Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Vatican would rather gay people were executed than married

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU
 
scytherius Donating Member (576 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 11:31 PM
Original message
Vatican would rather gay people were executed than married
Source: National Secular Society

When France proposed a resolution seeking all nations to decriminalise homosexuality, the Vatican immediately said it would oppose the resolution. This is despite the fact that up to 70 nations still have legal punishments for gay people including, in some instances, the death penalty. In a number of Islamic countries such as Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Yemen, homosexual acts are still a capital offense.

Read more: http://www.secularism.org.uk/vaticanwouldrathergaypeopl...



I had so many things I wanted to say, but, well . . . I'll let them damn themselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Pushed To The Left Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 11:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yet another reason why fundamentalist religion has no place in politics! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 11:44 PM
Response to Original message
2. been doin this to hundreds of millions of people for 2000 years nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madeline_con Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 11:53 PM
Response to Original message
3. The Vatican should STFU.
No one really cares what they think anyway. They are still trying to rule by fear and intimidation. The office of Pope should be abolished for human rights abuses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-10-08 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #3
39. That's what's really revolting about this, they COULD have abstained.
They could have shut the fuck up but instead immediately opposed the resolution.

They just couldn't help themselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northernsoul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
46. You're wrong.
Actually, far too people care what the Vatican thinks. I look forward to the day when that is not the case, but right now the sad reality is that far too many of our fellows give undeserved fealty to this morally bankrupt institution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ksimons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
4. all their priests would be legal then, no guilt

and what is religion, if there is no guilt involved?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goblinmonger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #4
24. All Catholic priests are not gay.
Nor are they all pedophiles. Nor are all pedophiles gay.

But otherwise there are no problems with your post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:23 AM
Response to Original message
5. Exactly what does Right to Life mean?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baby Snooks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:26 AM
Response to Original message
6. And the Catholics?
I hear Catholics all the time say they don't agree with the Pope on everything. Well, then, really, they are not Catholics.

I was horrified at the time but as the years have passed I am inclined to agree with Ted Turner. Christianity is for losers. As is all religion. But not like Christianity is. How many millions of people has Christianity murdered "in the name of god" and how many of those were murdered by the dictum of the supposed "vicar" of Christ?

Jung was said he was glad he wasn't a Jungian. I have to wonder if Christ at this point would say he was glad he wasn't a Christian.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidthegnome Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 02:53 AM
Response to Reply #6
14. Sorry, but that's untrue
Any church is made more of it's worshippers and followers than it's clergy. Catholics are individuals, as unique in perspective as anyone else. While I despise the Vatican's bigotry and am no longer a Catholic myself, the Pope is not, and never has been the church. Disagreeing with anyone at all does not invalidate one's religion.

On the contrary, I would say that the pope and his dwindling followers in the Vatican are far less Catholic than most of those who go to church on sunday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CatholicEdHead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #14
25. True, but the ultra-"orthodox" uses that definition
Back when I posted on Catholic Answers' board it was and still is all or nothing. Turn your brain off, never question or get out. :crazy: :puke:

Sadly that is most bishops/archbishops and Rome right now too. You do that crap to get ahead in today's Church.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #14
26. Besides the importance supposedly placed on the primacy of conscience... nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beam Me Up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:29 AM
Response to Original message
7. I'm supposed to give a shit what a bunch of men wearing dresses
and jewelry (aka canonical drag) think about gay people? GMAFB!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WildEyedLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:31 AM
Response to Original message
8. Completely false and misleading OP title
The Vatican is against the death penalty. It would rather no one be executed. Their support for the criminalization of homosexuality is abhorrent, but surely to God that's enough to be outraged over without inventing a completely false and idiotic claim completely out of your ass. Jesus, isn't the truth sad enough without you lying to make it seem "more" awful?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Inventing what?
The Vatican supports criminalization despite the fact that it leads to the death penalty in some places.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WildEyedLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. Try rereading the headline of this OP, genius
And tell me *exactly* where the Vatican "supports executing homosexuals." I'll be waiting a long time.

