Tuesday, 20 October 2009

Illum: Labour aktar Roża milli Aħmar

http://www.illum.com.mt/2009/10/18/t1.html
18.10.9

It-tibdiliet li qed isiru fil-Partit Laburista qed iwasslu biex il-Partit jitlef l-identità tradizzjonali tiegħu. Dan sostnewh delegati li tkellmu ma’ din il-gazzetta. Tliet deċiżjonijiet riċenti huma kkunsidrati bħala s-sisien ta’ dan. L-ewwel hi l-wasla ta’ Marisa Micallef (Leyson) u l-involviment tagħha fil-Media Group tal-Partit Laburista. Imbagħad hemm id-deċiżjoni ta’ Joseph Muscat li jagħżel lill-avukat żagħżugħ Edward Zammit Lewis bħala s-Segretarju Ġenerali l-ġdid. U fl-aħħar id-deċiżjoni politika biex il-PL jersaq aktar viċin il-lobby tal-persuni gay. Dawn kollha huma parti mir-riċetta ta’ Muscat biex jirbaħ l-Elezzjoni Ġenerali minkejja li l-ingredjenti jirritaw lill-għeruq ħarxa tal-Partit.

Illum: Sal-aħħar tas-sena LGBT Labour

http://www.illum.com.mt/2009/10/18/t3.html
18.10.9 minn Albert Gauci Cunningham

“Fl-aħħar elezzjoni vvutajt PN. Illum ma rrid nassoċja ruħi bl-ebda mod ma’ dak il-partit” – Albert Gauci Cunningham Grupp ta’ żgħażagħ li bħalissa qed jaħdmu minn wara l-kwinti se jkunu qed iħabbru fergħa ġdida u organizzata tal-gays taħt il-kappa tal-Partit Laburista.

Dan il-grupp se jħabbar uffiċjalment il-ħidma tiegħu sal-aħħar ta’ Diċembru li ġej u se jimla vojt li s’issa tħalla fil-kamp politiku hekk kif sal-lum l-ebda partit ma rrikonoxxa uffiċjalment il-persuni LGBT (Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender). Fuq quddiem nett fuq LGBT Labour hemm Albert Gauci Cunningham, għalliem ta’ 26 sena li sa ftit xhur ilu kien iqis lilu nnifsu Nazzjonalist.

“Jien qatt ma kont membru tal-PN imma kont nikteb favur tiegħu bil-kitbiet regolari fit-Times u l-Independent. Fl-aħħar elezzjoni vvutajt lill-Partit Nazzjonalista imma llum ma rrid nassoċja ruħi bl-ebda mod mal-PN,” jistqarr iż-żgħażugħ f’kummenti lil Illum. “Il-prime mover wara LGBT Labour hu l-mexxej tal-PL Joseph Muscat. Kien hu li mar fuq żewġ kollegi tiegħi. Inħossuna komdi naħdmu fil-Partit Laburista. Dan kien l-ewwel partit li qed jitkellem favur id-drittijiet tagħna fil-miftuħ,” ifisser Gauci Cunningham.

Bħalissa eluf ta’ persuni LGBT qed ikunu avviċinati u mitluba jressqu l-ilmenti tagħhom dwar is-settur. Fost dawn anke persuni fil-media li huma gay.

“Nikkonferma li qed inħejju rapport b’opinjonijiet differenti ta’ persuni LGBT. Dan ir-rapport se nressquh quddiem it-tmexxija tal-PL u quddiem il-konferenza ġenerali,” spjega ż-żgħażugħ. “Joseph Muscat kien l-ewwel bniedem li fil-kampanja tal-elezzjonijiet għall-Parlament Ewropew ħa pożizzjoni ċara favur civil partnership.”

Aktar kmieni din il-ġimgħa l-programm Wiċċ Imb Wiċċ fuq ONE TV tkellem ċar u tond dwar is-sitwazzjoni tal-LGBT f’Malta. F’Malta hu stmat li hawn bejn 25,000 u 40,000 persuna gay. Mitluba tgħid jekk il-Malta Gay Rights Movement jikkunsidrax li jwaqqaf partit politiku għalih, Gabi Calleja, ko-ordinatur tal-moviment qalet li m’hemm l-ebda ħsieb li jsir dan. Mistoqsija liema partit tħoss li hu eqreb id-drittijiet tal-persuni LGBT Calleja ddikjarat li “il-Partit Nazzjonalista ilu ħafna fil-Gvern u ma tantx kien hemm bidliet legali. Kien hemm opportunità u din ma ħaduhiex.”

