Absolutely! Can you imagine a progressive speech like this coming from a President Romney, Gingrich or Bachmann? Shudder the thought!

The US are entitled to comment on this because homosexuality is legal and accepted there, and that is the standard they seek from other countries. Your point would be valid if they were calling for gay marraige in these countries. Your point also implies that only countries with gay marriage can speak up for international gay rights on any level, which is clearly not true.

how can they be accepted if they can’t marry?

I meant by “accepted” that an atmosphere of tolerance and social acceptability exists in the US; I didn’t mean full legal recognition. The US doesn’t imprison, torture or condemn to death gay people. They can therefore criticize those who do, as can we.

if there was tolerance and social acceptability they could marry

how safe are the streets of chechnya angryzes? oh and what about the detention of protestors in moscow st petersburg? allegations of ballot box stuffing…glass houses and stones etc

How about the majority of Africa where most aid money goes. We are all used to ur homophobic comments on every article that mentions gay. Is it wrong to try stop countries executing people for just being gay.

Gay and straight rights are not mutually exclusive and it is absurd to try to divide countries into “gay” and “non gay” states! As Clinton rightly made clear gay rights are human rights and that is a fundamental principle. In fact a true test of how fair and just a society is is how it treats its minorities.

And to seek to justify the kind of outrageous persecution against LGBT citizens outlined so starkly in Clinton’s speech under the pretext of defending “traditional family values” or health and education is disgusting quite frankly and you have a strange view of all these areas if you think that in order to “protect” them, this requires the arrest, detention, harassment and even state sanctioned murder of LGBT people.

@Colm Mooney

>how safe are the streets of chechnya angryzes?

Yes, streets of Chechnya – do not make me laugh, ask better about forests and mountains. It was very safe in USSR times, very friendly people, etc, etc. Grozny was built by Russians and now there 99.9% chechens, I would say it’s pretty safe to be there if you’re chechen.

Detention of protesters in Washington, LA, New York, etc ? How about that? Why do you silent about that? Ballot box stuffing? It could done by opposition because they want scandal – give me some forensic evidence that it was not. And again, why you forgot about Florida when Bush Junior was “elected”?

@David McDermott

Explain please how my comment looks homophobic for you? I want to stop reverse discrimination when people are labeled as “homophobic”, etc. I resepect privacy and free will of all people – but what I disrespect: pointless scandals against regular people. I am not gay – does it offend you? I want my rights taken into consideration – does it offend you? I am not liberal democrat – does offend you? Now – there is a new excuse to attack some countries – protection of rights of gay people. How they “protected” civilians in Libya? Any intervention of USA to protect any gourp will result in huge loses for that group.

Angryzes havent forgotten Floridss hanging chads. Never sad USA is perfect but lets look st Russias foreign policy afghanistan..invaded to prop up an unpopular military coup..hungary czechoslovakia..in post communist russia..oppression of chechens..brutal invasion of indepenfant soverign state of georgia..no condemnation of syria whose state forvescare butchering innocentscwith russian weapons..murder of journalists in russia..murder of alexander litvenenko in london..need i go on

Angryzes, seriously start making sense cos you are only making yourself out to be completely homophobic and bigoted! I don’t have a problem your straight, but do you have s problem with gay people having equal rights?

As for traditional family values also, does that mean you fear unmarried couples, single mothers, one parent families and anyone who does not conform to the traditional family?

@Tony Stanley
Thanks for another example of reverse discrimination

@Colm Mooney
It’s not a history lesson by I can tell that Afganistan asked USSR for help to fight fundamentalist forces.

oppression of chechens: Russian population of Chechnya was reduced to zero.

And you forget one fact – Russia is not that USSR with Stalin you talk all the time. It’s a different country.

The same if I will start talking with you about time of Napoleon – when I discuss France.

@angryzes I have seen you comment on many articles and it is clear you are against gay people i.e homophobic. I certainly have no problem with you being straight. I have problems with ur attitudes. How exactly are your rights not being voiced. Is it ur right to deny gay people rights? Is it your right to execute or imprison gay people. Please explain. If you want a traditional heterosexual family life no one is stoping you. You argument is pathetic.

@David McDermott

It’s a public allegation.
Please copy/paste my words where I show just a hint of hate against gay people. Can you, defend your position in court for example (just in theory)?

@angryzes yes if I was in court I could show them most of your comments from this site. And if I’m found guilty what punishment would u prefer? Since I don’t fit into the label of ‘traditional family values’ and am a big gay menace would execution be satisfactory or life imprisonment. Just asking since you haven’t once shown disgust at the way gay people are treated in African countries. Do u agree with the laws of these countries?

