US to sign UN gay rights declaration

[dad49er]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration will endorse a U.N. declaration calling for the worldwide decriminalization of homosexuality that then-President George W. Bush had refused to sign, The Associated Press has learned.

Strong support from Europe and others:

The move was made after an interagency review of the Bush administration's position on the nonbinding document, which was signed by all 27 European Union members as well as Japan, Australia, Mexico and three dozen other countries, the officials said.

Official statements:

"The United States is an outspoken defender of human rights and critic of human rights abuses around the world," said one official.

"As such, we join with the other supporters of this statement and we will continue to remind countries of the importance of respecting the human rights of all people in all appropriate international fora," the official said.

The official added that the United States was concerned about "violence and human rights abuses against gay, lesbian, transsexual and bisexual individuals" and was also "troubled by the criminalization of sexual orientation in many countries."

"In the words of the United States Supreme Court, the right to be free from criminalization on the basis of sexual orientation 'has been accepted as an integral part of human freedom'," the official said.

Bush administration position:

Gay rights and other groups had criticized the Bush administration when it refused to sign the declaration when it was presented at the United Nations on Dec. 19. U.S. officials said then that the U.S. opposed discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation but that parts of the declaration raised legal questions that needed further review.

According to negotiators, the Bush team had concerns that those parts could commit the federal government on matters that fall under state jurisdiction. In some states, landlords and private employers are allowed to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation; on the federal level, gays are not allowed to serve openly in the military.

Thoughts, reactions?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hMYVcX059oZR7YRqBU-8kZ098naQD9704OPG0

[PaleoPaul]

Obama just loves him some globalism, don't he?

[PaleoPaul]

BTW...homosexuality's already "decriminalized" here in the US...Lawrence v. Texas, plus in some states gay marriages and civil unions are legal

[BasicGreatGuy]

First thought is screw the U.N.
Second thought is we should get the heck out of the U.N.
Third thought is I agree with the previous administrations stance.

[Ninjacorpse]

First thought is screw the U.N.
Second thought is we should get the heck out of the U.N.
Third thought is I agree with the previous administrations stance.

I would just like to add screw the U.N. :razz:

[SonsofLiberty]

I wonder how many countries in the Mid-east will sign it? Think any of them will be harassed if they don't?

[BasicGreatGuy]

I wonder how many countries in the Mid-east will sign it? Think any of them will be harassed if they don't?

How long can you tread water?

[Pudge]

It's about time we joined the civilized world on this. We were previously aligned with Saudi Arabia, Uganda, and Iran.

Nice bedfellows.

[SonsofLiberty]

How long can you tread water?

not sure what you are saying? I don't think I would fall into that specific category of punishment ;)

[BasicGreatGuy]

not sure what you are saying? I don't think I would fall into that specific category of punishment ;)

I was saying don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen, unless you can tread a long, long time. lol

[ChaosControl]

Why are the matters of other nation's laws regarding a behavior a concern of ours at all? This is completely idiotic.

[Pudge]

Why are the matters of other nation's laws regarding a behavior a concern of ours at all? This is completely idiotic.

Signing a declaration isn't invading and forcing policy change. It's a move that requires nothing but a signature.

I question anyone who really opposes this- you're basically saying that homosexuality should remain a crime and that gay people in those countries should be imprisoned or killed by their governments.

[Blemonds]

Obama's signature is purely symbolic anyway. Ratification requires approval by 67 Senators

[SonsofLiberty]

I was saying don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen, unless you can tread a long, long time. lol

oh phew lol

[dad49er]

I wonder how many countries in the Mid-east will sign it? Think any of them will be harassed if they don't?

Wonder how many times we have aligned our thinking with theirs?
Just seems strange.
Glad now we won't.

[darknessesedge]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration will endorse a U.N. declaration calling for the worldwide decriminalization of homosexuality that then-President George W. Bush had refused to sign, The Associated Press has learned.

Strong support from Europe and others:

The move was made after an interagency review of the Bush administration's position on the nonbinding document, which was signed by all 27 European Union members as well as Japan, Australia, Mexico and three dozen other countries, the officials said.

Official statements:

"The United States is an outspoken defender of human rights and critic of human rights abuses around the world," said one official.