Monday, 19 October 2009

MaltaToday: When Daddy president knows best

http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2009/10/18/joseph.html
18.10.9 by Joseph Carmel Chetcuti

When traditionalists speak about marriage and the family, they invariably ignore many significant features of these institutions. To state the obvious, marriage is multi-dimensional: it is, amongst others, a contract, a ceremony, an event and, to some but not all Christians, a sacrament.

Marriage as we know it today in Malta and many European countries has had a varied and chequered history. You would have to be historically naïve and mentally challenged to think that today’s traditional marriages have not undergone significant change. Roman men could dissolve marriage at any time. That was their privilege as men, a privilege not extended to women. Before the Justinian Code (527-565), a simple statement that you were married was the only requirement. Catholic marriage celebrated at a Catholic Church before a priest and two witnesses was enforced in 1563 by the Council of Trent. Across Europe, marriages only became a religious event during the eighteenth century.

But traditionalists have a habit of overlooking what does not fit nicely into their view of the world. They are quite discriminating, taking in only those aspects of history that do not disrupt their take on tradition.

Let’s clear the air. Most gay men and lesbians have nothing against marriage, or the family, or the strengthening of the union between a man and a woman and – where relevant – providing necessary governmental and non-governmental support to the couple’s offspring. Most accept that marriage is an important institution to the individuals, their offspring and society … their admiration for this institution may go some way towards explaining why some gay men and lesbians have a desire to marry. Incidentally, many gay and lesbian activists of the 1970s would have been appalled at such a prospect. Many had been pressured into marrying a person of the opposite gender or forced to resist such pressures. Not a few had been picked on, bullied, violated and persecuted on account of their sexual orientation and within the confines of what some think is a venerable institution.

Traditional marriage is in a constant state of flux. What matters nowadays is what’s in the heart and mind not what one has between the legs. Forget all the nonsense about the father being head of the family. Forget about different roles being assigned to the husband and the wife and talk of the principle of complimentarity. Forget about parents ordering their children how they should lead their lives. Forget about children not having rights. Those days of old have long been cast into the dustbin of history.

So it is with some dismay that I read the opening address of Malta’s President on 6 October, 2009. Why, I wondered, is he taking us for fools?

Marriage and the family

The President set himself the unenviable task of identifying what he called “the exact meaning of marriage”. So I waited with baited breath for this presidential revelation. He spotted the clue in a United Nations document (UN Declaration of Human Rights) which led him to conclude that “marriage does not mean relationships which involve two men or two women or a variety of other possibilities.”

This raises the significant legal problem of how to interpret international documents. Do you adopt an activist approach or stick to a strict construction of the original text? A strictly textual interpretation of any international document that ignores today’s world is unlikely to be of any public benefit. Those who drafted the UN Declaration of Human Rights had no idea of the gains to be attained decades later by gay men and lesbians. Any interpretation of any international document has to be interpreted within today’s context. After all, does not Article 1 of the Declaration state that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights? Should not subsequent provisions in the Declaration be interpreted against the general principles of the preamble?

Even so, I am left wondering what to do with polygamous marriages that are legally recognised, under civil law, in Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brunei, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Central African Republic, Comoros, Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, The Gambia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Morocco, Myanmar, Niger, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, UAE, Western Sahara, Yemen, Zambia?

Or how to deal with polygamous marriages that are recognised under customary law as is the case with Botswana, Equatorial Guinea, Lesotho, Liberia, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Swaziland, Zimbabwe?

Or what to make of same-sex marriages that are legally recognised in Belgium, Canada, Netherlands, Norway, South Africa, Spain and Sweden?

Perhaps the President of Malta knows best and he should discard these unions as not complying with the exact meaning of marriage and the family.

What research?

Other droplets of wisdom are thrown in for good measure. Take, for instance, the President’s claim to which he offers no proof that there is less substance abuse, crime, poverty and welfare dependence among young people in married parent families. Quite undaunted, he goes on to assert that “studies have constantly shown that children raised outside marriage suffer disproportionately from physical and mental illness and that they are more likely to drop out of school, abuse drugs or alcohol, engage in or suffer from violence and less likely to attend higher educational institutions.”

What absolute twaddle! What an insult to single parent Maltese families! What a middle class approach in linking good parenthood with higher education!

Is the President seriously putting forward that the children of a middle-class, educated but single parent are more prone to physical and mental illness than children of a poorly educated and badly disadvantaged heterosexual couple! Where is the evidence, Mr President?

Having two bob each way?

