From: queerplanet@igc.apc.org
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Queer Planet v1n1 addendum 1
Date: 15 Dec 92 03:45:00 GMT
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1309200015:000:59636
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!queerplanet    Dec 14 19:45:00 1992


From: <queerplanet>
Subject: Queer Planet v1n1 addendum 1

/* Written 11:11 pm  Dec 13, 1992 by queerplanet@igc.apc.org in igc:queerplanet */
/* ---------- "Queer Planet v1n1 addendum 1" ---------- */
A Human Rights Report
by Queer Planet
The Human Rights Impact of State Measures Which Restrict
Protections Based on Sexual Orientation


December 6, 1992
By Kim Grittner 
Queer Planet, Executive Director

Part 1. Background
A far-right political group in Oregon, (a western state in the
United States) named the Oregon Citizens Alliance (OCA) succeeded
in putting on the November 1992 ballot in the state of Oregon,
"Measure 9," which, if it had been passed by popular vote, would
have amended the State Constitution to strip away varies
constitutional and human rights from the estimated 10% of the
Oregon population who are lesbian or gay. A wide coalition of Civil
Rights leaders, spiritual leaders and politicians came out against
Measure 9 in Oregon, and the "No on 9 Campaign: Campaign for a Hate
Free Oregon" spearheaded efforts against this measure. 

As Oregon Governor Barbara Roberts said, in a speech invoking the 
Holocaust, Measure 9 is "a cancer in Oregon's soul."2

Fortunately, this measure was defeated by a margin of 55% to 45% of
the vote. In Colorado, "Amendment 2" which was aimed at revoking
city laws protecting against discrimination based on sexual
orientation was also put on the ballot. "Amendment 2" passed by 53%
of the popular vote. Lesbian and gay activists in Colorado report
a corresponding "rash of gay-bashing incidents, ranging from verbal
abuse to bomb threats."3 Appalled by the Colorado amendment, many
Gay and Lesbian groups around the nation have called for a boycott
of Colorado until this measure is overturned or repealed. 

A legal challenge has been mounted against Measure 2 in Colorado.
However, if upheld, Measure 2 would prevent any town or other
governmental subdivision to ever be allowed to vote on the matter
of non-discrimination for gay and lesbian people. This measure
would have the additional effect of negating existing laws which
have already been enacted in Aspen, Boulder and Denver. 

The Colorado measure was spearheaded by a Colorado Springs-based
group called "Colorado for Family Values" (CFV), which is an
offshoot of the "Traditional Values Coalition," a national anti-gay
organization based in Anaheim, CA. Member of CFV's executive and
advisory boards represent fundamentalist, right-wing groups such as
the TVC, Focus on the Family, Concerned Women for America, Summit
Ministries and Eagle Forum. 

What is the impetus behind these repressive measures? Who are the
reactionary forces behind them and what threat do they pose to
Democracy in the United States? These are some of the larger
questions that will be explored in this report.


Both the Oregon and Colorado measures are designed to permanently
legalize discrimination against gays and lesbians, and both
measures are backed by the same national right-wing forces, like
Pat Robertson and the "Christian Coalition". A San Francisco news
report description of the Oregon measure sums this up as follows: 
"The measure is part of the resurgence of America's religious
right, whose anti-gay message was proclaimed at the Republican
National Convention in August. It also represents a retrenchment
against the political gains of the gay rights movement: 19 states,
including California, and 112 cities and counties have some sort of
law protecting gays and lesbians from discrimination."2

The group sponsoring Measure 9, (The Oregon Citizens Alliance or
OCA) grew out of the 1986 Senatorial campaign of Republican Joe
Lutz. Lutz, along with campaign aide Lon Mabon, founded the OCA in
1987. Currently, Mabon heads the OCA out of offices in Wilsonville
with his wife, parents and children. The OCA claims to have a
mailing list of over 160,000 with 3,000 members across the state.
The OCA has close ties to other right-wing groups around the
country and received significant contributions to pass Measure 8
from Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition. 2,4,5

The OCA officially became the Oregon affiliate of the Christian
Coalition in October of 1991. In November of 1991, the OCA was
represented by a sixteen member delegation at the Coalition's "Road
to Victory" Conference in Virginia Beach, Virginia. Speakers at
this event included Vice President of the United States Dan Quayle,
U.S. Congressman Bill Dannemeyer, Gary Bauer, president of the
Family Research Council, anti-feminist activist and Eagle Forum
founder Phyllis Schlafly, and Robertson himself. A man by the name
of Billy McCormick was seated to the right of Robertson. McCormick,
who has gone on record as a supporter of the "ex"-klansman David
Duke, was described as the man who inspired Robertson to found the
Coalition. 6.36

Pat Robertson is a nationally know "religious leader" in the United
States, and has rallied against homosexuals and in favor of this
measure and others like it around the country. He has further
voiced his opinions through the national and international media.
Robertson also appears frequently on a religious television
network, and gained much attention in the summer of 1992 when he
was given a prime time speakers slot at the United States
Republican Party Convention, which was televised around the world. 

As reported in "TIME" magazine, this convention "got a boost" from
"prominent televangelists like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell,"
and reported that prior to giving a prime-time speech, Robertson
"revved up ultraconservatives outside the convention hall." This
article then continues to report that: "At a Houston rally, young
zealots distributed handbills denouncing "queers" and "feminazis"
as Robertson berated the Democrats for failing to mention God in
their platform."7

Also prominent at the 1992 Republican Convention was Pat Buchanan,
(another nationally known anti-gay figure) who called for a
"religious war" to save "traditional values." Buchanan publicly
expressed his religious intolerance of homosexuals at this
convention and was greeted with wild applause by the audience. At
one point he strongly rallied against the agenda of a political
opponent (Bill Clinton) which he decried for including "homosexual
rights," and then said, "that's not the kind of change America
wants. It is not the kind of change America needs. And it is not
the kind of change we can tolerate in a nation that we still call
God's country."8 

During a live television interview on the U.S. television network
"C-SPAN" on November 1, 1992, Buchanan claimed that this speech was
cleared by President Bush. He said, "It was cleared by the
President himself. We showed it to him."

