[Grem] US fails to change the definition of the family / "Anti-family-language rolled back at the UN"

[Emoke Greschik]

 Obama Team Tries to Scrap Parts of Universal Declaration of Human
Rights By Stefano Gennarini, J.D.
http://c-fam.org/en/issues/marriage-and-family/7749-obama-team-tries-to-scrap-parts-of-universal-declaration-of-human-rights

NEW YORK, February 28 (C-FAM) *Angry over not getting a same-sex-friendly
definition of the family into a new UN document, the Obama Administration
tried to delete language agreed upon by the founders of the UN and repeated
in documents since then.*

Regularly contentious in recent decades, the family has been a diplomatic
football with one side eager to recognize "diverse forms of the family"
while the other holds on to the understanding that *the family is the
"natural and fundamental group unit of society"* taken directly *from the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.*

Behind closed doors, *US negotiators asked to replace the definition of
family *from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights *with a lengthy new
description of families* that have* "diverse forms and functions" and
express "diversity of individual preferences."*

*The proposed definition excluded the notion of the natural family, based
on the union of a man and woman, *as the norm for the procreation and
upbringing of children. *The US effort was ultimately rejected by UN member
states.*

The move puts the United States in an odd position.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights has almost sacred status at the
United Nations. It is regarded, together with the UN Charter, as a founding
document of the new world order set in place after World War II.

*What's more, the UN definition of the family  is reflected in the
constitutions of nearly 120 countries.*

US diplomats argued that extended families and single parent households are
not included in the classic UN definition. Delegates from traditional
countries understood the US argument as pretext to gain recognition for
same sex unions because extended families and single parent households were
always included in the UN definition.

Similar proposals from the United States, albeit never excluding language
from the Declaration, were routinely included in UN documents until
recently. But* the General Assembly rejected the notion of "various forms
of the family" at its last two sessions* *despite **insistence from the
European countries and the United States. *Once thought to be inoffensive,
the phrase has become embroiled in controversy because of western
insistence on same-sex issues.

*UN Member States are not taking kindly to the* *new focus on lesbian, gay,
bisexual or transsexual (LGBT) issues from the United States and European
countries.* Western countries have still to table a substantive resolution
that addresses sexual orientation and gender identity and *outspoken
countries have limited themselves to campaigns to publicize LGBT issues
internationally.*

LGBT supporters are not the only ones frustrated with the United Nations.
There is a trend of rolling back UN terminology that was uncontested until
recently not only on LGBT issues but also related to sexual and
reproductive health. *Abortion groups are frustrated that they have lost
ground at the UN. They are worried they will not be able to carry out their
agenda into future UN policies.*

*US diplomats stirred controversy last year when they rejected **language
from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights*. During negotiations over a
resolution about women's policies, US diplomats asked to delete a reference
to the "inherent right to life, liberty, and security of person" of every
human being, also from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
--------- következõ rész ---------
Egy csatolt HTML állomány át lett konvertálva...
URL: http://turul.kgk.uni-obuda.hu/pipermail/grem/attachments/20140228/746030aa/attachment.html