Hello Racers, I found this to be very Disturbing, voice your opinion

Dear Colleague,

EU and UN "law" have now crept into US law. In his decision striking down
the Texas sodomy law Justice Anthony Kennedy referred to a legal brief
filed by Mary Robinson, former president of Ireland and former UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights. In her brief, Robinson threatened trouble
from Europe for the US if the Texas law was upheld. This is a direct
threat to US sovereignty and was agreed to by a majority on the high
court. Very very dangerous.

Spread the word.

Yours sincerely,


Austin Ruse
President

Action item: Last week we said we would soon ask you to act directly in
the UNFPA debate. The vote in the House of Representatives has been
delayed indefinitely, but stay tuned...you will be needed.
____________________________________________________________________________


FRIDAY FAX

July 4, 2003
Volume 6, Number 28

European Legal Brief Threatened Trouble for US Over Texas Sodomy Law

As debate continues on the significance of the US Supreme Court’s
decision to overturn Texas’ law against sodomy, it has gone largely
unnoticed that the majority’s decision relied on judicial rulings made in
Europe and at the United Nations. The pivotal role of international law in
the Supreme Court decision seems to confirm the concerns of conservative
legal scholars, who have long warned that laws developed in Europe and at
the UN could be imposed on the US. The majority opinion was guided,
specifically, by the pro-homosexual rulings of the European Court of Human
Rights.

In the majority opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy also refers to a
“Friends of the Court” brief submitted by Mary Robinson, former UN High
Commissioner for Human Rights, which asserts, “This Court should not
decide in a vacuum whether criminalization of same-sex sodomy between
consenting adults violates constitutional guarantees of privacy and equal
protection. Other nations with similar histories, legal systems, and
political cultures have already answered these questions in the
affirmative….This Court should pay due respect to these opinions of
humankind.”

Robinson’s brief also says, “Legal concepts like ‘privacy,’ ‘liberty,’
and ‘equality’ are not US property, but have global meaning.” Robinson
argues that the United States should be “construing these terms in light
of foreign interpretations,” even warning the Supreme Court that “To
ignore these precedents virtually ensures that this Court’s ruling will
generate controversies with the United State’s closest global allies.”

The brief seeks to isolate the Texas law, noting, “…the fifteen member
states of the European Union included sexual orientation as an
impermissible ground of discrimination in two international instruments.
Similarly, five of the six major UN human rights treaties have been
interpreted by their respective supervisory organs to cover sexual
orientation discrimination.” This last point also troubles conservative
scholars, since none of the UN treaties now interpreted as pro-homosexual
explicitly mentions sexual orientation.

If the Supreme Court continues to be guided by the decisions of the UN
and the EU, US recognition of same-sex marriage could eventually follow
suit. The Robinson brief cites a number of cases in the United Kingdom,
Canada and Israel, which appear to create a foundation for same-sex
marriage. In one decision, Israeli Chief Justice Barak wondered how
“living together for persons of the same sex [was] different, with regard
to the relationship of sharing and harmony and running the social unit,
from this life of sharing for heterosexual couples?” According to members
of the UK House of Lords, “the concept of ‘family’ is now to be regarded
as extending to a homosexual partnership.”

Writing in dissent, Justice Scalia condemned the importation of foreign
laws into US judicial deliberations: “Constitutional elements do not
spring into existence…as the Court seems to believe, because foreign
nations decriminalize conduct…. ‘this Court…should not impose foreign
moods, fads, or fashions on Americans.’”

 

You mind telling us who Austin Ruse is and what he is president of?

 

Even being a Republican myself I can still see the paranoid rightist slant on this.

The Supreme Court did not need international pressure to reach the conclusion they arrived at.

Also, given the direction of US foreign policy as of late and the willingness to overrun countries in the face of very vocal and overt international friction I really don’t see the logic now where in a domestic concern whether or not people have the right to take it up the ass or not would have hinged largely on the basis of foreign influence.

I think I am seeing a plot for a new South Park movie. Which country was it that recently OK’d homosexual marriage? Oh yea, CANADA.

Coincidence? I think not. So what on the surface seems to be a right wing paranoid attempt to stir up nationalistic sentiment and kill two birds with one stone by attacking BOTH homosexuality AND right wing paranoia of outside influences is merely a Hollywood plot to stir up the foundation for a new South Park movie.

 

and another thing..........

It would seem what Christian Fundamentalists regard as one of the most heinous sins is actually corrected by another heretic theory called Darwinism. Oh the irony…………

…….and being a Republican myself (in California, and simply being ostracized for that living in the SF Bay area), I never fully understood the lesbians resistance to BUSH, nor gay’s resistance to DICK. It would seem the current administration has all the bases covered with that political market segment.

My head is spinning, the world is too confusing.......