In fact, President Bush offered considerable political credibility
to these right-wing fanatics by granting both Robertson and
Buchanan prime-time speaking slots and by approving of their dogma
of religious intolerance. Soon after the convention, George Bush
also echoed one of Robertson's criticisms, by condemning his main
political opponent (Bill Clinton) for failing to include "God" in
his party's (The Democratic Party) political platform.10,11 

In fact, the religious right has heavily infiltrated much of the
U.S. Republican Party, including the National decision-making
apparatus; and had a major role in writing the 1992 Republican
Platform. The Buchanan forces were particularly influential in the
drafting of this document.9

Although public opposition to the measure in Oregon was widespread
on a state-wide level, and included members of the two largest
political parties, public opposition by national political figures,
particularly within the Republican party was sadly lacking. The
close association which high level officials like Vice President
Quayle have to Pat Robertson would suggest much support for these
measures. 

Instead of disavowing the religious intolerance that the
Republicans engaged in during their 1992 convention, Dan Quayle has
echoed what right-wing World War II revisionists say when they
claim that "the holocaust never happened." On November 5, 1992,
when asked by syndicated columnist Cal Thomas, "Was the GOP
convention, the way it was handled, a mistake?" Quayle responded,
"No. This is just the liberal media ranting and raving about
something that never really happened. Traditional values are
important. Family values are important..."12

Given the support, involvement and association of political figures
at the highest level of the United States federal government with
those leading this movement of hatred and intolerance, the
immediate and extreme danger which this movement poses to the human
and civil rights of United States Citizens is clearly evident. The
remainder of this report will further document, in detail, some
specific examples of how society has been injured by this threat to
liberty, freedom and democracy itself. 

Part 2. Repressive Measures and a Growing Climate of Fear, Hatred
and Intolerance

The "No on 9 Campaign" charges that "Measure 9 fostered a climate
of Hate," and points out that in September of 1991, after the
Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon warned that the OCA initiative
"will exacerbate the fear and violence toward the gay and lesbian
community," a few months later an HIV center operated by Ecumenical
Ministries was vandalized -itself the victim of a hate crime. The
No on 9 Campaign office was also burglarized and ransacked. Hate
crimes based on sexual orientation in Oregon are increasing at an
alarming rate - more than doubling in number each year.13

In September of 1992, two people in Oregon have died as the result
of a firebomb attack, which is strongly suspected to be a
hate-motivated crime, directed against a gay man and a lesbian.
Four neo-Nazi skinheads have been arrested in connection with this
incident.

Brian Mock was one of the two killed in this attack. Approximately 
three weeks prior to the firebombing that killed him, skinheads
beat Brian Mock so severely that "he would have required
reconstructive surgery, had he lived," according to Martin Hiraga
of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. This gang of 10-20
skinhead youths, then continued to harass Mock nightly, yelling
eptithets and throwing objects at the boarding house where he lived
with 11 other people.

The other victim killed was Hattie Mae Cohens, a black lesbian who
lived in the same boarding house as Mock and who had begun
protecting him against the skinheads harassment, according to
Martin Hiraga. The fatal attack occurred at 3:18 a.m., Sunday,
September 27. The skinheads were again harassing the occupants of
the boarding house, Hiraga says, shouting insults like "nigger
dyke," when someone threw a molotov cocktail into the house.
According to a report by the Associated Press(AP) Cohens died in
the fire. According to Hiraga, the other occupants of the house
were unable to rescue Mock, because he was so severely injured from
the beating he had received earlier at the hands of the skinheads.
Mock died of burns five hours after the firebombing.14


In Douglas County, Oregon a group of rural Women were repeatedly
harassed and terrorized by neo-Nazis. On July 18, 1992, two large
sticks and a number seven pool ball were found inexplicably stuffed
into their rural mailbox a mile and a half from the main house. On
July 27, a note in the mailbox was left which read, "Lezzy Queer
Nigger-Jews Die Young!!" The note was made with a stencil and red
marker, with a strange smiley face design and swastikas all over
it. One of the women told the San Francisco Gay Newspaper "The Bay
Area Reporter," that, "From that day on there were daily
harassments and threats --calls to the house and signs of them
coming closer and closer to the house." She indicated that they
lived remotely, and had no houses or neighbors nearby. She also
stated that, "Some women were followed down the road by a truck --
a friend who came to visit and give support was followed home and
found her headlights smashed the following morning."
The women then received a second note in the mailbox which said, 

"Hey Nigger-Jew We Are Coming To Get You!!! We Are [swastika]
Power. We Are Watching YOU!!!" The note, was illustrated with
swastikas and eerie smiley faces, as was the previous one. 
After reporting the written threats and the telephone calls to the
local police, the women described the police response as one that
made them "feel even more isolated and unsafe," and were unsure as
to whether or not the police reported the death threats received in
the mailbox to the postal authorities or whether reports had been
passed on to the Federal Bureau of Investigation based on civil
rights violations. One of the officers was of the opinion that the
threats possibly came from 'a rejected lesbian.'

A third death threat was delivered on a road, closer to the house,
and then, says one of the victims, "...after the fourth death
threat was found they painted a swastika on the door of the
farmhouse."

On August 3, 1992 starting at 9:20 p.m. the women heard noises and
yells from the wooded area bordering the road. At 9:30, Ruth
grabbed a rifle and left the house to investigate. Six shots were
fired at her by three men standing in the trees. She was not
injured. Ruth fired back at flashes in the dark. 