The President makes an astonishing somersault. After embarking on the task of isolating the exact meaning and definition of marriage and the family, he rapidly switches his attention to traditional marriage and the traditional family. How this variety of marriage and the family differ from the “exact meaning” of marriage and the family is not all that clear.
What is intriguing is the President’s apparent conclusion that traditional marriage and the traditional family “no longer exist”. The traditional family in Malta, he points out, goes beyond the nuclear family to take in the extended family. In an effort to dig himself out of a hole, he poses an interesting question: whether the term family should be solely applied to a situation where the parents are “officially married”. But the President is eager to avoid political controversy (as if he has not done a good job of it already). He says he does not wish to pre-empt discussion on the topic because his office of president precludes him from entering into the political foray. I wonder whether the office of president also precludes him from standing up for the rights of minorities in Malta including those of gay men and lesbians!

How we change the law
The prospect of the current Maltese government doing anything about gay and lesbian rights is remote. We are tired of Nationalist Party rhetoric that delivers nothing. Gay marriage in Malta is as remote a prospect as having an atheist installed as Malta’s Catholic archbishop. But Maltese society has changed, is changing and will continue to change. It is a pity that many of Malta’s mediocre parliamentarians are behind the eighth ball. Governments of whatever political persuasion will continue to trail behind public opinion because they are devoid of leadership material. So why not take the law into our hands and devise our marriage tradition? Why not draw up binding legal contracts between same-sex couples? Why not make our commitments public? The State will in due course be forced to catch up.
I have to say I was not as annoyed by the President’s speech as some other Maltese gay and lesbian activists. What really appalled me was that the speech was so illogical, so poorly written, so poorly thought out and so ahistorical. That it was an address to the Cana Movement is no excuse for peddling prejudice under the cover of illusory research. I hope it attracts a limited international audience as otherwise we are all so more poorer.

Chetcuti is the author of Il-Ktieb Roza: Dnub, Dizordni u Delitt? (1997) and Queer Mediterranean Memories: Penetrating the Secret History and Silence of Gay and Lesbian Disguise in the Maltese archipelago (2009).

Independent: That wonderful word ‘progressive’

http://www.independent.com.mt/news.asp?newsitemid=95762
18.10.9 by Dr Josie Muscat, leader of Azzioni Nazzjonali

[Excerpt of the article.]

...

The question therefore is whether social democrats can return to their old ways, to that idea that Yelstin described had no place to go to.

Well, that is for social democrats to answer. But one can now see the reason behind the PL’s adoption of “progressive”. At the moment it is simply an appeal to attract to the Labour fold those who want divorce; those who are in a state of cohabitation; the gay community thirsting to apply the word “wedding” to their union; and anybody else with a grudge, real or imagined.

...

MaltaToday: The thin Green line

http://www.maltatoday.com.mt/2009/10/18/interview.html
18.10.9 by Raphael Vassallo

It’s official: MICHAEL BRIGUGLIO will contest the post of AD chairman later this month. But how long will the Green Party remain ‘Green’, if taken over by a self-styled left-wing radical activist?

[Excerpt of the article.]

Once again, divorce is Briguglio’s example of choice. “Joseph Muscat is asserting himself as a progressive liberal, but what is he saying exactly by giving a free vote? ‘I myself am in favour in divorce, but I want to let my MPs decide for themselves’. Again, I admire him for his own views, but at the same time he doesn’t have the courage to take a clear stand. Is this the extent of his political strength? The same is true of other issues, like gay rights. Both Labour and PN now claim to champion gay rights, but what have they done in practice?”

...

Saturday, 17 October 2009

Telegraph: Bosnia-Herzegovina football coach orders players to kiss each other on the lips

16.10.9

The coach of the Bosnia-Herzegovina national football team has ordered players to kiss each other on the lips in order to create a special bond between team mates.

Bosnia's head coach Miroslav Blazevic: Bosnia-Herzegovina football coach orders players to kiss each other on the lips
Bosnia's head coach Miroslav Blazevic Photo: REUTERS

Miroslav Ciro Blazevic - who has Portsmouth star Asmir Begovic in his squad - said: "I take two of my players and tell them, 'Love him! Kiss him!' and he kisses him."

He claimed the unorthodox morale-boosting exercise has already proven successful: Mr Blazevic has taken the squad further than ever before in the World Cup.


"The secret of my success is in a unity of a squad. You can't do anything without an atmosphere in a team," he explained."They I tell them they have to kiss each other straight to the lips," the coach wrote in his column in Croatian news website net.hr.

His revelation came after Vincenzo Santoruvo, the Italian striker, amazed fans by planting a kiss on a team mate's lips after scoring for Serie B club Frosinone.

Friday, 16 October 2009

Peter Tatchell: The global struggle for queer freedom

http://www.petertatchell.net/international/global-struggle-for-queer-freedom.html
[Peter Tatchell is a gay-rights activist and member of the British Green Party.]

Caroline Benn Memorial Lecture 2009

13.10.9 By Peter Tatchell

Most of the world is still living in the homophobic dark ages, but LGBT people are defiant and making gains.

