The U.S. Goes Global With its Anti-Gayness

Funny thing about this great land of ours. She's got no problem fighting for what's right (Civil War), but she doesn't always make the simple stand for righteousness (Civil Rights movement).

This past Thursday the United Nations, which excels at issuing proclamations, circulated one that is as marginally effectual as it is symbolically strong. It was just a little ole declaration seeking universal decriminalization of homosexuality.

Wasn't saying Gays could get married.

Wasn't saying Gays could show up at your house and read your kids Heather Has Two Mommies.

It was just saying, you know: "Hey, Iran, when you're done with that show trial, could you possibly not hang those two guys who engaged in a love whose name you dare not speak."

And if you think I'm being hyperbolic, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay notes that ten countries still have laws making homosexual activity punishable by death.

But the U.S. did not sign the declaration.

You'd think in a country where presidential aspirants do song parodies about introducing rogue nations to the wonders of thermal nuclear diplomacy, the U.S. would have no trouble putting its John Hancock on something that would mock the backward nature of those "funny" little nations that aren't as forward thinking as we are.

Problem is, we'd be mocking ourselves.

The word is, as innocuous as the U.N. declaration was, it could turn into a sharp-toothed boomerang that, when set free, would whip around and bite Uncle Sam in the backside. See, in America it is not against the law to be gay. We just use the law to deny gays equal rights; the right to marry, the right to serve openly in the military... In some states the right to work and the right to fair housing.

So, really, it's not that American officials wouldn't sign the declaration, they couldn't for fear of overloading on hypocrisy and giving Gays an instrument to use in court cases.

But we weren't the only ones to abstain. Sure, a couple of small time left-leaning countries threw in with the U.N. Japan, Australia, Mexico. The entire EU.

But we stood strong with our buddies from the Organization of the Islamic Conference which issued a bewildering SAG-type declaration of their own against "the social normalization and possibly the legalization of deplorable acts" like pedophilia and incest. Sure. Along with dream stealing, alchemy and a bunch of other stuff homosexuals don't actually engage in either.

Hey, sorry to sell you short, Gays. Not our fault you don't have access to rich oil finds.

But, though your government has let you down, Citizen of Democracy, it hasn't abandoned you. She stands ready at a moment's notice to nuke Iran for being the least bit belligerent.

And that, not signing declarations, is the morally responsible thing to do.

For more opinion, visit www.thatminoritything.com

Comments

[SworldPeas]

I knew Prop 8 was going to pass months before the election. Sure enough as the election got closer I watched my marriage certificate dissolve right before my eyes. California THINKS its liberal but its not. There has been 4 democrat governors since 1939, 3 since the 60's. Prop 8 would certainly pass in a state that votes for a republican governor more times then not. Prop 8 proves homophobia is alive and well.

[lilith13]

What's really difficult for me to understand is the historical fact that black people were not considered to be free human beings in this country. I would think with a record like that that the new Prez would have some sort of understanding about all minorities wanting the same thing. Freedom to love whomever they choose and have all the rights that are written in the Constitution. I was so proud of my country for electing Obama, now what's he doing? There are a lot of us straight people who have no problem at all and are not interested in what goes on in anyones bedroom. Perhaps more of us should let him be reminded of history and call him on it. This is not right. What this is cow towing to the right. Get with the program, "times' they are a changin."

[InstantDogma]

My giant invisible friend
My giant invisible friend
He doesn't like anyone gay
He wants them to all. go away
My giant invisible friend

[Agentprovokatur]

Time for one of those things that those who practice that "Old Time Religion" would recognize.

Organize a "Shunning Party".

Many venues might be preparing to have inaguration parties.

Go ahead and Attend but when Warren takes the stage - and anyone attending in D.C. should do the same.

Stand and turn your back on him.

If you are so inclined - do the same when Obama is sworn in.

[NWBrunette]

So, since Mr. Obama is so openly supportive of the GLBT community (according to his statements and his website) he'll very soon be standing up in public and condemning this action. Right? ... hello?

[ObamaSheeple]

Another outstanding essay.

Thanks

[JohnBryansFontaine]

What is incredible here is that across HuffingtonPost's page, there is a story about white vigilantes murdering 'at least' eleven black men:

Report: White Vigilante Groups Blockaded Small Town In Post-Katrina New Orleans And Murdered Blacks

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/12/20/the-nation-katrina/

and Mr. Ridley is worrying about gay marriage. Is it really more important than the lives of 11 African Americans. It's no small blessing that our new President has vastly different priorities.

[Aegletes]

Implying that we as a nation can't simultaneously work to address violence against African Americans and the injustices endured by lesbians and gay men? I didn't realize we could only address one problem at a time.

[ObamaSheeple]

Exactly. The three named person's argument is invalid.

[JohnJames]

How about naming us a country where black people are put to death by the government for being black?

[FearlessFreep]

Sudan?

[StevenKeirstead]

Off topic, Mr. Ridley's post is not about gay marriage, it's about executions and lesser discriminations, like people loosing their livelihoods.

Sure the murder of anyone is horrible, and should be investigated and justice done. But consider this: around 20 homosexuals per year are lynched or murdered in the US.

