Connect with us

BREAKING: UN Votes To RESTORE “Sexual Orientation” To Anti-Execution Resolution

Published

on

Five weeks ago today, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people were subjected to homophobia and religious and cultural extremism, thanks to a United Nations vote that removed “sexual orientation” from an ongoing resolution that protects people from arbitrary executions. Yes, the UN General Assembly on November 16 had in fact voted to allow LGBT people to be executed without cause.

Today, after a reported gas-leak forced evacuation of the building, a vote to restore the term “sexual orientation” to the UN General Assembly resolution on extra judicial executions is taking place, with U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice leading the effort.

Today, the UN voted in favor of restoring “sexual orientation” to the UN General Assembly resolution on extra judicial executions, by a margin of 109-41, with 35 abstentions.

The UN General Assembly’s Third Committee vote to remove the term “sexual orientation” from a draft resolution on extrajudicial killings last month won by a slim seven vote margin, 79 to 70, (17 abstentions and 26 absent,) but support for the final version of the resolution won with a lopsided victory at 165 votes in support and 10 absentions, one of which included the United States.

South African political leaders wielding religious fundamentalism, aided by Mormon and Christian Fundamentalists, including “The Family,” were behind the UN Vote allowing gays to be executed without cause.

“We are going to fight to restore the reference to sexual orientation,” Ambassador Rice said.  “We’re going to stand firm on this basic principle.  And we intend to win.”

Rice delivered a passionate statement about the UN General Assembly (UNGA) vote that stripped out “sexual orientation” for the first time in 10 years, to a UN LGBT group on Dec. 10, commemorating International Human Rights Day.

“Here at the United Nations, like many of you, I was incensed by the recent vote in the General Assembly’s Third Committee, which eliminated any mention of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals from a resolution condemning extrajudicial killing of vulnerable people around the world.  We fought hard for that reference when it came to the Committee vote, and we lost.  But we’re not done yet.  The resolution now goes to the full General Assembly.  For countries that voted in the Commitee to keep the reference to sexual orientation, we thank you.  For countries that haven’t yet done so, we urge you to join us. And for countries that have supported this reference in the past but charged course this year, we urge you to stand  again with us and with all vulnerable people around the world at risk of violence.”

Last month, U.K. gay rights and human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell called it “a shameful day in United Nations history.”

A winning outcome was not assured, according to Mark Bromley, chair of the Council for Global Equality. Bromley also had said the “vote count is looking better, but it is going to be very, very, very close.”

During today’s vote, Belgium, representing the European Union said the restoration “significantly improves” the text of the resolution. The Nordic countries representative said they were “deeply disappointed” by the removal of the term “sexual orientation,” and added, “No one should be killed because of their sexual orientation.” Canada added a request to include “gender identity” to the text. Argentina and Mexico spoke in support of adding the term back into the resolution also, saying, “We’re not demanding that this group enjoy greater protections,” but, “every year there are people executed for reasons of their sexual orientation.”

Suggesting LGBT peoples are weak and invited discrimination, the United Arab Emirates spoke at length, and said it “rejects firmly” the “controversial” statement that has “no legal foundation.”

The African Group representative said they were “gravely alarmed” with the “undefined notion of sexual orientation,” and called the attempt to restore the term a “systematic attempt to create new rights,” and  said it would “jeopardize the entire human rights framework… to achieve narrow political gain.”

In a major switch, South Africa voted for the resolution, after having voted to remove sexual orientation from the resolution last month. Rowanda also spoke very eloquently. But Zimbabwe, calling the text “adventurism,” also likened homosexuality to bestiality and said “individual proclivities should be just that.”

A significant effort had been launched by the Unitarian Universalist United Nations Office LGBT Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity project, who hosted its second UN consultation meeting on Dec. 13, in concert with the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), the Metropolitan Community Church (MCC), the St. Paul’s Foundation for International Reconciliation and the Union Theological Seminary and 40 leaders of faith, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and LGBT activists to discuss the UNGA vote and the increasingly hostile environment for LGBT people in Eastern Africa.