"As such, we join with the other supporters of this statement and we will continue to remind countries of the importance of respecting the human rights of all people in all appropriate international fora," the official said.

The official added that the United States was concerned about "violence and human rights abuses against gay, lesbian, transsexual and bisexual individuals" and was also "troubled by the criminalization of sexual orientation in many countries."

"In the words of the United States Supreme Court, the right to be free from criminalization on the basis of sexual orientation 'has been accepted as an integral part of human freedom'," the official said.

Bush administration position:

Gay rights and other groups had criticized the Bush administration when it refused to sign the declaration when it was presented at the United Nations on Dec. 19. U.S. officials said then that the U.S. opposed discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation but that parts of the declaration raised legal questions that needed further review.

According to negotiators, the Bush team had concerns that those parts could commit the federal government on matters that fall under state jurisdiction. In some states, landlords and private employers are allowed to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation; on the federal level, gays are not allowed to serve openly in the military.

Thoughts, reactions?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hMYVcX059oZR7YRqBU-8kZ098naQD9704OPG0

are we gonna retire the stars and stripes and use the rainbow now?

[RedStatePaPa]

Poor wittle gay people. Evewy body hates them.

Screw that and the screw the UN.

[BasicGreatGuy]

Poor wittle gay people. Evewy body hates them.

Screw that and the screw the UN.

That makes 3 for screw the U.N. :D

[Pudge]

I bet most of you would be all for a UN Declaration that decried the persecution of Christians in China or other countries.

So would I, for the record.

[Ninjacorpse]

That makes 3 for screw the U.N. :D

I would like to vote again for screw the U.N.

[tjvh]

Signing a declaration isn't invading and forcing policy change. It's a move that requires nothing but a signature.

I question anyone who really opposes this- you're basically saying that homosexuality should remain a crime and that gay people in those countries should be imprisoned or killed by their governments.

What would you have America do about it? Military Force? If so, by your argument, everything America did Militarily in Iraq IS JUSTIFIED. It was for the same reasons... Humanitarian. A government criminalizing, and killing it's own people. The problem with Liberalism is that they are very "selective" about which cause they desire to pursue... Screw the Iraqi's, but save Darfur... Screw Israel, but free Tibet.:wall: On one hand they preach Morality, and on the other they behave despicably. HYPOCRITES, and you only need to read Bumper stickers on Hybrids to see it in it's purest form.

[Ninjacorpse]

I bet most of you would be all for a UN Declaration that decried the persecution of Christians in China or other countries.

So would I, for the record.

Are they gay Christians?:think:

[BasicGreatGuy]

I would like to vote again for screw the U.N.

Sorry, you can only vote one time, unless you want to pay the vote tax. :whistle:

[Kelzan]

I bet most of you would be all for a UN Declaration that decried the persecution of Christians in China or other countries.

So would I, for the record.

In principle it sounds like a great declaration, but with the UN nothing is that simple and there could be legitimate concerns with the declaration. You also know they will never give the worst offenders a hard time about their gay-rights records because they are buddies on the hate America/Israel front.

[Mobulis]

What would you have America do about it? Military Force? If so, by your argument, everything America did Militarily in Iraq IS JUSTIFIED. It was for the same reasons... Humanitarian. A government criminalizing, and killing it's own people. The problem with Liberalism is that they are very "selective" about which cause they desire to pursue... Screw the Iraqi's, but save Darfur... Screw Israel, but free Tibet.:wall: On one hand they preach Morality, and on the other they behave despicably. HYPOCRITES, and you only need to read Bumper stickers on Hybrids to see it in it's purest form.

You bet we're selective we don't have unlimited resources

[eib4ever]

I'll add my "SCREW THE UN" to the mix! ....and screw the homosexual agenda too (pun intended). Drive 'em back in the closet where they belong.

Obama is fixing to open a can of worms that will help in undoing his Presidency. The "don't ask,don't tell" policy is going to be overturned which in turn will destroy military morale. Hide and watch, it will happen!!

He is a slave (no pun intended) to marxist socialist leanings, he is a slave to Soros, he is a product of the far left and corrupt Chicago politics. Far left liberal socialist African-Americans have NEVER succeeded beyond their "communities" and he WON'T be the first to break that trend!