[NWBrunette]

For most of us, it's not hard at all to work on two issues at once.

[chickenhawkwarrior]

For a country so "bigoted and racist according to the rest of the world, it sure is odd, that a MINORITY WAS JUST ELECTED PRESIDENT!!!! I know that we are "centuries" behind the enlightened world of Europe and Canada who have had minority leaders for, ummm, errrr, oh wait - NEVER!!!!!

Give me a break. Sure we have some problems, but the rest of the world should get their own house in order before casting the first stone...

You would think Ga-ys could be legally stoned like much of the Muslim world and that there were still Jim Crowe laws if you went by posts here...

[AliMB]

US mission at international bodies are generally under orders to abstain from decelerations/agreements that could create problems, conflicts, or contradictions on actual domestic laws. US laws are different from European laws, and the US has a federal structure where state governments have certain authorites in regards to gay civil rights issues. To argue that this refusal to sign a non-binding declaration is tantamount to an anti-gay position is false.

[StevenKeirstead]

To argue that it would have been harmful to support the declaration is ridiculous. But I'm not surprised GW Bush's administration does not care about the abuse of gays and lesbians in the world. That is what refusing to do the right thing says about our glorious leader and his cronies.

[QuietNetworker]

No, ChickenHawk...

...we would think that the US would agree that places in the world
which stone gay people should be put on notice.

And that signing a NON-BINDING resolution to that effect would be
what we seem to hold as a 'moral' leadership.

It's precisely because it's not happening here, but it happening in
the countries that "joined us" in not signing that is telling.

Read the article before you post, perhaps?

Paulie Sabol

[coolmaiden]

Canada and almost all the countries in the EU, as well as Israel, Argentina, Nicaragua, Philippines, Liberia, and even Pakistan have had female leaders. Don't be so quick to rush to judgement.

[cminca]

You are aware that, in many states, gay bashing is NOT considered a hate crime? In the SF bay area today there were reports that a lesbian was kidnapped and gang-raped. It seems that the perpetrators saw her rainbow bumper sticker. They made anti-gay remarks during the rape.

Yep--thank god we live in America.

We should be embarrassed that such a fuss was made about the election of a black man or the possible election of a woman.

[NWBrunette]

It's amazing to me the ways in which people are so creative in the ways they come up with to cloak their homophobia. If only they used their creativity to actually solve problems.

[walleymr]

Agreed!

[Canadiamerican]

My Dad uprooted us from the security of Idaho and moved us to Canada in 1967. It took me a few years to forgive him and to realize it was the best move we could have made. As the years pass, I grow ever more thankful that I no longer live in a country as bigoted, racist, classist, homophobic,xenophobic and hypocritical as the US. Bastion of freedom and democracy my ass.

[chickenhawkwarrior]

Yeah, ummm, I tink the us has changed just a little since then, eh? For a country so "bigoted and racist according to the rest of the world, it sure is odd, that a MINORITY WAS JUST ELECTED PRESIDENT!!!! I know that we are "centuries" behind the enlightened world of Europe and Canada who have had minority leaders for, ummm, errrr, oh wait - NEVER!!!!!

Give me a break. Sure we have some problems, but the rest of the world should get their own house in order before casting the first stone.

[AliMB]

the US has the highest percentage of ethnic minorites who hold democratically elected office in the world (for a country where positions are not assigned quotas based on ethnicity or race). that is fact. i dont know with how that concurs with a statement that the US is "bigoted" (an absolute which has no empirical basis). Oh, and let us not forget that the US will elevate a black man to the most important position in the world. Or that a Black woman/man has served as America's chief diplomat i.e. foreign representative to the world for the past 8 years.

[NWBrunette]

Nobody cast a stone. It was a sensible UN declaration we didn't sign. It was a gross and insulting mistake to not sign it. All you need to see that is your own moral conscience, presuming your listening.

[AliMB]

i think your analysis on the superiority of the Canada vis-a-vis civil rights and human rights is far fetched. I dont know have any idea where you live in Canada, but if you travel to some of the more rural areas and away from the cities you may have a different opinion. however, you are entiled to your opinion and I'm glad you enjoy living in Canada.

[brantl]

You're arguing with someone that actually lives there, and yet you pretend to know more about it than they do? Unreal.

[chickenhawkwarrior]

Oh, and if you are from Canada, then you must admit there is a huge problem between english and french speaking canadians. The "bigoted" names I have heard both sides call the other right out in public in Canada.... You would never hear any ethnic group act like that towards another in public anywhere in the US.... And I have bl-ack friends who live in Canada, and surprise, it is not as rosy as you say when bi-racial dating is involved...

[JayJonson]

you are amazingly misinformed (not to say deliberately indifferent to the truth). In the first place, Canada has hate speech laws which forbid the kind of hate speech we tolerate in this country. Canadians are able to discuss differences more calmly than we are, and the "conservatives" there are far more liberal than the liberals here.

[eilish]

Everyday the wince factor still hits when reading the news of our great Christian Right repugnant government's showing on the world stage. Once again, in ignorance, the Bush administration makes Americans look like intolerant fascists. Yup, we're right up there with our best buddies in the Middle East.

