The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionNew foreign policy on gay rights seen as threat to religious liberty
Jan. 27, 2012
QUINCY, Mass. -- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's announcement in December that respect for gay rights is now a factor in the Obama administration's foreign policy decisions is on a collision course with religious freedom, said an official with the Becket Fund.
"This administration clearly wants to elevate certain rights over others. And unfortunately it seems that religious freedom is never prioritized in their foreign policy as it should be," Tina Ramirez told The Anchor, newspaper of the Fall River Diocese.
Ramirez is director of government and international relations for the Becket Fund, which seeks to protect the free expression all faiths.
On Dec. 6, Clinton announced to U.N. diplomats in Geneva that U.S. agencies engaged abroad have been instructed to "combat the criminalization" of the "status or conduct" of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people.
President Barack Obama, in a memo released later the same day, called ending discrimination against this group of people central to the U.S. commitment to promoting human rights. This follows an announcement by the administration last summer that it supports legislation to repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
In her speech, Clinton said that all people deserve to be treated with dignity "no matter whom they love" and said that those who defend human rights are "on the right side of history."
"Gay rights are human rights," she said.
She also announced the formation of the $3 million Global Equality Fund that will help groups "record facts so that they can target their advocacy, learn how to use the law as a tool, manage their budgets, train their staffs and forge partnerships with women's organizations and other human rights groups."
Clinton focused her half-hour speech on violent abuses against homosexuals, but she did not elaborate on what else would be considered discrimination. A senior State Department official said later in a briefing that about 80 countries still criminalize the status and/or conduct of gay, lesbian bisexual and transgendered people.
The Catholic church teaches that the dignity of homosexual individuals must be respected as well as their rights as people, such as the right to employment and freedom from unjust discrimination.
But the church also upholds the sanctity of traditional marriage as being only between one man and one woman. The church also teaches that any sexual activity outside of marriage is sinful. Its opposition to same-sex marriages is considered by supporters of such marriages to be discrimination.
Preview NCR's Family Life Issue
Watch this video from NCR Editor Dennis Coday for highlights from our annual Family Life special section.
You won't find these articles on our website. Subscribe now to receive all the content from each biweekly issue.
Timothy Herrmann, the U.N. representative for the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute in New York, told The Anchor that the resolution to support gay rights initiatives abroad represents a fundamental change in U.S. foreign policy.
A senior State Department official told reporters the policy just builds on what the agency is already doing but what is new is that it applies to all federal agencies abroad.
Herrmann said that by focusing on violence against homosexuals, Clinton and Obama's "real intention is to create a set of human rights that don't need to be created because everybody, by the nature of being a human, already has those rights. ... What we are dealing with fundamentally is the imposition of a certain type of behavior on society."
In the United States, Catholic leaders have raised a number of concerns in recent months about the effect on religious liberty of state action on same-sex marriage or civil unions.
In Illinois, Catholic Charities agencies in Illinois have been "driven out of the adoption and foster care business," because they would not place children with same-sex couples. In New York state, some county clerks are facing legal action for refusing to participate in same-sex unions.
Bishop William E. Lori of Bridgeport, Conn., chairman of the bishops' new Ad Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty, told a House subcommittee In October that he found it "troubling" when opposition to same-sex marriage "is portrayed as bigotry" and when some try to draw a "parallel between racial discrimination and (opposition to) same-gender marriage."
Abroad, religious speech about homosexuality has been prosecuted as hate speech.
"It is important to make sure that pastors who have beliefs about homosexuality are able to express those in the context of their ministry," Ramirez said.
She said of the new foreign policy, "There's clearly an agenda, and there's no real clarity of where the lines will be drawn to protect conscience rights. That's the main concern. We do have a priority of protecting religious freedom."
Apparently, standing up for
Apparently, standing up for human rights and standing against hate and bigotry are not popular positions with some Catholic bishops and some Catholic organizations. Now, according to them, to be loving and helpful to ALL people is a violation of religious freedom! Since when is it against religious freedom to practice the Christian virtues of understanding and love towards our fellow human beings. The really sick thing is that some bishops have the gall to do this in the name of Christianity! Shame, shame, shame!
I agree with you. I think
I agree with you.