Anybody who would advance a blatant lie to make their point is not worth my respect. This OP COULD have been relevant, but the bald-faced LIE in the title renders it worthless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occulus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 02:40 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. Try reading the first two paragraphs
The Vatican has come out against a United Nations resolution that calls on all governments to decriminalize homosexuality. The resolution, Archbishop Celestino Migliore said, would "add new categories of those protected from discrimination" and could lead to the decline of heterosexual marriage, Reuters reported Tuesday.

"If adopted, they would create new and implacable discriminations," Migliore said. "For example, states which do not recognize same-sex unions as 'matrimony' will be pilloried and made an object of pressure."


Yeah- that's the point.

Italian newspaper La Stampa said the city-state's stance was "grotesque," figuring that the Vatican feared a chain reaction in legally instituting marriage equality, especially in Italy, where there is no law banning same-sex marriage.

"The French resolution... has nothing to do with gay marriage. It is about stopping jail and the death penalty for homosexuals," Franco Grillini, president of Italy's leading gay rights activist organization Arcigay, told Reuters.

Homosexuality is still punishable in at least 85 countries, including Afghanistan, Iran, Sudan, and Ghana. Some countries kill those who are found guilty of such an offense.


Do you think the Roman Catholic Church and former Hitler Youth member John Ratzinger are not very well aware of these facts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 04:46 AM
Response to Reply #11
17. What a crock of shit post. Yeah, the church is full of bigots. And
this board has its share of frauds and liars and phonies itself.

Someone is full of shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wellst0nev0ter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 02:21 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. What, So They Support Life Imprisonment For Being Gay?
Sometimes in order to foster a relationship with someone or something, you should take the good along with the bad. But then there are times that the bad is so invidious that one must have no choice but to cut off all ties to that entity and condemn them for what they are. You've heard it here first. As a lifelong Catholic that has been wavering in the recent months, this has represents the last straw. Although I still believe in God, Jesus and the saints, I cannot associate myself with this type of evil and from now on will no longer associate myself with that institution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lostnfound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 07:51 AM
Response to Reply #12
21. As a parent choosing to send child to Catholic school, I'm questioning it also.
The school itself is a wonderful, loving community.
But this type of news is really disturbing.
As were the 'vote-for-obama-and-you'll-go-to-hell' messages.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #12
30. Can you provide an direct evidence that the Church supports " Life Imprisonment For Being Gay"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Bacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 05:08 AM
Response to Reply #8
18. Not according to Neo-Con Michael Novak and his pals
Neo-Con Novak is a BIG supporter of the death penalty, especially when it applies to Iraq and Iran!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Politicalboi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:40 AM
Response to Original message
10. The Pope and his ilk
Edited on Mon Dec-08-08 01:46 AM by BecauseBushSaysSo
Are Pedophiles and guilty of covering it up at all costs. I can't believe they still have a following. It's pretty disgusting. I mean he's the head cheese.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 03:08 AM
Response to Original message
15. Another reason why religion has no place in modern society.
Religion sucks. I'm the result of a religious cult, and I can tell you, religion sucks. End of story.

Let the hate begin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 04:23 AM
Response to Original message
16. This story is based on a misleading summary of an interview a week ago:
... Copyright Vatican - Agence I.MEDIA - 1er dcembre 2008 - 5200 signes ...

Pour sa part, la France a l’intention de prsenter l’ONU un projet de dclaration pour demander la dpnalisation de l’homosexualit dans le monde entier, au nom des 25 pays de l’Union europenne. Comment ragissez-vous cette proposition ?

Tout ce qui est fait en faveur du respect et de la protection des personnes fait partie de notre patrimoine humain et spirituel. Le Catchisme de l’Eglise catholique affirme, et cela ne date pas d’hier, qu’il faut viter toute forme injuste de discrimination contre les homosexuels. Mais ce n’est pas l la question. Dans une dclaration ayant une valeur politique et signe par un groupe de pays, il est demand aux Etats et aux mcanismes internationaux d’application et de contrle des droits de l’homme d’ajouter de nouvelles catgories devant tre protges contre la discrimination, sans tenir compte que, en cas d’adoption, elles creront de nouvelles et terribles discriminations. Par exemple, les Etats qui ne reconnaissent pas l’union entre personnes du mme sexe comme ‘mariage’ seront mis au pilori et feront l’objet de pressions ...

http://tuespetrus.wordpress.com/2008/12/02/lintervista-...


