http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2006/01 ... n12535.htm


U.S. Aligned With Iran in Anti-Gay Vote

(Washington, D.C., January 25, 2006) - In a reversal of policy, the United States on Monday backed an Iranian initiative to deny United Nations consultative status to organizations working to protect the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. In a letter to Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, a coalition of 40 organizations, led by the Human Rights Campaign, Human Rights Watch, the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission, and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, called for an explanation of the vote which aligned the United States with governments that have long repressed the rights of sexual minorities.

“This vote is an aggressive assault by the U.S. government on the right of sexual minorities to be heard,” said Scott Long, director of the LGBT rights program at Human Rights Watch. “It is astonishing that the Bush administration would align itself with Sudan, China, Iran and Zimbabwe in a coalition of the homophobic.”

In May 2005, the International Lesbian and Gay Association, which is based in Brussels, and the Danish gay rights group Landsforeningen for Bøsser og Lesbiske (LBL) applied for consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council. Consultative status is the only official means by which non-governmental organizations (NGOs) around the world can influence and participate in discussions among member states at the United Nations. Nearly 3,000 groups enjoy this status.

States opposed to the two groups’ applications moved to have them summarily dismissed, an almost unprecedented move at the UN, where organizations are ordinarily allowed to state their cases. The U.S. abstained on a vote which would have allowed the debate to continue and the groups to be heard. It then voted to reject the applications.

“The United States recklessly ignored its own reporting proving the need for international support for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. “The State Department’s ‘Country Reports on Human Rights Practices’ show severe human rights violations based on gender identity and sexual orientation occur around the world.”

As the U.S. government acknowledged in its 2004 country report on Iran, Iranian law punishes homosexual conduct between men with the death penalty. Human Rights Watch has documented four cases of arrests, flogging, or execution of gay men in Iran since 2003. In its 2004 country report on Zimbabwe, the U.S. government noted President Robert Mugabe’s public denouncement of homosexuals, blaming them for “Africa's ills.” In the past, Mugabe has called gays and lesbians “people without rights” and “worse than dogs and pigs.”
The U.S. has reversed position since 2002, when it voted to support the International Lesbian and Gay Association’s request to have its status reviewed. Officials gave no explanation for the change.

“It is deeply disturbing that, at the UN, the United States has shifted gears toward an aggressive stance against human rights for LGBT people,” said Paula Ettelbrick, executive director of the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission. “Unfortunately, denying LGBT groups a voice and a presence within the United Nations – the world's most important human rights institution – is fully in keeping with the U.S.’s assault on basic human rights principles worldwide.”

In voting against the applications to the NGO committee, the U.S. was joined by Cameroon, China, Cuba, Iran, Pakistan, the Russian Federation, Senegal, Sudan, and Zimbabwe. Votes in favor of consultative status came from Chile, France, Germany, Peru, and Romania. Colombia, India, and Turkey abstained, while Côte d'Ivoire was absent.

We are in some great company here.

Chalk up another win for the Bush administration.

I was gonna post this earlier, but I was too embarassed as an American.

Wow.

This is going to be the kind of thing that kids hear about in history texts 40 years from now that will just make them think that we were all bigots today. The fact that even most of the conservative voices on this forum (and we're mostly young adults) have no problem with gay people is stark evidence that the ignorance and bigotry of the older generation is quickly on the way to the dustbin of history.

Like gentile racism of 50 years ago, there will be no gentile homophobia in the next generation. It will be seen simply, as the blind hatred that it is.

Yeah, this really is embarassing.

THIS is why God kills us with hurricanes.

For the record, here's the reason provided by the US:

http://www.washblade.com/2006/2-3/news/ ... nambla.cfm

NATIONAL NEWS



U.S. cites NAMBLA in U.N. vote against gay groups
Bush administration sides with Iran, others

By LOU CHIBBARO JR
Friday, February 03, 2006



The United States received sharp criticism from human rights organizations last week when it supported a proposal by Iran to deny United Nations consultative status for two gay rights groups.