I think what we now understand about gay people is that they are naturally who they are. God made them the way they are. They aren't the same as the "majority", but, what the heck, some people are left handed and some are red headed. A norm is only a norm; it does not encompass all.
So, now we have to consider "conscience rights" for people who want the right to discriminate in how gays are treated. Not only do they want that right, in some cases they want to be able to use the tax payors dime to exercise that right. And some of those tax dimes are from gay people themselves, some from among the 54% of Catholics who support gay marriage, (admittedly) some is from Catholics who do believe in discriminating against gay people, and some is from the general population that is 46% in favor to 44% who disfavor gay marriage.
What about my "conscience right" not to have my tax payor dime given to people/organizations who want to violate the basic principles of the constitution under which we all live - freedom and equality for all, including gay people.
Real civil equality for gays may have to wait until the older generation, ummm, ages out. Each younger generation increasingly supports gay marriage as an equal civil institution to straight marriage. It will come. I am very proud of Catholic politicians and voters who support gay marriage - if they still believe in what the Church says about it, at least they believe equally and separately that rights in the civil sphere are not the same as "religious freedom."
Romano, thank you for this
Romano, thank you for this note. You are indeed correct. Remember the Church once stood up for the legally of slavery. It takes secular intervention to change ethical standards. In a church that follows The Way of Christ one would think it would be the Chruch that would stand for ever increasing moral standards. Unfortunately, it has been the Chruch's lack of ability to understand its own mistakes that has caused much bigotry.
Homesexual perverion, part of
Homesexual perverion, part of the NCR's seamless garment.
Abortion, humanitarian wars, secular tyranny, crony capitalism, pornography, police state tactics, debts. Or is this stuff social justice?
This reaction is a sick as it
This reaction is a sick as it is ignorant.
"This administration clearly
"This administration clearly wants to elevate certain rights over others..."
Yes, we call them HUMAN rights.
Memo to Mildred Bean:
Could I interest you in some vacation property in UGANDA?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uganda_Anti-Homosexuality_Bill
Or perhaps INDIA?
http://www.outandaround.com/indian-supergays-create-a-home-for-women-rej...
Some bishops seem to be
Some bishops seem to be saying that advocacy by the US State Department for human rights for LGBTI persons could pose a violation of their consciences.
It's very clear what the State Department's policy is about. In many of the countries of the world all forms of "homosexual conduct" are punishable by jail terms and, in some countries, by the death penalty. In Nigeria, which has a large Catholic Church, by law anyone advocating for equality for LGBTI persons in employment or housing is punishable by up to five years in jail. In Uganda, the government was ready to add the death penalty to that country's already severe jail punishments for "homosexual conduct." Jamaica is the gay murder capital of the western hemisphere. Last year, a group of mourners gathered in an Anglican Church to participate in the funeral of a UN World Health Organization representative who was working in Jamaica in the fight against the spread of HIV/AIDS. This young man was murdered after it became know thast he was gay. While the police watched, a gang of thugs burned down the church and killed most of the worshippers. Jamaican reggae music is redolent with the call, "death to the battie boys", a Caribbean expression for gay men.
How is advocating for respect for human life a violation of the religious freedom of Catholic bishops? How is opposition to the death penalty a violation of the consciences of some bishops? How is having nothing to say about jailing and murdering people for human rights work and the struggle for world health an exercise of the religious freedom of some bishops? Especially in the context of exercising leadership in a Church which publically brands sexual minorities as "gravely disordered".
Most gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and intersex persons go to be every night in fear of what may be done to them by those who, in ignorance, hate them. Most LGBTI children in the world live in despair, without the hope of ever living a life with love, family, celebration, joy. The things that make life livable for the rest of us.
We are waiting for some words of hope from those who claim to embrace the healing grace of Jesus, and to speak for him.
I believe you have asked some
I believe you have asked some very important questions, Karen. There seems to be something intrinsic about ascending the ladder of hierarchy that causes an individual to deep-six the attributes that Jesus advocated. This is probably why Jesus always scorned the idea of 'levels' in the community of faith that he was describing as his own.