Delivered 13 October 2009 at Bishop Grosseteste University College, Lincoln, UK

It is a very great honour, and joy, to deliver the Caroline Benn Memorial Lecture 2009. Caroline was a friend and comrade. I remember her with much affection. She left us with a fine humanitarian legacy as a leading advocate of comprehensive education and better educational opportunities. She also lives on, in spirit, through her inspiring, passionate support for socialism, trade union rights, women’s equality and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) freedom. She was a true progressive, who dedicated her life, with much honour and nobility, to the upliftment of humanity. I am very proud to have known Caroline, and salute her life and work with this lecture.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people have made great progress in Britain, especially in the last decade. But in large parts of the world, homophobic and transphobic oppression remains rife.

Take Jamaica, a country with which Britain has close ties. It is a parliamentary democracy and a member of the Commonwealth. It is not a police-state dictatorship. Yet male homosexuality is criminalised and punishable with up to 10 years hard labour. Homophobic discrimination and violence is endemic and the government refuses to take any serious action to protect LGBT Jamaicans.

One of my Jamaican colleagues was the AIDS educator and gay rights activist, Steve Harvey. He was a trail-blazer for LGBT people and especially for people with HIV. In late 2005, a gang burst into his home, kidnapped him, took him to a remote place and shot him dead in an execution-style killing.

Soon afterwards, Nokia Cowen drowned when he jumped into Kingston harbour to escape a violent homophobic mob that had chased him through town. A few weeks later, Jamaica’s trade ambassador, Peter King, was found dead with his throat slashed and multiple stab wounds. Then there was the gruesome discovery of the mutilated bodies of two lesbians, who were found dumped in a septic pit behind the house they shared. All these horrific, homophobic killings happened just weeks apart.

Only this summer, John Terry, the British consul in Jamaica, was brutally mudered in his own home by a killer who left a note abusing him as a “batty man” (Jamaican patois slang for faggot), and warning that the same fate would happen to “all gays.”

Homophobic violence is routine in Jamaica, according to Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. LGBT victims of hate crimes seldom get justice. Police sometimes ignore anti-gay attacks and some officers have been known to abuse, threaten, beat and arrest gay-bashing victims. The perpetrators of homophobic violence are rarely put on trial and convicted.

What is happening in Jamaica is symptomatic of a much wider homophobic persecution.

Around 80 countries continue to outlaw homosexuality, with penalties ranging from one year’s jail to life imprisonment. Just under half these countries are former British colonies and current members of the Commonwealth – a community of nations supposedly committed to uphold democracy and human rights. The anti-gay laws in these Commonwealth nations were originally legislated by the British government in the nineteenth century during the period of colonial rule. They were never repealed when these nations won their independence from Britain.

As well as homophobic laws, British imperalism imposed homophobic prejudice, by means of the fire and brimstone Christian fundamentalist missionaries who sought to “civilise” the so-called “heathen” peoples of the colonies. Some civilisation! The British conquerers instilled in these countries a homophobic hatred that lives on to this day, which is wrecking the lives of LGBT people.

Homophobia is particularly extreme in the Islamist states that impose the death penalty for same-sex relations, including Saudi Arabia, Iran, Mauritania, Sudan and the Yemen. In some regions of other countries, such as Nigeria and Pakistan, Sharia law is enforced and lesbians and gays can be stoned to death.

Amid this gloom, last December something truly remarkable and historic happened. Sixty-six countries signed a United Nations’ statement calling for the universal decriminalisation of homosexuality and condemning homophobic discrimination and violence. This was the first time the UN General Assembly had addressed the issue of LGBT human rights. Previously, all resolutions that attempted to get UN committees to endorse LGBT equality had been blocked by an unholy alliance of the Vatican and Islamic states.

Despite this breakthrough statement, even today no international human rights convention specifically acknowledges sexual rights as human rights. None explicitly guarantee equality and non-discrimination to LGBT people. The right to love a person of one’s choice is absent from global humanitatrian statutes. Relationships between partners of the same sex are not officially recognised in any international law. There is nothing in the many UN conventions that concretely guarantees LGBT equality and prohibits homophobic discrimination

Nor are specific LGBT rights and protections included within the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It is only in the last decade or so that the ECHR’s equality and privacy clauses been interpreted to outlaw discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation.

In the late 1990s, British LGBT citizens filed appeals at the European Court of Human Rights, against the UK’s then discriminatory, homophobic laws. They cited the ECHR’s right-to-privacy and anti-discrimination clauses to successfully challenge centuries-old anti-gay UK legislation. These victories at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg forced the British government to repeal the unequal age of consent for gay men, discriminatory sexual offences laws and the ban on lesbians and gays serving in the armed forces.