[BasicGreatGuy]

That makes 4 for screw the U.N. and the diaper they rode in on. Do I hear a 5th?

[tjvh]

You bet we're selective we don't have unlimited resources

Thanks for being honest, and proving my point.

[tjvh]

That makes 4 for screw the U.N. and the diaper they rode in on. Do I hear a 5th?

Oh, and SCREW THE UN.

[BasicGreatGuy]

Oh, and SCREW THE UN.

Everyone should send their elected, along with the President, a picture of a screw with the words "Screw the U.N."

[ChaosControl]

Signing a declaration isn't invading and forcing policy change. It's a move that requires nothing but a signature.

I question anyone who really opposes this- you're basically saying that homosexuality should remain a crime and that gay people in those countries should be imprisoned or killed by their governments.

I'm saying we have no say in it.
They can sign it, but it is completely pointless. Governments should focus on their own nations and not worry about others unless the others are hostile towards them.

[CaptainPike]

It's about time we joined the civilized world on this. We were previously aligned with Saudi Arabia, Uganda, and Iran.

Nice bedfellows.

We are the most civilized country in the wold despite any disagreement with homosexuality.

[Antrel]

I'm as anti-globilzation as it comes, and I see nothing wrong with any entity calling for the decriminalization of an unoffensive action.

[ChaosControl]

Oh and yeah I support the screw the UN declaration.

[BasicGreatGuy]

Oh and yeah I support the screw the UN declaration.

6 votes for "screw the U.N." :clap:

[Tomcat]

Signing a declaration isn't invading and forcing policy change. It's a move that requires nothing but a signature.

I question anyone who really opposes this- you're basically saying that homosexuality should remain a crime and that gay people in those countries should be imprisoned or killed by their governments.

When stupid signs his name to the document all the ills of the world will be cured and gay imams will dance in the street with poppies in their hair.:rolleyes:

[Pudge]

What would you have America do about it? Military Force? If so, by your argument, everything America did Militarily in Iraq IS JUSTIFIED. It was for the same reasons... Humanitarian.

I believe I said in my second post in this thread that signing the declaration does not commit the United States to using force. It's simply a statement saying that homosexuality should not be considered a crime as it is in many non-Western nations. Funny, though, how under the Bush administration, that the US was the *only* Western nation that didn't sign.

A government criminalizing, and killing it's own people. The problem with Liberalism is that they are very "selective" about which cause they desire to pursue... Screw the Iraqi's, but save Darfur... Screw Israel, but free Tibet.:wall: On one hand they preach Morality, and on the other they behave despicably. HYPOCRITES, and you only need to read Bumper stickers on Hybrids to see it in it's purest form.

You know nothing of my stances on political issues, the war, or foreign policy, and you call me a liberal and a hypocrite. Maybe ask me a few questions before you make judgments, that way you won't look like a fool when I'm done with you.

[Pudge]

Are they gay Christians?:think:

Maybe. Regardless, I'm not in favor of any group of people being persecuted by despotic regimes.

[Mojotiger]

I'm as anti-globilzation as it comes, and I see nothing wrong with any entity calling for the decriminalization of an unoffensive action.

Homosexuality is already decriminalized in the U.S. What's the point of this? Think Iran is going to all of a sudden see the light because of a worthless document?


Oh and screw the UN.

[Pudge]

In principle it sounds like a great declaration, but with the UN nothing is that simple and there could be legitimate concerns with the declaration. You also know they will never give the worst offenders a hard time about their gay-rights records because they are buddies on the hate America/Israel front.

If there were legitimate concerns then I don't think it would have gone through so easily with Western countries. I wouldn't agree with the declaration if it committed our troops to using force, but nothing I've read about it indicates that.

The UN is a completely political organization that has an anti-American bias. I understand that, but as long as we're playing the game, play the game to the hilt. We might not do much to woo those nations who hate Israel by signing this, but we would increase clout with Europe. There may be a time when we have to cash in those chips. On the opposite side, we're not going to curry any favor with repressive or Islamo-fascist regimes by not signing it.

I think it's time that civilized nations recognize that in some countries, being gay or lesbian is a death sentence. It could help some of these individuals who make it to a signatory nation to obtain asylum, if anything.

