U.N. Seeks Criminal Sanctions
Against Foes of 'Gay Rights'


 Thursday, April 24, 2003

Austin Ruse reports:

A heated debate took place today at the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in Geneva, as members considered an unprecedented proposal to expand the U.N.'s definition of discrimination to include discrimination based upon "sexual orientation."

The resolution, introduced by Brazil and co-sponsored by 19 other nations, including most European nations and Canada, is the first resolution in U.N. history to link homosexuality with human rights law. One advocacy group, International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission, describes the resolution as "a historic opportunity to advance LGBT [Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender] issues in international human rights law."

The resolution "Calls upon all states to promote and protect the human rights of all persons regardless of their sexual orientation" and for the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights "to pay due attention to the phenomenon of violations of human rights on the grounds of sexual orientation." It "Expresses deep concern at the occurrence of violations of human rights in the world against persons on the grounds of their sexual orientation."

In an effort to defeat this measure, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, Libya and Malaysia have introduced amended resolutions in which all references to sexual orientation have been deleted. The United States, a member of the commission, did not co-sponsor the original Brazilian resolution, nor did it introduce an amendment of its own.

Pro-family legal scholars are deeply concerned with the Brazilian proposal. A. Scott Loveless, associate professor of law at the World Family Policy Center at Brigham Young University, believes: "The remedy proposed may have worse societal implications than the alleged disease, which is so-called homophobia. It is highly likely that gay rights advocates will use this resolution, if it passes, to advance their agenda to legalize gay marriage and to create hate-crimes legislation."

Thought Crimes for Big Brother to Persecute

Loveless notes that "in their quest to legitimize homosexuality, many of these countries have actually limited some of our most fundamental freedoms, including freedom of speech. In Canada and Great Britain, people who have spoken out against homosexual behavior have been criminally prosecuted for speaking, not for actually harming anyone."

Jane Adolphe, assistant professor of law at Ave Maria Law School, believes that the resolution may be used against the Catholic Church. According to Adolphe, "This initiative opens the door for further attacks on the church. With respect to the commission, individuals could presumably use this discrimination language to bring complaints against the church with regard to hiring, employment, even the doctrines of the church itself."

An official present at the meeting told Ruse's Friday Fax that it was "a difficult discussion, a heated discussion, because of the quite delicate subject matter, and the fact that this has never been discussed before." A vote on the resolution and its amendments will likely occur tomorrow, report Ruse, president of C-FAM (Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute).  

[COMMENT: For those out there who think that it is not yet affecting you, read the above again.  Dear reader, if you will not stand against this travesty of public policy, who will?  If not now, when?  Suggest a reading of Homosexuality: Good & Right in the Eyes of God? for a lesson in God's winning strategy.


A Follow-UP

----- Original Message -----
From: Robert A Jason
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 6:00 PM
Subject: HOW SWEET IT IS!!! Canada and other anti-family bigots defeated at U.N!!!

LifeSite News, April 28, 2003

GENEVA, 25 April (UN Information Service) -- The United Nations Commission on Human Rights concluded its 59th (2003) annual session Friday voting to postpone consideration of the controversial proposal to ban discrimination based on "sexual orientation."  International law experts have warned that approval of such language could threaten religious rights.

The motion, which was sponsored by Brazil and co-sponsored by
CANADA, was heavily promoted by the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC).  The Commission decided, in a recorded vote of 24 in favour and 17 against, with 10 abstentions, to postpone consideration of the draft resolution until its sixtieth session.

While the
U.S. abstained on the vote, the 17 nations wanting to promote the anti-family resolution included: Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Croatia, France, Germany, Guatemala, Japan, Mexico, Poland, Republic of Korea, Sweden, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

See related LifeSite coverage:

See the UN release on the vote:

[COMMENT: The extraordinary incompetence of "our side" to argue the Biblical, Godly case is almost beyond understanding.  There is seldom any attempt to tell what homosexual behavior is, nor the horrendous medical and psychological aspects of it.  Until we connect the empirical data with the moral and spiritual data, we will continue to have little or no respect from people "out there".

Read also Rabbi Dennis Prager's article on the three contending forces in the world today.  This "UN" view is what Prager calls "European", i.e., so-called secular liberal democracy, which is neither liberal nor democratic, and is the the political side of the homosexualist agenda.  These politicians are cynically using homosexual people for their own agenda.  They do not give a hoot about real people dying of AIDS.  E. Fox]

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Go to:  => TOP Page;  => UN International Library;  => POLITICS Library;  => ROAD MAP