Connect with us

DeMint To Obama: Stop Promoting Human Rights Protections For LGBT Communities Outside The United States

Published

on

Guest Author Andrés Duque shares another important story with The New Civil Rights Movement. It is cross posted from his own excellent site, Blabbeando, which should be on your regular reading list. We are always grateful to him for his excellent work, and especially grateful when he allows us to share it with our readers.

When President Barack Obama named Puerto Rican lawyer Mari Carmen Aponte as his choice to become the U.S. Ambassador to El Salvador in 2009, the nomination ran smack into a wall set up by Republican Senators who simply refused to vote on a wide array of diplomatic candidates nominated by the president.

At preliminary hearings at the time, conservative South Carolina Republican Senator Jim DeMint led the charge against Aponte raising several “issues” including ludicrous rumors that she might very well be a Communist infiltrator.

Facing an obstructionist Republican Senate, Obama waited until a congressional recess to pull several of the nominees out of the regular nomination process and use his presidential powers to appoint them as interim ambassadors.  That meant that they could immediately start serving as diplomats but would have to eventually face confirmation hearings at the end of the next calendar year from the date in which they were appointed.

Among those who were appointed for interim posts on August of 2010 was Aponte.

On a related matter, on June 27th of this year U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton held the third annual LGBT pride event to happen at the U.S. Department of State under her watch.

In an extraordinary speech before staff from the Department of State and members of the U.S. diplomatic corps, Clinton saluted their work on promoting respect for LGBT communities throughout the world. An excerpt from the full speech:

There is the tremendous work that our diplomats have been doing in regional and international institutions to strengthen a shared consensus about how governments should treat their citizens. And we’ve made the message very consistent and of a high priority. All people’s rights and dignity must be protected whatever their sexual orientation or gender identity.

The very next day El Salvador’s La Prensa Gráfica published an opinion piece by Ambassador Aponte titled “For an end to prejudice, wherever it exists“.  An excerpt from the article (full translation at the end of this post):

Last March, before the Human Rights Council at the United Nations, the United States, El Salvador and eighty-three other nations signed a pledge to eliminate violence against members of the LGBT community; additionally, on May of 2010, Salvadorean President Mauricio Funes signed Decree 56 which prohibits all forms of discrimination by the government of El Salvador on the basis of sexual orientation or identity. I applaud efforts by the government of El Salvador in support of the LGBT community both on the national and the international level.

The OpEd drew an immediate and furious rebuke from a small but powerful group of right-wing conservative religious leaders from El Salvador and other Latin American countries.

On July 6th, ACI Prensa reported that 42 so-called “pro life” and “pro family” organizations from the United States and Latin America had signed a statement rejecting the opinion piece (“Civil groups energetically reject the gay ideology of the United States in El Salvador“).  A translated excerpt:

Aponte’s article is essentially a cover for those so-called ‘gay rights’ which are actually an attempt to disguise an absolute imposition of the LGBT lobby’s ideology on Catholic countries such as El Salvador – a position promoted by the Obama administration and by his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in particular.

It’s a position taken as a ploy to impose gender ideology – which stems from the tenents of feminism and homosexual thinking – and use it to promote the idea that the differences between a man and a woman are merely social and not biological or based on nature.

As for the risks of such ideology being “imposed” on El Salvador by the United States? The actual statement released by the organizations made comparisons between the United States and the Roman Empire in the following way:

The fallen Roman Empire was considered to be modern and progressive.  Babies were aborted, newborns were murdered, and – similarly – people would engage in homosexual, bisexual and incestuous relationships, pedophilia, zoophilia and orgies. Such decadence weakened said empire and led to its fall.

Salvadoran cultural observer Marvin Aguilar took the homophobic religious doomsayers to task a week later in an OpEd that ran in La Página (“In consideration of what was said by the U.S. Ambassador“). A translated excerpt:

In the Tuesday, June 28th edition of La Pagina Gráfica, Mari Carmen Aponte wrote about the policies of the current U.S. president which which observe June as the month in which the United States commemorates LGBT pride.