[Pudge]

When stupid signs his name to the document all the ills of the world will be cured and gay imams will dance in the street with poppies in their hair.:rolleyes:

Ah yes, more evidence of ODS.

[mdk190]

are we gonna retire the stars and stripes and use the rainbow now?

I believe that is in the wording of the bill. You better get into your gay bunker before it spreads.

[zantax]

Sure let's sign it, as soon as the UN takes countries with grievous human rights violations off their human rights council.

Until then, put me down for "screw the UN".

[Nashville]

That makes 4 for screw the U.N. and the diaper they rode in on. Do I hear a 5th?


I'm all for screw the U.N., get out of the UN, and the takover of "U.N. Territory" that sits on USA soil.

[Pudge]

I'm saying we have no say in it.
They can sign it, but it is completely pointless. Governments should focus on their own nations and not worry about others unless the others are hostile towards them.

It's not pointless for those in other countries who may be suffering under their own regime and look to the US for moral leadership.

[Pudge]

We are the most civilized country in the wold despite any disagreement with homosexuality.

Aligning ourselves with repressive governments and Islamo-fascists because Bush didn't like icky gay people doesn't make us appear very civilized.

[dad49er]

It's not pointless for those in other countries who may be suffering under their own regime and look to the US for moral leadership.

I like that.
Good post.

[Hellsbane]

It's about time we joined the civilized world on this. We were previously aligned with Saudi Arabia, Uganda, and Iran.

Nice bedfellows.


Yea. The United States has a well documented record of executing homosexuals for being homosexual.

[Nashville]

It's about time we joined the civilized world on this. We were previously aligned with Saudi Arabia, Uganda, and Iran.

Nice bedfellows.

That is a totally false and ridiculus comment!!!

Not signing some toothless and useless U.N. declaration, does not equate to alignment with anyone.

[Beccaria]

"Legal" does not equal "moral."

That's all I'm saying on the matter for now.

[Pudge]

Yea. The United States has a well documented record of executing homosexuals for being homosexual.

Way to miss the point.

The point is, on the issue of homosexuality, by refusing to sign the declaration, we had allied ourselves ideologically with those who *do* execute homosexuals or criminalize homosexuality, even though we do not do those things. By signing the declaration, we repudiate the criminalization of homosexuality by repressive regimes.

[ExDem]

Screw the U.N!!!!! This declaration does nothing. If they were truly worried about how gays were treated they would be sanctioning Saudi, Iran and the others that are executing people because of the mere accusation of homosexual behavior. This is just more stupid fluff from the U.N. Screw the damn U.N.

[fallenturtle]

If there were legitimate concerns then I don't think it would have gone through so easily with Western countries. I wouldn't agree with the declaration if it committed our troops to using force, but nothing I've read about it indicates that.

The UN is a completely political organization that has an anti-American bias. I understand that, but as long as we're playing the game, play the game to the hilt. We might not do much to woo those nations who hate Israel by signing this, but we would increase clout with Europe. There may be a time when we have to cash in those chips. On the opposite side, we're not going to curry any favor with repressive or Islamo-fascist regimes by not signing it.

I think it's time that civilized nations recognize that in some countries, being gay or lesbian is a death sentence. It could help some of these individuals who make it to a signatory nation to obtain asylum, if anything.

I don't understand how people can claim that homosexuality is a choice when you have homosexual people in countries that tend to execute homosexuals.

[Pudge]

That is a totally false and ridiculus comment!!!

Not signing some toothless and useless U.N. declaration, does not equate to alignment with anyone.

I'm under no illusions that this declaration will make Iran or Uganda do an about-face and decriminalize homosexuality. It is a political gesture on several levels, but I wouldn't call it toothless. It sets a standard for the first world, the civilized, Western world where people are free.

I say, yes, it does equate to alignment. Alignment is not endorsement, but it does speak volumes as to what our prior president believed about gay & lesbian people- that we simply don't matter, and if we live in a country where our relationships are a capital offense, well, tough crap. While the US may not criminalize or execute gays & lesbians, under Bush, the official statement of our country was, 'we don't care'. I think that's a pretty odious position for the alleged most free nation on Earth.

[Pudge]

Screw the U.N!!!!! This declaration does nothing. If they were truly worried about how gays were treated they would be sanctioning Saudi, Iran and the others that are executing people because of the mere accusation of homosexual behavior. This is just more stupid fluff from the U.N. Screw the damn U.N.