<Original probably here:> Vatican - Agence I.MEDIA - 1er dcembre 2008 - 5200 signes
Inclure l’avortement dans les droits de l’homme serait une ‘barbarie’, selon le Saint-Sige (Interview)
http://www.imedia-info.org/imedia/public_html /

France, a very Catholic country, is circulating a draft resolution on homosexuality; it plans to submit the resolution on human rights day, 10 December. The draft status of the resolution probably explains why no one has posted the text of it here. The comments above appear in a longer interview on human rights with the Vatican's representative at the UN, where the Vatican has observer status. The Vatican position indicated in the interview, of course, is not progressive: it is that the Vatican was not supporting the draft resolution it saw, because it thinks the resolution will open the door to gay marriage. However disappointing that position is, it is widespread: the United States (for example) is certain to reject the resolution for exactly the same reason

It is however dishonest to claim the Catholics support the death penalty for gays. It is easy to find documents indicating that the church generally opposes the death penalty, and one can even find church-produced anti-death penalty materials that explicitly mention (say) Sharia executions for homosexuality:


Vatican Releases Dossier on the Death Penalty

FIDES Service – 13 August 2007
FIDES DOSSIER

THE DEATH PENALTY: “Love your enemies” ...

How States take lives ...

Stones? Big, but not too big ...

In 2005 in 14 Muslim majority countries there were at least 302 executions ordered by Islamic Courts on the basis of a strict application of the Sharia ... The problem is how the Koran is interpreted: it often becomes a weapon against the most helpless and less protected people, women and homosexuals ...

<link to MSWord document:> http://vox-nova.com/2007/08/23/vatican-releases-dossier...
<via: “Amate i vostri nemici” http://www.zenit.org/article-11620?l=italian >


Here's a recent Ottawa Citizen editorial on the resolution, indicating that changes are needed for passage:

A persecuted group
The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Thursday, December 04, 2008

... France, with the support of the rest of the European Union, is preparing a declaration at the United Nations condemning "human rights violations based on sexual orientation or gender identity wherever they occur, in particular, the use of the death penalty on this ground, extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, the practice of torture and other cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment or punishment, arbitrary arrest or detention and deprivation of economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to health."

This is an important declaration, but it doesn't have wide support; even Canada is still considering it. It would be a shame if few countries chose to sign because the declaration is too broad. For example, the sticking point for the United States might be same-sex marriage.

Canada is still in a small global minority in its recognition that same-sex marriage is a rights issue. The more urgent problem is the abuse and criminalization of gay people, particularly gay men. If a consensus could form at the UN about that, it would be a powerful statement.

Canada should work with France to make the declaration one that will inspire broad support.

http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=1028963
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #16
22. Here's something that is not misleading: Fuck the vatican!
Edited on Mon Dec-08-08 10:09 AM by Raster
I am a gay man. I was born a gay man. I am a human being and an American citizen. And I consider ANYONE OR ANYTHING that would seek to surplant, limit or curtail my rights as said human being my enemy. I love. I bleed. I laugh. I cry. And I get extremely pissed off when old religious relics seek to force their outmoded and outdated faux morality on others. Fuck the vatican! Oh, and Fuck the mormon church while I'm at it.

Defend the putrid theological cesspools all you like. That's your choice. I have made mine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #22
28. You are, of course, free to hold whatever view of the Vatican you choose. In any case,
it is no skin off my nose: I'm not even Catholic. My own belief is that you are entitled to live your life unmolested, enjoying the rights and privileges that any other person deserves

That said, I have rather little sympathy for dishonesty or misrepresentation. I've wasted too many years of my own life ranting before I learned that careful attention to the facts leads to better analysis, better propaganda, and better results. The OP, like much other coverage, misrepresents what was actually said in the interview: the Catholic Church has not taken the stand that execution of gays would be preferable to gay marriage