[AliMB]

again, the US mission's decision not to sign this was probably to avoid signing a declaration (tantamount to a communiqué of official position) that had language that could be interpreted as running counter to current law. Usually these declarations are loaded with nuanced language; sometimes they can spend weeks negotiating a sentence, or use words that are so ambiguous as to create confusion between different member countries as to the meaning. US mission at international bodies are generally under orders to abstain from decelerations/agreements that could create problems, conflicts, or contradictions on actual domestic laws. that has been my experience. George Bush may or may not have had a hand on this decision, it is unclear. PE Obama would have probably done the same thing.

[montex]

I doubt that. But we will see, won't we?

[JayJonson]

I see, you are agreeing that Obama is as indifferent to gay rights as many are saying here.

[ceti]

This declaration is only the latest of a series of anti-international community decisions made by the US Administration. This global moral turpitude has a long history though. The US never joined the League of Nations which was the invention of its own president. It refused to join the International Criminal Court or Kyoto during the Clinton Era. It has voted virtually NO on everything since then, with the Cluster bomb ban and Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People being the latest outrages. For the last two decades, it has stood increasingly alone (with Israel and few island states) in rejecting calls to ends its embargo on Cuba with farcically lopsided margins of 185 to 3 in the latest GA vote.

In the latest declaration which has divided the UN right down the middle, the US's position is a bit hazier, although the states' rights argument seems paramount.

[AliMB]

As i have mentioned before, many of these legal documents are loaded with nuanced language; with sentences and words that are so ambiguous as to create confusion between different member countries as to their meaning. US missions at international bodies are generally under orders to abstain from declarations/resolutions that could create problems, conflicts, or contradictions with the federal system or actual domestic laws. You make a fair point about the lopsided-ness of GA resolutions considering Cuba and Israel, even if the reasons for voting against the measures were legit e.g. a condemnation of Israeli military incursions without simultaneously condemning terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians. Another point, the Cluster bomb and land mine bans were rejected by the US because it failed in part to recognize differences or create exceptions for superior US technology e.g. smart land mines. But please do not interpret that it is my personal opinion that the US voting record on international accords is correct all the time, I am only attempting to convey some information.

[ceti]

The US has very little moral authority left to dictate to anyone about human rights, especially when its human rights reports, immigration policies, and entire foreign policy are so farcically partisan and propagandistic (criticizing potential enemies, and going lightly on allies).

Anyways, leveraging this moral authority has always been an an hypocritical and imperious way of conducting business. In this case, you have to go with the beautiful French secretary of state for human rights, Rama Yade.

[AliMB]

the US has always been imbalanced in its criticism of the HR records of other members states at the UN... that is the nature of foreign relations, and not in any way a poor reflection on the United States because every Western country does it. FYI, 'adversary' states tend to have the most flagrantly poor HR records; please see the countries placed under the State Dept's "outpost of tyranny" category. there are few exceptions that i can think off the top of my head of a country not belonging to that category because of its good relations with the US, Saudi Arabia being one, arguably Egypt being another. The US domestic HR record is on par with the best in the world, and thats an objective analysis. Coincidently, the UN human rights commission contains some members with astonishingly repressive governments.

[JayJonson]

I think "objective" organizations like Amnesty International have seriously faulted the human rights record of the United States, particularly when compared to western European nations.

[brantl]

You seem to have missed some very important facts, like the fact that we are currenlty doing and are complicit in other nations doing TORTURE. GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF YOUR BUTT.

[cbjames]

This is exactly why Rick Warren's presence at Obama's swearing in matters so much.

He is not delivering a prayer in a vacuum. He is a man devoted to the opression of gay and lesbian people who has been given an international stage to promote himself. The world will be watching. The entire world. And Mr. Obama has chosen to give that honor to a hate filled bigot.

I can't wait to see whom he appoints to the Supreme Court.

[clevelandchick]

You are so right cbjames. Those who discriminate and fight against civil rights have no place on any stage. Their views should be shunned not tolerated.

[BSERIUS]

Actually THE GLOBE WENT GLOBAL and it was not "anti -Gayness".. Russia, China ,Islam ,Catholicism comprise most of the planet .. The US and many other nations agreed that this was anti progress

[RussellH]

Ah, the old "safety in numbers" canard! Shame on us!

[AliMB]

refusal on part of the US to sign this deceleration does not equate anti-gayness... pls read my post on this (currently 2nd page)... this issue i.e. the signing of this particular decleration is being blown out of proportion, IMO.

[Ant]

"refusal on part of the US to sign this deceleration does not equate anti-gayness"

How the hack would you know? It wouldn't surprise me one bit that the Bush administration forwent signing it because they thought it was too pro-gay.

[JimmyG55]

The question really is would that resolution have been signed had Obama been the actual
President of the USA or is the refusal to sign the UN anti-discriminatory declaration just more of the pernicious Bushism we have had to burden under for the past eight years? If Obama and his new team defend the USA's refusal to end Gay discrimination then I have voted for the wrong man.

[friskee1]

if if if...he hasn' t done anything yet. unless you have a crystal ball and can see into the future, leave the speculation out..