She argued in favor of combating violence, hate and misconceptions about a specific community of individuals. She explained the efforts made by the current government she represents in understanding that the rights of homosexuals are Human Rights and described how [homosexuality] was no longer classified as a pathology or a perversion that should be corrected or silenced.

Nowhere in the text authored by the Ambassador did she refer to any intent by the government she represents to intervene directly in the culture, tradition and values of El Salvador.

Which brings us to this:  As an recess appointee, Aponte must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate before the end of this year to be able to keep her post and, once again, Senator DeMint is the one leading the charge against her.  But now, instead of the Cuban infiltrator charges, DeMint is questioning Aponte’s strong support for the protection of LGBT communities in El Salvador.

From a November 8th confirmation hearing before the Foreign Relations Committee…

https://youtube.com/watch?v=pX_8Xk0yTow%3Fversion%3D3%26hl%3Den_US

And a partial transcript…

I would like to ask unanimous consent to submit for the record an opinion piece published in El Salvador by Ambassador Aponte in June of this year.  In her OpEd, Ms. Aponte, presuming to represent the view of all Americans, in strongly promoting the homosexual lifestyle, wrote that “everyone has the responsibility to inform our neighbors and friends about what it means to be lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender.” The OpEd upset a large number of community and pro-family groups in El Salvador who were insulted by Ms. Aponte’s attempt to impose a pro-gay agenda in their country.

I would also like to ask unanimous consent to submit, for the record, a response to the OpEd from a coalition of more than three dozen groups and a letter from Salvadorean groups to the United States Senate asking the Senate to oppose Ms. Aponte’s confirmation and I quote “We respectfully request that Ms. Aponte be removed from her post as soon as possible so that El Salvador may enjoy the benefits of having a person as a government representative of your noble country.”

I would like to apologize to the Salvadorean people on behalf of the United States and reassure them that most Americans share their values. Ms. Aponte’s personal, professional and political contact over many years raises numerous questions of judgement. I will vote ‘no on Ms. Aponte’s confirmation and strongly recommend my colleagues do the same.

In an OpEd published the next day in the conservative website Human Events, DeMint singled out Aponte’s praise for Hillary Clinton (“Aponte’s Agenda“).

Aponte praised Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her previous remarks that “gay rights are human rights” and also noted gay pride month is celebrated with “parades, festivals, and educational campaigns” in the United States where the gay rights movement “celebrates its identity throughout the country.”

That’s right.  Senator DeMint is urging the U.S. Senate not to appoint Aponte as U.S. Ambassador to El Salvador based on an OpEd in which she saluted the government of El Salvador for their own initiatives to protect their LGBT populations.

Aponte, who was at the hearing, defended herself against DeMint’s accusations when she had a chance to reply. “The OpEd reflects the policies of the Obama administration, the Salvadorean government and sixty-three other countries,” she said to La Prensa, “It was not drafted as an insult to anyone.”

Salvadoran columnist Marvin Aguilar, in an OpEd column published in La Prensa on November 10th, described DeMint’s attempts at getting rid of Aponte as follows:

Catholic fundamentalists in El Salvador, skipping over historical papal lessons, have begun a Christian crusade to cleanse El Salvador of Mari Carmen Aponte. They say she is a destroyer of national family values, that she promotes heinous sinfulness and, in adition, some say that she even likes the arts.  Leave it up to us, the Latin American beggars, to be more papal than the Pope when it comes to defend conservative beliefs, customs and traditions which are – of course – shared by all Salvadoreans.

Love unites but hate also brings people together.  That’s the way that local Catholics with an European pedigree have built an alliance with Jim DeMint, U.S. Senator from South Carolina, who is – according to U.S. political analysts, the most conservative congressmember in the Senate. He is a member of the Tea Party and is a member of the Foreign Relations Committee of the U.S. Senate.

