UN: General Assembly to Address Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
Statement affirms promise of Universal Declaration of Human Rights
For Immediate Release
(New York, December 11, 2008) - As the world celebrates the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the UN General Assembly will hear a statement in mid-December endorsed by more than 50 countries across the globe calling for an end to rights abuses based on sexual orientation and gender identity. A coalition of international human rights organizations today urged all the world's nations to support the statement in affirmation of the UDHR's basic promise: that human rights apply to everyone.
Nations on four continents are coordinating the statement, including: Argentina, Brazil, Croatia, France, Gabon, Japan, the Netherlands, and Norway. The reading of the statement will be the first time the General Assembly has formally addressed rights violations based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
"In 1948 the world's nations set forth the promise of human rights, but six decades later, the promise is unfulfilled for many," said Linda Baumann of Namibia, a board member of Pan Africa ILGA, a coalition of over 60 African lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) groups.
"The unprecedented African support for this statement sends a message that abuses against LGBT people are unacceptable anywhere, ever."
The statement is non-binding, and reaffirms existing protections for human rights in international law. It builds on a previous joint statement supported by 54 countries, which Norway delivered at the UN Human Rights Council in 2006.
"Universal means universal, and there are no exceptions," said Boris Dittrich of the Netherlands, advocacy director of Human Rights Watch's lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender rights program. "The UN must speak forcefully against violence and prejudice, because there is no room for half measures where human rights are concerned."
The draft statement condemns violence, harassment, discrimination, exclusion, stigmatization, and prejudice based on sexual orientation and gender identity. It also condemns killings and executions, torture, arbitrary arrest, and deprivation of economic, social, and cultural rights on those grounds.
"Today, dozens of countries still criminalize consensual homosexual conduct, laws that are often relics of colonial rule," said Grace Poore of Malaysia, who works with the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission. "This statement shows a growing global consensus that such abusive laws have outlived their time."
The statement also builds on a long record of UN action to defend the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people. In its 1994 decision in Toonen v. Australia, the UN Human Rights Committee - the body that interprets the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), one of the UN's core human rights treaties - held that human rights law prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation. Since then, the United Nations' human rights mechanisms have condemned violations based on sexual orientation and gender identity, including killings, torture, rape, violence, disappearances, and discrimination in many areas of life. UN treaty bodies have called on states to end discrimination in law and policy.
Other international bodies have also opposed violence and discrimination against LGBT people, including the Council of Europe and the European Union. In 2008, all 34 member countries of the Organization of American States unanimously approved a declaration affirming that human rights protections extend to sexual orientation and gender identity.
"Latin American governments are helping lead the way as champions of equality and supporters of this statement," said Gloria Careaga Perez of Mexico, co-secretary general of ILGA. "Today a global movement supports the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, and those voices will not be denied."
So far, 55 countries have signed onto the General Assembly statement, including: Andorra, Armenia, Australia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Cape Verde, the Central African Republic, Chile, Ecuador, Georgia, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Liechtenstein, Mexico, Montenegro, New Zealand, San Marino, Serbia, Switzerland, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Uruguay, and Venezuela. All 27 member states of the European Union are also signatories.
"It is a great achievement that this initiative has made it to the level of the General Assembly," said Louis-Georges Tin of France, president of the International Committee for IDAHO (International Day against Homophobia), a network of activists and groups campaigning for decriminalization of homosexual conduct. "It shows our common struggles are successful and should be reinforced."
"This statement has found support from states and civil society in every region of the world," said Kim Vance of Canada, co-director of ARC International. "In December a simple message will rise from the General Assembly: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is truly universal."
The coalition of international human rights organizations that issued this statement include: Amnesty International; ARC International; Center for Women's Global Leadership; COC Netherlands; Global Rights; Human Rights Watch; IDAHO Committee; International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC); International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex Association (ILGA); and Public Services International.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Sunday, November 23, 2008
"Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
FROM THE WASHINGTON TIMES...
Obama to delay 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal
Advisers see consensus building before lifting ban on gays
Rowan Scarborough (Contact)Friday, November 21, 2008
EXCLUSIVE: President-elect Barack Obama will not move for months, and perhaps not until 2010, to ask Congress to end the military's decades-old ban on open homosexuals in the ranks, two people who have advised the Obama transition team on this issue say.
Repealing the ban was an Obama campaign promise. However, Mr. Obama first wants to confer with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and his new political appointees at the Pentagon to reach a consensus and then present legislation to Congress, the advisers said.
"I think 2009 is about foundation building and reaching consensus," said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. The group supports military personnel targeted under the ban.
Mr. Sarvis told The Washington Times that he has held "informal discussions" with the Obama transition team on how the new president should proceed on the potentially explosive issue.
