The Bush administration kept the U.N. at arms length for eight years. The matter was to assess the concerns of sex, marriage, and religion. Why? Because of human rights, public health, family planning, and HIV/AIDS. Faith-Orientated groups restricted funds for abortions in the developing world. And implementing conservative values.
“This is a restoration of the majority view, which is that most people want to see the separation of church and state,” informs Adrienne Germaine, President of the International Women’s Health Coalition. I second that.
In March Obama will be presented by Congress to restore family planning programs to the U.N. Population Fund. A first in seven years. Also, included in the presentation is the U.N. Conventions on women’s and children’s rights.
Social conservatives are hoping for a longer approach in alliance with conventions with the Vatican and Islamic States. Traditional Catholic countries.
Also, advocates will state rights of sexual and reproductive health. Whereas religious conservatives find that having these rights forgo the sanctity of family. As Germaine states, “A woman can only exercise empowerment and human right if she has control over her own body.”
It is stated by the Amnesty International USA: Action for Human Rights. Hope for Humanity, “One key reason is the widespread deference to cultural and religious values when it comes to issues of sexuality and women’s control over their reproductive choices. What is considered socially acceptable in terms of sexual relations and family planning, it is argued to such a varying degree on cultural and religious attitudes in each context that an affirmative right to sexual and reproductive automy cannot be asserted as a universal rights,” this contrasts to the stereotypical view that prohibits the vast heterogeneity of option that lies with a single faith. Merely glancing and igniting the fact that women’s sexuality and reproduction rights are pin=pointed to socially keep women subordinate.
It’s known that Obama supports some cases but that he’ll take a more deliberate approach. The convention on the Rights of the child will be reviewed in length. Coincidently, Obama’s inauguration and first week as the 44th President will coincide with the 1973 Supreme Court’s decision Roe v Wade.
“There is a lot of pent up energy at the Untied nations to do a lot of things that didn’t get done over the last eight years over fears that the Bush administrations would roll back some languages,” Austin Ruse, president of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute in New York Speculates.
Joseph Among, epidioligist and head of HIV/AIDS and Human Rights Program at Human Rights Watch says this about the AIDS epidemic, “If we want to have an impact on the AIDS epidemic, we cannot allow moral ideological considerations to tramp scientific evidence and human rights.
Human Rights, public health and HIV:
“The protection and promotion of human rights are necessary both to the protection of the dignity of persons affected by HIV and to the achievement of the public health goals of reducing vulnerability to HIV infection, lessening the adverse impact of HIV and AIDS on those affected and empowering individuals and communities to respond to HIV.”
The promotion and protection of human rights and well-being of al individuals. Especially for those whose rights are violated. Same goes for public health and those with physical and mental or social well-being disturbances.