In sharp contrast to Salvadorean Catholic leader Archbishop Escobar Alas, DeMint has promoted prayer in schools; in contrast with people from El Salvador, he is in favor of abortion when the life of a mother is at risk; he does not want undocumented Salvadoreans living in the United States and is in favor of deporting them unlike other Catholics; he supported the Iraq invasion and when he finally visited Honduras in 2009, he met with Roberto Micheletti even though our country had not recognized his de facto government.

Nobody is perfect, least of all politicians whether they are from the U.S. or El Salvador, but… What is someone who is a Protestant Baptist and the son of divorced parents doing creating alliances with Salvadorean Catholics who sustain that divorce is a sin? What sexual agenda unites them against Mari Carmen Aponte?

Senator DeMint has publicly said that gays, single mothers, heterosexuals in civil unions as well as sexually active persons should not be hired as school educators.  Similarly, he also has been and advocate that, if government does not have the authority or the legal tools to restrict homosexuality, it also should not be promoted through the legalization of gay marriage. And that is why he has echoed the tumultuous and sad complaints shouted to heaven by the increasingly strident Salvadorean Christian movement that has taken its lobbying activities to U.S. grounds.

Senator DeMint has said that his statements [on homosexuality] are based on his personal beliefs and should not be interpreted as issues he wants or should bring up as a Senator. It’s surprising, then, that he is now opposing a column written by the U.S. Ambassador in La Prensa Gráfica which only sought to explain the vision of the Obama government as related to the gay community in the United States.

A tiny drop of fundamentalist fanatics cannot represent the ocean of Salvadoreans who respect the ways of other nations.

Aguilar is making reference to several on the record comments DeMint has made in the past (“Sen. Kim DeMint: Gays and unmarried, pregnant women should not teach public school“, The Huffington Post, Oct. 2, 2010).

Covering last week’s hearing, La Prensa also mentions that Marco Rubio, U.S Senator from Florida and Tea Party darling, asked Aponte if she had felt pressured to write the OpEd piece.  Aponte reminded the Senator that she has written a regular opinion column for the paper and that she had written on LGBT issues specifically from a human rights viewpoint.

I have yet to find a full transcript or video of the hearing but Senate Republicans, in voting against Aponte, but her written testimony can be downloaded in PDF form here. Three former Salvadorean presidents traveled to Washington, DC, last month to support her confirmation (“Felix Rodriguez: In U.S. National Interest, confirm U.S. Ambassador to El Salvador“, Miami Herald, Nov. 5, 2011).

I have translated Ambassador Aponte’s “controversial” OpEd on LGBT rights. As you read it, please ask yourself who is seeking to impose certain values on El Salvador: Ambassador Mari Carmen Aponte of South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint.

Clearly for DeMint this is not only about Aponte. This is a rebuke against any attempt by the U.S. government to promote policies that extend human rights protections to LGBT populations throughout the world.

For an end to prejudice, wherever it exists

by Mari Carmen Aponte – As published in Spanish in La Prensa Gráfica on June 28th, 2011

On May 31st, President Obama proclaimed June of 2011 as the pride month for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people.

“The history of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community in the United States,” says the President’s proclamation, “is the story of our parents and children, our mothers and daughters, our neighbors and friends who continue the task of making our nation a more perfect union.”

In the U.S., June is recognized as Gay Pride Month, a month during which the LGBT community celebrates its identity throughout the country through parades, festivals and educational campaigns.

When Congressman Barney Frank, who is openly gay, was asked why they should be proud of such a natural and innate human characteristic, he said “We are proud to stand up to hatred, prejudice and violence, specially when it is so difficult to stand up and say ‘This is me’; To do so should make us feel extremely proud”.

No one should be subjected to abuse because of who he is or who he loves. Homophobia and the brutal aggression that [gays] often endure are often based on a lack of understanding about what it truly means to be homosexual or transgender. We should work together too prevent negative perceptions through education and offering support to people who confront those who promote hate.

A year ago, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, with great passion, stated “gay rights are human rights.”  In the same way, we believe people should not be stripped from their rights on the basis of their sexual preference or orientation.  For that reason, the United States will continue to support the elimination of violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation on a worldwide basis.

