The UN has Voted to Remove Gays from Execution Protection

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e83ae94ae4b8.jpg[/atsimg]

The United Nations has voted to remove sexual orientation from a resolution against immoral executions. Sexual orientation had been on the list for the past ten years, alongside religion, ethnicity, and language as unacceptable reasons to execute civilians.
The motion, which was introduced by Morocco and Mali, was supported by 79 countries, opposed by 70, and there were 17 to abstain.
Looking over the list, I found very few surprises, with the exception of South Africa, which voted in favour of removing gays from execution protections despite having legalized same-sex marriage in 2006 via parliamentary vote. I’m not under the impression that South Africa has solved all of its homophobia problems, but their vote is a pretty bizarre contradiction and certainly a large step backwards.
At any rate, if you need a good reason why human rights issues should never be put to a vote, this seems like a pretty compelling demonstration. The deletion sends a baffling message to the world, easily interpretable as a sort of OK to executing gays simply for having a different sexual orientation.

Link

I am not gay but sexual preference should not be the means to execute someone.
These laws scare me and just gives me another reason to hate the UN and the direction it goes.

Countries that voted to delete sexual orientation from anti-execution measures:

Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belize, Benin, Botswana, Brunei Dar-Salam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, China, Comoros, Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guyana, Haiti, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Yemen, Zambia, Zimbabwe.

Countries that voted against:

Andorra, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bhutan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Estonia,Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland,India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Micronesia, Monaco, Montenegro, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Samoa, San Marino, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Venezuela.

Countries that abstained:

Antigua-Barbuda, Barbados, Belarus, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Colombia, Fiji, Mauritius, Mongolia, Papau New Guinea, Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Tuvalu, Vanuatu.

Death Penalty News

Funny this topic speaks to me about the conspiracies to create a one world government.
There really is no easy way this could ever be achieved except by force and conquest.
Religions and politics are too diverse and too spread out for any type of 'happy medium' on votes and topics such as these.
This time it was the homosexuals being singled out, what is next - race, religion, IQ, physical characteristics?
We all know how that story ends thanks to the Nazi party!

Well this is monumentally stupid. At least though we now have a list of all nations that are loose with human rights.

reply to post by AnteBellum


I don't get what your problem with this is, they are just making them equal to the rest of us, their sexual orientation shouldn't exclude them from being executed if required, while me not being gay doesn't exclude me.

That what I take from this, they are just saying your sexual orientation doesn't make you special, you are still a human being like the rest of us.

that said, I don't agree with execution, but I do agree with equality.

The deletion sends a baffling message to the world, easily interpretable as a sort of OK to executing gays simply for having a different sexual orientation.

but see that's not what it's saying at all, it's saying that just because you are GAY doesn't make you special enough not to be executed. This isn't saying because you are gay we will execute you, it's saying we don't care if you are gay or not.


It's still a troubling development but I guess it really comes down to if you consider being gay special compared to straight.

No. What you have here the stark beginnings of two obvious camps that are forming up, and this issue is a bell weather.

What you see here are the two groups and two very different agendas. The two which cannot live in harmony.

Actually ignore what I said, I had to re-read the entire article to actually "get it" yup, it is literally saying:

Being Gay is no longer considered an illegal reason to be executed. I took it competely backwards.

At least the Canadian government voted against this, and Harper is in no way shape or form, friendly to the gay community.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters


It didnt make being gay special. It made it so that your crime of BEING GAY wasn't an execution offense. Which it is in a number of these countries.

edit: I'm glad that you re-read it.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters

The United Nations has voted to remove sexual orientation from a resolution against immoral executions.

Very first line in the link provided by the OP.

This resolutions specific goal was do make a list of things that you could not execute people for.

If you are caught for commitng and executable crime, you will still be executed.

Feel free to ignore this, I was typing while you put up your second post.

reply to post by Aeons

It didnt make being gay special. It made it so that your crime of BEING GAY wasn't an execution offense. Which it is in a number of these countries.

Yup, see my post above you, I didn't get that from the quotes, I had to read the full article twice.
=======

if you follow the OPs link scroll down a little more:

We know how controversial the issues surrounding sexual orientation can be. In the search for solutions, we recognise that there can be very different perspectives. And yet, on one point we all agree – the sanctity of human rights. As men and women of conscience, we reject discrimination in general, and in particular discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. When individuals are attacked, abused or imprisoned because of their sexual orientation, we must speak out. We cannot stand by. We cannot be silent.

