US Democrats pass bill to prosecute foreign opponents of LGBT agenda
WASHINGTON, DC Feb. 10 (C-Fam) "Is a parent who rejects their minor child's wish for a gender reassignment complicit in cruelty?" »
“Is the Pope engaging in degrading treatment when he voices his opposition to same-sex marriage? »
These are some of the questions raised by Congresswoman Claudia Tenney (R-NY) during a debate on the floor of the House of Representatives on Wednesday when the House passed the Global Respect Act on a close-lines election. party.
The answer to both questions is a resounding yes, if you ask any international human rights expert working in and around the United Nations system. UN experts have repeatedly accused parents, religious leaders and governments of torture and incitement for their opposition to the gay/trans agenda. They have done so in official communications with governments around the world, including the Vatican.
Now, the Biden administration and Democratic lawmakers could finally give some teeth to those UN expert opinions with a law known as the Global Respect Act that would bar entry into the United States to foreigners who s oppose the gay/trans agenda.
The bill passed the House largely along party lines on Wednesday, with a vote of 227 in favor and 206 against. Six Republicans joined the Democrats. The bill gives the President of the United States the power to impose visa sanctions on foreigners he deems "complicit" in human rights abuses against people who identify as gay or trans.
Democrats said the bill was "historic" and necessary to prosecute human rights abuses around the world. Republicans countered that the bill was unnecessary and redundant because gross human rights abuses against these people are already prosecuted under federal law. They also warned that the bill would be misused to target political opponents of the program and would hamper freedom of expression and freedom of religion around the world.
“We all believe that all people have inherent dignity and equal human rights. We all reject violence directed at people because of their race, religion, biological sex or sexual orientation,” Tenney (R-NY) said.
“The problem with this bill,” she said, “is that it does not emphasize the human rights of all, but the human rights of certain groups” . Tenney said Bill would be used as a weapon in the culture wars.
Tenney said the bill's vague language on 'complicity' and 'cruel and degrading treatment' could be used to prosecute 'non-violent behavior' like political speech, free exercise of religion and even decisions parental. She then cited the example of parents who objected to their children receiving transgender treatment and the pope who expressed biblical teaching on marriage.
“There are no safeguards in the bill for those situations,” said Ms. Tenney, who criticized her fellow Democrats for rejecting an amendment by MP Scott Perry (R-PA) aimed at protecting freedom. of expression, freedom of religion and parental rights.
"Despite what some of my colleagues say, freedom of religion does not conflict with promoting LGBTQI rights globally," said David Cicilline (D-RI), the bill's author. . He spoke of a Democratic addition to the bill that prohibits the enforcement of sentences based "solely on religious beliefs." Mr Tanney said the Democratic amendment fell short because it only dealt with “creed” and did
not address the expression of beliefs in daily life.
The White House issued a statement in support of the bill last week, in which it said "the Administration has taken historic steps to accelerate the march toward LGBTQI+ equality at home and abroad. ". Some of the measures listed in the letter include promoting transgender issues, same-sex marriage, and ordering US embassies around the world to fly the rainbow flag.
“Is the Pope engaging in degrading treatment when he voices his opposition to same-sex marriage? »
These are some of the questions raised by Congresswoman Claudia Tenney (R-NY) during a debate on the floor of the House of Representatives on Wednesday when the House passed the Global Respect Act on a close-lines election. party.
The answer to both questions is a resounding yes, if you ask any international human rights expert working in and around the United Nations system. UN experts have repeatedly accused parents, religious leaders and governments of torture and incitement for their opposition to the gay/trans agenda. They have done so in official communications with governments around the world, including the Vatican.
Now, the Biden administration and Democratic lawmakers could finally give some teeth to those UN expert opinions with a law known as the Global Respect Act that would bar entry into the United States to foreigners who s oppose the gay/trans agenda.
The bill passed the House largely along party lines on Wednesday, with a vote of 227 in favor and 206 against. Six Republicans joined the Democrats. The bill gives the President of the United States the power to impose visa sanctions on foreigners he deems "complicit" in human rights abuses against people who identify as gay or trans.
Democrats said the bill was "historic" and necessary to prosecute human rights abuses around the world. Republicans countered that the bill was unnecessary and redundant because gross human rights abuses against these people are already prosecuted under federal law. They also warned that the bill would be misused to target political opponents of the program and would hamper freedom of expression and freedom of religion around the world.
“We all believe that all people have inherent dignity and equal human rights. We all reject violence directed at people because of their race, religion, biological sex or sexual orientation,” Tenney (R-NY) said.
“The problem with this bill,” she said, “is that it does not emphasize the human rights of all, but the human rights of certain groups” . Tenney said Bill would be used as a weapon in the culture wars.
Tenney said the bill's vague language on 'complicity' and 'cruel and degrading treatment' could be used to prosecute 'non-violent behavior' like political speech, free exercise of religion and even decisions parental. She then cited the example of parents who objected to their children receiving transgender treatment and the pope who expressed biblical teaching on marriage.
“There are no safeguards in the bill for those situations,” said Ms. Tenney, who criticized her fellow Democrats for rejecting an amendment by MP Scott Perry (R-PA) aimed at protecting freedom. of expression, freedom of religion and parental rights.
"Despite what some of my colleagues say, freedom of religion does not conflict with promoting LGBTQI rights globally," said David Cicilline (D-RI), the bill's author. . He spoke of a Democratic addition to the bill that prohibits the enforcement of sentences based "solely on religious beliefs." Mr Tanney said the Democratic amendment fell short because it only dealt with “creed” and did
not address the expression of beliefs in daily life.
The White House issued a statement in support of the bill last week, in which it said "the Administration has taken historic steps to accelerate the march toward LGBTQI+ equality at home and abroad. ". Some of the measures listed in the letter include promoting transgender issues, same-sex marriage, and ordering US embassies around the world to fly the rainbow flag.
C-FAM
By Stefano Gennarini, J.D. and Lisa Correnti
https://c-fam.org/friday_fax/les-democrates-americains-adoptent-un-projet-de-loi-pour-poursuivre-les-opposants-etrangers-au-programme-lgbt/
By Stefano Gennarini, J.D. and Lisa Correnti
https://c-fam.org/friday_fax/les-democrates-americains-adoptent-un-projet-de-loi-pour-poursuivre-les-opposants-etrangers-au-programme-lgbt/
