U.S. democrats push for LGBT International Human Rights Defense Act

[Jingthing]

As many know, the U.S. state department under Obama has sometimes been involved in advocating for LGBT human rights at the international level. But the U.S. democrats are now working to have this policy be an official part of U.S. foreign policy under any administration. As the democrats don't control the house or the senate, it seems doubtful this will pass. But it's interesting that at least some right wing Americans attack severe anti-gay policies in some other countries such as Russia and Iran.

“With the rights of the LGBT community under attack around the globe, we must stand hand-in-hand with them in the struggle for recognition and equality everywhere," he said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/29/us-usa-lgbt-lawmaking-idUSKBN0L22U320150129

Edited January 30, 2015 by Jingthing

[NeverSure]

The US isn't big on signing away its sovereignty to international groups. Start there.

The US has come a long way in the civil rights arena just in my lifetime as I can remember whites-only restaurants and restrooms in the South, segregated schools, and when being gay was in the closet.

JT, I think you know I really like you as a person and I think if we lived in the same area we would be friends. I'm as straight as it gets but that wouldn't stop us from being good friends. I don't know why I'm straight and other people aren't so I have no bias one way or the other.

It's too bad it didn't happen sooner, but gays are gaining more rights all the time in the US and it won't be long before it's only an issue if an individual makes it one.

Think about this. Marriage and other things are under state control. The powers of the federal government are strictly limited by the Constitution. If the Federal Government signed an agreement that violated states' rights it might be declared unconstitutional.

Bottom line. The people of the US wouldn't stand for that agreement. It's not about gays, it's about national sovereignty. The people wouldn't stand for any such agreement regardless of the topic. There are many international treaties and conventions that the US never signed off on.

The work has to be done on a national level and even on the state level and several states allow gay marriage and others don't yet, but any changes are always in the direction of progress.

Cheers

[Jingthing]

Suggest you read the news item because your reply has absolutely nothing to do with it.

[Swiss1960]

Well, JT, you already pointed out that due to the political situation, the Dems will never get that through... but even if... the article says " to make preventing and responding to discrimination and violence against the international LGBT community a foreign policy priority"

do you really, I mean REALLY believe that this would ever happen? Do you REALLY believe that the US would invoke sanctions agains Saudi Arabia for this and endager their interest about the oil and the military bases they have? Do you REALLY think they would issue more than some "strong words" against Russia for such discrimination? Took them long enough to put out sanctions about the Krim - and that was for a military invasion... and since they can't (and do not want to) put it right in their own country...

hipocrisy from a country that treats basic human rights with complete indifference and negligence and even refusal when it does not fit the national priorities...

[Jingthing]

There is nothing in the bill requiring sanctions against any country. It doesn't say TOP priority. Just A priority. Similar I suppose to the U.S. position on human rights issues like human trafficking.

As far as hypocrisy, you're barking up the wrong tree if you think I'm going to defend the U.S. government as being hypocrisy free, or any other country, actually.

Edited January 31, 2015 by Jingthing