Saudi Arabia insists UN keeps LGBT rights out of its development goals

[GennGreymane]

No, but if you want to work together with them you have to accept that they are different and not enforce your own believes and ideals. We wouldn't want them to enforce theirs on us either.

If we don't want anything to do with their ideology we should break ties completely and build a giant wall around Europe and the US.

These are just U.N goals mind you. Not exactly something thats 100% binding.

[Revi]

These are just U.N goals mind you. Not exactly something thats 100% binding.

True. But seeing as Saudi Arabia is on the UN council of human rights, they should feel some obligation

[Grimbold21]

Its not about forcing such things, its about the fact that government has no right to force you "the right way". They should not force heavens on you. Things like religion, sexual orientation etc should be your choice, not governments.

Well given that SA is sharia law runnes, that reasoning loses its footing.

[Grimbold21]

The UN should follow rule of secular law, not rule of theological law, one is clearly better, more civilized, and not counter to human rights due to it being mutable overtime, as all life and culture is.

I wasnt disputing or disagreeing with that. I think religious dogma has no place when it comes to the rule of law.

The fact that people can argue that we shouldnt go agaisnt SA because of culture, when this is a simple matter of universal human rights, is baffling

[Kuntantee]

Saudi Arabia is hopeless without a regime change anyway. Better do not waste efforst for that country.

[Zandalarian Paladin]

Because LGBT people are not people. It's not like they were born this way, right? Got it. Way to go, SA!

Disclaimer: This was satire.

[Xargoth6634]

While I'm personally strongly in favor of LGBT rights, I must admit that in a circumstance where this is counter to the deep values of Islamic nations, it smacks of imperialism for an international organization to set changing those country's policies as a top goal. Bit of a conflict for people that say they value cultural diversity.

So you're such a multiculturalist and cultural relativist that you're willing to allow another country to refuse basic human rights to its citizens? I bet you also feel that FGM is no big deal and should be left up to individual cultures as well.

[Xjev]

Reverse the situation.

Imagine if the UN development goals had a line about "all women must wear a hijab" -- all Western countries would absolutely insist to keep that clause out.

Part of the difficulty of negotiating things like universal human rights and the Geneva convention etc, is getting a consensus from different cultures in a pretty vast and complex world.

Yes if UN ever says that everyone should be against that. But what it says not is like all women can wear hijab if they want, and can avoid it if they do not want. This is what UN LGBT right is about.

[Deleted]

Kind of amazed that people would rather "keep cultural norms" than advocate basic human rights. The faster we get out of this religiously dominated world, the faster we'll progress as a modern civilisation and not stay stuck in the past.

Christianity doesn't exactly agree that homosexuality is a good thing either, only recently has it become accepted as a human way of life yet people argue that we should preserve culture over this just because its an islamic tradition? Gtfo because when religion is used as an oppression tactic, that should never be advocated.

[Revi]

So you're such a multiculturalist and cultural relativist that you're willing to allow another country to refuse basic human rights to its citizens? I bet you also feel that FGM is no big deal and should be left up to individual cultures as well.

There's a difference between allowing an illegitimate state to oppress it's citizens, and allowing a democratically chosen state to follow the will of the people.

[Breccia]

The Saudis are entitled to their opinion. The U.N. can decide collectively whether or not the Saudi's moral/ethical codes are worth following. My guess is "no" based on the fact that the U.N. might respect religions, but isn't required to follow them.

[Vightnic]

People talk about imposing views on others, but, forcing the opposing side to make concessions is a normal part of any diplomatic process.

You want things from us, this is what you have to do to get it. If you don't like those terms then we can discuss them, but don't expect us to compromise on everything and don't cry imperialism.

Everyone does this. If Saudia Arabia were in a position to impose their Sharia Laws on others through diplomatic pressure they absolutely wouldn't hesitate to do so. Bargaining position is the only mitigating factor in any of it.

[Rukh]

When is someone going to tell Saudi Arabia to put a sock in it?

If it were up to me there would've been a few dozen covert ops strike teams restructuring that country already...

While I absolutely disagree with them using religion to try to undermine global efforts for equality, I don't think forced regime change is going to do anything beyond cause a lot of chaos and instability to the world. Nothx.

[Dezerte]

I'm not a cultural relativist, and it's pretty clear that executing, castrating or imprisoning people simply for being homosexual is inhumane and not inline with the UN human rights.

But, Saudi Arabia isn't very modern socially, so expecting them to be able to abide to this seems unrealistic. And forcing change can sometimes have the opposite results, and may strain our relations with Saudi Arabia (making it even harder to deal with them diplomatically in the future).

- - - Updated - - -

For nations that seem so concerned about mental illness, they do an awfully good job of pretending that specific forms of mental illness fall under the ambiguous concept of "diversity."

You might've had an argument if people who follow religious beliefs were classified as mentally ill.

[Deleted]

True. But seeing as Saudi Arabia is on the UN council of human rights, they should feel some obligation

They are? Isn't that like telling your dog to guard the sausages?

[Deleted]

Whoever thought it was a good idea to let Saudi Arabia(or any other muslim country) to host anything related to human rights is a fucking retard.

[Kujako]

LGBT seem to already be covered by the UN Declaration of Human Rights. Unless the argument is that LGBT folk's aren't human.

[GrinningMan]

I'm not a cultural relativist, and it's pretty clear that executing, castrating or imprisoning people simply for being homosexual is inhumane and not inline with the UN human rights.

But, Saudi Arabia isn't very modern socially, so expecting them to be able to abide to this seems unrealistic. And forcing change can sometimes have the opposite results, and may strain our relations with Saudi Arabia (making it even harder to deal with them diplomatically in the future).

I think we can reasonbly expect -every- human to learn to adapt to the change that has taken place in every other civilized place on the globe. Their excuse is them wanting to cling to barbarism. It isn't religious piety that they're sticking to, it's bloodlust.

[Shakadam]

If we don't want anything to do with their ideology we should break ties completely and build a giant wall around Europe and the US.

For the record, I'd be perfectly ok with this.

[Venant]

But should cultural diversity include the oppression of others?

Why are we even debating cultural diversity when dealing with a country that takes people into the desert and cuts their heads off over actions like attempting to leave the prevailing religion.