That you characterize my preference for accuracy as defending the Catholic Church seems strange to me -- and it suggests that you are not ready for fact-based analysis. When you are ready to analyze the situation factually, here are some considerations: First, the Church is only an observer and so has rather little influence at the UN; second, the resolution in question is non-binding and so could have only limited impact; third, one will not know what the resolution will actually say until it is introduced Wednesday; fourth, the United States (a major player at the UN) is likely to oppose the resolution for reasons similar to those given by the Church (namely opposition to gay marriage)

Once you have understood that, you should read the Ottawa editorial I posted above, since it leads to the following strategic question: does one want a stronger nonbinding resolution that fails or a weaker nonbinding resolution that might succeed? The question is familiar to anyone who engages in practical politics, and it boils down to this: is it more important to push for exactly what one wants (even if that guarantees one will lose), or is it more important to actually make some progress (even if that requires asking for considerably less than one should)?

A modified resolution might gain support from the Church, if that is indeed something you want, since the interview explicitly asserted Le Catchisme de l’Eglise catholique affirme, et cela ne date pas d’hier, qu’il faut viter toute forme injuste de discrimination contre les homosexuels

On the other hand, if you don't care whether the Church supports the resolution or not, why not focus your energies on something more productive, such as the question of how to obtain US support for such resolutions? It seems to me unlikely that the current administration will support such a resolution in any form, but perhaps one might succeed at getting the next administration to do the right thing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #28
31.  Thank you so much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeSwiss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 05:48 AM
Response to Original message
19. This is one more example among their many despicable acts....
...which only serves to prove their total moral bankruptcy, degeneracy and illegitimacy.

- K&R

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 07:47 AM
Response to Original message
20. The Vatican should not be a member of the UN.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #20
32. The Vatican isn't a member of the UN: it is a "nonmember state permanent observer"r


Church and state at the United Nations - Religion
USA Today (Society for the Advancement of Education), Nov, 2001 by Frances Kissling
... The Vatican enjoys the status of a Nonmember State Permanent Observer. Only Switzerland, which chose that status for reasons of neutrality, is on an equal footing ... http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1272/is_2678_130...

Unfulfilled: the holy see backs off from its claim for full membership of the UN, settling for the rights already held by Palestine.
By: Sippel, Serra
Publication: Conscience
Date: Wednesday, December 22 2004
... On July 1, 2004, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution (A/RES/58/314) granting the Holy See new rights for participation in the General Assembly, but made no change in the Holy See's status as Non-member State Permanent Observer. The Holy See is the only entity to hold such status since Switzerland became a full member in 2002 ... http://www.articlearchives.com/international-relations/...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-10-08 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #32
36. "the interference in UN business in such a cruel and heartless way degrades not only the Vatican ...
"the interference in UN business in such a cruel and heartless way degrades not only the Vatican itself but undermines the reputation of the UN."

Keith Porteous Wood of the National Secular Society said: "These two incidents expose the Vatican's 'morality' to be a sham. How otherwise could an organisation that purports to be a moral authority and whose current Pope’s first encyclical was laughingly entitled God is Love actually oppose measures to put pressure on states who execute citizens because of their sexuality? It seems that in some respects the Vatican has not moved on very much from some of the medieval atrocities for which it was so famous."

Mr Wood continued: "Most of the dwindling number of Catholics left in the pews will be horrified by this latest manifestation of the increasingly reactionary and authoritarian Vatican and this latest outrage can only serve to swell the ranks of the millions of lapsed Catholics. But the interference in UN business in such a cruel and heartless way degrades not only the Vatican itself but undermines the reputation of the UN. The so-called Holy See is not a legitimate partner of the UN and should never have been recognised. It should lose its undeserved status immediately."





"It should lose its undeserved status immediately."

