in English
Last week, during a world conference on HIV/AIDS the United Nations came close to advocating a significant worldwide shift on traditional sexual morality, and nobody noticed.
New York Times (C-FAM)
While the New York Times recordedcontroversies about condoms and wording about "men having sex with men,"many delegations reported that an intense debate was taking place inbasement conference rooms about the very nature of human sexuality, andwhether or not the UN should promote the complete transformation of sexualnorms. The conflict concerned a little-known document called the UNInternational Guidelines on HIV/AIDS and Human Rights. The European Unionand Canada sought reference to these guidelines within the Declaration onHIV/AIDS, while all sixty Islamic countries successfully opposed anymention of the document. The guidelines, written in 1998 by the UN HighCommissioner on Human Rights and UNAIDS, argue that a kind of freedom ofsexuality is a fundamental human right on par with freedom of religion orfreedom of speech.
The guidelines seek "penalties for vilification of people who engage insame-sex relationships." Although it is unclear what 'vilification' means,and what 'penalties' would be sought, the Holy See delegation worries thatreligious leaders may be criminally liable for upholding the teaching thathomosexual acts are sinful. The guidelines argue for other profoundchanges in judicial systems urging that individuals should be allowed to"bring cases under pseudonym," and judges should be "sensitized" to theaims of the guidelines.
The guidelines also mandate explicit sexual and homosexual education forchildren -- so explicit, in fact, that the materials used in classrooms"should not be wrongfully subject to censorship or obscenity laws." Thisseems to mean that pornography should be considered a valid component ofclassroom instruction.
The guidelines also seek to overturn all laws that limit sexualactivity,including laws against "adultery, sodomy, fornication, and commercialsexual encounters [prostitution]," so that the new human right tosexuality is not violated. The guidelines call for nations to legalizehomosexual marriage. Not surprisingly, an Islamic delegate called theguidelines "offensive to religious and cultural sensitivities."
After a vociferous debate all references to the guidelines were removed>from the final draft of the Declaration of HIV/AIDS. If left in, fundingfor a wide-range of programs might have been tied to compliance with itsagenda. But it is now clear that the guidelines have strong advocates inmany delegations. The guidelines call for these norms to be "integrated"into the activities of all "partner" agencies of UNAIDS, including "UNDP,UNESCO, UNFPA, UNICEF, WHO, and the World Bank."
At this time it is unclear how these new guidelines have been integratedinto the work of other UN agencies. What is certain is that theseguidelines do not reflect the wishes of the UN General Assembly. Thedebate over the guidelines points up the frequently deep divide betweenthe Member States of the UN and the more radical UN bureaucracy.
© 0000 www.kath.net