We need to remember that it was this same level of hierarchy that ordered the great peace activist and Trappist monk, Thomas Merton, to quit writing essays against the Vietnam war. Merton in his private journal commented sarcastically about this strange order when he wrote: "What was I thinking! I should have known that as a Catholic priest I shouldn't be against war."
These are strange Christians, these people who call themselves Catholic bishops: refusing to defend the LGBT community, opposing those who write against war, and more recently sacrificing little kids to sexual abuse in order to protect their reputation. I say "their reputation" because clearly, they were not trying to stand up for Jesus in any of these affairs! The rebukes of Jesus against the Scribes and Pharisees of his day are becoming living words in our own day!
Ray, it seems that today
Ray, it seems that today everything that shows love and respect for our fellow humans is in the eyes of our bishops an affront to THEIR consciences'. If Jesus himself were to walk among them He would not measure up to their observance of laws that seek to harm and discriminate against others. We see them act like the blind leading the blind, for others who call themselves Christians and follow their rules do not behave with love. Only THEIR MAGISTERIUM RULES. When I read the new catechism on the subject of LGBT people,I,a straight person, was appalled. Their understanding on all levels of human sexuality lives somewhere in the fog of the third and fourth centuries. Time for them to wake up!!!
Conservatives: you don't have
Conservatives: you don't have FOREVER to debate about issues of sexuality and sexual & human freedom before anything is done about them. We're all going forward, gayly forward, to secure human rights for all. Religious freedom is Nothing if human rights are not established. This means secular human rights too. Religious rights are based upon an expansive view and not limited view of the human. The Incarnation Jesus brought to a crescendo in humanity 2000 years ago cannot continue unless this happens. The Spirit is always looking for ways to take on flesh, all the time, in many guises and varieties. This means LBGTI people.
"Love one another as I have
"Love one another as I have loved you. "
(That's unconditional.)
Those who are violating
Those who are violating freedom and religious liberty are any clerics of the Catholic Church, from the pope on down to any parish priest, deacon, or lay person who subscribes to this nonsense. No one is being forced to enter a same-sex union of any kind, and no church or any church minister is being required by any law to preside over any such union. These are lies, distortions, deceits, and any Catholic, from the Bishop of Rome on down to any cleric or lay patron who claims otherwise is lying or ignorant. These lies are all being directed from the Vatican under the guise of "mental reservations." Anyone who peddles these lies should be ashamed of themselves--if they had any pride of honesty. Lying, after all, is supposed to be a sin.
Oh, Mildred, get a grip.
Oh, Mildred, get a grip. None but flat earth hangers on and eccesiastical aristocrates can accept the gobbldigook espoused by the perversion assertion, way too much evidence to the contrary. Now, conspiratorial hierarchs, infringement on another's right to make informed decisions about their own bodies, insurance company infringement on doctor-patient health care decisions, economically restricting access to medication, perpetually hungry children living in poverty, the unencumbered right to bear arms (and shoot at people one doesn't like or agree with), these seem to verge on legitimate concerns. A few Hail Mary's in those directions might be helpful.
No, the IL Dioceses have not
No, the IL Dioceses have not been "driven out" of adoption services, they packed up and chose to back out. They were not forced out.
In many areas of Africa,
In many areas of Africa, areas which receive copious US foreign aid and where the RCC is making a concerted evangelizing effort, homosexuals are arrested, tortured and even murdered, so I totally agree that protection of gay rights should be a cornerstone of American foreign policy. Thank you, Hillary! The RCC should be careful not to engage in inflamatory hate speech, even though it may be very appealing to potential converts' cultural biases. The RCC is on the wrong side of this argument, and the USA has every right, indeed obligation, to enact policy against bigotry and discrimination.
"In New York state, some
"In New York state, some county clerks are facing legal action for refusing to participate in same-sex unions."
## With a bit of goodwill on both sides, that shouldn't be insoluble. How were the old laws forbidding intermarriage, the new laws allowing it, and objections by legal personnel to participation in mixed-race marriages dealt with after desegregation ? If the problems arising from desegregation could be solved - why can't those be solved that arise from extending the rights of gay people ? Was desegregation persecution of Christians ? If not, why should extending gay rights be ?