ECHR judgments also successfully pressured Romania and Cyprus to decriminalise homosexuality. The ECHR has thus played an important role in challenging and overturning homophobic legislation.

Of the 192 member states of the UN, only a handful have repealed all major legal inequalities against LGBT people: including the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, France, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Canada, New Zealand and, more recently, the UK.

Britain’s record was not always so positive. In the 1980s, the UK had a greater number of homophobic laws than the then communist-ruled Soviet Union. Nowadays, we are one of the most progressive European countries. We’ve gone from zero to hero in a mere decade.

In large parts of the world, however, homophobia is still rampant. Hundreds of millions of LGBT people are forced to hide their sexuality; fearing ostracism, harassment, discrimination, imprisonment, torture and even murder.

Some of this violence is perpetrated by vigilantes, including right-wing death squads in countries like Mexico and Brazil. They justify the killing of queers as “social cleansing.”
Other homophobic persecution is officially encouraged and enforced by governments, police, courts, media and religious leaders.

This persecution is happening even in Europe and the US. In echoes of Margaret Thatcher’s notorious Section 28, Lithuania has just passed a new law banning the so-called “promotion” of homosexuality. The US maintains a federal ban on same-sex marriage and openly LGBT people are not allowed to serve in the armed forces.

Homophobic injustice is rife in much of Africa. Cameroonian gay men have been arrested and jailed in the last year, without any clear evidence that they had same-sex relations.

In Nigeria, in 2005, six teenage lesbians, one only 12 years old, were ordered to be punished with an agonising 90 lashes for consensual same-sex relations. Last year, a Nigerian gay pastor and another Christian gay activist were forced to flee the country after threats to kill them.

In Nepal, there is a long, sad history of transgender people being regularly beaten, raped, arrested and detained without trial.

Government ministers in Namibia, echoing the homo-hatred of President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, have denounced lesbians and gays as unAfrican, as traitors and as spreaders of HIV/AIDS.

In the new post-Saddam Hussein “democratic” Iraq, the rise of Islamist fundamentalism has led to the creeping, de facto imposition of Sharia law, with deadly consequences for LGBTs - and for women who refuse to be veiled. Iraqis who murder LGBT people to defend the “honour” of their family escape punishment. The US and UK-backed Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani has issued a fatwa calling for the execution of lesbians and gays in the “worst, most severe way possible.” Islamist death squads of the Badr and Sadr militias are assassinating LGBT people in their homes and streets, with impunity.

Russian religious leaders have united to orchestrate a campaign of hatred against the LGBT community. The Orthodox Church has denounced homosexuality as a "sin which destroys human beings and condemns them to a spiritual death." The Chief Mufti of Russia’s Muslims, Talgat Tajuddin, says gay campaigners “should be bashed…Sexual minorities have no rights, because they have crossed the line. Alternative sexuality is a crime against God.” Russian Chief Rabbi, Berl Lazar, has condemned gay pride parades as “a blow for morality," adding that there is no right to “sexual perversions."

The Mayor of Moscow, Yuri Luzhkov, has denounced gay people as “satanic.” He has repeatedly banned Gay Pride marches. This violates Russia’s constitution and law, which guarantee freedom of expression and the right to peaceful protest. LGBT people who have attempted to march have been violently arrested.

The Iranian persecution of LGBTs continues unabated. Twenty-two year old Amir was entrapped by via a gay dating website. The person he arranged to meet turned out to be a member of the morality police. Amir was jailed, tortured and sentenced to 100 lashes, which caused him to lose consciousness and left his whole back covered in huge bloody welts. He is just one of many Iranian LGBTs who have been subjected to lashings, torture, imprisonment and, sometimes, execution.

The western-backed regime in Saudi Arabia retains the death penalty - usually beheading - for homosexuality. In early 2006, its neighbour, the United Arab Emirates, imposed six years jail on 11 gay men arrested at a private party. They were not imprisoned for sexual acts, but merely for being gay and attending a gay social gathering.

The election of a right-wing, Catholic fundamentalist government in Poland in 2005 resulted in the abolition of the government office for combating discrimination against women and LGBTs. The same year, the Mayor of Poznan banned the Gay Pride parade. LGBT people marched anyway. Over 60 were arrested. Many more were injured after the police failed to protect them from the violence of far right counter-protesters.

Uganda is gripped by the state-sponsored victimisation of LGBT people. Typical is the fate of gay rights activist Kizza Musinguzi. He was jailed in 2004 and subjected to four months of forced labour, water torture, beatings and rape. Another gay Ugandan, Isaac K, narrowly escaped an attempted summary execution by a homophobic mob acting with the connivance of local government officials.

