While we sit in our soft chairs watching big screen TVs and complaining that microwave popcorn takes too long to cook, activists backing the homosexual agenda relentlessly march on. Availing themselves of avenues that are notably left of center, both culturally and politically, they incrementally pursue and secure special treatment under the guise of “rights” and “equality.” And while we’ve seen this happen at many levels of government—both state and national—we err greatly if we fail to see the inroads being made on an international level as well.
For example, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) has created a “Unit on the Rights of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, and Intersex (LGBTI) Persons.” The IACHR seeks to allay concerns about this group by positing them as just another part of “the comprehensive approach” being taken toward the rights of all people. Yet, to the lucid observer, it’s clear that what’s really happened here is that an entirely new unit has been created to address the rights of one specific group of people over others.
Among the many ramifications of such an approach to rights is the elevation of some and the subsequent, unavoidable lessening of others. As an anonymous dissenter within the IACHR’s ranks put it: “[This] overall trend in human rights to single out particular groups for special attention at the expense of other rights and groups [poses a] threat to the overall integrity of the human rights idea.”
And the natural outworking of this unnatural elevation of one group over another is that other groups—particularly religious ones—experience not only diminished rights but actual persecution by the groups empowered by the special treatment they receive.
The Catholic Family & Human Rights Institute has made this much clear:
In various places where “sexual orientation” enjoys political protection as a “right,” many people with religious and moral convictions have been fired from jobs, fined, prosecuted, barred from being foster parents, harassed, or have suffered property vandalization.
We’ve seen this in Chile, where an emboldened IACHR sided against Chilean Supreme Court judges for determining that it was in “the children’s best interest” to be awarded to their heterosexual father instead of their practicing and self-described homosexual mother. Moreover, the IACHR also demanded the judges be punished for the decision.
The bottom line is that an elevation in the rights of one group over another vitiates the fundamental rights of all. And this is even more evident when the reason for the issuance of special rights is ideologically driven in the first place.
Exposed: Dem Candidate's Misleading Statements on Spending, Borrowing for AZ Universities | Ky Sisson
White House: Ask DOJ About What's in The Fast and Furious Documents Covered By Obama's Executive Privilege | Katie Pavlich
Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Against IRS From Targeted Group True the Vote; Tea Party Outraged | Katie Pavlich