US rejects Japan-signed plan for 'sexual rights'

[Taro Toporific]

US Rejects UN Plan for Women
The Associated Press / Thursday 14 October 2004
he United States has refused to join 85 heads of state and government in signing a statement that endorsed a 10-year-old U.N. plan to ensure every woman's right to education, healthcare and choice about having children.
The Bush administration said it withheld its signature because the statement included a reference to "sexual rights." ...
...The statement was signed by leaders of 85 nations, including those in the European Union, China, Japan, Indonesia, Pakistan and more than a dozen African ...
Photo via VinceWorld.com

[dimwit]

US Rejects UN Plan for Women
The Associated Press / Thursday 14 October 2004
The Bush administration said it withheld its signature because the statement included a reference to "sexual rights." ...

Fraid I have to agree with them on this one. I mean WTF are sexual rights? The right to hook in front of the pacinko parlour?? The right to not being raped by their community for some religious/tribal reason? The right to an abortion? The right to phone sex? A little more specific definition might be in order here.

[Andocrates]

This one is just about abortion. The US and the UN are at odds on this and I think I agree with the US. I don't want the UN in charge of who gets born and who doesn't.

Imagine the UN without the US, it's kinda creepy and orwellish.

[Mulboyne]

Imagine the UN without the US, it's kinda creepy and orwellish.

Agreed. But the US without the UN, as we are witnessing now, is not a pretty sight either.

[twilightzone]

US Rejects UN Plan for Women
The Associated Press / Thursday 14 October 2004
The Bush administration said it withheld its signature because the statement included a reference to "sexual rights." ...

Fraid I have to agree with them on this one. I mean WTF are sexual rights? The right to hook in front of the pacinko parlour?? The right to not being raped by their community for some religious/tribal reason? The right to an abortion? The right to phone sex? A little more specific definition might be in order here.

very true!

[MShades]

This one is just about abortion. The US and the UN are at odds on this and I think I agree with the US. I don't want the UN in charge of who gets born and who doesn't.

Actually, the current US administration's position appears to be that everyone should be born, regardless of what the mother wants. Now while I agree that the blanket term "sexual rights" is awfully vague, I think it would be better if governments would stay out of business that doesn't relly concern them, such as whether or not a woman chooses to have an abortion.

[Andocrates]

everyone should be born, regardless of what the mother wants.

God, I wish you could hear yourself so you could realize how stupid agenda's make you sound.

[Socratesabroad]

everyone should be born, regardless of what the mother wants.

God, I wish you could hear yourself so you could realize how stupid agenda's make you sound.

Don't know about agendas, but I gotta go with Ando about stupidity here. Umm.. 'mother' is, by definition, after the fact (live birth of young). So anything else in the prepatory stage needs must be 'a potential mother,' 'mother-to-be,' pregnant woman, etc. Obviously, aborted/failed birth doesn't result in qualification of the woman as a mother...