Isn't that a slap in the face right there? Wow. UN fail.

edit: I'm glad that you re-read it.

lol me too. Glad the op linked to that site, quite informative, I'm actually amazed this is the first time I've encountered it.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters


The way I read it was a little different. Just like saying "Don't kill Catholics (for example) because you think their religion is wrong/ amoral", this list used to include "Don't kill gays because you think their lifestyle is wrong/ amoral".

Now, according to the countries that voted, it's OK to kill the gays because you don't like them. It's no longer a human rights issue, apparently.

Why can't we just agree that executing innocent civilians (this list was just for civilians) for any reason is wrong?

How exactly is this a U.N. fail?

The UN did exactly what it was supposed to do. It put it to a member vote.

If anybody failed it is the countries that voted to remove it, and those that abstained from voting.

Ironically, this is an example of democracy actually working.

Why can't we just agree that executing innocent civilians (this list was just for civilians) for any reason is wrong?

Probably the same reason the US isn't on that panel and didn't get a vote?

Honestly though, from the countries that voted for this, I'm not that surprised. The 17 that abstained, however, baffle me.

The UN did exactly what it was supposed to do. It put it to a member vote.

How?

The purpose of the United Nations is to bring all nations of the world together to work for peace and development, based on the principles of justice, human dignity and the well-being of all people. It affords the opportunity for countries to balance global interdependence and national interests when addressing international problems.

Source

Pretty darn clear how that is a fail to me. Then again I go by the dictionary definition of justice, dignity, and well-being of ALL people. I guess to some gays aren't people, go figure.

Each nation should be able to choice their social norms. Whom Algeria, Iran, or Benin executes is none of our business.

They are sovereign nation after all.

reply to post by Evola

Each nation should be able to choice their social norms.

they can, they just need to remove themselves from the UN and lose all the benefits that holds.

What you should find interesting is that Cuba and China are in the list.

China's is a bought vote. Now.....why?

Seeing this im so happy I live in Canada. Being gay and being pretty open from teenage years, i have never had to deal with hate crimes (hateful slurs and such but those roll right off me), and can't imagine myself in that situation...things like this make me love my country. I would consider leaving the country if possible in those countries which voted no (ESPECIALLY uganda), I couldn't live in fear everyday of my life, I refuse to.

I usually ignore alot of gay rights issues since I just want to be label free and live my life, but things like this scare me and need some serious attention from the world. I seriously find this disturbing, almost wish i didnt read it. S and F though, thanks for sharing this.

Ironically, this is an example of democracy actually working.

More like an example of democracy not working, and where justice will end up when we continue to worship democracy like a holy cow it is not, and install it into third world backwards countries and then consider them our peers. People are stupid.

Also, how many of those UN representatives were democratically elected?


It is good that UN does not have much real power, tough.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters


Perhaps we had to read it twice to understand it because from where I am standing the purveyor of human rights just slapped all gay people in the face and said you don't matter. In fact, they shouldn't even be allowed to live!

So, in South Africa, since gays can legally marry, what do they do...execute them instead of a honeymoon?

At least we now know which countries truly control the UN and which way the end result to all of this maneuvering is going to go. Hint: it's not in favor of human rights..

reply to post by Aeons

China's is a bought vote. Now.....why?

That one surprised me, too. Maybe to have more excuses to execute domestic threats?

Aeons - I couldn't agree with you more! There seems to be two distinct sides being formed as we speak.
The ones who feel we should have individual rights (or at least pretend to) and the ones who don't.

The rest of you seem to see through the reality this type of precedent makes.
I heard supporters of Sharia law were now also trying to get involved with a law that would enable muslims that convert to another religion to be stoned to death in certain countries. If this goes to fruition they can overturn religious preference the same way sexual preference has.

What good is the UN if it can be manipulated by majority votes based on religious, sexual preference and race?

The other thing that bothers me is the utter lack of press coverage this has generated.
All the news sites with any credence seem to have taken this off the archives or just not reported it to begin with.

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Aeons

 

China's is a bought vote. Now.....why?

That one surprised me, too. Maybe to have more excuses to execute domestic threats?

I'm going to suggest that China sells some votes it doesn't care about in order to assure their access to energy and not being blocked or hampered in economic trade by those other countries on that list.