Last March, before the Human Rights Council at the United Nations, the United States, El Salvador and eighty-three other nations signed a pledge to eliminate violence against members of the LGBT community; additionally, on May of 2010, Salvadorean President Mauricio Funes signed Decree 56 which prohibits all forms of discrimination by the government of El Salvador on the basis of sexual orientation or identity. I applaud efforts by the government of El Salvador in support of the LGBT community both on the national and the international level.

However, the responsibility does not only lie in the hands of governments. Everyone has the responsibility to contribute whether it’s by confronting intimidation or violence when it happens in our schools or worksites, or by helping to inform our neighbors and friends about what it means to be lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. As our nations advance, we also experience an ongoing transformation on what it means to be a citizen in a democratic society.  Together, as governments and as individuals, we can work to break the cycle of violence and discrimination.

It is the responsibility of each generation to bring our nations closer to fulfilling the promise of equality.  Progress takes time, but history is on our side when we come together to demand an end to prejudice, wherever it exists, and to celebrate the great diversity of the Americas.

 

Andrés Duque is long-time LGBT-rights advocate and award-winning Latino gay blogger. He writes at Blabbeando.

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.

OPINION

Trump Threatens to Violate Gag Order and Go to Jail: ‘I’ll Do That Sacrifice Any Day’

Published

on

Just hours after a New York State Supreme Court Justice held Donald Trump in criminal contempt of court for violating his gag order and threatened him with jail time, the ex-president attacked several of the judges overseeing his cases, and suggested he may violate the gag order for the good of the U.S. Constitution.

“Because this judge has given me a gag order and says you’ll go to jail if you violate it. And frankly, you know what, our Constitution is much more important than jail. It’s not even close. I’ll do that sacrifice any day,” Trump claimed.

Trump is on trial for 34 criminal felonies for falsification of business records, which experts describe as election interference after he paid “hush money” to an adult film actress in an effort to keep his alleged affair away from the public eye just before the 2016 presidential election.

The ex-president, who announced his 2024 run for the White House, insiders say, to escape prosecution for a wide variety of alleged crimes, began his Monday post-trial news conference with reporters by criticizing the prosecution’s announcement it expects to wrap up its portion of the trial in about two weeks.

READ MORE: ‘Israel Aid, Ukraine Aid, Kitchenaid’: Dem Mocks GOP’s ‘Hands Off Our Appliances’ Week

“The government just said that they want two to three more weeks,” Trump complained. “That means they want to get me off the [campaign] trail for two to three more weeks. Now, anybody in there would realize that there’s no case, they don’t have a case. Every legal scholar says they don’t have a case. This is just a political witch. It’s election interference. And this is really truly election interference, and it’s a disgrace. It’s a disgrace, and in every poll I’m leading by a lot.”

Those statements are false.

The New York Post reports, “Prosecutor Josh Steinglass estimated that the DA’s office would wrap up its case around May 21, two weeks from tomorrow. But he cautioned that’s a ‘rough estimate.'”

Concluding the District Attorney’s Office did have a case, a Manhattan grand jury indicted Trump on 34 felony counts.

A great many legal scholars say there is a case.

There is no evidence of a “political witch-hunt.”

Trump is not leading in all the polls, nor, in all the ones he is leading in, is he leading by “a lot.” Nor do political candidates get exempt from prosecution because they may be leading in a particular poll.

The ex-president went on to claim prosecutors “figure maybe they can do something here, maybe they can do, this case should be over, this case should have never been brought.”

“And then Alvin Bragg brought the case, as soon as, when I’m running and leading, that’s when they decided, let’s go bring a case. So it’s a disgrace. But we just heard two to three more weeks. I thought that we’re finished today and they are finished today. We look at what’s happening. I thought they were going to be finished today and then 2 to 3 more weeks,” he again complained, again saying prosecutors “all want to keep me off the campaign trail. That’s all this is about. This about election interference. How do we stop it? And it’s a disgrace.”

READ MORE: ‘I’m Not Talking About That Meeting’: Noem Implies She May Have Met With Kim Jong Un

Trump then brought up the gag order.