According to Ryan Ubuntu Olson, the Unitarian’s LGBT-SOGI (sexual orientation and gender identity) director, there has been a lot of concern at the UN about how a negative vote by the UNGA that would not restore “sexual orientation” to the resolution would affect other efforts to advance LGBT rights at the UN.

“Many people are worried and it is not clear how the votes are going to go,” Olson said.

In response and support of Ambassador Rice’s efforts, the UN Faith Coalition for LGBT Human Rights issued a resolution on Dec. 18th which “fully affirms and supports the proposed actions of Ambassador Rice … to restore the prohibition of the violent targeting and extrajudicial killing of people who are vulnerable because of their sexual orientation.”  The resolution also urges UN member states to abstain from the vote to restore “sexual orientation” if they can not support it.

ARC International and the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission have also been organizing NGO activists who have been working the vote to restore “sexual orientation” to the UNGA resolution. For more information on the UN vote and to learn more about organizing for UN LGBT related issues go to the ARC website.

Editor’s note: Tomorrow we will post the audio of the vote. Stay tuned!

Tanya L. Domi is an Adjunct Assistant Professor of International and Public Affairs atColumbia University, who teaches about human rights in Eurasia and is a Harriman Instituteaffiliated faculty member. Prior to teaching at Columbia, Domi worked internationally for more than a decade on issues related to democratic transitional development, including political and media development, human rights, gender issues, sex trafficking, and media freedom.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Let That Sink in’: Suspending Habeas Corpus Is on the Table Says Stephen Miller

Published

23 hours ago

on

May 9, 2025

By

White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Stephen Miller says the White House is “actively” examining suspending habeas corpus, a constitutional protection that supports the right to due process. Critics, including legal experts, reacted strongly, with some noting that this right has only been suspended in the United States four times.

“Well, the Constitution is clear, and that, of course, is the supreme law of the land—that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus can be suspended in a time of invasion,” Miller, the architect of Trump’s child and family separation policy during his first term, told reporters on Friday.

“So I would say that’s an option we’re actively looking at,” Miller declared, before attacking the judicial branch.

“Look, a lot of it depends on whether the courts do the right thing or not.”

READ MORE: ‘Bystander’ Trump Keeps Saying ‘I Don’t Know’ — Critics Ask ‘Who’s in Charge?’

Habeas corpus is a cornerstone of Western democracies, with roots tracing back to the Magna Carta of 1215, which first established the principle that no person could be imprisoned arbitrarily by the king.

Miller, who has no law degree and is not an attorney, went on to give reporters his understanding of constitutional law.

“So,” Miller concluded, “it’s not just the courts aren’t just at war with the executive branch, the courts are at war with these radical judges, with the legislative branch as well, too,” he opined.

“So all of that will inform the choice of the president ultimately makes, yes.”

Critics blasted the extreme suggestion that President Donald Trump has the authority to suspend habeas corpus—Congress does—and that he would attempt to do so when there is no invasion or rebellion, prerequisites mandated by the Constitution.

“Habeas corpus has been suspended only 4 times,” wrote The Washington Post’s Aaron Blake. 1) Civil War 2) When Congress authorized it to combat Ku Klux Klan vigilantism during Reconstruction 3) In the Philippines during a 1905 insurrection 4) In Hawaii after Pearl Harbor.”

“The President lacks the power to suspend habeas corpus under Article II. That power is exclusive to Congress under Article I,” explained civil rights attorney Patrick Jaicomo.

READ MORE: ‘Barely Literate’: Education Secretary’s ‘Deranged’ Letter Gets Major Red Ink Corrections

“Too bad he never went to law school and doesn’t understand the law,” remarked Professor of Law Joyce Vance, the well-known MSNBC legal analyst and former U.S. Attorney.

