Gays Need Global Equal Rights

[Raimondin]

Elton John recently commented on gays having equal rights worldwide. Next Wednesday he and his longtime boyfriend David Furnish will celebrate a civil partnership.

My question is would the United States have to be the country to approve (nationwide) same-sex civil recognition for it to catch-on or spread to the other 80 or so countries that have not done so? In other words, to the rest of the world. Or it wouldn't matter?
Oh, and "marriage" is a no-no word to avoid!

---------------------------------------------------------------------

LONDON - Elton John said forming a civil partnership with his longtime lover David Furnish in England this week will be "the happiest day of my life."

But, the pop star added, he will feel sorry for the many gay couples who live in countries that prohibit such unions.

"It has been a long struggle for equal rights to gay people in Britain, but now, in the 21st century, we have real civil rights, tolerance and final acceptance in our lives," John wrote in The Observer, a Sunday newspaper.

"Next Wednesday, on the happiest day of my life, when I celebrate a civil partnership with David, I will be thinking, however, about those less fortunate than we are. In many countries, having a same-sex partner is still outlawed."

Quoting Amnesty International, John said an estimated 80 countries still have laws that criminalize adult same-sex relations. He also cited specific cases of abuse in countries such as the United Arab Emirates, Jamaica, Uganda, Iraq and Poland.

"Throughout history, gay people such as myself and David have often been made scapegoats by those who fear that we are a threat to the status quo," John said.

More than 600 same-sex couples plan to form civil partnerships in England and Wales on Wednesday, the first day that such ceremonies become possible. In order to get the law passed that allow such unions, the British government avoided potential opposition by avoiding the term "marriage."

 

[Raimondin]

Along with Equal Rights, acceptance!

 

[Harrowborg]

When I saw this thread I thought it was a joke from Little Britain, being the 'only gay in the village' and all

 

[kbate]

Along with Equal Rights, acceptance!

Dear Santa,

 

[Raimondin]

What the heck! If you're going to ask, then ask BIG!

RIGHTS, ACCEPTANCE THE WHOLE ENCHILADA! RIGHT?

I don't think it's naive stupidity to do so, nor a joke, nor unrealistically idealistic.

I think that's why it will always be the way it is.

I've never been so ashamed of my own country. That's why maybe we do need another '60's-like social revolution afterall.

(Ok, I've vented my rant for the day!)

 

[pa-guy]

It's highly unlikely the US will lead the world in this aspect. And more to the point, world-wide acceptance is quite a ways away.

 

[gypsywitch]

In our lifetime? That would take a miracle!

Eventually though... eventually.

 

[Raimondin]

In our lifetime? That would take a miracle!

Eventually though... eventually.

Yeah, I know. More than a miracle, actually. And definitely not in this lifetime.

But it's still good somebody as famous like E.J. brought it up on a global level!

I'm a member of Amnesty International and I'll always do my part to promote and help freedom.

 

[Raimondin]

It's highly unlikely the US will lead the world in this aspect. And more to the point, world-wide acceptance is quite a ways away.

True. And as I mentioned above, being a member of Amnesty International has always been my mission or goal to fight for our rights.

 

[pa-guy]

You might say international level but to claim this is a global level is a bit arrogant. This is something our media has picked up on, maybe even most of western Europe media has, but to assume that asian, african, and middle-eastern medias are reporting on this is a bit naive.

It would be nice if it were global, but it is highly unlikely that it is. Before homosexual rights can be acknowledge on a global level, shouldn't basic human rights be accepted everywhere first? Else you're putting the cart before the horse. As important as I think homosexual rights are, as are african american, women, and any other group, basic human rights trumps them all in priority.

 

[neonflux]

To pa-guy - I thank you for your post!!!

Thank you for your post and taking us beyond our sometimes narrow concerns.

I believe that the 2 go hand-in-hand and in those countries which still execute or imprison people for same-gender behavior, those who are oppressed may be too scared to speak out but certainly welcome support from outside - take it from someone who works with queer/questioning immigrant kids in san francisco and has friends who have done international work in this area. While the issue certainly has less prominence in non-Western countries, there are growing LGBT-rights movements in countries with a higher standard of living like India, Japan, China, and throughout Latin America. It's amazing to me that South Africans, recognized the connection between LGBT and human rights, wrote protections for LGBT people into their constitution.

That said, I would agree with you that for the vast majority of the world's people, who live on less than $2 a day, this issue is less than relevant. Social and economic justice issues are grounded in human rights issues, colonization, oppression and racism and deserve our attention. As a queer-identified activist, that is where I would prefer to concentrate most of my efforts, modelling and helping others make connections to my community in the process.

RE: how long for full LGBT rights? I believe less far off in the US than one might think, despite the continuing use of us as diversionary scapegoats by the radical religious right...

