US votes against UN resolution condemning death penalty for same gay sex joining the fine countries of Iraq and Saudi Arabia. Doesn't that make you proud of the Trump administration. Sorry people I have tried to respect his presidency, but he doesn't deserve my respect.

So, we're gonna start killing gay-homos..?? 😕

and what was it gonna cost us in dollars to agree with the UN..?? 😕

No, be we seem to be OK with other countries doing that.

But the saudis let him touch the cool glowing orb. Why wouldn't he vote with them?

there's more to it than that.. this was probably just a small part of something else... 😟

THIS ^^^ and what about context???


"We voted against that resolution because of broader concerns about the resolution's approach to condemning the death penalty in all circumstances; and, it called for the abolition of the death penalty altogether," Nauert said. "We had hoped for a balanced and inclusive resolution that would better reflect the positions of states that continue to apply the death penalty lawfully, as the United States does."

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/state-department-defends-us-vote-against-death-penalty-ban-at-the-un/article/2636429 

smh...

if only the op were stating the jist of the overall bill, not a single bullet point on homosexuality and apostasy

here is the actual resolution (as far as i can tell)

http://ilga.org/downloads/HRC36_resolution_question_death_penalty.pdf 

no, it isnt just "should gays be killed," it is essentially a recommended ban on the death penalty the world over for any cause and there was a similar vote under obama/rice as i understand it

but its hard to turn all facts into trump bashing so facts sometimes have to be invented

I'm a "meh" on this.

It is neither as bad as Gummy says nor as innocuous as Spey says.

The resolution doesn't force us to ban the death penalty.
But it also isn't just condemning/stopping the death penalty for gays ....

It does acknowledge that in some countries the death penalty is imposed unfairly on people who are poor, or gay, or a specific race, or act wrong.
... more appropriately, it "deplores" and "condemns" that.... and urges states with the death penalty to ensure they don't kill people for being poor, mentally ill, gay, or whatever.

But then it "Calls upon States that have not yet acceded to or ratified the Second Optional Protocol
to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights aiming at the abolition of the death
penalty to consider doing so"....

... we know that's not gonna happen any time soon. But the language is wishy washy... "to consider doing so".... so we could sign it and say we "considered it" and promptly decided not to....

But what really is likely the kicker is that it has about 3 paragraphs where it "calls upon states...." with the death penalty to provide a butt-load of information to the UN about how it's applied and a whole lot of data we just likely aren't going to want to provide.

So I'm a "meh". It doesn't really read how trump detractors think it reads... but it doesn't really read how trump supporters want to say it reads.

Mostly we didn't vote for it because it's a bureaucratic request.

In other words you're keeping the fence warm while TW is away... 😟

I was about to ask what else was in it to make us vote against it... thanks.

Being able to read and make assessments for oneself is an important skill. You should try it some day.

😱

.... didn't know you flew there too Drafter.

😠

I heard Teedubbya is bringing Drafter back some Spotted Dick

Looks like a lot of wasted resources to create a resolution condemning anything. Big a$$ building. Lots of energy to run said building. And tons of people running around with Franklin day planners deciding on what they're not going to do anything about next.

Let's shut that bitch down.

Seems to me that condemning the death penalty for LGBT people for just being themselves, for youths under 18, for pregnant women, for religious beliefs, for retarded people, for poor people, for sexual active unmarried women, and so on is a good thing. Asking that states consider abolishing the death penalty is only asking. The only point I can see questioning is the poor people part. But being against this resolution doesn't fly for me.