“Where I can basically, I have to watch every word I tell you people, you asked me a question, a simple question I’d like to give it but I can’t talk about it,” he claimed, falsely.

“Because this judge has given me a gag order and say you’ll go to jail if you violate it. And frankly, you know what, our Constitution is much more important than jail. It’s not even close. I’ll do that sacrifice any day.”

Trump attacked three of judges overseeing his case, excluding U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon.

“But what’s happening here is a disgrace and the appellate courts ought to get involved. New York looks so bad, system of so called justice was so bad between this judge and [Judge Arthur] Engoron and [Judge Lewis] Kaplan the triple teamed with the corrupt judges is a disgrace to our nation. So I should be out there campaigning.”

Watch Trump’s remarks below or at this link.

READ MORE: Congressman Pummeled for Praising Students Mocking Black Protester With Monkey Sounds

 

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘Israel Aid, Ukraine Aid, Kitchenaid’: Dem Mocks GOP’s ‘Hands Off Our Appliances’ Week

Published

on

Last year in January, in the wake of a study that found 650,000 children have developed asthma because of gas stoves, Bloomberg News reported: “US Safety Agency to Consider Ban on Gas Stoves Amid Health Fears.”

There was no ban in the works or on the way, and the chair of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) was forced to issue a statement promising, “I am not looking to ban gas stoves and the CPSC has no proceeding to do so.”

Republicans however, went on the attack, with some, like U.S. Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-TX), a physician, shouting on social media, “I’ll NEVER give up my gas stove. If the maniacs in the White House come for my stove, they can pry it from my cold dead hands. COME AND TAKE IT!!”

Congressman Jackson soon doubled-down, appearing on Newsmax.

One month later, West Virginia Democratic U.S. Senator Joe Manchin teamed up with several Republicans to protect Americans’ “right” to non-electric cooking.

READ MORE: ‘I’m Not Talking About That Meeting’: Noem Implies She May Have Met With Kim Jong Un

“Gas stoves have been in the news lately and I’ve come out strongly against the Consumer Product Safety Commission pursuing any ban of gas stoves,” Manchin declared, despite there being no possibility of that. “In fact, I’m introducing legislation today with Senator [Ted] Cruz that would ensure that they don’t and separately sending a letter to the commission with Senator [James] Lankford.”

For decades the scientific community has known about the health dangers of gas stoves, but Americans love them and there are no plans to have any federal government agency coming to take them away.

The Biden administration would like to help Americans buy new, energy-saving home appliances, but Republicans oppose those efforts as well.

Nearly sixteen months later, Republicans are still working to protect Americans from what some have suggested will be the federal government knocking on the doors of U.S. citizens to take away their gas stoves.

Last month, Republican Speaker Mike Johnson was all set to revive the House’s focus on ensuring Americans can continue to grill baby grill – indoors – childhood asthma-be-damned, and nearly put HR 6192, the Hands Off Our Home Appliances Act, and several others on the floor for votes, including:

The “Liberty in Laundry Act” (HR 7673), the “Clothes Dryers Reliability Act (HR 7645), the “Refrigerator Freedom Act” (HR 7637), the “Affordable Air Conditioning Act” (HR 7626), and the “Stop Unaffordable Dishwasher Standards Act” (HR 7700).

But at the last minute he changed the schedule after aid to Ukraine and Israel became the national focus.

READ MORE: Judge Hands Trump ‘Incarceration’ Threat as Experts Say Next Time He’ll Toss Him in Jail

MSNBC’s Steve Benen reports Monday, “the ‘Hands Off Our Home Appliances Act’ … will likely reach the floor this week, possibly as early as tomorrow.”

One year ago this month, U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) delivered amusing remarks during a House hearing.

“I want to apologize on behalf of the Democratic Party that we have decided to put kids’ safety, in their neighborhoods from getting gunned down, in movie theaters, or grocery stores, or school churches, or synagogues – we as Democrats have clearly lost our way that we are not focused on appliances,” Moskowitz said sarcastically in a viral video.