“Suspending habeas corpus,” noted The Atlantic’s James Surowiecki, “would suspend the right for everyone, not just for undocumented people. So what Stephen Miller is saying here is that Trump is thinking about asserting the right to throw Americans in prison while giving them no opportunity to use the courts to get out.”

“The U.S. Constitution guarantees due process to everyone within the United States, not just citizens. They’re inventing a fake ‘invasion’ to call for an emergency and give themselves more power,” added political strategist Max Flugrath, Communications Director at Fair Fight Action.

“Don’t even think about it,” remarked U.S. Senator Ed Markey (D-MA).

The well-known attorney George Conway, saying it “can’t be overstated,” called Miller “deeply, deeply disturbed.”

“Suspending habeas corpus. Let that sink in,” commented The Lincoln Project.

Former Democratic National Committee chairman Jaime Harrison described Miller’s threatening remarks as “dictatorial b——.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Total Injustice’: Pope Leo XIV Likely to Weigh in on Trump-Era Policies, Brother Hints

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Scopes Just Went Black Again’: Air Traffic Controller Urges Pilot to Press for Fix

Published

1 day ago

on

May 9, 2025

By

New chilling audio of an apparently concerned and frustrated air traffic controller urging a pilot to get his company to apply pressure to fix the FAA’s technical issues was just released.

Over the past two weeks, air traffic controllers covering Newark Liberty International Airport have had to endure two separate system-wide outages that caused their radar scopes to go black and caused them to lose some communication with pilots, with the latest one occurring early Friday morning.

“FedEx 1989,” the unnamed air traffic controller can be heard saying (audio below), “our scopes just went black again.”

“If you care about this, contact your airline and try to get some pressure for them to fix this stuff,” the controller told the pilot.

READ MORE: ‘Bystander’ Trump Keeps Saying ‘I Don’t Know’ — Critics Ask ‘Who’s in Charge?’

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on Friday told reporters it was a “glitch in the system” that “was caused by the same telecoms and software issues that were raised last week.”

Insisting there was “no operational impact,” she said the “DOT and the FAA are working to address this technical issue tonight to prevent further outage.”

Leavitt did not specify what caused the glitch or how it could be fixed now.

On Thursday, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said it would take months to fix the problem.

“It’s going to take a little time. I hope by the summer we’re going to be fully functioning,” Secretary Duffy said, CBS News reported.

MSNBC vice president Jesse Rodriguez called it a “Pretty extraordinary plea from an air traffic controller.”

READ MORE: ‘Total Injustice’: Pope Leo XIV Likely to Weigh in on Trump-Era Policies, Brother Hints

ABC News added that in “another transmission, a controller told an arriving private jet that the airport just had a brief radar outage and to stay at or above 3,000 feet in case the controllers couldn’t get in touch during the aircraft’s descent.”

The FAA in a statement on Friday said that there was a “telecommunications outage that impacted communications and radar display at Philadelphia TRACON Area C, which guides aircraft in and out of Newark Liberty International Airport airspace. The outage occurred around 3:55 a.m. on Friday, May 9, and lasted approximately 90 seconds.”

CNN’s Pete Muntean posted the audio. Listen below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Barely Literate’: Education Secretary’s ‘Deranged’ Letter Gets Major Red Ink Corrections

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

‘Bystander’ Trump Keeps Saying ‘I Don’t Know’ — Critics Ask ‘Who’s in Charge?’

Published

1 day ago

on

May 9, 2025

By

President Donald Trump’s grasp of what’s happening on his watch is being debated, as the 78-year-old increasingly responds, “I don’t know” when asked basic questions.

Despite swearing—for the second time now—an oath to the U.S. Constitution, the President of the United States when asked if he is obligated to “uphold the Constitution” told NBC News’ Kristen Welker, “I don’t know.”

Trump, as The New York Times pointed out, offered the same answer when asked if everyone in the U.S. should be afforded due process rights—which are mandated by the Constitution.