The women then packed their belongings in terror and fled to a
"safe house" in Roseburg, Oregon. A few hours later they found a
note telling them that they had been traced. Again they fled, this
time to Eugene, Oregon, where a note was slipped under their door
reading, "You Are Dead Jew Bitch!!! We Are [swastika] Power." They
then fled south to the San Francisco, California Bay Area where
they remain in hiding.15

In an article by Jim Hunger in the October issue of "just out,"
witnesses and a victim describe incidents in August, 1992 of
Portland Police officers beating gay men in a city park. In one
incident, Arleen Curths, who lives across the street from the park,
reported that: "...she was awakened by somebody outside her home
screaming for help as he was being beaten by a group of six men.
Noting the time, she called 911 and was put on hold for five
minutes while the beating continued. 'I thought he would be dead by
the time someone answered,' she said. When she asked the dispatcher
to send the police out, she was told that the men doing the beating
were the police. 'They looked and acted like goons,' she said."16


Those on the front lines against repressive measures (like Measure
9) have tried to point out the severe dangers they pose to the
general public; though many people, (including some members of the
press) seemed unable to understand that these objections, (which
have included comparing the CFV/OCA/Christian Coalition to Nazis)
were accurate and relevant, and were not being made merely to
emphasize a position. 

For example, Oregon Governor Barbara Roberts spoke out against
Measure 9, saying, "Literally, almost like Nazi Germany, if we sit
idly by while one group of people is discriminated against, then we
risk that each one of us, whatever group we belong to, may be
next." In response to her speech, "The Oregonian" columnist Phil
Stanford, in the context of opposing the ballot measure, made
reference to "frantic do-gooders" who "seem to think that the best
way to combat Measure 9 is to invoke the terrors of Nazi Germany." 

There is a vast difference, he said, between "killing six million
Jews and Gypsies, and requiring the state not to promote
homosexuality. One is deadly, the other mischievious."17

The San Francisco Chronicle reported that "both sides are using
apocalyptic language to drive their point home," and goes on to say
that: "Gay rights advocates compare what is happening to the
situation of Jews in Nazi Germany and to the 'ethnic cleansing'
taking place in the former Yugoslavia."11 

While it is true that many people have made ridicules and unfair
comparisons of varies persons and groups to "Hitler and Nazism"
over the years, it should also be noted that comparing the rise of
Nazism to a contemporary movement which "lawfully strips away the
rights of free citizens and dehumanizes them; and censors and
destroys books by and about the group being persecuted" is
completely accurate, and should be acknowledged as such. 

For those who believe that the prospect of the CFV/OCA and the
"Christian Coalition" succeeding in their anti-democracy agenda is
nil, consider this fact: the Colorado measure did pass (though it
has been legally challenged in court) and the OCA earlier passed a
similar measure in the city of Springfield Oregon. The Springfield
measure passed in the primary election of 1992, and shortly
afterwards, the "No on 9 Campaign" reported that: 

"Within days of the Springfield Ordinance's passage, the OCA moved
to investigate and censor the holdings in the Springfield public
library. 

Then the OCA declared that the City's participation in organizing
a regional meeting of the Northwest Coalition Against Malicious
Harassment violates the Springfield Ordinance because the
conference includes two workshops regarding homosexuality. We've
heard that the OCA is planning now to sue the City of Springfield
for their participation in the conference."1

In September 1992, the Corvallis-Benton County Library in Oregon
experienced the destruction of four books in their collection about
lesbian and gay issues. The books were ripped cut and mangled. One
had been flushed in a toilet. Library Board Chairman Thomas
McClintock commented on the vandalism, "The destruction of books
does violence to the very purpose of a library: to make available
printed and other materials for the enlightenment and pleasure of
its users."18

Springfield resident Jean Marchant has been repeatedly taunted and
spat upon in the street since the campaign began. On one occasion
she was cursed and then told by a man, "We don't want you in
Springfield." Her partner Sandy Shirley, one of Springfields few
open gays, who has appeared on "Donahue" and network TV news shows
said she got a phone call in September 1992 from a man who said:
"If you don't like what people voted in, then get out of town."2,11
Despite the failure by some to fully grasp the full implications of
Measure 9, Oregon's major newspapers have made an effort to warn
the public about the dangers that Measure 9 poses to all
Oregonians. As was stated in the May 28, 1992 addition of the "East
Oregonian":

"It is no surprise that the Oregon Citizens Alliance
anti-homosexuality initiative in Springfield has quickly led to an
attempt to censor reading material deemed inappropriate by
self-proclaimed morality police. After all, a limit on freedom of
speech is at the heart of the OCA's campaign of hate.

"And if you think that only homosexuals should be worried about the
OCA's attack on this most precious American right--think again."1
Part 3. Full Text of the OCA's Ballot Measure 9

A copy of the Measure 9 follows 19:

Ballot Title

Amends Constitution: Government cannot facilitate, must discourage
homosexuality, other "behaviors."

Question: Shall Constitution be amended to require that all
governments discourage homosexuality, other listed "behaviors," and
not facilitate or recognize them?

Summary: Amends Oregon Constitution. All governments in Oregon may
not use their monies or properties to promote, encourage or
facilitate homosexuality, pedophilia, sadism, or masochism. All
level of government, including public education systems, must
assist in setting a standard for Oregon's youth which recognizes
that these "behaviors" are "abnormal, wrong, unnatural and
perverse" and that they are to be discouraged and avoided. State
may not recognize this conduct under "sexual orientation" or
"sexual preference" labels, or through "quotas, minority status,
affirmative action, or similar concepts."

An Act
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
Paragraph I. The Constitution of the State of Oregon is amended by
creating a new section to be added to and made a part of Article I
and to read:

Section 41 
(1) This state shall not recognize any categorical provision such
as "sexual orientation," "sexual preference," and similar phrases
that includes homosexuality, pedophilia, sadism or masochism.
Quotas, minority status, affirmative action, or any similar
concepts, shall not apply to these forms of conduct, nor shall
government promote these behaviors.

(2) State, regional and local governments and their properties and
monies shall not be used to promote, encourage, or facilitate
homosexuality, pedophilia, sadism or masochism.

(4) State, regional and local governments and their departments,
agencies and other entities including specifically the State
Department of Higher Education and public schools, shall assist in
setting a standard for Oregon's youth that recognizes
homosexuality, pedophilia, sadism and masochism as abnormal, wrong,
unnatural, and perverse and that these behaviors are to be
discouraged and avoided.