"Ramirez is director of
"Ramirez is director of government and international relations for the Becket Fund, which seeks to protect the free expression all faiths."
## Before Vatican II, no Catholic bishop - except for raving liberals - would have tolerated any notion of "the free expression [of] all faiths". Such a position would have been fiercely denounced as God-denying indifferentism leading to the destruction of society. Today's horrid liberal error is tomorrow's Catholic orthodoxy that must be believed & taught.
If the Church can champion as a fundamental human right what it formerly attacked with passionate counter-arguments, why can it not move on gay marriage ? Doctrines are always unchangeable - until they are changed. Then those who still hold them are called "troublemakers", "heretics", "schismatics", for the sin of doing no more than remain faithful to the Faith as it was drummed into them. Denying changes, even reversals, in doctrine happen is not the way to convince doubters that they cannot happen. Denial is not an option - it's a form of untruthfulness, and that is not a Christ-like quality :(
"She said of the new foreign
"She said of the new foreign policy, "There's clearly an agenda, and there's no real clarity of where the lines will be drawn to protect conscience rights. That's the main concern. We do have a priority of protecting religious freedom.""
What about the persecution of the Southern Christians who were convinced of the lawfulness, before God, of slavery ? Yet Lincoln, that denier of the Bible who had the effrontery to put an end to an institution allowed by God's Word, is treated as a hero and martyr ! Where were the bishops *then* ? Why did they not condemn Lincoln, for his satanic agenda of seeking to deprive Christian people of their God-given, Bible-given, Tradition-given, doctrine-given, Faith-given, conscience-given RIGHT to hold slaves as property ? When does the Bible say, even once, that slave-owning is a sin ?
If Bible-denying Lincoln can be a hero and martyr, despite his rejecting and fighting to end an institution never once condemned by the Bible, one practiced by Biblical heroes such as Abraham; by what logic is it out of the question to stop condemning how gay people live ? And why the hostility to Obama ? He has not stopped people from doing what the Bible allows them to do, or fought a ruinous war to force them to stop it. No one has been obliged to be gay - but many were obliged to stop owning slaves. All gay people want is freedom not to be interfered with; why is that so much to ask ? Are they "not..men and..brother[s]"? Then they deserve the same rights, to exercise if they will, or not, if they will. If the Bible can be reversed once, why can not it be reversed again - assuming, that is, that it condemns gay activity ? How can a Biblical argument be conclusive, if the Biblically-uncondemned practice of slavery can be condemned despite non-condemnation in the Bible ?
Since "protecting the family"
Since "protecting the family" is fast becoming a losing slogan for discriminating against homosexuals (for the simple reason that 99% of heterosexuals, and heterosexual couples, don't feel at all threatened), the latest rationale for such discrimination is the "religious freedom" to discriminate. It works with respect to inner church structures (Mormons didn't allow blacks until a few years ago). It won't work when the Church takes public monies to perform public services. In the latter case, such discrimination is becoming a breach of law whether the Church likes it or not. This is one Catholic who believes this is a progressive moral development.
Meanwhile, the Archbishop of
Meanwhile, the Archbishop of Ibadan and the Bishops of Jos have endorsed legislation in the mass media to throw all Gay persons in jail for up to 14 years for the 'crime' of being Gay, and also to shut down any straight of gay relgious group (on penalty of up to 10 years in prison) for the 'crime' of attending a same sex marriage ceremony in accordance with their religious beliefs. So much for religious freedom. So on one hand we have peaceful Gays, who simply say that organizations that discriminate should not receive taxpayer subsidies, and on the other, the Roman Catholic Church, which argues that Gay people should be thrown in prison and any religion that supports them should be shut down and their members thrown in prison for simply attending a religious ceremony.
No matter how you parse this,
No matter how you parse this, the Church's position is pathetic. Hermann's comments are those put forward by those who are not concerned with the special discrimination against gay people. His subtext is: "if this is how they choose to live, then they should not be surprised that they will have to confront the consequences." As comments have pointed out, homosexual persons are singled out in many parts of the world including the US. These kinds of moral platitudes from the likes of Hermann and Timothy Dolan are nothing if not irrelevent, if not spiritually poisonous while posing as moral truths. Pathetic, really pathetic.
Post new comment