READ MORE: ‘Total Injustice’: Pope Leo XIV Likely to Weigh in on Trump-Era Policies, Brother Hints

“I don’t know,” the President replied, twice. “I’m not, I’m not a lawyer. I don’t know.”

VoteVets, a progressive political action committee (PAC), served up a scathing rebuke.

“He’s taken the oath twice—but now he’s not sure if due process matters. That’s not a gaffe. That’s a warning. Believe him. He’s telling you what he may burn down next,” the group posted on social media.

The nonpartisan advocacy group Patriotic Millionaires, which works to have wealthy Americans pay a larger portion in taxes and says “tax the rich” on its website, pointed to the President’s “I don’t know” response to upholding the Constitution.

“That is something that an authoritarian-dictator-wannabe would say, and we should absolutely take him at his word when he says this,” they wrote.

When Welker asked if he would run for a third term, Trump said he would not but admitted “I don’t know” if the Constitution prohibits it, but it’s “something you’re not allowed to do,” he said.

Back in April, Trump told reporters, “Many, many people come from the Congo. I don’t know what that is, but they came from the Congo.”

On Wednesday, in an Oval Office press gaggle, reporters asked, “Mr. President, is your administration sending migrants to Libya?”

“I don’t know,” Trump replied. “You’ll have to ask Homeland Security.”

Also on Wednesday, a reporter told Trump, “Your Treasury Secretary just told lawmakers that a tariff exemption for certain baby items like car seats is under consideration. Will you exempt some products that families rely on?”

“I don’t know,” was the President’s response, adding he will “think about it.”

READ MORE: ‘Barely Literate’: Education Secretary’s ‘Deranged’ Letter Gets Major Red Ink Corrections

Trump was also asked about U.S. Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) announcing he opposed Trump’s pick to be U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia.

“I didn’t know that,” the President told reporters.

Back in October, after his infamous “they’re eating the dogs” attack on immigrants, Trump went on Fox News and was told, “You said ‘they’re eating the dogs, they’re eating the cats.’ That turned out not to be true.”

“I don’t know if it’s true or not,” the President quickly replied.

“You don’t know? It’s been debunked,’ the Fox News host declared.

“What about the goose, the geese? What about the geese? What happened there?” he was asked.

“I have no idea,” was the President’s reply.

The Atlantic’s James Surowiecki, author of The Wisdom of Crowds, back in March noted, “Trump also didn’t know that his administration had invoked the Alien Enemies Act to deport Tren de Aragua members, even though he had supposedly signed the executive order invoking it. ‘I don’t know when it was signed, because I didn’t sign it,’ he said.”

And when SignalGate hit, Trump told reporters, “I don’t know anything about it. I’m not a big fan of The Atlantic. To me it’s a magazine that’s going out of business. But I know nothing about it. You’re saying that they had what?”

Trump’s “I don’t know” remarks have become so frequent some have started to question why.

“Is somebody keeping a tracker of President ‘I don’t know’ Trump’s I don’t knows?” asked former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security Juliette Kayyem. “It’s getting ridiculous. From Supreme Court decisions, to Libya prisons, to nominees, he has one answer. It’s not acceptable. He either isn’t in charge, is lying or has no capacity. I don’t know.”

It appears CNN has, at least in part, been keeping track.

On Thursday, Trump announced his new, highly-controversial Surgeon General nominee. Asked why he picked her, Trump replied, “Because Bobby thought she was fantastic,” but, “I don’t know her.”

MSNBC columnist Michael A. Cohen commented, “Yet another piece of evidence that Trump is a bystander to the actions of his administration.”

CNN medical analyst Jonathan Reiner remarked, “The president says he doesn’t know the new Surgeon General but he appointed her because ‘Bobby thought she was terrific’. Who’s in charge here?”

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Maoist’ ‘Soviet’ ‘Communist’: As Trumpism 2.0 Takes Shape, Experts Endeavor to Define It

 

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.