Every scream begins with a whisper. You might say it's fluff, I say it's a good start that will help gays & lesbians in repressive countries whether they decide to leave and go to a non-repressive country, or fight for their rights on their home soil.

[Hellsbane]

Way to miss the point.

The point is, on the issue of homosexuality, by refusing to sign the declaration, we had allied ourselves ideologically with those who *do* execute homosexuals or criminalize homosexuality, even though we do not do those things. By signing the declaration, we repudiate the criminalization of homosexuality by repressive regimes.

No we don't. You are not at liberty to pick and choose how we are similiar to ideaologies that are hateful and how we are similiar to ideaologies that arn't. Overall, the US has 0 common ground with those countries that violate human rights across a VERY BROAD spectrum, primarily because the US does not violate human rights.

[Pudge]

I don't understand how people can claim that homosexuality is a choice when you have homosexual people in countries that tend to execute homosexuals.

A little off topic, but they have to believe it's a choice to fit their ideology. Some will even rationalize their own 'choice' of heterosexuality, even though nobody makes such a choice. It's absurd and illogical to cling to the notion that we choose our attraction towards gender, but the alternative, to them, poses way too many uncomfortable 'what if's'.

[fallenturtle]

No we don't. You are not at liberty to pick and choose how we are similiar to ideaologies that are hateful and how we are similiar to ideaologies that arn't. Overall, the US has 0 common ground with those countries that violate human rights across a VERY BROAD spectrum, primarily because the US does not violate human rights.

*cough cough* water boarding *cough cough*

[Pudge]

No we don't. You are not at liberty to pick and choose how we are similiar to ideaologies that are hateful and how we are similiar to ideaologies that arn't. Overall, the US has 0 common ground with those countries that violate human rights across a VERY BROAD spectrum, primarily because the US does not violate human rights.

Unless we think you're a terrorist because some paid mercenary in Afghanistan rounded you up with no evidence... ahem... but that aside, yes, I am at liberty to draw that conclusion when we were the ONLY Western nation that didn't sign the declaration when it was initially made.

You're splitting hairs. We may not violate the human rights of gay & lesbian people, but by not signing on, we stated to the world that we don't give a damn if anyone else does.

That's alignment. Now, feel free to spin and twist your way out of that one.

[Broseph]

Official statements:

"The United States is an outspoken defender of human rights and critic of human rights abuses around the world," said one official.


Wow. What a load of crap from one official.

[Hellsbane]

*cough cough* water boarding *cough cough*

Nothing in common there. Waterboarding is humane. Those countries would just drown your ass.

[Hellsbane]

Unless we think you're a terrorist because some paid mercenary in Afghanistan rounded you up with no evidence... ahem... but that aside, yes, I am at liberty to draw that conclusion when we were the ONLY Western nation that didn't sign the declaration when it was initially made.

You're splitting hairs. We may not violate the human rights of gay & lesbian people, but by not signing on, we stated to the world that we don't give a damn if anyone else does.

That's alignment. Now, feel free to spin and twist your way out of that one.


Why should we care if other countries sign an non binding agreement? They sign such agreements all the time. Some we sign onto, some we don't. Some they sign onto, some they don't. Big hairy deal. You are making a mountain out of an anthill.

[fallenturtle]

Waterboarding is humane.

So you'd have no qualms being water boarded? If it's so humane, can we do it to your grandmother?

[Gaetano "Tommy" Lucchese]

Wow. What a load of crap from one official.

To be fair, we do criticize other countries, unless those countries happen to be Egypt, Pakistan, the UAE or Saudi Arabia.

[Hellsbane]

So you'd have no qualms being water boarded? If it's so humane, can we do it to your grandmother?


My grandmother died at the age of 92 in 1992 you jackass.

[Gaetano "Tommy" Lucchese]

Sometimes I don't think people grasp the difference between the Security Council and the General Assembly.

[Broseph]

To be fair, we do criticize other countries, unless those countries happen to be Egypt, Pakistan, the UAE or Saudi Arabia.

Do as I say, not as I do.

[dad49er]

Wow. What a load of crap from one official.

You disagree with the statement:

"The United States is an outspoken defender of human rights and critic of human rights abuses around the world," said one official.