Hear, hear! :applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-10-08 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #36
38. Australia and US not signed up to UN decriminalisation declaration
By Tony Grew • December 5, 2008 - 12:00
... In the Americas the most notable absence is the United States. Canada has signed up alongside Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Mexico and Uruguay ... Louis Georges Tin, the founder of the Inernational Day Against Homophobia, .. said: "If your government has not yet signed the text, and if you think it is relevant to ask them, you could then lobby the Foreign Ministry in your capital. It might be also useful to copy any message to your country’s Ambassador at the United Nations ... " ... http://www.pinknews.co.uk/news/articles/2005-9763.html

The point of my prior post was simply that the Vatican is not a member of the UN; I provided recent info on its actual status there. I don't really have an opinion whether the Vatican should have a particular UN status: that's more or less a matter of complete indifference to me. If you're interested in changing the Vatican status, you can try to do so, but a quick search will show you that a recent attempt to do that failed. If you're interested in supporting the French resolution, perhaps you should direct your energies here:

http://www.usunnewyork.usmission.gov/Issues/pd_contactu...

Of course, writing to Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad, who represents Spurious George, is unlikely to have any immediate effect, but if you write now, you can send a copy of your letter to the President-Elect in the hopes that the next administration really will represent change

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-10-08 01:12 AM
Response to Reply #38
40. So that makes what the Vatican did acceptable?
For someone who claims to have no opinion on the subject you sure spend a lot of time defending the indefensible.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-10-08 01:16 AM
Response to Reply #40
42. Translation: You are interested in meaningless noise but not in concrete action
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-10-08 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #42
44. Translation: The Vatican would rather gay people were executed than married
Defend away, it just gives me more opportunities to point out their crimes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #20
33. Link to pdf: A-RES-58-314
http://www.undemocracy.com/A-RES-58-314

<Text (with footnotes removed) from the pdf:>

Fifty-eighth session
Agenda item 59
03 51470
Resolution adopted by the General Assembly
<without reference to a Main Committee (A/58/L.64)>
58/314. Participation of the Holy See in the work of the United Nations

The General Assembly,

Recalling that the Holy See became a Permanent Observer State at the United Nations on 6 April 1964, and since then has always been invited to participate in the meetings of all the sessions of the General Assembly,

Recalling also that the Holy See is a party to diverse international instruments, including the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the Protocol thereto, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Optional
Protocols thereto, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, the main disarmament treaties and the Geneva Conventions and the Additional Protocols thereto,

Recalling further that the Holy See enjoys membership in various United Nations subsidiary bodies, specialized agencies and international intergovernmental organizations, including the Executive Committee of the Programme of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the United Nations Conference on Trade
and Development, the World Intellectual Property Organization, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization and the International Committee of Military Medicine,

Aware that the Holy See actively participates as an observer in many of the specialized agencies, such as the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the International Labour Organization, the World Health Organization, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the United
Nations Industrial Development Organization, the International Fund for Agricultural Development and the World Tourism Organization, as well as in the World Trade Organization, that it is a full member of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and a Guest of Honour in its Parliamentary Assembly,
and that it participates as an observer in various other regional intergovernmental organizations, including the Council of Europe, the Organization of American States and the African Union, and is regularly invited to take part in the main meetings of the Asian-African Legal Consultative Organization,

Aware also that the Economic and Social Council, by its decision 244 (LXIII) of 22 July 1977, recommended that the Holy See attend sessions of the regional commissions on a basis similar to that provided for in the relevant terms of reference applicable to States Members of the United Nations not members of the
regional commissions,

Recalling that the Holy See contributes financially to the general administration of the United Nations in accordance with the rate of assessment for the Holy See as a non-member State, as adopted by the General Assembly in its resolution 58/1 B of 23 December 2003,

Considering that it is in the interest of the United Nations that all States be invited to participate in its work,

Desirous of contributing to the appropriate participation of the Holy See in the work of the General Assembly in the context of the revitalization of the work of the Assembly,

1. Acknowledges that the Holy See, in its capacity as an Observer State, shall be accorded the rights and privileges of participation in the sessions and work of the General Assembly and the international conferences convened under the auspices of the Assembly or other organs of the United Nations, as well as in United Nations conferences as set out in the annex to the present resolution;

2. Requests the Secretary-General to inform the General Assembly during the current session about the implementation of the modalities annexed to the present resolution.

