posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 03:57 AM
Originally posted by The Old American
1. What rights exactly are being infringed upon that are exclusively gay? The article kept switching back and forth between the terms "gay rights" and
"human rights", but which gay rights were never mentioned.
Because "gay rights" and "human rights" are, for all intents and purposes, interchangable phrases; there's no functional difference. Unfortunately,
for a long time, they were legally
different - in that sexuality and gender identity were not mentioned in the Universal Declaration of Human
While it seems like just a "common sense" thing that since gay people are human, all human rights should apply to them equally, the legalese
mumbo-jumbo allowed for, eh, "alternative" interpretations. Basically this resolution affirms and puts into writing what was really there all along,
just unwritten and loopholed.
2. Why did the U.S. State Department take the lead on this? Why not the State Departments of other nations?
should it matter who takes the lead?
3. This is this most important question I have: How is this new legislation to be enforced? When is it to be enforced?
Same way all human rights are enforced... which brings us to the unfortunate fact that the UN has a hard time actually making any serious move on
human rights violations, since many nations in the UN have a vested interest in continuing some human rights violations while also having an interest
in stopping others. For instance, the US has an interest in protecting its own human rights violations in the Middle East, as well as covering
Israel's ass for its Human Rights violations. However the Us is an outspoken critic of Iran's human rights violations - unlike china, which covers
Iran's ass for economic reasons.
It'd be nice if the UN had more teeth to enforce human rights. But the UN doesn't really work that way. However it can lean moralistic pressure on
certain nations that are aiding and abetting; for instance Uganda's current drive to eradicate its gay people is being fueled and funded by American
Christians; with this resolution, perhaps the US will make moves to cut off American support for that travesty.
edit on 18/6/2011 by
TheWalkingFox because: (no reason given)