???

I would hope that would be the US position.

[Gaetano "Tommy" Lucchese]

Do as I say, not as I do.

Oh, and I almost forgot, Israel gets a pass too.

I mean come on, what did Rice and McCain say last year during the Russia-Georgia thing? "Countries don't invade other countries in the 21st Century." I almost died laughing.

[Broseph]

Nothing in common there. Waterboarding is humane. Those countries would just drown your ass.

The GOP sheeple would think anything is humane if the leadership says it is so.

[fallenturtle]

My grandmother died at the age of 92 in 1992 you jackass.

Okay, replace your "grandmother" with another family member... jackass. ;)

[Broseph]

Oh, and I almost forgot, Israel gets a pass too.

I mean come on, what did Rice and McCain say last year during the Russia-Georgia thing? "Countries don't invade other countries in the 21st Century." I almost died laughing.

Yeah, who do those Ruskies think they are?

Rice should have said, "Countries don't invade other countries in the post-2003 era."

Or maybe an answer that I seriously wouldn't put past the Bush Administration would be, "Countries don't invade other countries unless it is an absolute necessity to maintain national security."

Anyway... Russia should do it the American government's way. Pick a 3rd world country halfway across the globe nearest your one-time Cold War rival and then wonder why said rival is upset that you have entered their sphere of influence.

[ddye]

I'll add my "SCREW THE UN" to the mix! ....and screw the homosexual agenda too (pun intended). Drive 'em back in the closet where they belong.
God bless America, where everyone has the right to post hateful, homophobic drivel.

Doug

[Broseph]

"Legal" does not equal "moral."

That's all I'm saying on the matter for now.

And "moral" does not equal "better".

When people stop attempting to use the government to run facets of people's personal lives, it will be a day to celebrate in America.

[zantax]

I don't understand how people can claim that homosexuality is a choice when you have homosexual people in countries that tend to execute homosexuals.

Plenty of drug users right here where it's illegal to use them and there are still drug addicts in countries that execute them as well. Not weighing in on whether or not it's a choice, just pointing out the flaw in your logic.

[fallenturtle]

Plenty of drug users right here where it's illegal to use them and there are still drug addicts in countries that execute them as well. Not weighing in on whether or not it's a choice, just pointing out the flaw in your logic.

Touche.

[Cav Scout]

Signing any agreement with the UN is wrong, matters not what the tripe being signed is.

[BasicGreatGuy]

The count thus far for "screw the U.N." is 10. :clap:

[Mobulis]

Thanks for being honest, and proving my point.


How is the FACT that we don't have UNLIMITED resources and thus MUST pick and choose where and when to intervene hypocritical?

[zantax]

Okay, replace your "grandmother" with another family member... jackass. ;)

I have a very simple litmus test about torture, it's not torture if people are willing to volunteer to see what it's like.

[Antrel]

Homosexuality is already decriminalized in the U.S. What's the point of this? Think Iran is going to all of a sudden see the light because of a worthless document?

Oh and screw the UN.I think there's a significance behind advocating the decriminalization of homosexuality. Are demonstrations pointless if they don't result in direct change? Even if you believe it's futile, the action of speaking out, especially in this scenario, is nothing to be deplored.

More people and more nations should speak and act out against authoritarians.

[dad49er]

I have a very simple litmus test about torture, it's not torture if people are willing to volunteer to see what it's like.

No that's masochistic.

[PredFan]

The UN is a completely worthless organization. OTOH, I would also sign this if I was POTUS.

Then right after that I'd kick the UN out of this country.

[Pudge]

Why should we care if other countries sign an non binding agreement? They sign such agreements all the time. Some we sign onto, some we don't. Some they sign onto, some they don't. Big hairy deal. You are making a mountain out of an anthill.

You may see it that way because you're not gay. I see it as an important symbolic gesture that puts us in alignment with the civilized, free world. Bush not signing it, especially when he had nothing to lose as an outgoing president, speaks volumes to me and not in a good way- his decision to spurn it aligned us with despotic, repressive regimes.

[opsyscw]

I wonder how many countries in the Mid-east will sign it? Think any of them will be harassed if they don't?
None, because there are no homosexuals in Muslim countries, so no need to sign this agreement.

:Wink: