/* Written 11:11 pm Dec 13, 1992 by queerplanet@igc.apc.org in igc:queerplanet */ /* ---------- "Queer Planet v1n1 addendum 1" ---------- */ A Human Rights Report by Queer Planet The Human Rights Impact of State Measures Which Restrict Protections Based on Sexual Orientation December 6, 1992 By Kim Grittner Queer Planet, Executive Director Part 1. Background A far-right political group in Oregon, (a western state in the United States) named the Oregon Citizens Alliance (OCA) succeeded in putting on the November 1992 ballot in the state of Oregon, "Measure 9," which, if it had been passed by popular vote, would have amended the State Constitution to strip away varies constitutional and human rights from the estimated 10% of the Oregon population who are lesbian or gay. A wide coalition of Civil Rights leaders, spiritual leaders and politicians came out against Measure 9 in Oregon, and the "No on 9 Campaign: Campaign for a Hate Free Oregon" spearheaded efforts against this measure. As Oregon Governor Barbara Roberts said, in a speech invoking the Holocaust, Measure 9 is "a cancer in Oregon's soul."2 Fortunately, this measure was defeated by a margin of 55% to 45% of the vote. In Colorado, "Amendment 2" which was aimed at revoking city laws protecting against discrimination based on sexual orientation was also put on the ballot. "Amendment 2" passed by 53% of the popular vote. Lesbian and gay activists in Colorado report a corresponding "rash of gay-bashing incidents, ranging from verbal abuse to bomb threats."3 Appalled by the Colorado amendment, many Gay and Lesbian groups around the nation have called for a boycott of Colorado until this measure is overturned or repealed. A legal challenge has been mounted against Measure 2 in Colorado. However, if upheld, Measure 2 would prevent any town or other governmental subdivision to ever be allowed to vote on the matter of non-discrimination for gay and lesbian people. This measure would have the additional effect of negating existing laws which have already been enacted in Aspen, Boulder and Denver. The Colorado measure was spearheaded by a Colorado Springs-based group called "Colorado for Family Values" (CFV), which is an offshoot of the "Traditional Values Coalition," a national anti-gay organization based in Anaheim, CA. Member of CFV's executive and advisory boards represent fundamentalist, right-wing groups such as the TVC, Focus on the Family, Concerned Women for America, Summit Ministries and Eagle Forum. What is the impetus behind these repressive measures? Who are the reactionary forces behind them and what threat do they pose to Democracy in the United States? These are some of the larger questions that will be explored in this report. Both the Oregon and Colorado measures are designed to permanently legalize discrimination against gays and lesbians, and both measures are backed by the same national right-wing forces, like Pat Robertson and the "Christian Coalition". A San Francisco news report description of the Oregon measure sums this up as follows: "The measure is part of the resurgence of America's religious right, whose anti-gay message was proclaimed at the Republican National Convention in August. It also represents a retrenchment against the political gains of the gay rights movement: 19 states, including California, and 112 cities and counties have some sort of law protecting gays and lesbians from discrimination."2 The group sponsoring Measure 9, (The Oregon Citizens Alliance or OCA) grew out of the 1986 Senatorial campaign of Republican Joe Lutz. Lutz, along with campaign aide Lon Mabon, founded the OCA in 1987. Currently, Mabon heads the OCA out of offices in Wilsonville with his wife, parents and children. The OCA claims to have a mailing list of over 160,000 with 3,000 members across the state. The OCA has close ties to other right-wing groups around the country and received significant contributions to pass Measure 8 from Pat Robertson's Christian Coalition. 2,4,5 The OCA officially became the Oregon affiliate of the Christian Coalition in October of 1991. In November of 1991, the OCA was represented by a sixteen member delegation at the Coalition's "Road to Victory" Conference in Virginia Beach, Virginia. Speakers at this event included Vice President of the United States Dan Quayle, U.S. Congressman Bill Dannemeyer, Gary Bauer, president of the Family Research Council, anti-feminist activist and Eagle Forum founder Phyllis Schlafly, and Robertson himself. A man by the name of Billy McCormick was seated to the right of Robertson. McCormick, who has gone on record as a supporter of the "ex"-klansman David Duke, was described as the man who inspired Robertson to found the Coalition. 