(5) It shall be considered that it is the intent of the people in
enacting this section that if any part thereof is held
unconstitutional, the remaining parts shall be held in force. 


Part 4. Colorado Amendment Number 2

Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Colorado:

Article 2, of the Colorado Constitution is amended by the addition
of Sec. 30, which shall state as follows:

No protected status based on homosexual, lesbian, or bisexual
orientation. Neither the State of Colorado, through any of its
branches or departments, nor any of its agencies, political
subdivision, municipalities or school districts, shall enact, adopt
or enforce any statute, regulation, ordinance or policy whereby
homosexual, lesbian, or bisexual orientation, conduct, practices or
relationships shall constitute or otherwise be the basis of, or
entitle any person or class of persons to have or claim any
minority status, quota preferences, protected status or claim or
discrimination. This Section of the Constitution shall be in all
respects self-executing.


Part 5. Analysis of Specific Human Rights Agreements Which Both
Measures Violate

Both of the repressive measures discussed in this report are
fundamentally repugnant to the very concept of human rights and
directly violate a number of International agreements which the
United States is party to. In this initial analysis of the human
rights impact of such measures, I will concentrate on the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which was
ratified by the United States Senate on April 2, 1992. Further
updates of this report may include additional analysis and
references to other international instruments. Following are
specific articles which both the Oregon and Colorado Measures (or
similar measures) would be in direct violation of, should they be
enforced as law within the jurisdiction of the United States of
America (or any other Country which recognizes the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights). There may also be
additional articles of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights which these repressive measures violate; this
report is only meant to educate the public as to some of the many
ways in which these measures pose a real threat to human rights. 

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) G.A.
Res. 2200 (XXI), 21 U.N. GAOR, Supp. (No. 16) at 52, U.N. Doc
A/6315 (1966). In Force 23 March 1976 in accordance with Article
49.

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ratified by
the United States Senate with reservations on April 2, 1992.
Congressional Record-Senate, S 4783-4784, April 2, 1992

Preamble

The States Parties to the Present Covenant,

Considering that, in accordance with the principles proclaimed in
the Charter of the United Nations, recognition of the inherent
dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of
the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in
the world.

Recognizing that, in accordance with the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, the ideal of free human beings enjoying civil and
political freedom and freedom from fear and want can only be
achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his
civil and political rights, as well as his economic, social and
cultural rights, Considering the obligation of States under the
Charter of the United Nations to promote universal respect for, and
observance of, human rights and freedoms,

Realizing that the individual, having duties to other individuals
and to the community to which he belongs, is under a responsibility
to strive for the promotion and observance of the rights recognized
in the present Covenant,

Agree upon the following articles:




S 4784 Senate reservations to the preamble:
III. The Senate's advice and consent is subject to the following
declarations: (1) That the United States declares that the
provisions of Articles 1 through 27 of the Covenant are not
self-executing. IV. The Senate's advice and consent is subject to
the following proviso, which shall not be included in the
instrument of ratification to be deposited by the President:
Nothing in this Covenant requires or authorizes legislation, or
other action, by the United States of America prohibited by the
Constitution of the United States as interpreted by the United
States.

Part I [International Covenant]

Article 1 

1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of
that right they freely determine their political status and freely
pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their
natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations
arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the
principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may
people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.

3. The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those
having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing
and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right
of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity
with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.

Part II 

Article 2 

1. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to respect
and to ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject
to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the present Covenant,
without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex,
language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social
origin, property, birth or other status.

2. Where not already provided for by existing legislative or other
measures, each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to
take the necessary steps, in accordance with its constitutional
processes and with the provisions of the present Covenant, to adopt
such legislative or other measures as may be necessary to give
effect to the rights recognized in the present Covenant.




S 4783 reservations to Part II, Article 2 (1) II. 

The Senate's advice and consent is subject to the following
understandings, which shall apply to the obligations of the United
States under this Covenant: (1) That the Constitution and laws of
the United States guarantee all persons equal protection of the law
and provide extensive protections against discrimination. The
United States understands distinctions based upon race, colour,
sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or
social origin, property, birth or any other status--as those terms
are used in Article 2, paragraph 1 and Article 26--to be permitted
when such distinctions are, at minimum rationally related to a
legitimate governmental objective. The United States further
understands the prohibition in paragraph 1 of Article 4 upon
discrimination, in time of public emergency, based "solely" on the
status of race, color, sex, language, religion or social origin not
to bar distinctions that may have a disproportionate effect upon
persons of a particular status.


Part II [International Covenant continuted] 

Article 5 

1. Nothing in the present Covenant may be interpreted as implying
for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity
or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights
and freedoms recognized herein or at their limitation to a greater
extend than is provided for in the present Covenant.

2. There shall be no restriction upon or derogation from any of the
fundamental human rights recognized or existing in any State Party
to the present Covenant pursuant to the law, conventions,
regulations or custom on the pretext that the present Covenant does
not recognize such rights or that it recognizes them to a lesser
extent.

Article 12 

1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State Shall, within
that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom
to choose his residence.

3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any
restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary
to protect national security, public order (ordre public), public
health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are
consistent with the other rights recognized in the present 
Covenant.

Article 17 

1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference
with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful
attacks on his honour and reputation.

2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such
interference or attacks.

Article 18 

1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience
and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt
a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individual
or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest
his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and
teaching.

2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his
freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.

3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject
only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary
to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the
fundamental rights and freedoms of others.

4. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have
respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal
guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their
children in conformity with their own convictions.

Article 25 
Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any
of the distinctions mentioned in article 2 and without unreasonable
restrictions: a. To take part in the conduct of public affairs,
directly or through freely chosen representatives; b. To vote and
to be elected at a genuine periodic elections which shall be by
universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot,
guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors; c. To
have access, on general terms of equality, to public service in his
country.