Those who speak out against anti-gay violence risk dire consequences. Bishop Christopher Ssenyonjo was dismissed by the Church of Uganda for defending the human rights of LGBT people.

In recent years, the Ugandan government has passed a law banning same-sex marriage, fined Radio Simba for broadcasting a discussion of LGBT issues, and expelled a UN AIDS agency director for meeting with gay activists.

LGBT people have nevertheless made huge strides forward in many parts of the world. A mere four decades ago, “queers” were almost universally seen as mad, bad and sad. Same-sex relations were deemed a sin, a crime and a sickness. It was in only 1991 that the World Health Organisation declassified homosexuality as an illness, and that Amnesty International agreed to campaign for LGBT human rights and to adopt jailed LGBTs as prisoners of conscience.

Nowadays, the global tide is shifting in favour of LGBT emanicipation. An out gay man and LGBT activist, Sunil Pant, was elected to the parliament of Nepal in the post-monarchy elections. In 1999, Georgina Beyer took office in New Zealand, becoming the world’s first openly transgender MP. Uruguay, formerly a military dictatorship, this summer lifted its prohibition on gay servicemen and women. The Lebanon has made history by becoming the first Arab Middle East nation to allow the open, legal establishment of an LGBT welfare and human rights group, Helem.

While fundamentalist religion is still a major threat to LGBT equality, we also have our allies in many faiths. The anti-aparheid hero, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, has compared homophobia to racism, and described the battle for LGBT freedom as the moral equivalent of the fight against apartheid.

Six countries now outlaw sexual orientation discrimination in their constitutions: South Africa (1996), Fiji (1997), Ecuador (1998), Switzerland (2000), Sweden (2003) and Portugal (2004).

In almost every country on earth, there are LGBT freedom movements - some open, others clandestine.

For the first time ever, countries like the Philippines, Estonia, Lebanon, Columbia, Russia, Sri Lanka, and China are hosting LGBT conferences and Pride celebrations. Via the internet and pop culture, LGBT people in small towns in Ghana, Peru, Uzbekistan, Kuwait, Vietnam, St Lucia, Palestine, Fiji and Kenya are connecting with the worldwide LGBT community. The struggle for LGBT liberation has gone global. We’ve begun to roll back the homophobia of centuries. Bravo!

Postscript:

LGBT movements worldwide are urging every government to legislate LGBT equality and human rights and to tackle homophobic and transphobic prejudice, harassment, discriminatiion and violence. These demands include:

1) Decriminalise same-sex relations; in particular, abolish the death penalty and flogging.

2) Allow the formation of LGBT organisations and the advocacy of LGBT human rights; and consult with these organisations and their spokespeople when drafting new laws and policies.

3) Outlaw discrimination and harassment based on sexual orientation and gender identity, in employment, housing, education, advertising, health-care and the provision of goods and services, such as hotel accommodation and service in bars and restaurants.

4) Establish an equal age of consent for heterosexual and homosexual acts.

5) Grant legal recognition and rights to same-sex partners; either via civil marriage or civil partnerships / civil unions.

6) Teach gay-inclusive sex and civic education in schools, in order to challenge homophobia and promote understanding and acceptance of LGBT people.

7) Crackdown on homophobic hate crimes, to protect LGBTs from hate-motivated violence.

8) Revise all laws to make them sexuality-neutral, so there is no legislative differentiation between heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality, and so that heterosexual, lesbian, gay and bisexual people have the same rights and responsibilities in law.

9) Provide access for same-sex couples to fertility treatment and give them the right to foster and adopt children.

10) Offer gay-inclusive HIV education and prevention campaigns, non-discriminatory HIV care and support services, and LGBT access to free or low-cost condoms.

Onward, upward and forward to queer liberation worldwide.
* Peter Tatchell has campaigned for LGBT human rights for over 40 years. For more information about his campaigns and to make a donation: www.petertatchell.net

Click here to return to the International Index

Thursday, 15 October 2009

Wiċċ Imb Wiċċ: Gaby Calleja, Malta Gay Rights Movement

Wiċċ Imb Wiċċ: TVM 12.10.9: Julia Farrugia tintervista lil Gaby Calleja, MGRM

Open the following link with media player or real player:

mms://wms.di-ve.com/ONE/WiccImbWicc/091012.wmv


---

DI-VE.com: Julia Farrugia Wiċċ Imb Wiċċ with Gabi Calleja


http://www.di-ve.com/Default.aspx?ID=71&Action=1&NewsId=64879&currentPage=2

Tonight Wiċċ Imb Wiċċ delves into gay rights issues.

