Sex Activists Bemoan Passage of Pro-Family Resolution at UN in Geneva

By | July 16, 2015

NEW YORK, July 17 (C-Fam) If anyone doubts the victory claimed by pro-lifers regarding the rights of the family resolution passed by the Human Rights Council in Geneva recently, look no further than the reaction of sex activists. They are very upset.

A group calling itself the “Sexual Rights Initiative” condemned the resolution in no uncertain terms. Days before the debate began the group complained that the resolution did not recognize how “morals and traditions” may be inconsistent with “international human rights standards.” They called the resolution “unhelpful in furthering the human rights discourse in any meaningful way and serves only to undermine hard gained advances.”

The family resolution first passed two years ago and calls upon states to take the family into consideration in public policy. This second passage of the resolution further sets in stone the recognition that the Human Rights Council is officially pushing back against trends that have put the family in danger.

Particularly troubling for sex activists is Member States insistence on using the singular “family” rather than “various forms of the family.”

After the resolution passed, the Sexual Rights Initiative grew apoplectic and even apocalyptic. They called it a “setback and serves to further polarize the Human Rights Council…”

They charged the resolution was a set back for the “human rights of individuals” by “elevating the family as an institution…” They further charge that the family is scene of human rights abuses and that the family is patriarchal and oppressive.

One of the most divisive skirmishes in the debate was over the word “family.” Years ago the phrase “various forms of the family” became what’s known as “agreed upon language” in UN documents. Agreed upon language hardly ever changes. But, this one did. In the past two years alone “various forms” has been rejected in favor of the singular “family.” European countries attempted to get the term accepted in Geneva and were rebuffed. Conservative countries were prepared to propose an amendment saying marriage is between men and women only, but this was withdrawn after the “various forms” amendment failed.

For many years the Human Rights Council has been the scene of many battles between LGBT activists and their country-sponsors and the country representatives of traditional peoples. LGBT supporters have tried for years to get “sexual orientation and gender identity” recognized by the Council as a new category of non-discrimination on par with well-established human rights as freedom of religion. With the exception of a resolution calling for a report on abuses of LGBTs, they have completely failed.

LGBT supporters, however, have used the resolution on abuses very effectively. It was erroneously called a huge human rights victory and resulted in a report from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights that fell short of calling for a right to same sex marriage but that did consider SOGI a new human rights category. The High Commissioner does not have the authority to establish new human rights, however.

Will the Human Rights Council resolution on the family result in recognition in the General Assembly in New York, and in other UN documents? That remains to be seen. Supporters will certainly try but there remains stiff resistance from the powerful states of the European Union.