92nd plenary meeting
1 July 2004

Annex

The rights and privileges of participation of the Holy See shall be effected through the following modalities, without prejudice to the existing rights and privileges:

1. The right to participate in the general debate of the General Assembly;

2. Without prejudice to the priority of Member States, the Holy See shall have the right of inscription on the list of speakers under agenda items at any plenary meeting of the General Assembly, after the last Member State inscribed on the list;

3. The right to make interventions, with a precursory explanation or the recall of relevant General Assembly resolutions being made only once by the President of the General Assembly at the start of each session of the Assembly;

4. The right of reply;

5. The right to have its communications relating to the sessions and work of the General Assembly issued and circulated directly, and without intermediary, as official documents of the Assembly;

6. The right to have its communications relating to the sessions and work of all international conferences convened under the auspices of the General Assembly issued and circulated directly, and without intermediary, as official documents of those conferences;

7. The right to raise points of order relating to any proceedings involving the Holy See, provided that the right to raise such a point of order shall not include the right to challenge the decision of the presiding officer;

8. The right to co-sponsor draft resolutions and decisions that make reference to the Holy See; such draft resolutions and decisions shall be put to a vote only upon request from a Member State;

9. Seating for the Holy See shall be arranged immediately after Member States and before the other observers when it participates as a non-member State observer, with the allocation of six seats in the General Assembly Hall;

10. The Holy See shall not have the right to vote or to put forward candidates in the General Assembly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
23. People who live in gold prom dresses shouldn't throw stones.
A howdy to the gay folks here. I'm an atheist, and they feel the same way about us.

I always get a laugh when the Xians whine about "being excluded from the public square." Sorry about that, guys (acutally I'm not). But historically speaking, whenever you take over the public square, you use it to round up unpopular minorities and burn 'em at the stake. Gays, atheists, Huguenots, Cathars, witches, Templars, etc. etc. etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
qwlauren35 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 03:16 PM
Response to Original message
27. What a LEAP!
The title of the article is meant to be inflammatory. Marriage isn't even mentioned.

I cannot believe that if any country called for a global end to the death penalty for homsexual acts that the Vatican would oppose it. I cannot imagine any humanitarian reason for opposing such a resolution. However, the Vatican will never condone homosexual acts because it contradicts what is written in the Bible - to decriminalize it would be explicit acceptance. Not going to happen.

The very idea of a proposing such a resolution, knowing that it would be opposed, makes no sense to me. The very idea of a Catholic nation proposing such a resolution, knowing that the Vatican, as the Church of France, would oppose it, makes even less sense.

As Americans, we are very spoiled in our expectation that church and state shall be separate. This is another example of not accepting cultural differences. It doesn't occur to many of us that some countries WANT church and state to be linked. I'm no fan of inquisitions and executions, but it annoys me when one culture tries to impose its values on another.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-10-08 12:35 AM
Response to Reply #27
35. "This is another example of not accepting cultural differences"
Pressuring other nations to protect glbt people is NOT A FUCKING CULTURAL DIFFERENCE.

The Vatican could have shut the fuck up and let the other nations weigh in but instead chose to IMMEDIATELY oppose the resolution, how dare you defend their actions and accuse other DUers of using inflammatory rhetoric?



"The title of the article is meant to be inflammatory. Marriage isn't even mentioned."

Did you even read the fucking thing? The Vatican used its defense of "traditional" marriage as an excuse.



"I cannot believe that if any country called for a global end to the death penalty for homsexual acts that the Vatican would oppose it. I cannot imagine any humanitarian reason for opposing such a resolution"

Um, funny thing happened, the UN just did call for an end to it, and the Vatican peed all over itself in its rush to oppose the resolution:

Archbishop Celestino Migliore said the Vatican opposed the resolution because it would "add new categories of those protected from discrimination" and could lead to reverse discrimination against traditional heterosexual marriage.

"If adopted, they would create new and implacable discriminations," Migliore said. "For example, states which do not recognise same-sex unions as 'matrimony' will be pilloried and made an object of pressure," Migliore said.


Oh, dear, the horror.
We can't add new categories of people to the list of those whose human rights are protected, can we?
What would the rest of the world think?



"The very idea of a proposing such a resolution, knowing that it would be opposed, makes no sense to me. The very idea of a Catholic nation proposing such a resolution, knowing that the Vatican, as the Church of France, would oppose it, makes even less sense."

