A girl who was 8 or 9 walked into a courthouse alone and said, “I need a divorce.” Here’s the story:
Related, here’s Cynthia Gorney speaking about girls who are forced to marry (due to prearranged marriage) when they are as young as five. Very sad.
Summary execution, homosexuality and the United Nations, continued: USA kicks ass.
December 22, 2010 By 9 Comments
Some of you might remember a blog I wrote about the UN Third Commitee back in November, specifically about their removal of homosexuality from a list of reasons why states shouldn’t murder people.
I was pleased that the US envoy to the UN roundly condemned the ammendment at the time, and I said so in the blog.
Well, Uncle Sam’s duly appointed representatives to the UN have gone one better and gotten the ammendment removed. So, thanks to the USA and their supporters, UN member states are now no longer allowed to murder gays just for being gay. Of course, many still will, but let’s not detract from the message that this sends about where the USA stands on sexuality and freedom.
I don’t say this often, so don’t blink or you’ll miss it: Go USA!
Summary execution, homosexuality and the United Nations.
November 22, 2010 By 34 Comments
News from the United Nations has emerged that’s frightening for more reasons than I can express. The UN Third Commitee on Social, Humanitarian and Cultural issues has been debating a resolution protecting people from summary execution. Now, first of all, I would like to suggest that it’s obscene that there is even a debate on this. In a civilised world, summary execution should never, ever be acceptable under any circustances – but the Third Commitee disagrees. They’ve been debating specific reasons that should be excluded from the list of valid excuses to kill somebody out of hand – for example, it (in theory) protects journalists from the fear of being shot without trial.
As reported by the New Civil Rights Movement blog, the debate has been effectively highjacked by African and Arab nations in order to remove the protection of the resolution from a specific group: Homosexuals.
While this doesn’t mean that the UN has explicitly said that it’s okay to kill gay people, the implicit message in removing a specific group from the resolution is clear as a bell. Without wanting to make racial assumptions, it shouldn’t come as a shock that the Chairman of the Third Commitee is from Cameroon, an African nation known for persecuting homosexuals, or that the members who voted for the ammendment were chiefly the African and Arab nations, while the US, Australia, New Zealand and most of the European members voted against.
I have been unable to find details of the 17 abstaining voters or the 26 absentees, but I will name and shame them when I find out.
On a positive note, I want to say well done to the United States Mission to the United Nations for roundly condemning this amendment.
Archdiocese of DC Makes Strange Threat
November 13, 2009 By 23 Comments
by Jesse Galef
The poor VaticanThe Catholic Church tries to foster a reputation for their good works with the poor (unless of course the poor want to use condoms, the naughty boys). Given their desired public image, I was rather surprised to read that they’re threatening to stop providing care unless they’re allowed to discriminate against homosexuals:
The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it will be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if the city doesn’t change a proposed same-sex marriage law, a threat that could affect tens of thousands of people the church helps with adoption, homelessness and health care.
Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians.
Yeah, that just screams “charity” and “compassion” to me.
When I worked at the Secular Coalition for America, we did a lot of lobbying on the Faith-Based Initiatives. It was our position that, at the least, any organization receiving federal money should abide by the reasonable secular federal anti-discrimination laws.
And Catholic Charities – the 501(c)3 nonprofit arm of the Church – IS receiving federal dollars. Millions of federal dollars. Do they expect that money to come completely without any conditions? It is not a fundamental right to receive $8.2 million in federal contracts.
Council member David Catania has the right idea, saying “If they find living under our laws so oppressive that they can no longer take city resources, the city will have to find an alternative partner to step in to fill the shoes.”
I think my friend Rob Boston at Americans United for Separation of Church and State put it best on the AU blog:
Let me get this straight: The church is saying, “Unless you bow to our demands, we’ll stop taking your money”?
Church leaders really need to come up with some better threats.
Decisions, decisions…
Atheists on Kiva
June 20, 2009 By 49 Comments
Kiva is “the world’s first person-to-person micro-lending website, empowering individuals to lend directly to unique entrepreneurs around the globe.” Guess who are the top group lenders there?
That’s right, atheists! So far, they’ve lent $611,500 dollars.
If you haven’t already, please consider signing up and joining the kiva atheist community.
Follow Patheos
Atheist: