A U.N. 'gay' threat to 1st Amendment?
Group seeks to muzzle media that have 'content
discriminatory to homosexuals'
By Mary Jo Anderson
© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com
Homosexual activism is advancing on a number of fronts at the
United Nations these days, including a call by one group to
prohibit the media from publishing "discriminatory" content –
which critics are calling an outright attack on the First
Amendment right to a free press.
This, as well as other related controversies, are embroiling the
U.N. as it heads toward the opening of the World Conference
Against Racism scheduled for August 31 through September 7
in Durban, South Africa.
For instance, yesterday the U.N.'s AIDS conference closed
amidst diplomatic tensions sparked by threats from
"progressive" nations that insisted the conference document
not connect the spread of AIDS to homosexual behavior.
Western nations objected when the Egyptian delegation
attempted to insert into the document the pertinent factors that
constitute the leading cause of the spread of the disease –
namely, "homosexuality among men, prostitution and other
forms of irresponsible sexual behavior." Some Western nations
balked at referring to homosexuality as "irresponsible sexual
behavior."
But the efforts at de-emphasizing any negatives associated with
homosexuality took an unprecedented turn recently when the
International Gay and Lesbian Association (IGLA) demanded
that the U.N.'s World Conference on Racism, Racial
Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance (WCAR)
adopt provisions that would prohibit media from broadcasting
"content discriminatory to homosexuals."
Although the IGLA does not have an official status at the
United Nations, some of the demands made by the association
are advanced by powerful non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) which do enjoy official United Nations designations.
IGLA representatives lobbied in Geneva during the preparatory
meeting for the Conference on Racism.
The Conference on Racism includes a segment on the influence
of the media. Draft provisions include this: "Developments in
technology have had a profound impact on the role of the media
by providing individuals and groups with new ways to
communicate with each other. These developments have
benefited societies in many ways, for example, in drawing
attention to human rights abuses and in the field of human rights
education. Regrettably, the Internet and other new forms of
communication have also been used to disseminate messages of
hatred and contempt for certain groups based on race, religion,
nationality, ethnicity and gender."
Media experts are wary of the questions that the U.N.'s
Conference on Racism have raised about the role and obligation
of the media. U.N. critics point to what they recognize as the
"usual obfuscation" inherent in the language employed. Such
critics note that the U.N. listed the following questions:
How can the media be used more effectively to promote
tolerance and respect?
Are there best practices with regard to balancing of
freedom of expression with the use of new technologies,
such as the Internet, to promote racist beliefs and
attitudes?
How can freedom of the press best be balanced with the
duty not to incite racial hatred?
How can the U.N. human rights system assist in the
process of balancing competing rights?
These questions from the U.N. draft use the word "balance," say
critics, as a euphemism for censorship of the media.
Homosexual activists working through IGLA want the language
of the U.N. conference document to specifically restrict "all
forms of discrimination that negatively affect human
individuality." The IGLA held a "satellite meeting" in preparation
for the upcoming racism conference. The "declaration" produced
by IGLA at Quito, Ecuador, in March applauded the conference
as the first U.N. world conference to include "related forms of
intolerance."
Related forms of intolerance?
Some legal scholars find the phrase "related forms of
intolerance" to be so broad as to be interpreted in the future as
including any new group that seeks U.N. protection under these
standards, if adopted.
"We cannot rule out pedophiles as 'related intolerance' in the
future," said one attorney who requested anonymity. (Many
experts who lobby at the U.N. fear being quoted as it may
endanger their continued work at U.N. conferences.)
"Now," remarked one New York-based journalist, "the gay lobby
is on the brink of bagging two for one -- they have linked
'homophobia' to racism, and they have demanded the U.N.
muzzle the media to ensure their 'rights' to be free from
'discrimination.'" A religious leader who declined to be named
raised the question of religious freedom.
"If it becomes an infringement of a homosexual person's 'rights'
to speak out about homosexuality as an offense against nature
and God, then how is religious freedom protected?"
Others, however, note that prominent media leaders have
favored some of the proposed provisions.
Bill Roedy, president of MTV Networks International and
chairman of the Global Business Council – a business booster
group that supports United Nations initiatives – said, "MTV is
working hard to break the wall of silence on HIV and AIDS by
broadcasting programs that talk to our audience around the
world ... to break the stigma and discrimination associated with
HIV and AIDS." MTV and the United Nations have collaborated
to set up a website on racism, discrimination and tolerance
issues in preparation for the WCAR. (See websites on the
International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and
the Fight for your rights campaign. )
Homosexuals whose lifestyle is at odds with their inherited
religious beliefs are also challenging that heritage from within.
The Muslim homosexual activist group called al-Fatiha has been
set up to help homosexual followers of Islam to reconcile their
sexuality with their religion. Homosexuality is forbidden in
Muslim cultures; in certain Islamic countries it is regarded as a
criminal activity punishable by death. Muslim leader Ajaf Shaikh
is firm: "... the Muslim culture and religion is totally against this
kind of activity. And Muslim religion don't allow these kind of
activities." Reconciling homosexual lifestyles with inherited
religion is a struggle that homosexual men and women claim
must be fought, including at the international level.
Traditional religious leaders have resisted. Pope John Paul II
addressed some pointed remarks to the United Nations' AIDS
conference that ended yesterday. He said "[The] frightening
spread of AIDS" has plagued a world "characterized by a
serious crisis of values." The pope exhorted the international
community not to ignore its "moral responsibility" to address
the disease. His remarks, though diplomatically worded, were a
pointed call for a traditional moral view of human sexuality which
would eradicate the disease through chastity and marital fidelity.
The Black Radical Congress, however, in a statement prepared
for WCAR has said, "What we have not seen is any significant
decline in the scourge of racism and its corrosive effects on the
lives of millions of people of color around the world, nor any
pronounced slippage in xenophobia, nor any reduction in
heterosexual hatred of other sexual orientations, nor any
abatement of religious intolerance ... The Black Radical Congress
strongly supports the WCAR."
U.N. observers have pointed out that the five themes that
WCAR lists as its major issues are ominous. The themes are:
Sources, causes and manifestations of intolerance; victims of
intolerance; measures of prevention, education and protection
against intolerance at the national, regional and international
level; effective remedies, recourses and compensation; and
strategies to achieve equality for victims of racism and
intolerance, including enhancement of the U.N. and other
international mechanisms in combating intolerance.
Observers critical of the U.N.'s sweeping conferences, that
launch new standards into international and customary law,
point out that the attempt by the IGLA lobby to muzzle the media
as part of a world standard against "intolerance" would suit
many substructures within the U.N. system.
"Look," commented one legal scholar, "just look at that fifth
provision in the five themes listed for WCAR. What do you
think 'enhancement of the U.N. and other international
mechanisms' means? We are talking media censorship, sure, but
also coercive means that bring once-sovereign nations to heel."
One of those mechanisms may be to control media imagery
about homosexuality. The IGLA declaration demands: "To call
upon the communication agencies, the media and related
systems to reaffirm their democratic and ethical principles and
their social function as opinion leaders, by opening up their
areas of action to sensitize society and to include the
expressions and symbolic representations of diversity; to
recognize discriminated sectors' right to communication; and to
eradicate the broadcasting of products with discriminatory
contents."
worldnetdaily.com
Another rather amazing article from that same source you cited. |
