Human rights
- Eleanor Roosevelt with the Spanish version of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
December 10 marks the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) ...
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is a declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (10 December 1948 at Palais de Chaillot, Paris) ..... The Declaration arose directly from the experience of the Second World War and represents the first global expression of rights to which all human beings are inherently entitled ...
At the same time that the Vatican is planning some events to to commemorate the occasion, they put the kibosh on a newly proposed U.N. declaration that would call for an end to the criminalization of homosexuality. I saw this at TIME - The Pope's Christmas Gift: A Tough Line on Church Doctrine .....
******************
[...] Benedict's envoy to the United Nations, Archbishop Celestino Migliore, has announced that the Vatican will oppose a proposed U.N. declaration calling for an end to discrimination against homosexuals. At first blush, no one should be surprised to find the Catholic Church hierarchy butting heads with gay rights activists. But this particular French-sponsored proposal, which has the backing of all 27 European Union countries, calls for an end to the practice of criminalizing and punishing people for their sexual orientation. Most dramatically, in some countries, including Iran and Saudi Arabia, homosexuality can be punished by death.
Papal spokesman Father Federico Lombardi was forced to clarify that the Vatican continues to condemn the use of the death penalty for any crime, including those associated with homosexuality. Instead, Migliore said the Vatican's opposition to the U.N. proposal was driven by concern that countries that prohibit gay marriage would somehow be targeted. Said Migliore: "Countries that don't recognize the union between people of the same sex as marriage will be punished and pressured."
The U.N. declaration does not in fact mention gay marriage, and most of the nations that support it themselves don't allow people of the same sex to wed .....
*******************
It's a weird world where religious "freedom" and human rights conflict.
posted by crystal | 11:44 AM
15 Comments:
Crystal,
Good to see you posting so much. I've been out of the loop with the holiday and traveling. Will have to catch up soon - several interesting posts.
I'm not sure this is really about religious freedom. It doesn't sound like the U.N. Declaration is telling countries or The Church to change their views on homosexuality. It's really about legality, not morality. Making something legal doesn't mean the church has to accept it as part of their doctrine. I mean, heterosexuals can legally have affairs - that doesn't make it morally acceptable to the church.
And if we needed a priority list of sins, I guess we now know that the Church considers homosexuality more ghastly than the death penalty, eh?
Hi William,
Yeah, I agree that there's no legitimate reason for the Church to object to the de-criminalization of sexual orientation.
There's a difference between criminalizing sexual orientation and criminalizing sexual behavior; I was wondering which was being proposed.
Cowboy Angel,
Morality and legality overlap. If the Church should have the freedom to condemn the legalization of the death penalty (or slavery, or any of a number of other things), then the Church should have the freedom to condemn the legalization of homosexual behavior. (Not that it necessarily does.)
Although the Church does not generally advocate for the illegalization of adultery, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Church opposing any attempt by the U.N. to declare a universal condemnation of the illegalization of adultery.
Also, I wonder where you are getting that homosexuality is more ghastly than the death penalty, since the Church is not supporting using the death penalty for crimes relating to homosexuality?
God bless,
Anna
It is my understanding that the UN declaration was particularly aimed at the Islamic countries that impose a death sentence for homosexual acts. Of course there may be other motivations behind the declaration, or perhaps the Church officials are feeling paranoid when they claim it will be used to push same sex marriages.
At any rate, despite denials, it would seem that Church policy is that same sex marriage is a worse problem than capital punishment for homosexual acts. Nor, does it appear, that the Church has much of an objection to lesser punishments for homosexual behavior.
I believe that the declaration also mentioned gender identification, which might be seen as the Church's opposition to homosexual orientation as well as actions.
Overall, I think cowboyangel is pretty well correct in his priority of sins, particularly when the Church has always taught that the state has a right to use capital punishment for the good of the whole.
By the way, is it capital or capitol punishment??
Hugs,
Mike L
Mike L,
At any rate, despite denials, it would seem that Church policy is that same sex marriage is a worse problem than capital punishment for homosexual acts.
Hmm. I'm not sure the Church's actions have to be interpreted that way, although I admit I haven't investigated the whole situation very well to know what *exactly* the Church is saying on the topic in the first place. I would guess that if the UN was willing to phrase the resolution to exclusively condemn using the death penalty for homosexuality, the Church would support that. It might be that the Church is objecting to the resolution as written not because the evil it might encourage (same sex marriage) is worse than the evil it seeks to condemn (death penalty for homosexuality), but because it encourages any evil at all.
To make what may be a poor analogy, if someone tried to pass a bill that would make abortion illegal but encourage theft, there will probably be people in the Church speaking out against it for even possibly encouraging theft, even if abortion (as murder) is seen to be worse than theft.
It's capital punishment. Capitol is capitol buildings, capitols of states, that sort of thing. Or so I think.
As for whether same sex marriage or the death penalty is a bigger threat overall... I think it depends. To the conservative Catholic Church in America (including, generally, the bishops), yes, homosexuality is the bigger issue. But you might be interested in this article, which points out the importance of the death penalty to European (particularly Italian) Catholics, it being as important to them as abortion is to pro-life Catholics in America. I think, overall, that the Church is pretty diverse in its priorities; I'm not sure there's really any consistent priority even among the Vatican.
God bless,
Anna
This comment has been removed by the author.
I have to agree with Mike.
Crystal,
I would say that I think that there is a tendency among conservative Catholics in America to make homosexuality into a bigger priority (especially politically) than it should be. I'm just not convinced that the rest of the Church outside America even thinks about it half as much as we seem to.
Anna
Anna,
I think you are right, but still you see signs of it everywhere -
UK: Catholic Church will not comply with 'gay equality' adoption law
No gays, no way: Vatican on homosexual priests
The position of the Church is that same sex orientation is disordered and as long as that's the taching, there will be discrimination.
Oh, I don't know. Since I agree with the Church's teaching, I think you and I have different ideas on where the line is between discrimination and not. But both those decisions that you linked to are fundamentally pastoral decisions, not doctrinal. It might be easier for the Church to decide that way because of the 'disordered' teaching, but the teaching doesn't force the Church to decide that way. Which means even if the Church never changed her teaching, she still could change those kind of things. I wouldn't expect it to happen anytime SOON, but you can hope that it will change in God's time. (The way that the Church has, for example, made a point of opposing slavery in the last century, whereas before that was not a priority.)
God bless,
Anna
To the conservative Catholic Church in America (including, generally, the bishops), yes, homosexuality is the bigger issue.
You haven't been listening, especially recently with an execution that was scheduled in Washington state.
Hi Garpu,
Yeah, I saw that story - - Bishops ask Gov. Gregoire to stop execution - thanks for bringing it up on your blog.
The church's position on gays cannot be understood without seeing its basic anti-sexual orientation. All recognize that historically the church has a strong anti-sex lean.Today the church makes some glum concessions to sexuality (see Theology of the Body)but still it(sex) is basically justifed for procreation. I know, the unitive principle. But until people say, and I include catholics,"Hey, honey, how about some unity tonight", I'm not buying it. Jack
Jack,
Yeah, that propagation as the only worthy justification for sex thing does seem to be a big factor.
Garpu,
I'm glad to see the bishops speaking up on that. Thanks for the info!
Anna
Post a Comment
<< Home