@David McDermott

David, no offence but you just proven my point. You have no facts, just scandal. Please, do not take my “court” comment too serious – I said that it is just “in theory”. You label me as “homophobic” – but in fact you have some sort of phobia maybe? In my comments I never judged anyone based on their sexual orientation.

Just to make 100% clear for you. I criticize not you: I always comment on such an issues when they get political. Now, it is not about your rights – it’s about politics. Elite of post modernist western society found an excuse to intervene into affars of other more traditional countries based on their cultural differences. This is wrong. Nobody cares about some Russian or Arabic gay people – it’s all about politics. The goal is not to “aid” – the goal is to take control over that country. As a result of such intervention – in the target country the first victims will be persons who they want to “protect”.

Another point: when you support some political candidate based on his sexual orientation alone – you offend my sense of justice.

Heres a sample

angryzes
165 days ago #
I think adopting children for gay people is a bit over the top. They must be raised and must have rights to be raised in the traditional families. The can choose to be gay afterwards if they want. By adopting children who will grow up and will be straight – you will ruin their lives, they will never be proud of their parents in school, etc.

angryzes
165 days ago #
Are these their own children or adopted? Ok, combinations: two men adopt a newborn boy, two men adopt a newborn girl. They undress them and wash the in a bath. You see nothing wrong? Where is the limit?

Here are my facts you serious bigot!!!! i have no phobia as you put i just cant stand homophobia which you portray in every comment you write.

Agree.

@Brian Ward

The abuses Clinton was refering to go far beyond not “providing for civil partnership in Sudan” and I presume you were just being flippant with that remark.

“Culture” and “traditional values” should never be invoked to defend persecuting a class of people – was it wrong for the international community to condemn the actions of apartheid era South Africa or the persecition of jews by the Nazis? For some, it seems that abuses can be justified on grounds of “cultural sensitivity” if it involves LGBT people! But basic human rights are universal and it was especially appropriate that Clinton made her strong defence of gay rights at the UN.

I agree with Adam. Human Rights are universal, regardless of local social mores or attitudes. The incarceration and punishment of gays is what’s at issue here, not the availability of civil partnerships. To incarcerate someone who’s gay is just as serious a violation of human rights as the incarceration of political activists or racial minorities, and unfortunately is widespread in aid receiving countries.

Adam obviously we are not going to see civil partnership in Sudan anytime soon, In fact the only thing that we are going to see there will probably be civil war. I fully agree with you that no-one should be discriminated against because of their gender or sexuality among other things. There are many African countries that have a despicable record on human rights in general and some of them have seen people (including one MP I think) murdered because they are gay. This obviously is completely wrong and should not be allowed to continue. Where I am coming from is that the US is seeking to impose sanctions on the many for the moral beliefs of the few. I have no problem with gay rights and reform is necessary in in many countries but should this be at the expense of those in need? As you say your self human rights are universal so I would be of the belief that having food in your belly and a roof over your head is more of a priority than “a way of helping Obama win support from the US’s own gay and lesbian communities ahead of his drive for re-election next year.”

Gay rights is the issue here but if we take it further and we do get gay rights universally in aid countries and this would be my hope, what next? How long will it be before the US runs out of human rights and starts on imposing it’s values on aid countries? To put it another way, the last time you gave to GOAL or Concern did you ask if the money was going to a country that supported gay rights and if they said “no it’s going to Zimbabwe or Ethiopia” did you take your money back? Do you really think the refugees in Ethiopia give a crap what anyone does in their own bedroom or what some pontificating election year US politician thinks? All they want is to survive, to feed their children and have a shelter over their heads. If I were gay myself I would be appalled to think that my sexuality was used to deny the very basic human right of survival to someone just so Obama could get re-elected. I fully support the basic human right to freedom to express one’s sexuality or equality of gender but not at the expense of the much more basic and important human right of survival.

Brian people starve and suffer in countries like Sudan and Afghanistan because of their “culture”,” traditions” and above all religions. Quaint traditions like female genital mutilation, limb amputation for various offenses and death for homosexuality and adultery !
The lions share of the money that is sent in aid is used to prop up the corrupt dictators and warlords life styles and improve their “security forces”. Cut aid and it won’t make a toss of difference to the vast majority of the ordinary people.
Aid only in return for reform.

It would be a case of redirecting aid to the NGO’s working the area. That’s the British position. But human rights must form a key part of any financial support these countries receive.

Exactly what I was thinking. They’re just using this as a smokescreen.