Article 26 
All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any
discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect,
the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all
persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on
any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political
or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or
other status.


Part 6. Analysis of the Factual Similarities Between the
CFV/OCA/Christian Coalition and Nazism

A 1964 English translation of 10 essays about Nazism by German
historians entitled "The Road to Dictatorship," which describes the
rise of fascism in Germany from 1918 to 1933, provides an excellent
factual source from which to draw comparisons between the tactics
and tendencies of Nazis rise to power, to those of the
CFV/OCA/Christian Coalition now. I will refer frequently to essays
found in "The Road to Dictatorship," to establish a solid, factual
and fair comparison between the two movements; which, though
separated by time and country - can be shown to have significant
similarities worthy of the immediate attention and concern of all
those who care about Democracy and Human Rights in modern
society.20

In Kurt Sontheimer's essay entitled "Anti-democratic Thought in the
Weimar Republic," 20.39 he explains how anti-democratic thought in
the Weimar Republic contributed greatly to it's fall from Democracy
to Hitler's dictatorship. He notes that "It was neither the world
economic crisis," nor post-war policies, "nor alone the failure of
the political parties," nor President Hindenburg's actions in the
months preceding Hitler's elevation to the Chancellorship which led
to the destruction of the Republic. He further states: "Neither
would the structural weaknesses of the Republic have been
sufficient on their own to make its collapse inevitable if they had
not coincided with fateful political decisions made by individuals.
But again these were only so serious because they paved the way for
Hitler's dictatorship..." 

In it's rise to power, the National Socialist ideology became a
"conglomerate of ideas" which attracted many factions of German
citizens unhappy with current conditions. On page 45, Sontheimer
writes: "But many of those people who for the time being had no
means of releasing their aspirations and expressed their discontent
with the existing form of government through anti-democratic tracts
and pamphlets finally gave their support to the National Socialist
mass movement. In many cases they did not do this because they
sympathized entirely with the ideas of the movement, but because
they saw in Hitler's party the growth of a political force which
they confidently hoped would bring the tottering Weimar democracy
to its fall."

Sontheimer points out that much of the anti-democratic thought in
Germany came from "right-wing nationalists," which is also an
accurate description of many of those (like Pat Buchanan) at the
central core of the current United States political-religious
intolerance forces behind "anti-homosexual measures." 
Sontheimer describes the "anti-democratic thought of the right-wing
nationalists" as "richer and more differentiated" then that of the
Communists and others that opposed the Weimar Republic, stating
that "It ranged from deep speculation on the philosophy of politics
down to the primitive antisemitic pamphlet. The broad effect which
it exerted on the intellectual life of the Weimar Republic would
have been inconceivable without the intellectual and cultural
upheaval which took place in every sphere of life at the beginning
of the twentieth century." 

Indeed the right-wing forces behind these repressive measures have
assembled an onslaught of materials to justify outright attacks and
discrimination against lesbians and gay men. As an example of the
incredible volume of literature that these groups produce; during
an earlier campaign against queers in Oregon, the OCA and their
backers reported in "The Oregon Alliance" that in the last six
weeks of the campaign: "...almost 1 million pieces of literature
were placed in the hands of Oregon voters by No Special Rights
Committee volunteers and Oregon Citizens' Alliance members."6.24

When looking at the behavior of Pat Robertson and his zealous young
supporters passing out fliers denouncing "queers" and "feminazis"7
combined with a condemnation of political opponents for failing to
combine religion and politics into some sort of conglomerate
ideology, we see a disturbing consistent adherence to the
principles of Nazism. Also note that the right-wing tactics and
tendencies of the CFV/OCA/Christian Coalition members is identical
to that of the Nazis in that they occur simultaneously on two
levels: 1. "Respectable leaders" such as Pat Buchanan and Pat
Robertson call for the legalizing of discrimination against a group
targeted for oppression (in this case queers or Jews). 2. Currently
illegal crimes of physical violence, censorship and terrorism which
are not formally endorsed by the "respectable leaders" of this
movement are committed against the "targeted group."

One of the more obvious examples of the Nazi/CFV/OCA/Christian
Coalition connection is the fact that many of the hateful attacks
against lesbians and gays have been committed by neo-Nazis.
Numerous examples have already been given of modern-day attacks by
right-wing forces, which like the attacks of right-wing German
nationalists, could be accurately described as "rich and
differentiated"; and range from the illegal destruction of public
library materials to the terrorizing, murder and firebombing of
free citizens. 

While some may describe these two primary tactics as being "vastly
different," their effects are essentially the same. The targeted
class (queers and those who defend them) are silenced, censored,
marginalized and become increasingly susceptible to attacks; while
at the same time, they are less and less able to find individuals,
groups or governmental agencies who are willing and able to defend
their most basic civil and human rights. Writing on this subject in
1938, Mahatma Gandhi observed: "Germany is showing to the world how
efficiently violence can be worked when it is not hampered by any
hypocrisy or weakness masquerading as humanitarianism. It is also
showing how hideous, terrible and terrifying it looks in its
nakedness."21.328

When offering his opinion on how Jews might resist "this organized
and shameless persecution" Gandhi suggested, "...If I were a Jew
and were born in Germany and earned my livelihood there, I would
claim Germany as my home even as the tallest gentile German might,
and challenge him to shoot me or cast me in the dungeon; I would
refuse to be expelled or to submit to discriminating treatment. And
for doing this I should not wait for the fellow-Jews to join me in
civil resistance, but would have confidence that in the end the
rest were bound to follow my example..."21.328

Gandhi's views on this subject are very instructive in
understanding how quickly civil unrest can develop in a situation
where political forces threaten the fundamental civil and human
rights of a "targeted group." This is true because given a
situation of inherent injustice, even the most law-abiding and
non-violent citizens become morally compelled to rise up against
this type of outrage. Then, as social unrest escalates, the
"respectable fascists" justify the use of police repression to
restore "law and order." This helps to explain the strategic
importance of these two distinctively different right-wing tactics
in achieving the common goal of institutionalized oppression
against a targeted group. Physical thugs create social unrest,
while "respectable fascists or thugs" offer a swift and strong
authoritarian resolution, which becomes tempting to the public at
large. Such a scenario poses a very real threat to democracy. As
Gandhi wrote in 1922, "...Democracy is not a state in which people
act like sheep. Under democracy individual liberty of opinion and
action is jealously guarded..."21.221

