Another Fight for the Family at the next General Assembly of the American States. Paraguay Leads.

By Marianna Orlandi, Ph.D. | June 13, 2017

Whether the thirty-five States of the Americas will continue to promote the controversial social agendas in the whole hemisphere will be decided next week by the next General Assembly of the Organization of the American States (OAS).

Gathered in Cancun, the OAS’ Member States will vote on its next yearly resolution on “human rights, sexual orientation, and gender identity,” adopted since 2008. Since 2013, the resolution’s title includes protection of “gender expression”. This year’s draft proposal goes further, calling for condemnation of “violence” against individuals “with intersex traits.”

The new language may imply proscription of any surgical correction of children’s malformed genitalia until they can make an autonomous decision on the matter. Such measure could apply equally even when it is scientifically clear what sex they are born with genetically, and when such corrections were recommended by the best available science.

The 2017 proposal was presented by Brazil and co-sponsored by Argentina, Canada, Colombia, Chile, Mexico, Uruguay, and the United States, who are founding members of the so called “OAS LGBTI Core Group,” an Obama’s legacy.

The OAS was the first regional body to elevate “sexual orientation and gender identity” to protected categories of unjust discrimination with the adoption of the Convention Against All Forms of Discrimination and Intolerance in 2013. The regional treaty, signed by less than one third of the States and ratified by none, goes beyond any UN binding provision. Due to its vague language, both Canada and the United States–some of the world’s strongest supporters of the LGBT agenda—rejected it.

In particular, the treaty condemns an “intolerance” whose contours are so vague that they may violate freedom of expression, and religion, well protected by binding human rights norms.

In recent news, Canada passed a bill that may allow social workers to take a child away from their families if parents do not adhere to the predicates of “gender ideology,” including on religious grounds.

Brazil has already demonstrated that some forms of criticism are not “allowed” by fining a blogger who claimed it was inappropriate to fund a transgender organization with taxpayers’ money.

In 2014, thirteen Member States expressed reservations on the resolution on sexual orientation and gender identity and expression based on their constitutions. Some underlined that there is no need for such a resolution because human rights are universal and all forms of violence and discrimination are covered and condemned by international law.

This year, the state of Guatemala reserved on the whole text at an early stage, while the Paraguay delegation is once again leading the pro-family fight.

Paraguay asked the proposal not to be included in the “omnibus” human rights’ resolution, as it happened last year. “Gay rights are human rights” is an Obama-Clinton motto inconsistent with international human rights law since human rights are universal.

Jamaica and Panama have also expressed their concerns, and more voices are expected to follow.

The present draft urges Member States “to adopt and implement effective measures to combat homophobia and transphobia.” Neither terms are better defined within a text that does offer safeguards for parental rights, freedom of opinion, or religion.

This 47th General Assembly will be held in Mexico, a place where the issue of same-sex marriage was at the center of the political debate. Mexican President, Enrique Peña Nieto, led a campaign for its legalization in all the States, but the answer of its people revealed the values of Mexicans are different. The President’s ratings fell from 54% in 2012 to 17% in 2017.

The OAS’ Member States will also be required to vote on the funding of the Inter-American system of Human Rights. As per the latest press release, both the Inter-American Commission and the Court are confident the OAS will double its budget next week.

It is honorable to fund a human rights’ system. It is desirable that it deals with human rights.

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Tagged with: •