathering peacefully were bloodied by Russian Orthodox and Socialist protesters. Gatherers in Jerusalem were threatened also with physical violence, and anti-gay haredim rioted and burned property. In Nepal, two young women were detained by Communist Maoists before being starved and beaten for suspicion of being lesbians.

    In several countries—including Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Mauritania, Sudan, Pakistan, the United Arab Emirates, Yemen and parts of Nigeria—homosexuality is punishable by death.

    Thus, I’m not sure how I see how alleviating some of this is supposed to be seen as some sort of “conspiracy”.

  3. Michael Bauman says:

    Any unprovoked physical assualt on anyone for any reason ought to be illegal and prosecuted. If found guilty the prepetrators ought to be jailed. Period.

    The best way to blunt the Homosexual Agenda is simply to really enforce the laws against violence without regard to the the status of the person assualted. If the Russian Orthodox Bishops have any courage, they will condemn the attacks and intervene to stop them if necessary.

  4. Meona Goodday says:

    #3 Any unprovoked physical assualt on anyone for any reason ought to be illegal and prosecuted. If found guilty the prepetrators ought to be jailed. Period.

    The best way to blunt the Homosexual Agenda is simply to really enforce the laws against violence without regard to the the status of the person assualted.

    What he said.

    #2 Thus, I’m not sure how I see how alleviating some of this is supposed to be seen as some sort of “conspiracy”.

    I guess you haven’t heard about the preacher in Sweden who was arrested and jailed for preaching against homosexuality then? Google Åke Green if you have not. He might not have been the most diplomatic in his objection, but should he be jailed and threatened and protested because of it?

    IMO, laws like this are targeted at people like me who don’t think homosexuality is just an alternate lifestyle choice. I believe it is a sin like stealing, adultery and praying to false gods and that is what I teach my son. Laws like this would eventually make it impossible for folk like me to say that out loud–just like in Sweden.

    Because

  5. Christopher says:

    laws like this are targeted at people like me who don’t think homosexuality is just an alternate lifestyle choice.

    That is exactly right.

    JamesK knows this, he simply has another dog in this fight – and thinks your loss is a necessary evil…If he recognizes the evil at all…

  6. #4–
    I happen to agree with you in one respect; I believe that homosexuality should be morally and legally akin to praying to false gods.

  7. Michael Bauman says:

    Phil, your comment proves once again that you have no concept of morality.

  8. Uh, okay.

  9. Nancy L. says:
  10. Nancy L. wrote:

    My husband is always asking, “What happened to the Vikings!” They have changed…..since the Olde Days. How did they come to be reserved if not docile?

    They bought into Pietism.

  11. Michael Bauman says:

    Nancy,

    Some thoughts on law

    Jesus is the Alpha and Omega, all law is flows from Him and is fulfilled in Him.

    Since we have the Incarnation and partake of His Body and Blood the nature of law changes. It is not supposed to be only external anymore but primarily internal-written in our hearts.

    Capital Crimes: Everything we label a crime and many things we do not lead to the death of the soul. “If you call your brother a fool, you are worthy of death…isn’t that somewhere in John?

    Unlike the governing theology of Massachusettes Bay and Israel the focus is not on God’s wrath (although that is real), but on His forgiveness and on the Cross.

    He stands at the door and knocks, He does not break down the door with a battering ram. He never stops knocking

    The Law was given for a time to convict us of our sin, now the Life is with us and we must submit to His love if we are to be saved. Love cannot be compelled.

    IMO more will come to salvation if allowed to come freely and no one extra will be lost–this is not possible with man, but it is with God.

    If we submit our own hearts to the transforming and healing power of God’s love, then many around us will be saved.

  12. Nancy L. says:

    It is not supposed to be only external anymore but primarily internal-written in our hearts.

    WHEN? whenever was it ‘to be only’ external?

    Unlike the governing theology of Massachusettes Bay and Israel the focus is not on God’s wrath (although that is real), but on His forgiveness and on the Cross.

    HOW? how was Israel’s ‘governing theology’ God’s wrath?

  13. – Phil votes both remain not outlawed.

    Well, you might infer that that would be my vote. It wasn’t stated in this thread. But I’m happy to defend the contention that society, or a unit of it, such as the government or the family, should treat both the same.

    I’m curious how Michael managed to find fault with what I wrote in note 6 but not with the statement I was agreeing to in note 4.

  14. Nancy L. says:
  15. Nancy L. says:

    Note 13.
    Dear Phil:

    Oh – you caught me “inferring!” :) One of my worst faults since Childhood. Some of my family members (four aunts/uncles of my Grandparents 12 children) were born unable to hear/speak. They were deaf mutes. Two of them attended Gauladet School for the Deaf in Washington D.C. Something interesting is that one of them, Uncle Leonard, married a woman who was also deaf. She was an Ireland, same family as Archbishop John Ireland, St Paul, Minnesota — who was the nemesis of Saint Alexis Toth.

    But my father and mother would sometimes use sign language around us kids. Or directly to us, such as the sign for “Naughty!” Your two forefingers form a “T”. You move from X to T. But I hear my mother saying to me in my pre-puberty days — “Stop jumping to conclusions!!!”

    Thank you Phil