Quizzed by Julia Farrugia Gabi Calleja, co-ordinator of the Malta Gay Rights Movement, answers the most intriguing questions.

Which political party is more likely to favour gay issues? With more than 22,000 gay people in Malta, is it high time that a new political gay-friendly party is set up?

Wiċċ Imb Wiċċ is produced by 24seven Media. Research by Tonio Bonello.

Previous editions of Wiċċ Imb Wiċċ can be viewed through di-ve.com’s on-demand media library.

L-Orizzont: L-Universitarji favur il-kondoms, il-koabitazzjoni u d-divorzju

http://www.l-orizzont.com/news.asp?newsitemid=57406
15.10.9 minn Victor Vella

“Irridu magna tal-kondom fl-Università għax din turi l-bżonn li ssir distinzjoni bejn il-Knisja u l-Università,” tgħid Gaby Scicluna li tirrappreżenta lill-Assoċjazzjoni tal-Istudenti tal-Mediċina. Studenti oħrajn isostnu li l-kondoms illum issib tixtrihom mis-supermarket u għalhekk ma jaraw xejn ħażin li jkun hemm magna tal-kondoms fl-Università.

Studenti jsostnu li fil-fatt kien hemm diversi kumpaniji li biex ibiegħu l-prodotti tagħhom lill-istudenti jew iwasslu messaġġ, qassmu kondoms bla ħlas.

Mill-banda l-oħra l-istuden- ti msieħba f’organizzazzjonijiet Kattoliċi jsostnu li l-Università tmur biex titgħallem u mhux biex tagħmel is-sess.

Fr Ray Zammit mill-Fakultà tat-Teoloġija enfasizza li mbilli l-maġġoranza tal-istudenti jridu l-kondoms fl-Università, ma jfissirx li din hi deċiżjoni tajba.

F’laqgħa pjuttost taħraq fuq il-Campus tal-Università, ġie diskuss stħarriġ li sar mill-organizzazzjoni MOVE, organizzazzjoni li ddeskriviet lilha nfisha bħala bi prinċipji progressivi. L-għaqda rnexxielha toħloq dibattitu tajjeb ilbieraħ fl-Università, fejn uriet ukoll fejn qed iħabbat il-polz tal-istudenti, b’mod partikolari fuq id-divorzju, il-koabitazzjoni u l-magna tal-kondoms.

Wara d-diskussjoni, ħafna studenti baqgħu jiddibattu bejniethom, fejn fost uħud minn-hom spikka l-argument li l-Knisja m’għandhiex tidħol dwar x’jagħmel individwu fil-ħajja privata tiegħu. B’diversi studenti minn għaqdiet konservattivi preżenti, id-dibattitu kien wieħed sħun. Ma setax jonqos li l-għaqda MOVE tiġi mistoqsija jekk hix xi fergħa tal-Partit Laburista, minħabba l-ideat progressivi.

MOVE għamlitha ċara li hi għaqda indipendenti u m’għan-dhiex x’taqsam mal-Partit Laburista u li jinteressaha hu li tmexxi ’l quddiem ideat progressivi. Fi stħarriġ li sar minn Vincent Marmara, irriżulta li pparteċipaw fih 395 student. Minn dawn kien hemm 42 fil-mija tas-sess maskili u 58 fil-mija tas-sess femminili.

Rigward id-divorzju naraw li 54.9 fil-mija tal-istudenti li ħadu sehem fl-istħarriġ, wieġbu li jaqblu li d-divorzju għandu jidħol f’Malta, 32.7 fil-mija kie-nu kontra d-divorzju waqt li 12.4 fil-mija kienu għadhom indeċiżi. Fejn jidħol l-abort, naraw li hawnhekk is-sitwazzjoni tinqaleb. Kien hemm 78.7 fil-mija li huma kontra l-abort, 14.4 fil-mija li huma favur, waqt li 6.8 fil-mija huma indeċiżi.

L-istħarriġ tratta wkoll iż-żwieġ ċivili għall-persuni omosesswali. Minn dan jirriżulta li 50 fil-mija ta’ dawk li ħadu sehem jaqblu li l-omosesswali għandhom jingħataw id-dritt ċivili li jiżżewġu f’Malta, 35.2 fil-mija huma kontra dan id-dritt, waqt li 16.2 fil-mija huma indeċiżi fuq dan il-każ. Fuq il-koabitazzjoni u r-rikonoxximent tagħha fil-liġi Maltija, l-istudenti Universitarji wrew li 69.9 fil-mija jaqblu ma’ dan. Kien hemm biss 13.4 fil-mija li ma qablux waqt li 16.7 fil-mija kienu indeċiżi.