You might say international level but to claim this is a global level is a bit arrogant. This is something our media has picked up on, maybe even most of western Europe media has, but to assume that asian, african, and middle-eastern medias are reporting on this is a bit naive.

It would be nice if it were global, but it is highly unlikely that it is. Before homosexual rights can be acknowledge on a global level, shouldn't basic human rights be accepted everywhere first? Else you're putting the cart before the horse. As important as I think homosexual rights are, as are african american, women, and any other group, basic human rights trumps them all in priority.

 

[Raimondin]

You might say international level but to claim this is a global level is a bit arrogant. This is something our media has picked up on, maybe even most of western Europe media has, but to assume that asian, african, and middle-eastern medias are reporting on this is a bit naive.

It would be nice if it were global, but it is highly unlikely that it is. Before homosexual rights can be acknowledge on a global level, shouldn't basic human rights be accepted everywhere first? Else you're putting the cart before the horse. As important as I think homosexual rights are, as are african american, women, and any other group, basic human rights trumps them all in priority.

Yes, but as homosexuals we're not included in the 'basic human rights' agenda. "Cart before the horse," hell, we're not even in the pasture! That's the harsh reality of it.
Women, as women, are still accepted as human beings above us. Besides, next to women, we're probably the most feared and hated group.
Quoting some other source, imagine the outcry if the government prohibited blacks from getting married, establishing a separate partnership register for non-whites! Let's not put our heads in the sand.

 

[John Doe]

Along with Equal Rights, acceptance!

Not going to happen.

 

[John Doe]

As important as I think homosexual rights are, as are african american, women, and any other group, basic human rights trumps them all in priority.

Exactly.

Yes, but as homosexuals we're not included in the 'basic human rights' agenda. "Cart before the horse," hell, we're not even in the pasture! That's the harsh reality of it.
Women, as women, are still accepted as human beings above us. Besides, next to women, we're probably the most feared and hated group.

Bullshit.

 

[Samuelx]

I am in complete agreement.

 

[Programmer Cat]

Along with Equal Rights, acceptance!

Why acceptance? I don't accept Christians, but I don't go about oppressing them either.

 

[little_dragon]

It's highly unlikely the US will lead the world in this aspect. And more to the point, world-wide acceptance is quite a ways away.

Shit .

One can wish.......

....and write the president....

..........and lead rallies.......

............and protest.........


........................and go behind everyone's back, fly to Britian, get married, and fly back, and tell the US to kiss our asses......why the hell would you want to put a limit on someone's happiness????? Freedom of _____ my ass.


Ok, I'm done....lol.

Little Dragon

 

[none2_none2]

It would be nice if it were global, but it is highly unlikely that it is. Before homosexual rights can be acknowledge on a global level, shouldn't basic human rights be accepted everywhere first? Else you're putting the cart before the horse. As important as I think homosexual rights are, as are african american, women, and any other group, basic human rights trumps them all in priority.

Exactly.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." -- From the US Declaration of Independance 1776

What do you guys think homosexual rights are fundamentally about?
Do you think it is all about the right to dress in drag, wear a tiara, sing in falsetto, and go out dancing and & drinking at the bars every night?

Yes, but as homosexuals we're not included in the 'basic human rights' agenda. "Cart before the horse," hell, we're not even in the pasture! That's the harsh reality of it.
Women, as women, are still accepted as human beings above us. Besides, next to women, we're probably the most feared and hated group.

Bullshit.

Perhaps the way Raimondin expressed himself wasn't the most PC, but do you really think there is 0% truth to what he said? I remember a gay friend who was from Saudi Arabia. His life was hell before he came to America as a student. His father "suspected" he might be gay and threatened to disown him if he didn't get married to a woman. He also informed me that it wasn't that long ago that the punishment for adult homosexuality could be anything from lashings, imprisonment, beheading, or to being pushed off a cliff or the tallest building to your death. If your "own" people want to do something like that, I would call that hated. Tasmania had a punishment of 21 years in jail for sodomy up into the 1990's. Even in Kansas where I am, it was just recently that a young slightly retarted man was finally released from jail for sodomy. They had planned to keep him in prison for 17 YEARS. Had it been heterosexual sex with the opposite sex, the maximum would have been 15 MONTHS.

Sure you can always find hatred to other groups, but Raimondin's original posts shouldn't be dismissed. It reminds me of someone who once appealed for funds for an animal shelter. Some people dismissed the person's appeal because there are humans in the world that need food. We could also argue about how much land is wasted to grow tobacco, coffee, illegal drugs, etc. If tomorrow coffee was non-existant because that land was now used to grow food crops, just think of how many people would whine about how their basic rights were denied. It sure wouldn't take decades before they got their coffee fix again.

I may not always agree with the way Raimondin expresses his thoughts, but they shouldn't be marginalized.