 

this is who Austin Ruse is

Austin Ruse is president of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, a UN NGO that focuses on life and family matters. Ruse works closely with UN delegations from all over the world and has participated in the negotiation of many UN resolutions and treaties, including the International Criminal Court, Beijing+5, Cairo+5, Rio+10 and many others.

Ruse also founded and is president of the Center for the Study of International Organizations, a think-tank looking at funding and intentions of groups that affect international political and social policy.

Ruse lectures around the world on UN topics, and his published work has appeared in the Washington Times, Insight, National Review Online, Newsmax.com, Touchstone, the National Catholic Register and many others. Ruse has appeared frequently on radio and television including CNN, Fox, and NBC. Ruse is a regular foreign affairs commentator on EWTN, a global cable network reaching 65 million homes.

Ruse resides in New York City.

 

Re: this is who Austin Ruse is

When you cut and paste from another source, make sure you credit it.

http://petersvoice.org/catholicreform/ruse.htm

Their Position Statement is particularly interesting:
http://petersvoice.org/catholicreform/position.htm

 

im sorry

i usually dont cut and paste to often.

 

Re: Re: this is who Austin Ruse is

I agree. This is OT, but it is my opinion that through the hundreds and hundreds of years the Catholic Church has evolved into a sactuary for gay men.

Imagine if you will 1000 years ago you were a homosexual male. Where would you go? Where could one as a homosexual succeed in life without being an outcast. They have no interest in women so what better way to capitalize on being gay since existing in society then pretty much demanded you marry and have as many kids as you could. You wouldn't survive otherwise.

1000 years ago religious leaders commanded ARMIES (and some still do).

Through the years this simply evolved into what we have today and the scandel we have now of molestation. The world shuns US Catholic leaders, however, it is likely entrenched throughout the entire world in the Catholic Church. The US simply has the legal mechinisim to fight it.

So the irony of requiring those who seek priesthood be free of the desire of women quite ironicly targets what market segment people?

I am serious here. Look at it from an indifferent eye and you start to see many obvious things.

 

Re: this is who Austin Ruse is

I haven't the time to waste reading all the above ramblings, but the CATHOLICS are speaking out against sodomy? I thought it was a requirement for ordination into the priesthood.

come one now, since I started taking soap on a rope to the gym I could care less about who pokes who where, when, and how

 

That's right! The courts finally acknowledged the fact that not recognizing same-sex unions was an affront to our Constitution's protection against discrimination. The government has no power in enforce religious dogma. Marriage - in government terms - is a legal state, not a religious one.

I asked my representative once where he stood on same-sex marriage. He said that it was a religious state involving a man and a woman. I then ask that, if it is a religious state, why are aethists allowed to get married?

 

So can I poke a woman in the butt in TX?

If not the law must change. With the internet I can have women all over the US wanting me to poke em in da butt.

 

Stupid bubbleheads...

 

I think it is important to note that the briefs author, Mary Robinson, is a "former" President and "former" UN comissioner.

Tens of thousands of "Amicus Curiae" (literally "Friend of the Court") briefs are filed is these major cases. While they are sometimes read, they usually have little effect on the outcome of the decision.

Any moron can file an "Amicus Curiae" even Due! So they don't really matter much.

 

For now you can, but if they reinstate then no oral funnies either there, Chester.

From Websters:
1 : copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal
2 : noncoital and especially anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex

 

Personally I think there are much more important things to worry about in this world than what consenting adults do in private.

 

Funny how there's no laws against what consenting adults and cattle do in Texas.....

 

I cannot think of anything in the world that is more important that what consenting adults do in private. Whats the point of living if at some point in the day you can't go 'poke a ho in the doe with a schlong of man-do-lin'???

 

Not to frighten any of you people : the U.N. under a 4 part
"Constitution" which WAS ready to be implantted into the U.S. started in 1945. The object, is to do away with all the documents of freedom for the (our ) people and replace it with its own and its own laws.This also includes " Rights of Children".
By the way, that doesn't mean your rights to your children.
( check in out if you don't believe it) What is sorry for " Them"
is it has taken so long to be put in place.
When pervert boy clinton was in office for 8 years, that made
the " New World " documents closer than it has ever been.
All this imfo can be found to read. You might look for two books :
#1 Vampire killer 2000 about 100 pages
#2 Behold : A pale Horse by Cooper, William
Now this read will certainly open a few eyes !
( you can also look for imfo on the " Luminante'"
a secret society.)

 

Hell, fellow patriot, it is time to frighten people who care about America into taking action! The Black Helicopters are on the horizon. The one-world government is forming and the true defenders of the Constitution must take up arms and head to the designated freedom camps to fight.

I would go with you and help but the aliens messed up my back when they abducted me and did their experiments.