Fil-kwistjoni tal-magna tal-kondoms fl-Università naraw li maġġoranza qawwija tal-istudenti jaqblu li din tkun introdotta. Fil-fatt 70.6 fil-mija qalu li jaqblu li jkun hemm magna tal-kondoms, waqt li 18.2 fil-mija qalu li huma kontra u 11.1 fil-mija ma kellhomx pożizzjoni. Jidher li fost l-istudenti tas-sess maskili kien hemm persentaġġ ogħla ta’ qbil. Anke fuq il-‘morning after pill’ naraw li 49.1 fil-mija tal-istudenti Universitarji qegħdin jaqblu waqt li 35.9 fil-mija ma jaqblux. 14.9 fil-mija huma in-deċiżi. MOVE għamlitha ċara li minkejja li kkummissjonat dan l-istħarriġ ma jfissirx li hi taqbel ma kulma joħroġ minnu. Spjegat li MOVE hi favur l-introduzzjoni tad-divorzju, kontra l-abort, favur li l-koabitazzjoni tkun rikonoxxuta, favur li tiddaħħal magna tal-kondoms u favur li l-omosesswali jingħataw dritt għal żwieġ ċivili.

L-organizzazzjoni MOVE għamlitha ċara li hi se taħdem biex l-istudenti jkollhom magna tal-kondoms fl-Università. Min-naħa tiegħu, Fr Ray Zammit wissa lill-istudenti li l-kon-traċettivi mhumiex mija fil-mija siguri u għalhekk dan se jwassal għal attività sesswali riskjuża.

Independent: Sex and relationships very high on university students’ agendas

15.10.9 by Annaliza Borg

University students agree on the introduction of divorce, cohabitation, condom machines on campus, same sex marriages and the legalisation of the morning-after pill, a survey compiled by MOVE, a progressive students' organisation, concluded.

The majority of students on campus, however, oppose abortion and its introduction in Malta.

MOVE believes that students' views and opinions are not well represented in social dialogue. It therefore seeks to encourage more debates among students on political and social issues. A random sample of 395 Maltese university students of different ages and course years was taken.

The long drawn-out issue of having condom machines installed on campus grounds was brought up and 70.6 per cent of students think these are necessary. Nonetheless, 18.2 per cent are against their introduction and 11.1 per cent are undecided.

Again, the absolute majority, 69.9 per cent, believe that cohabitation should be recognised by the law. Only 13.4 disagree while 16.7 are undecided.

When questioned about the introduction of divorce, 54.9 per cent of students expressed their agreement. 32.7 per cent are against it while 12.4 per cent are undecided.

Not as many students agree with the legalisation of the morning-after pill and, while 49.1 per cent of students are in favour of the matter, 35.9 per cent oppose it, and 14.9 per cent are undecided.

Slightly less than 50 per cent of respondents agree that gays and lesbians should be given the right to marry. Meanwhile, 35.2 per cent are against same sex marriages and 16.2 per cent are undecided.

The vast majority of university students – 78.7 per cent – is against the introduction of abortion in Malta. Only 14.4 per cent are in favour of its introduction while 6.8 per cent are undecided.

Little statistical difference was observed between males and females. However, more males are opposed to the introduction of same sex marriages. There is no difference depending on the students’ course year and their opinion.

MOVE said that the data collected may not reflect its views and beliefs, yet these opinions will serve as a platform for the necessary discussion on campus.

The survey was conducted by Vincent Marmara, president of the Malta Statistics and Operational Research Organisation (MSTOR).

Di-ve: What's on [ILGA Conference in Malta]


What's on

Start date10/29/2009 9:30:00 AM
End date11/1/2009 6:00:00 PM
TitleILGA-Europe conference (LGBT)
Description

From Thursday, 29 October to Sunday, 1 November the 13th Annual Conference of ILGA-Europe will be held in Malta.

The annual conference allows LGBT activists from across Europe to discuss common problems and challenges, in the hope of tackling discrimination and advancing equality and human rights for LGBT people, as well as celebrating achievements and sketching future projects, strategies and tactics.

This year’s conference is titled, “Overcoming Religious and Cultural Barriers to LGBT Equality”.

Speakers include;
Ulrike Lunacek, Member of the European Parliament, Vladimir Luxuria, former member of the Italian Parliament and a journalist, Juris Cālītis, pastor of the Anglican Church of Latvia. Francis Agius, head of Maltese delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Frits Huffnagel, Alderman of The Hague City Council.

The theme of the conference will be explored through over 30 different workshops covering, religion, culture and European policy, combating hate crimes, asylum and transgender rights. Officials from the European Union, the OSCE, Scottish and Dutch governments and academics from Spain and UK have confirmed their contribution to these workshops.

For more information contact juris@ilga-europe.org