This process of "blunting people's minds to the inviolable rights
of the individual," is described by Sontheimer in detail near the
end of his essay. He notes that the intellectual atmosphere that
prevailed in German politics were rife with anti-democratic ideas,
and that they contributed greatly to the rise of the National
Socialist movement which was "later raised to the status of a
religion." Sontheimer further observes that, "In its contempt for
everything liberal it had blunted people's minds to the inviolable
rights of the individual and the preservation of human dignity. It
had sacrificed the idea of humanity as weak and incompatible with
its heroic attitude, it had paralyzed the feeling for freedom
because it held that subordination to a whole was more fundamental
and important."20.39

The right-wing attacks against queers takes the same course as that
of the Nazis. In speeches, literature and other forms of expression
the right-wing CFV/OCA/Christian Coalition forces decry "liberals"
and oppose "humanism" at every opportunity. They hysterically blame
homosexuals, "the media elite" (even though most of them have
direct media access and influence) and educators for the decline of
"traditional values." In August, for example, Pat Robertson, (along
with the Vice President of the United States) criticized a
political opponent for his support by teachers unions; which they
oppose on the grounds that public schools teach "humanism" in
classrooms.7

Another historical parallel which is important to note, is that the
United States, like Germany during the rise of Hitler, is
experiencing a "major upheaval" due to the end of the cold war, a
deterioration in the standard of living due to job losses, poor
health care coverage for millions of U.S. citizens, racial
tensions, the rise in violent crimes, (including hate crimes) and
other social problems. 


Part 7. Conclusions

It is reasonable to conclude that, based upon the facts, the number
and severity of violent crimes committed against lesbians and gay
men would increase dramatically, should either of these measures be
enacted and enforced as law. Indeed, merely by allowing these
repressive measures to reach the ballot, both Colorado and Oregon
have allowed hate groups to endanger the lives and liberty of many
of their citizens, some of whom have already lost their lives. This
conclusion is further reinforced by the fact that this is exactly
what has happened in the wake of the passage of Amendment 2 in
Colorado. 

Furthermore, should any State legally sanction the notion that
"homosexuality is wrong" on the grounds of "morality," it stands to
reason that the number of assaults committed against lesbians and
gay men committed by the police will escalate. "Equal justice under
the law" would become another causality for all lesbians and gays
in that State, because the State Government would officially
pre-define them as "abnormal, wrong, unnatural and perverse," or
would otherwise make it impossible to take legal recourse against
discrimination. 

Once the process of stripping away Civil and Human rights has been
sanctioned by a government, (state sponsored terrorism) it is
relatively simple for the anti-democracy forces at work to further
widen the scope of who is not to be tolerated, and inevitably, more
groups and individuals then become the victims of hate and
intolerance. 

Considering the National and International attention which vocal
supporters of both measures now enjoy, groups like the OCA, CFV and
their close allies (such as the "Christian Coalition") should be
recognized as much more dangerous than just political-religious
lunatic fringe groups. They represent a political-religious
intolerance movement which has gained considerable political power
in the United States in recent years. 

The illegal mixing of religion and law in the United States by
these intolerant groups is a potent recipe for disaster. These
people are modern day crusaders who feel that they have the right
to override human and civil rights in furtherance of their
religious ideology. In the words of OCA chairman Lon Mabon,
"Christians who oppose homosexuality are not "judging" homosexuals.
They are simply acknowledging what God has judged and fulfilling a
biblical mandate to warn others of the consequences of their
sins....Support for OCA's No Special Rights initiative by
Christians is not based on an attitude of moral superiority. It is
based on a desire to please God and to save other people from the
consequences of acting in ways that God has judged."6.24.2

Pat Robertson and the "Christian Coalition" have proven to be
enormously effective in using the tax exempt "Christian Coalition,"
(which is supposedly a non-partisan "citizen action" organization)
for partisan political purposes. Their accomplishments to date
include the sponsorship and election of right-wing Republican
members to Congress, the registration and distribution of over 40
million "voter guides" in churches, and having tapped into state
and local affiliates; to achieve majorities or near majorities on
Republican central committees in more than a half-dozen states. The
executive director of the Christian Coalition said: "I think this
will be the most effective coordinated activity by evangelical
Christians that we've ever seen," Ralph Reed Jr,. executive
director of the Christian Coalition, said of the group's electoral
activities. "I don't want to belittle Jerry Falwell or the Moral
Majority. But the Christian Coalition as a model represents a more
mature, more developed and more politically sophisticated vehicle
for Christian political activism."22

Finally, considering the fact that one of the two largest political
parties in the United States (the Republican Party) and the sitting
President and Vice President of the United States (George Bush and
Dan Quayle) have offered aid, comfort and credibility to these
anti-democracy forces, it should be clear to anyone concerned with
human and civil rights that this hate movement poses a clear and
present danger not only to the lesbian and gay citizens of the
United States, but to Democracy itself in the United States. 


NOTES

1Letter from "No on 9 Campaign: The Campaign for a Hate Free
Oregon," signed by Peggy A. Norman - Campaign Manager.

2"Oregon Battleground for anti-gay measure," San Francisco
Examiner, (California, U.S.A.) - article by Carol Ness. October 1,
1992. Pages: 1, A19

3"Colorado Tries to Avert Boycott By Tourists Over Anti-Gay Law,"
San Francisco Chronicle, (California, U.S.A) - Article by Louis
Sahagun. November 10, 1992. Page A7.

4Information sheet from "No on 9 Campaign: The Campaign for a Hate
Free Oregon," entitled "SAY NO TO THE OCA - NO ON 9."