Lawrence Korb, an analyst at the Center for American Progress and an adviser to the Obama campaign, said the new administration should set up a Pentagon committee to make recommendations to Congress on a host of manpower issues, including the gay ban.
"If it's part of a larger package, it has a better chance of getting passed," he said.
The Obama transition team did not reply to a request for comment.
The incoming administration is well aware of how President Clinton botched the same issue 15 years ago. Shortly after taking office in 1993, the president ordered the Pentagon to rescind the regulation that excluded gays.
On Capitol Hill, Republicans, and some leading Democrats, including then-Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sam Nunn of Georgia, objected. Retired military officers and a number of pro-military conservative activist groups joined the fight.
Obama to delay 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal
Advisers see consensus building before lifting ban on gays
Rowan Scarborough (Contact)Friday, November 21, 2008
EXCLUSIVE: President-elect Barack Obama will not move for months, and perhaps not until 2010, to ask Congress to end the military's decades-old ban on open homosexuals in the ranks, two people who have advised the Obama transition team on this issue say.
Repealing the ban was an Obama campaign promise. However, Mr. Obama first wants to confer with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and his new political appointees at the Pentagon to reach a consensus and then present legislation to Congress, the advisers said.
"I think 2009 is about foundation building and reaching consensus," said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. The group supports military personnel targeted under the ban.
Mr. Sarvis told The Washington Times that he has held "informal discussions" with the Obama transition team on how the new president should proceed on the potentially explosive issue.
Lawrence Korb, an analyst at the Center for American Progress and an adviser to the Obama campaign, said the new administration should set up a Pentagon committee to make recommendations to Congress on a host of manpower issues, including the gay ban.
"If it's part of a larger package, it has a better chance of getting passed," he said.
The Obama transition team did not reply to a request for comment.
The incoming administration is well aware of how President Clinton botched the same issue 15 years ago. Shortly after taking office in 1993, the president ordered the Pentagon to rescind the regulation that excluded gays.
On Capitol Hill, Republicans, and some leading Democrats, including then-Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sam Nunn of Georgia, objected. Retired military officers and a number of pro-military conservative activist groups joined the fight.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Williams Institute: New Study: Employment Discrimination
Williams Institute: New Study: Rate of Anti-Gay Employment Discrimination Similar to Race and Gender Rates
UCLA’s WILLIAMS INSTITUTE RELEASES NEW STUDY FINDING RATES OF SEXUALORIENTATION EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION SIMILAR TO RACE AND GENDERDISCRIMINATION
For Immediate Release
November 18, 2008
Media Contacts: M.V. Lee Badgett 310-904-9761 badgett@law.ucla.eduBrad Sears 310-794-5279 sears@law.ucla.eduChristopher Ramos 310-206-0883 ramos@law.ucla.edu
LOS ANGELES – Today the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Lawreported that laws prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination in theworkplace are used as frequently by LGBT workers as laws prohibiting sex andrace discrimination are used by women and people of color. Currently,twenty states and the District of Columbia prohibit employmentdiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation; thirteen of those statesalso prohibit gender identity discrimination.Analyzing employment discrimination complaints filed with state agencies instates prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination, the study finds 5 outof 10,000 LGBT people in the workforce file sexual orientation employmentdiscrimination complaints each year, compared to sex discriminationcomplaints filed by 5 out of 10,000 women in the workforce and racediscrimination complaints filed by 7 out of 10,000 people of color in theworkforce. “Our analysis directly questions the popular argument that sexualorientation anti-discrimination laws are unnecessary” noted study co-authorM.V. Lee Badgett, research director at the Williams Institute, “they areneeded and utilized by the LGBT workforce.”The report also addresses any worry that expanding employment discriminationto LGBT people would overwhelm state and federal agencies. Given the size ofthe LGB population and the filing rates of LGB people, any increase incomplaint intake would be negligible.Christopher Ramos, a researcher who also worked on the study, pointed outthat in eight states sexual orientation claims surpass sex claims; the sameis true for three states when compared to race claims. “Clearly, LGBTemployees are not only facing a certain level of discrimination, but also,taking advantage of protective state policies.”In 2007, a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act made a historicpassage through the U.S. House of Representatives, which would haveestablished sexual orientation as a federally protected class.Brad Sears, executive director of the Williams Institute, noted that over3.1 million LGBT adults live in states that do not provide this protectionfrom discrimination in the workplace. “As the debate surrounding thenecessity of LGBT workplace protections begins again in Congress we mustkeep in mind the fragile economic position of these LGBT employees and theirfamilies.”
The full report is available athttp://www.law.ucla.edu/WilliamsInstitute/pdf/PACR.pdf.