Now he’s back, along with the House Republicans’ renewed focus on the false fear-mongering the federal government is coming for your home appliances, or is going to ban them.

In response to Axios’ Andrew Solender reporting, “Appliance Week is BACK in the House!” Congressman Moskowitz replied, “Israel aid, Ukraine aid, Humanitarian aid, Kitchenaid.”

He then grew even more sarcastically excited:

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: Congressman Pummeled for Praising Students Mocking Black Protester With Monkey Sounds

 

Continue Reading

News

‘I’m Not Talking About That Meeting’: Noem Implies She May Have Met With Kim Jong Un

Published

on

Republican South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem continues to make media appearances promoting her new book, which has received massive attention for the story about her shooting to death her 14-month old dog, Cricket, and a goat, and her reportedly false claim she met with North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un.

But in discussing that apparent lie that appears in her book, Noem appeared to tell a few more – and seemed to suggest she may have actually met with Kim Jong Un but should not have put that meeting in her memoir. Experts have said it’s unlikely she did meet with him.

“The book is called, ‘No Going Back,’ but it sounds like the publisher, Center Street, is going back on a couple of the details in the book,” CBS Mornings told Noem.

“Well, I don’t believe so,” Noem replied.

After hearing the apparently false details of her alleged meeting with Kim Jong Un being read on-air straight from her book, Noem explained, “when I became aware of that we changed the content, and the future editions will be adjusted.”

READ MORE: Judge Hands Trump ‘Incarceration’ Threat as Experts Say Next Time He’ll Toss Him in Jail

Noem also said she’s “met with many, many world leaders, I’ve traveled around the world. I should not have put that anecdote in the book, and at my request they have removed it.”

She was then asked, “That specifically didn’t happen?” but Noem appeared to brush off the question.

“What I’m saying is I’m not talking about that meeting, I’m not talking about my meetings with world leaders, there are some that are in the book and there’s some that are not in the book.”

Asked, “Did you tell your ghost writer to write that?” Noem refused to answer the question.

“I specifically have worked on policy for over 30 years, and over that time I have traveled around the world and met with leaders around the world. And that anecdote, I’ve asked them to change the content, and it will be removed.”

“It’s a simple question, did you or did you not meet with Kim Jong Un?”

“That’s the answer that I have for you,” Noem replied.

READ MORE: Congressman Pummeled for Praising Students Mocking Black Protester With Monkey Sounds

She also did not tell CBS why she chose to put it in the book at all, if she knew it was false.

Noem does not mention that she recorded the audio book version for “No Going Back,” and would have read those words about meeting with the North Korean dictator aloud, yet apparently did not ask her publisher to remove it until a local newspaper, The Dakota Scout, published a report starting her account of the event was “in doubt.”

On Sunday, Noem first began to suggest the meeting might have taken place. Speaking with CBS’s “Face the Nation,” Axios reported, “Noem declined to talk about specific meetings she had with various world leaders, and never outright said she didn’t meet with Kim during the interview.”

A CBS News transcript of that interview shows “Face the Nation” moderator Margaret Brennan saying, “you released video of your recording of the audio book. you didn’t catch these errors when you were recording it?”

“Well, Margaret, as soon as it was brought to my attention, I took action to make sure that it was reflected,” Noem responded, before leaping into an attack on the media.

Also on Sunday, The Independent reported, “North Korea experts say it’s highly unlikely Ms Noem ever met the North Korean leader.”

“From 2011 to 2018, Mr Kim did not leave North Korea, according to University of Notre Dame professor and North Korea expert George Lopez.” The Independent added, “Benjamin Young, a professor at Virginia Commonwealth University and an expert on North Korea, told The Dakota Scout that Ms Noem’s account of meeting Kim was ‘dubious.'”

“I cover North Korea very closely, and I have never heard of Kim Jong Un meeting congressmen or congresswomen,” Young said.

Watch Noem’s full CBS interview from Monday below or at this link.

READ MORE: RFK Jr., Embracing Far-Right, Spoke at Fundraiser for Anti-Government Group With J6 Ties

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.