5"Pat Robertson's perversity," SF Weekly, (San Francisco,
California, U.S.A.) - article by L.A. Kauffman. September 30, 1992.
Page 12.

6"ROLLING BACK CIVIL RIGHTS - The Oregon Citizen's Alliance at
Religious War," Coalition for Human Dignity, (P.O. Box 40344,
Portland, Oregon 97240, U.S.A.) - report by S.L. Gardiner. 1992. 

6.24Page: 24 (quoted from Wiley, Mike. "Measure 8 vote Reaffirms
Traditional Values," in The Oregon Alliance. January/February 1989,
Vol. 2, No. 1, p. 5.) 6.24.2Page: 24 (quoted from a Letter from OCA
chairman Lon Mabon to "Alternative Connections," a Portland monthly
that serves the Lesbian/Gay community. February, 1992. p. 5.) 

6.36Page: 36

7"Pulpit Politics," TIME Magazine, (U.S.A.) - article by Laurence
I. Barrett. August 31, 1992. Pages: 34, 43

8"Unhumbled, Buchanan Backs Bust," New York Times -Article by
Richard L. Berke. August 18, 1992.

9"GOP Drafting Panel Puts Final Touches on Platform," Los Angeles
Times, (California, U.S.A.) - article by Robert Shogan. August 14,
1992. Pages: A16, A17

10Information sheet from "No on 9 Campaign: The Campaign for a Hate
Free Oregon," entitled "No on 9"

11 "Anti-Gay Measure Divides Oregon," San Francisco Chronicle,
(California, U.S.A.) - article by David Tuller. October 2, 1992.
Pages: 1, A8, A9 

12"Quayle discusses future of the GOP," San Jose Mercury News,
(California, U.S.A.) - interview by Cal Thomas. November 8, 1992.
Page: 5P.

13Information sheet from "No on 9 Campaign: The Campaign for a Hate
Free Oregon," entitled "NO ON DISCRIMINATION-NO ON 9"

14"First Two Martyrs in Oregon," an article which appeared in the
October 19, 1992 issue of the "New York Native". Published in New
York, New York. Pages: 1, 4.

15"Oregon Lesbians Terrorized by Bigots, Forced To Flee," An
article by Marghe Covino assisted by Keith Clark, which appeared in
the October 15, 1992 issue of the "BAY AREA REPORTER". Published in
San Francisco, California. Pages: 13, 14

16"Cops 'sting' in Laurelhurst," an article by Jim Hunger, which
appeared in the October 1992 addition of the monthly newspaper
"just out," published in Portland, Oregon. Page: 21.

17"NEVER AGAIN." An article by Marilyn Davis, which appeared in the
October 1992 addition of the monthly newspaper "just out,"
published in Portland, Oregon. Pages: 14, 15.

18"oca watch" a series of news briefs which appeared in the October
1992 addition of the monthly newspaper "just out," published in
Portland, Oregon. Pages: 12, 13. (18.7) "Vandals assault library"
by Jeff Williamson

19Information sheet from "No on 9 Campaign: The Campaign for a Hate
Free Oregon," entitled "FULL TEXT OF THE OCA'S BALLOT MEASURE 9."

20"The Road to Dictatorship, Germany 1918 to 1933. A symposium by
German historians" First published in Germany by R. Piper & Co.
Verlag, Munich, 1962. 1964 English translation by Oswald Wolff
(Publishers) Ltd., London. 20.39"Anti-democratic Thought in the
Weimar Republic" by Kurt Sontheimer. Begins on Page 39. 

21"The Essential Gandhi," (excerpts of Mahatma Gandhi), Edited by
Louis Fischer. 1962, Random House, Inc. 21.221From "Young India,"
March 2, 1922. Page 221. 21.328From "Harijan," November 26, 1938.
Begins on page 328.

22Information sheet from "The Equal Protection Campaign," of
Denver, Colorado. Dated October 9, 1992. Quote taken for the
Thursday, September 10, 1992 addition of the Washington Post. 



Queer Planet's Human Rights 

Day Message, 1992

On December 10th, 1992 Queer Planet gave a press conference on the
sidewalk in front of the Veterans War Memorial Opera House in San
Francisco. What follows is the press release and list of demands
that we made of the United Nations.

The news media in America has been closely following the ever
evolving civil rights issue of whether queer people should be
allowed to serve in the military. This is not our only issue. But
it has delineated a  link of two traditional foes of the queer
communities, the old guard in the Defense Department and the
Southern Baptist Church. The military and the christians. Just a
few weeks before we were targets of laws introduced into Oregon and
Colorado by so-called christians, which would limit our rights and
prevent anti-discrimination legislation from taking place. These
are civil and political rights issues that we have been dealing
with for the length of our movement's existence. But these
struggles form only the superstructure--the tip of the
iceberg--because queer people lack basic human rights. 

Queer people in most parts of the world aren't allowed the simplest
human rights let alone civil or political rights, and are denied a
process to appeal human rights violations, when these violations
occur. A few human rights organizations are beginning to deal with
victimized queer people as clients, and even fewer are advocating
for their protection. Much work needs to be done even with the few
groups that have begun to advocate for queer human rights. 

The United Nations, the world's largest human rights body has done
the least amount of work on our issues. The United Nations has, in
the past, produced some very exciting and noble declarations worthy
of all peoples of the world. The Universal Declaration of the Human
Rights of Man, signed on December 10, 1948, set the standard from
which other declarations have evolved, such as The Declaration on
the Elimination of Discrimination based on Religion or Belief, and
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. These
declarations "include the elimination of discrimination based on
race or on sex; violations of human rights; promotion of the right
of self-determination; realization of economic, social and cultural
rights; the adverse consequences for human rights of assistance
given to racist regimes; rights of detained or imprisoned persons,
including freedom from torture; rights of persons belonging to
minorities; human rights of migrant workers; rights of the child;
and human rights and scientific and technological developments." 1

"In December 1965, the General Assembly adopted the International
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination." It also adopted Declarations on the elimination of
discrimination against women, on the protection of women and
children in emergency and armed conflict, on the rights of
children, on torture and on the rights of disabled persons."1

But in the 44 years since the signing of the Universal Declaration
the United Nations has said and done nothing regarding the human
rights of queer people. In fact, the Sub-Commission on Prevention
of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities heard its first
testimony from a gay person, a Canadian professor, this past July
about discrimination that is leveled at all of us through
immigration laws.