UCLA’s WILLIAMS INSTITUTE RELEASES NEW STUDY FINDING RATES OF SEXUALORIENTATION EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION SIMILAR TO RACE AND GENDERDISCRIMINATION
For Immediate Release
November 18, 2008
Media Contacts: M.V. Lee Badgett 310-904-9761 badgett@law.ucla.eduBrad Sears 310-794-5279 sears@law.ucla.eduChristopher Ramos 310-206-0883 ramos@law.ucla.edu
LOS ANGELES – Today the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Lawreported that laws prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination in theworkplace are used as frequently by LGBT workers as laws prohibiting sex andrace discrimination are used by women and people of color. Currently,twenty states and the District of Columbia prohibit employmentdiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation; thirteen of those statesalso prohibit gender identity discrimination.Analyzing employment discrimination complaints filed with state agencies instates prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination, the study finds 5 outof 10,000 LGBT people in the workforce file sexual orientation employmentdiscrimination complaints each year, compared to sex discriminationcomplaints filed by 5 out of 10,000 women in the workforce and racediscrimination complaints filed by 7 out of 10,000 people of color in theworkforce. “Our analysis directly questions the popular argument that sexualorientation anti-discrimination laws are unnecessary” noted study co-authorM.V. Lee Badgett, research director at the Williams Institute, “they areneeded and utilized by the LGBT workforce.”The report also addresses any worry that expanding employment discriminationto LGBT people would overwhelm state and federal agencies. Given the size ofthe LGB population and the filing rates of LGB people, any increase incomplaint intake would be negligible.Christopher Ramos, a researcher who also worked on the study, pointed outthat in eight states sexual orientation claims surpass sex claims; the sameis true for three states when compared to race claims. “Clearly, LGBTemployees are not only facing a certain level of discrimination, but also,taking advantage of protective state policies.”In 2007, a version of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act made a historicpassage through the U.S. House of Representatives, which would haveestablished sexual orientation as a federally protected class.Brad Sears, executive director of the Williams Institute, noted that over3.1 million LGBT adults live in states that do not provide this protectionfrom discrimination in the workplace. “As the debate surrounding thenecessity of LGBT workplace protections begins again in Congress we mustkeep in mind the fragile economic position of these LGBT employees and theirfamilies.”
The full report is available athttp://www.law.ucla.edu/WilliamsInstitute/pdf/PACR.pdf.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Crash Course: Estate Planning II
We learned last week why estate planning for the GLBT community is so important, and we learned about some things we need to have a solid plan. This week, we’ll discuss some other estate planning topics to think about.
A Living Trust allows you and your partner to pre-arrange your giving and avoid some probate inconveniences. Here’s how it works:
You and your partner put all assets into the trust and become both the trustees and primary beneficiaries of the trust.
At the death of the first partner, all property belongs to the surviving partner automatically.
At the death of the surviving partner, all property in the trust passes as designated in the trust, eliminating the need for probate.
Living Trusts are private; probate records are public.
Living Trusts can be less expensive because they avoid the costs of probate court.
Property in a Living Trust is accessible right away; most assets are not distributed in a probate action for six months.
Living Trusts avoid Kentucky Inheritance Tax assessed on non-relatives (including partners who have no legally-recognized relationship.
Best of all, nothing changes in the day-to-day living; you (and your partner) still manage the assets.
Other Issues for GLBT partners to consider:
Real Estate – You must state that there is a survivorship interest or there is none (without it each person owns ½ of the real estate).
Personal Property – Titled property and financial accounts should be in joint names.
“Beneficiary” accounts (life insurance, pensions, etc.) – These do not pass through the probate court unless the beneficiary is your estate – make sure your beneficiary designation is current.
That’s it for this week. We’ll see you next week when we discuss adoption and parenting.
In fairness,
Your KFA Team.
A Living Trust allows you and your partner to pre-arrange your giving and avoid some probate inconveniences. Here’s how it works:
You and your partner put all assets into the trust and become both the trustees and primary beneficiaries of the trust.
At the death of the first partner, all property belongs to the surviving partner automatically.
At the death of the surviving partner, all property in the trust passes as designated in the trust, eliminating the need for probate.
Living Trusts are private; probate records are public.
Living Trusts can be less expensive because they avoid the costs of probate court.
Property in a Living Trust is accessible right away; most assets are not distributed in a probate action for six months.
Living Trusts avoid Kentucky Inheritance Tax assessed on non-relatives (including partners who have no legally-recognized relationship.
Best of all, nothing changes in the day-to-day living; you (and your partner) still manage the assets.
Other Issues for GLBT partners to consider:
Real Estate – You must state that there is a survivorship interest or there is none (without it each person owns ½ of the real estate).
Personal Property – Titled property and financial accounts should be in joint names.
“Beneficiary” accounts (life insurance, pensions, etc.) – These do not pass through the probate court unless the beneficiary is your estate – make sure your beneficiary designation is current.
That’s it for this week. We’ll see you next week when we discuss adoption and parenting.
In fairness,
Your KFA Team.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