In a Jan. 23 vote at U.N. headquarters in New York, the U.S. delegation joined Iran and eight other countries to deny consultative status at the U.N.’s Economic & Social Council to the International Lesbian & Gay Association and the Danish National Association for Gays & Lesbians.

Among countries joining the U.S. and Iran in voting against the two gay groups were China, Cuba, Pakistan, Sudan and Zimbabwe, all of which have records of human rights abuses.

Obtaining consultative status allows non-governmental organizations to attend U.N. meetings and distribute literature promoting their causes. About 3,000 groups currently have such status.

A State Department spokesperson said the U.S. opposed ILGA’s application for consultative status because the North American Man Boy Love Association was once an affiliated member of the organization. NAMBLA advocates legalizing sexual relations between adults and minors.

"In this case, we did not vote against the group because it was a gay rights group, but because of its past association with a group condoning pedophilia," said spokesperson Edgar Vasquez, referring to ILGA.

Vasquez said he did not know why the U.S. voted against the Danish group’s application. Another spokesperson did not immediately return phone calls seeking comment. The Danish group has no known affiliation with NAMBLA.

Scott Long, director of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, & Transgender Rights Program for Human Rights Watch, an international human rights group, said ILGA has had no ties to pedophile groups for more than a decade following its decision to expel NAMBLA from its ranks in 1994.

Long said he suspects that the Bush administration used ILGA’s past affiliation with NAMBLA as a pretext for opposing U.N. consultative status for gay groups to appease conservative organizations that oppose gay rights.

So, if they've broken ties with NAMBLA, how is this an issue?

because god hates gays, of course

this is an incredibly flimsy defense, and one that only applies for one of the two organizations they opposed. when your own spokesperson doesn't know why the u.s. opposed the danish group, i have to think there isn't even a pretext of a good reason.

How is this astonishing? Is anybody really surprised?

this may be the saddest thing.

Aah I wouldn't put too much stock into this... we're all just very supportive of Stone... whenever... he chooses to come out.

Don't confuse "conservative" with the religious right. I consider my self conservative (politically) and I think part of that is granting all citizens absolute equality under the law, equal rights not special rights. If other interest groups are given observer status at the UN, there is no reason at all why this group shouldn't be given the same rights. Being gay is no different than being a red head... just one part of the amazing spectrum of human diversity. Something to celebrate, not condemn.

That is a complete BS excuse from the Bushies. Talk about reaching. I would say it's a new low for the Bush administration, but I think they have done worse.

Exactly. Not to mention NAMBLA is a joke of an organization anyway. When I was in law school, I took a class where one of the guests was a cop who worked on an anti-child-pornography task force, and he said that NAMBLA was nothing to worry about because about half of its membership were undercover cops.

Of course, with the Bush administration, it wouldn't surprise me if they didn't even know that.

Don't worry, I don't confuse the two. The point is, as time goes by, and people become more exposed to people who are different from themselves, they tend to become more tolerant. Unless of course, they are blinded by hatred or religious belief or some other irrational block to understanding. Over time, I'm confident that those people who are politically/economically conservative will reclaim a major party and remarginalize the religious right to where they belong, the lunatic fringe.

My parents are probably the worst of the evangelical christians. I say this because my father is a fairly thoughtful guy, and is actually left of center on most economic issues as well as on topics such as social welfare, etc. However due to his and my mothers hardcore religious beliefs, he votes Republican. I was talking with him about this when I went home and he said that he has to "hold (his) nose and vote for the pro big business, pro rich Republicans in order to get (his) morals represented". I really think there are very few people who support the more neo con elements of the Bush platform, but the Whitehouse reads support for some aspects of the platform as support for everything I guess. If only the Democrats could somehow depict themselves as not being all about sodomy and killing babies...

No offense to you or your parents, but you're right. That is the worst. A good, decent Christian person who believes in hope, love, and charity who votes for people who represent the opposite just because he feels he needs his "morals" represented.

As if politicians COULD do anything about morals, even if they were moral people themselves, which most of them are not.

It's really a sad state of affairs.