Yesterday, we drew your attention to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s landmark gay rights speech at the UN Human Rights Council. While it’s great that Hillary acknowledged the struggles gay people face around the world, her speech and a simultaneously released White House executive order also lay out some landmark commitments that the US government is making in the global fight for gay equality
First, what this order doesn’t do is tie US foreign aid to recipient countries’ attitudes on gay rights, an action UK Prime Minister David Cameron has recently committed to taking. Despite speculation in a lot of media sources and even from politicians in Nigeria and Uganda, both US allies, that the bill would threaten their bottom lines because of their recent anti-gay legislation, it’s not clear that the US will go that far.
What the Obama administration has directed the US government to do is fight the criminalization of queer status or conduct abroad, protect vulnerable queer refugees and asylum seekers, use foreign aid to protect human rights, ensure swift and meaningful responses to human rights abuses of queer persons, work to fight for queer equality in international forums (ie, the UN), and deliver progress reports annually, with the first report coming in six months.
Clinton gave some concrete examples of how the US is stepping up: providing queer-safe spaces and programming in US embassies around the world; establishing a fund for the training of queer activists; and lobbying directly for queer rights.
While these sound like baby steps, they’re actually major commitments that could have a lasting impact on the fight for queer rights. The US is stepping up to provide space for discussion of queer rights in some of the most hostile places on earth.
Cool
But we still can’t get married everywhere in the USA. WE pay more taxes and have less rights than married couples even if we are married in some states or domestic partners in others. What good is a policy when we don’t protect and honor our own?
Iehairybear, I do understand where your coming from, but your statement is not accurate. We the GBLT community can not be paying more taxes then the whole. The Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law, a sexual orientation law and public policy think tank, estimates that 9 million (about 3.8%) of Americans identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender (2011). The institute also found that bisexuals make up 1.8% of the population, while 1.7% are gay or lesbian. Transgender adults make up 0.3% of the population. We only contribute a small portion of the large picture. I do agree on your statement of marriage. If the straight community would like marriage in church, then the government should offer an equal alliterative for the GBLT community.
No. An “equal alternative” is an oxymoron. Marriage must be understood to be a protected right in its connection to ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’ for all persons – sraight and gay. Inclusiveness has never diminished any group, except in their opposition to it. And when the fight for inclusion is won, Churches that refuse marriage to gay couples should lose their tax-exempt status. “Alternative” is NOT “equal”. It is an excuse.
Jack that is true in a perfect world were there is no separation of church and state, but we all don’t live in Walgreens. Man is self-centered and selfish, we live in a world of inequalities. Do you think people of color have equal rights? Slavery ended in 1865 and they still are fighting for equality. Is it equality when the top 10% of US population control 75% of the nations wealth? That is why government should take an active roll in creating equality.
PS marriage has always been an institution of the church, long before government and our rights “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”.