Oh, I know, so what if people are being killed because they weren't born heterosexuals like the rest of us?
Why should the UN propose doing something about all those silly little human rights violations?
Yes, of course, you're right, it makes no sense at all, how dare they worry our beautiful minds like that?



"As Americans, we are very spoiled in our expectation that church and state shall be separate. This is another example of not accepting cultural differences. It doesn't occur to many of us that some countries WANT church and state to be linked."

Keeping our opinions to ourselves while other nations continue to persecute and kill glbt people is NOT an option.
Just like slavery, this issue has nothing to do with cultural differences and everything to do with human rights.



"I'm no fan of inquisitions and executions, but it annoys me when one culture tries to impose its values on another."

Are you fucking kidding me?

Asking other countries to NOT KILL GAY PEOPLE annoys you?

Disgusting.

I'm ashamed for you.

Since you're obviously not familiar with it, I suggest you read this document and reconsider our obligations to our brothers and sisters - no matter where they live.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northernsoul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #27
47. France is a secular republic, just like us.
France is no more a "Catholic nation" than it is a Rastafarian nation. The Church (thankfully) plays no formal role in formulating France's public policies, and the French people are under no obligation to kow-tow to the Vatican's dictates.

Since you are willing to abandon any advocacy for basic human rights out of an expressed aversion to "one culture trying to impose its values on another," can you tell us which of the following cultural practices are now to held immune from any criticism or intervention: (1) female genital mutilation; (2) human sacrifice; (3) throwing acid on the faces of women who have the audacity of attempting to get an education; (4)the torture and murder of apostates, "heretics," and "infidels"; (5) the "honor killing" of female family members; and/or (6) giving up girls as young as twelve to be married (raped) by older men?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #27
48. You're not really an it-getter, are you? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
29. I know it may not be fair to criticize the current Pope for growing up as a Hitler Youth...

but when he continues to advocate the oppression of gay people to the point of allowing their punishment by death, one wonders if he may be have been affected by his upbringing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #29
34. ... HJ membership was made compulsory for youths over 17 in 1939, and for all over the age of 10 ...
... in 1941 ... http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/h...

... Pope Benedict, 78, has not tried to hide his enrollment in the Hitler Youth at age 14, addressing his brief membership in his autobiography ... ''We weren't in it to start with, but with the beginning of the obligatory Hitler Youth in 1941 my brother was enrolled as was required,'' he recalled. ''I was too young but later was enrolled into it from the seminary'' ... He said he tried to avoid Hitler Youth meetings, creating a dilemma. He needed proof of attendance to get a tuition discount, which his father -- a retired policeman -- badly needed. So he finessed it, according to his book. ''Thank God, there was a math teacher who understood. He was himself a Nazi party member, but an honest man who told me, 'Just go so we have it,''' he recalled. ''But when he saw that I simply didn't want to, he said: 'I understand, I'll take care of it.' And so I was free of it'' ... http://www.bc.edu/research/cjl/meta-elements/texts/cjre...

ADL Welcomes Election of Cardinal Ratzinger as New Pope
New York, NY, April 19, 2005 ... Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, issued the following statement: Having lived through World War II, Cardinal Ratzinger has great sensitivity to Jewish history and the Holocaust. He has shown this sensitivity countless times, in meetings with Jewish leadership and in important statements condemning anti-Semitism and expressing profound sorrow for the Holocaust. We remember with great appreciation his Christmas reflections on December 29, 2000, when he memorably expressed remorse for the anti-Jewish attitudes that persisted through history, leading to "deplorable acts of violence" and the Holocaust. Cardinal Ratzinger said: "Even if the most recent, loathsome experience of the Shoah (Holocaust) was perpetrated in the name of an anti-Christian ideology, which tried to strike the Christian faith at its Abrahamic roots in the people of Israel, it cannot be denied that a certain insufficient resistance to this atrocity on the part of Christians can be explained by an inherited anti-Judaism present in the hearts of not a few Christians." Though as a teenager he was a member of the Hitler Youth, all his life Cardinal Ratzinger has atoned for the fact ... http://www.adl.org/PresRele/VaticanJewish_96/44698_96.h...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-10-08 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #34
37. How old was he when he signed the order instructing clergy to hide sex crimes from the public?
From the Salon article:
Pope Benedict XVI faced claims Saturday night that he had "obstructed justice" after it emerged that he issued an order ensuring the church's investigations into child sex abuse claims would be carried out in secret. The order was made in a confidential letter, obtained by the Observer, which was sent to every Catholic bishop in May 2001.