Our goal at Queer Planet is to bring light to the fact that the
arbiter of human rights and values, operates as if we do not exist.
We do in fact exist in each of the above mentioned categories as
minorities within minorities. And in places of the world where
human rights violations go unchecked, we are often the first
detained, tortured or murdered, and no one is there to speak  for
us. The United Nations maintains the illusion that it helps
everyone, but the reality is quite different. This may not be a
flaw of their ability as people to care about our human rights
abuses, but may have more to do with the representative nature of
the United Nations bureaucracy-because we have no representation at
the United Nations we will not be heard. Two years ago the
International Lesbian and Gay Association was denied NGO status due
to religious bigotry. We will have to use other ways and means to
get the seriousness of our message understood at the United
Nations.

Next year the Centre for Human Rights is holding a World Conference
on Human Rights. The last conference of this kind was 24 years ago.
It is imperative that our human rights concerns be told at this
gathering, we simply cannot wait another quarter-century for the
next conference.

Notes

1 "Everyone's United Nations: A Handbook on the United Nations, Its
Structure and Activities" published by the United Nations,
Department of Information, page 235.


Queer Planet's List of Demands for the United Nations

Presented to the Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali and Under
Secretary General Antoine Blanca on December 10th, 1992

What follows is a partial list of demands that we are making of the
United Nations at this time. This list is by no means a complete,
nor is it immutable. This list will be added to by us and other
groups in the future.


We demand that: 

1. The United Nations formally recognize the global discrimination,
persecution, imprisonment, torture and murder of queer people by
their governments and societies.

2. The  United Nations amend existing human rights declarations and
covenants to include specific language (i.e. sexuality, sexual
minorities, sexual orientation, sexual preference) recognizing and
acknowledging queer people as part of the human family. 

3. The United Nations establish a non-governmental organization
(NGO) comprised of queer people, queer organizations and queer
positive organizations within the United Nations that would advise
the United Nations in regards to queer issues. 

4. The United Nations establish a pro-active queer human rights
investigative group  that will investigate and document human
rights abuses against queer people throughout the world and report
these findings directly to the United Nations Human Rights
Commission.

5. That the United Nations agree to give serious consideration to
queer human rights in the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights by:
a. inviting queer people to give personal testimony regarding human
rights issues and abuses in their countries.
b. inviting representatives of queer organizations to give
testimony regarding human rights issues and abuses in the world.
c. providing panel discussions and workshops during the conference
and allowing queer speakers to address the full conference at the
opening plenary.


6. That the United Nations advocate for the guarantee,
preservation, and expansion of queer culture in all its diversity
by insisting that member States work to:
a. allow for the peaceful association and assembly of queer people
and queer groups.
b. allow queer people to enjoy the right of free speech and the
guarantee of the right to receive and impart uncensored information
through newspapers, magazines, books, all forms of artistic
expression and electronic media and to ensure its unimpeded
distribution nationally and internationally.
c. eliminate all forms of heterosexual supremacy, heterosexist
expression, and queerphobia with in their own societies and
institutions.
d. eliminate all sodomy or sex laws which impede sexual freedom of
queer people and their full and complete expression of personality:
e. eliminate all laws which suggest that queer people are mentally
ill, deranged, psychologically hindered or deficient as human
beings.
f. ensure the right to privacy for their queer citizens.
g. guarantee equal access to all institutions including, education,
health care, employment, national defense, trade organizations and
unions, housing and transportation.

A separate demand that we are making of the City of San Francisco,
is that before anymore consideration be made in regards to the
United Nations using the Presidio to be used as its environmental
headquarters, that it give a full accounting of why the United
Nations has not begun to actively pursue the expansion of the human
rights movement to include queer people, and how it plans to
remediate this shortcoming. There is no place in San Francisco for
an organization espousing human rights only for the heterosexual.


What You Can Do Right Now

Writing a letter is one of the most effective ways you can
communicate as an individual. Make a case for including queer
people, send newspaper clippings to show the violence and hatred we
are subject to (their addresses are below). We've included
posecards with this addendum that you can send. Let us know if you
would like to work with us on our United Nations Project we need
your help. 

Secretary General of the United Nations
Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali
United Nations
New York, NY 10017

Under Secretary General
Mr. Antoine Blanca
Centre for Human Rights
8-14, avenue de la Paix
CH-1211 Geneva 10
Switzerland

John Pace
World Conference Coordinator
UN/World Conference on Human Rights
Palais des Nations
CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland

Ambassador Edward J. Perkins
U.S. Mission to the United Nations
799 United Nations Plaza
New York, NY 10017



Subscription Information

Queer Planet is a 501(c)(3) non-profit, international queer human
rights organization whose purpose is to defend the human and civil
rights of sexual minorities and to eliminate discrimination against
transsexuals and transgender, gay, lesbian, and bisexual people.
This newsletter is available on-line at no cost, on our e-mail
conference on PeaceNet (queerplanet@igc.org), and on Internet's
Queer Resource Directory (QRD) on File Transfer Protocol (FTP) at
Nifty.Andrew.CMU.EDU (under the directory
"pub/qrd/QRD/queerplanet").

Queer Planet Quarterly is a publication of Queer Planet. Our
mailing address is Queer Planet, 1046 Florida St., San Francisco,
CA 94110, USA. US subscription rates are $12 per year for the
Quarterly; $20 for the Quarterly and special reports; Canada $15
per year for the Quarterly and $25 for the Quarterly and special
reports; International $20 for the Quarterly and $30 for the
Quarterly and special reports. Permission is granted to copy only
if Queer Planet is credited.
c 1992 Queer Planet