Log in

View Full Version : Obama Bars LGBT Human Rights Violators From Entering US



Princess Luna
6th August 2011, 17:27
President Obama on Friday issued an LGBT-inclusive proclamation that bans immigrants and non-immigrants from entering the United States if they have engaged in serious human rights abuses abroad.
This proclamation grants the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, the discretion to prevent entry into the U.S. for those deemed to have committed serious human rights abuses while in other jurisdictions. The proclamation would also preclude entry for those who have “attempted or conspired” to commit such abuses.
From the text of the proclamation:
The United States enduring commitment to respect for human rights and humanitarian law requires that its Government be able to ensure that the United States does not become a safe haven for serious violators of human rights and humanitarian law and those who engage in other related abuses. Universal respect for human rights and humanitarian law and the prevention of atrocities internationally promotes U.S. values and fundamental U.S. interests in helping secure peace, deter aggression, promote the rule of law, combat crime and corruption, strengthen democracies, and prevent humanitarian crises around the globe. I therefore have determined that it is in the interests of the United States to take action to restrict the international travel and to suspend the entry into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, of certain persons who have engaged in the acts outlined in section 1 of this proclamation.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended (8 U.S.C. 1182(f)), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, hereby find that the unrestricted immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of persons described in section 1 of this proclamation would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.
Section 1. The entry into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, of the following persons is hereby suspended:
(a) Any alien who planned, ordered, assisted, aided and abetted, committed or otherwise participated in, including through command responsibility, widespread or systematic violence against any civilian population based in whole or in part on race; color; descent; sex; disability; membership in an indigenous group; language; religion; political opinion; national origin; ethnicity; membership in a particular social group; birth; or sexual orientation or gender identity, or who attempted or conspired to do so.
(b) Any alien who planned, ordered, assisted, aided and abetted, committed or otherwise participated in, including through command responsibility, war crimes, crimes against humanity or other serious violations of human rights, or who attempted or conspired to do so.
[Click here to read more.]
It should be noted that the discretionary element to this proclamation does not necessarily mean that all persons who have committed serious human rights abuses while abroad will be precluded from entering the United States. Rather, this would seem to create a general rule that the Secretary of State can waver if, as the proclamation puts it, to do so would be in the interests of the United States.
Human rights groups have praised the proclamation as an important development.
From The Washington Blade:
Mark Bromley, chair of the Council for Global Equality, said the order gives the Obama administration “an important tool to use in dissuading extremist actions that are prejudicial to basic human rights, and in encouraging the development of inclusive laws and societies.”
“The Council praises this move, which could in principle be used to justify the exclusion of hate-promoting politicians like Ugandan parliamentarian David Bahati, who introduced a ‘kill the gays bill’ in a previous legislative session in Uganda and may do so again,” Bromley said. “That bill, of course, would have carried dire consequences for LGBT individuals in Uganda.”
The Human Rights Campaign also praised the move, calling on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to move swiftly to implement this change

http://www.care2.com/causes/obama-bars-lgbt-human-rights-violators-from-entering-us.html
I must say, I was actually excited until I read the part about "the Secretary of State can waver if, as the proclamation puts it, to do so would be in the interests of the United States." I guess the king of Saudi Arabia will still be welcome over here.

TheGodlessUtopian
6th August 2011, 23:30
Ah yes, the whole "progress" through building a police state.

How nice. Does anyone else get the feeling that nothing will change?

Capitalism_Delenda_ESt
10th August 2011, 17:28
It is sort of sad that he is the best president on lgbt rights.

Sasha
10th August 2011, 17:43
It is sort of sad that he is the best president on lgbt rights.


its even very sad outrageous that under the best president on lgbt rights this still happens:


This Is All Kinds Of Wrong of the Day (http://thedailywh.at/2011/08/09/this-is-all-kinds-of-wrong-of-the-day-9/)

Aug. 9, 2011


Add to Favorites (http://thedailywh.at/page/2/#)
http://chzdailywhat.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/981c02af-0ace-4fae-93d7-23d4fb91eedd.jpg

This Is All Kinds Of Wrong of the Day: Married couple Anthony John Makk and Bradford Wells of San Francisco have been together 19 years, but that matters little to the US government, which two weeks ago denied Makk, an Australian citizen, the right to be considered for permanent residency (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/08/08/BAO71KKPEC.DTL).
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services turned down Makk’s application on the grounds that same-sex couples are not eligible to receive federal benefits per the Defense of Marriage Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act). Makk, who is the primary caregiver of Wells, an AIDS-afflicted American citizen, has until August 25th to leave the country.
If Wells moved to Australia with Makk he would lose the critical medical coverage he currently receives.
“It’s infuriating. It’s upsetting,” said Wells. “I have no power, no right to keep my husband in this country. I love this country, I live here, I pay taxes and I have no right to share my home with the person I married.”
Though President Obama and AG Eric Holder have previously stated that DOMA is unconstitutional on equal protection grounds, the administration continues to enforce the law, and House Republicans have hired attorneys to defends it where the White House is unwilling to do so.
A spokesman for Rep. Nancy Pelosi said her office is working on behalf of the couple “to exhaust all appropriate immigration remedies that are open to pursue.”
[sfgate (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/08/08/BAO71KKPEC.DTL).]

RedPolak
4th September 2011, 22:45
Oi. I'm rather new, so I haven't said it, but to ease the pain later on, I'll say it now.
I don't support LBGT rights.
Of course they're the same as everyone else, and are entitled to our same rights. But I have a tad of traditionalist tendencies. I blame this on my Christian Communist ideology. I think that if we were inteded to have relations with the same sex, we would be hermaphrodite. It's the way we were intended.
I'm all for barring people who have infringed on human rights, but to count LBGTs as a group the same as races and religions makes no sense whatsoever to me.

Nicolai
7th September 2011, 22:21
Communism excludes all form of classes, so what I find significantly weird is how you can exclude someone cause of their sexual preference, and still call yourself a communist. That you choose to ignore scientific fact can be one thing, but to exclude other people for their right is another thing.