It asserted the church's right to hold its inquiries behind closed doors and keep the evidence confidential for up to 10 years after the victims reached adulthood. The letter was signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who was elected as John Paul II's successor last week.

Lawyers acting for abuse victims claim it was designed to prevent the allegations from becoming public knowledge or being investigated by the police. They accuse Ratzinger of committing a "clear obstruction of justice."

The letter, "concerning very grave sins," was sent from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican office that once presided over the Inquisition and was overseen by Ratzinger. It spells out to bishops the church's position on a number of matters, ranging from celebrating the Eucharist with a non-Catholic to sexual abuse by a cleric "with a minor below the age of 18 years." Ratzinger's letter states that the church can claim jurisdiction in cases where abuse has been "perpetrated with a minor by a cleric." The letter states that the church's jurisdiction "begins to run from the day when the minor has completed the 18th year of age" and lasts for 10 years.

***

"Cases of this kind are subject to the pontifical secret," Ratzinger's letter concludes. Breaching the pontifical secret at any time while the 10-year jurisdiction order is operating carries penalties, including the threat of excommunication.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-10-08 01:14 AM
Response to Reply #37
41. You seem to have difficulty staying on point. As you seem to need me to state so explicitly,
I will say explicitly:

I do not take the position that anyone, Catholic or otherwise, religious or not, is beyond any reproach, nor do I take such a position with respect to any church or other religious institution or any other institution at all for that matter. I have never defended sexual assault by anyone upon anyone else, nor have I ever taken the position that some people should have the privilege to escape responsibility for their attacks on the dignity of others

Having said that, I fail to see how the Pope's attitude towards the church's handling of allegations and actual incidents of sexual abuse claims has anything whatsoever to do with his brief and compulsory membership in a Nazi youth organization more than 65 years ago
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beam me up scottie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-10-08 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #41
43. The topic is the immoral and criminal actions of the Vatican.
Right, I forgot, you have no opinion, that's why you keep playing thread nanny whenever anyone criticizes the Vatican.

Save it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-10-08 02:12 AM
Response to Original message
45. In Europe, same-sex showdown moves to UN (CSM)
Edited on Wed Dec-10-08 02:12 AM by struggle4progress
The Vatican fears the EU effort might open the door to gay marriage. The US is staying silent.
By Anna Momigliano | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
from the December 9, 2008 edition

... Gay rights groups have accused the Catholic Church of aligning with dictatorships that sentence homosexuals to death. This was on display Saturday, when hundreds of protesters gathered in Vatican City's St. Peter's Square, some of them wearing nooses around their necks in tribute to two gay young men hanged in Iran in 2005.

Following the protests, the Association of Catholic Jurists issued a statement trying to clarify the position of the Church. According to the group's president, Francesco D'Agostino, "The Vatican endorses the decriminalization of homosexuality, but opposes the equality between different sexual orientation" ...

The text has received the official endorsement of 53 nations. The US has thus far remained silent on the declaration, but a spokeswoman for the US delegation said on Monday that, "We're not in a position to sign on to it." The official declined to specify if this meant the US would oppose the declaration, however. "Discussions are still taking place," she says.

French and EU officials are optimistic they will obtain the majority required to be approved by the 192-member General Assembly of the UN. The body approved a similar EU-sponsored, nonbinding resolution last year condemning capital punishment, despite opposition from the US and several Muslim nations ...

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1210/p07s01-wogn.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moobu2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-12-08 11:17 PM
Response to Original message
49. Once they convince themselves

people actually continue to live on after cerebral death, they can justify all manor of despicable acts against their fellow man.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 18th 2014, 11:24 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC