A joint campaign of the UN Family Rights Caucus & Family Watch International.
Sorry. This form is no longer available.
On behalf of Family Watch International and the UN Family Rights Caucus, the organizations and individuals representing more than four million people from around the world listed below would like to bring to your attention the upcoming vote on Monday in the UN General Assembly on the deferral of the appointment of a UN independent expert on sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI).
We urge you to vote in favor of the postponement of this mandate that is outlined in Human Rights Council (HRC) resolution 32/2. We also respectfully request that you review the attached vital facts regarding the upcoming vote.
We anticipate that the vote on Monday will be specifically on an amendment that will be proposed by the African Group to defer the implementation of the highly contested and controversial HRC resolution 32/2 that appoints the SOGI independent expert.
The General Assembly has both the legal authority to exercise oversight of the activities of the HRC as well as the responsibility to do so. The postponement of the implementation of Resolution 32/2 is a reasonable request that will allow for consultation into all aspects of the legal basis for the mandate of the proposed SOGI independent expert.
The individuals and organizations listed below that have co-signed this letter is just a partial list as additional signatures are coming in by the minute. We will send you the complete list of signers on Sunday night prior to the vote.
President of Family Watch International and Chair of the UN Family Rights Caucus
1. The upcoming vote is not about whether the HRC has the right to appoint independent experts.The HRC clearly has the legal right to do so. Rather, the upcoming vote will allow time for Member States to determine (a) if there is any legal basis in international law for appointing a specific SOGI expert; (b) how “discrimination” based on SOGI will be defined; and (c) how this mandate can be implemented in a way that will not violate national sovereignty and the religious and cultural values of people in many nations.
2. As is clearly specified in GA Resolution 65/281, paragraph 3, the HRC is a subsidiary body to the UNGA. Therefore, the UNGA has the right and the responsibility to exercise authority over the HRC. This includes reviewing controversial, divisive, unclear, or ultra vires actions.
Those claiming the UNGA has no oversight authority over the HRC are completely ignoring the fact that the decisions made by the HRC pass by a bare majority of a small minority of UN Member States. This means that just 24 States could define or interpret “human rights” for the entire world without any checks or balances by the world community. The reason the GA exists is to ensure that any major decisions by the UN are supported by the majority of States, and ideally, unanimously by all States whenever possible.
3. A number of small nations do not maintain offices in Geneva due to budget constraints, and therefore, do not have a voice on the HRC, yet they will be greatly affected by this mandate. On such highly sensitive and controversial matters that have no clear basis in international law, these countries have a right to review the mandate at the General Assembly and to give input before it is forced upon them—especially since the sweeping mandate calls upon them to fully cooperate with the mandate holder and conform their laws to his views.
4. In addition to being so highly controversial and divisive, as pointed out by a number of HRC Member States during the debate surrounding its adoption, implementation of Resolution 32/2 will undermine the entire human rights system. This is because 32/2 is aimed at promoting controversial sexual behaviors and preferences as internationally protected rights, even for children, with no basis whatsoever in international law or treaties to support the existence of such highly contested rights.
5. The very basis of the SOGI mandate violates the UN charter, which prohibits the UN from interfering in domestic matters.
6. Resolution 32/2 has little to do with discrimination or preventing violence and is in reality about pushing a highly controversial LGBT “rights” agenda. The proposed independent expert, Vitit Muntarbhorn, is a well-known LGBT rights advocate who helped draft the highly controversial and factually incorrect Yogyakarta Principles. Muntarbhorn himself has already underscored his bias and determination to implement the radical LGBT agenda in a recent speech wherein he clearly outlined his interpretation of his mandate and his plans to (1) overturn laws that prohibit homosexual behavior; (2) prohibit therapeutic help for individuals who experience unwanted same-sex attraction; (3) promote transgender behavior as a right that must be supported by governments (even though in its severe manifestations, it is recognized by the international mental health community as a mental disorder); and (4) indoctrinate children from the youngest ages to accept controversial sexual orientations and gender identities.
7. The HRC has no legal basis under international law to exercise the activities outlined in resolution 32/2 with respect to LGBT laws and policies of Member States.
Dear Friend of the Family,
We need your help with a critical fight coming up at the UN!
Can you help us right now by signing a letter to UN ambassadors about an expected vote in the UN General Assembly?
This vote will be on the appointment and mandate of a special UN “independent expert” on LGBT issues.
While we are fully opposed to violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI), the proposed mandate for the independent expert goes way beyond preventing violence. The proposed expert, Vitit Muntarbhorn, will be pushing controversial LGBT rights throughout the world with the backing and funding of the UN.
You may recall that we warned you about this in June when the resolution creating the appointment was adopted by the UN Human Rights Council after much heated debate.
We are supporting a number of UN Member States, including the African Group, in trying to defer this mandate.
Countries are concerned that the appointed LGBT enforcer will investigate their laws and cultures regarding claimed LGBT rights and rights violations that conflict with their religious values. He will then
use the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to pressure countries to advance a controversial LGBT agenda legally and otherwise.
We expect this LGBT enforcer will also be pushing harmful comprehensive sexuality education for all children as a key way to advance this LGBT agenda.
The vote is expected to be held early next week.
Sexual rights activists have been circulating letters and petitions to UN ambassadors. They are claiming they have hundreds of organizations that are backing this mandate.
We need to counteract their efforts with our own letter showing there is much more support for deferring this mandate than for moving it aggressively forward.
What has this so-called “expert” already been promoting as part of his perceived mandate?
First of all, Muntarbhorn is a well-known radical homosexual “rights” advocate who has made it clear that he will push for the legalization of homosexual marriage across the globe.
Muntarbhorn says there is an “overemphasis on the binary approach to gender-sex and inadequate integration of gender diversity in the educational setting and people’s upbringing from a young age which should open the door to a less binary, or non-binary, understanding.”
I wonder which of the 112 “non-binary” genders on the “Gender Master List” Muntarbhorn plans to promote to children “from a young age.” (Click here to see the “Gender Master List.”)
In fact, this is exactly the problem. This mandate and the LGBT rights it purports to protect and promote is vague, undefined, and is as “non-binary” as the 112 controversial genders.
Muntarbhorn also opines that “the vortex of violence and discrimination, in their multiple forms, often starts in the home…” making it clear that he feels his UN mandate includes interferring in family life.
Please also know there is absolutely no legal basis in international law for appointing such an “expert.” There is absolutely no international consensus on what LGBT rights even are. If they exist at all, they have never been defined.
For all these and other reasons, the effort to appoint this LGBT “expert” has been highly controversial and divisive within the world community and needs to be reexamined.
So this is why we need your help. If we can generate enough pressure from concerned groups and people around the world we can stop this in the General Assembly next week.
The more people and organizations that sign our letter, the more impact it will have.
Consider helping in the following ways:
1. Please sign the letter.
2. If you are a member of an organization you can sign as an organization.
3. Please forward this alert on to everyone else who you think might also want to help.
Thank you for whatever you can do to help in this important effort.
Chair of the UN Family Rights Caucus &
President of Family Watch International
Family Watch created talking points (that were also translated into French and Spanish) outlining the serious problems with the resolution and sent them to key UN diplomats from Member States on the Human Rights Council. The document is posted below (adapted based on recent amendments).
DOWNLOAD TALKING POINTS:
English > Français > Español >
June 28, 2016 ACTION ALERT: Help Stop the UN from Appointing a LGBT “Czar” >
Facebook’s 71 Gender Options >