6.36 Pat Robertson is a nationally know "religious leader" in the United States, and has rallied against homosexuals and in favor of this measure and others like it around the country. He has further voiced his opinions through the national and international media. Robertson also appears frequently on a religious television network, and gained much attention in the summer of 1992 when he was given a prime time speakers slot at the United States Republican Party Convention, which was televised around the world. As reported in "TIME" magazine, this convention "got a boost" from "prominent televangelists like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell," and reported that prior to giving a prime-time speech, Robertson "revved up ultraconservatives outside the convention hall." This article then continues to report that: "At a Houston rally, young zealots distributed handbills denouncing "queers" and "feminazis" as Robertson berated the Democrats for failing to mention God in their platform."7 Also prominent at the 1992 Republican Convention was Pat Buchanan, (another nationally known anti-gay figure) who called for a "religious war" to save "traditional values." Buchanan publicly expressed his religious intolerance of homosexuals at this convention and was greeted with wild applause by the audience. At one point he strongly rallied against the agenda of a political opponent (Bill Clinton) which he decried for including "homosexual rights," and then said, "that's not the kind of change America wants. It is not the kind of change America needs. And it is not the kind of change we can tolerate in a nation that we still call God's country."8 During a live television interview on the U.S. television network "C-SPAN" on November 1, 1992, Buchanan claimed that this speech was cleared by President Bush. He said, "It was cleared by the President himself. We showed it to him." In fact, President Bush offered considerable political credibility to these right-wing fanatics by granting both Robertson and Buchanan prime-time speaking slots and by approving of their dogma of religious intolerance. Soon after the convention, George Bush also echoed one of Robertson's criticisms, by condemning his main political opponent (Bill Clinton) for failing to include "God" in his party's (The Democratic Party) political platform.10,11 In fact, the religious right has heavily infiltrated much of the U.S. Republican Party, including the National decision-making apparatus; and had a major role in writing the 1992 Republican Platform. The Buchanan forces were particularly influential in the drafting of this document.9 Although public opposition to the measure in Oregon was widespread on a state-wide level, and included members of the two largest political parties, public opposition by national political figures, particularly within the Republican party was sadly lacking. The close association which high level officials like Vice President Quayle have to Pat Robertson would suggest much support for these measures. Instead of disavowing the religious intolerance that the Republicans engaged in during their 1992 convention, Dan Quayle has echoed what right-wing World War II revisionists say when they claim that "the holocaust never happened." On November 5, 1992, when asked by syndicated columnist Cal Thomas, "Was the GOP convention, the way it was handled, a mistake?" Quayle responded, "No. This is just the liberal media ranting and raving about something that never really happened. Traditional values are important. Family values are important..."12 Given the support, involvement and association of political figures at the highest level of the United States federal government with those leading this movement of hatred and intolerance, the immediate and extreme danger which this movement poses to the human and civil rights of United States Citizens is clearly evident. The remainder of this report will further document, in detail, some specific examples of how society has been injured by this threat to liberty, freedom and democracy itself. Part 2. Repressive Measures and a Growing Climate of Fear, Hatred and Intolerance The "No on 9 Campaign" charges that "Measure 9 fostered a climate of Hate," and points out that in September of 1991, after the Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon warned that the OCA initiative "will exacerbate the fear and violence toward the gay and lesbian community," a few months later an HIV center operated by Ecumenical Ministries was vandalized -itself the victim of a hate crime. The No on 9 Campaign office was also burglarized and ransacked. Hate crimes based on sexual orientation in Oregon are increasing at an alarming rate - more than doubling in number each year.13 In September of 1992, two people in Oregon have died as the result of a firebomb attack, which is strongly suspected to be a hate-motivated crime, directed against a gay man and a lesbian. Four neo-Nazi skinheads have been arrested in connection with this incident. Brian Mock was one of the two killed in this attack. Approximately three weeks prior to the firebombing that killed him, skinheads beat Brian Mock so severely that "he would have required reconstructive surgery, had he lived," according to Martin Hiraga of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. This gang of 10-20 skinhead youths, then continued to harass Mock nightly, yelling eptithets and throwing objects at the boarding house where he lived with 11 other people. The other victim killed was Hattie Mae Cohens, a black lesbian who lived in the same boarding house as Mock and who had begun protecting him against the skinheads harassment, according to Martin Hiraga. The fatal attack occurred at 3:18 a.m., Sunday, September 27. The skinheads were again harassing the occupants of the boarding house, Hiraga says, shouting insults like "nigger dyke," when someone threw a molotov cocktail into the house. According to a report by the Associated Press(AP) Cohens died in the fire. According to Hiraga, the other occupants of the house were unable to rescue Mock, because he was so severely injured from the beating he had received earlier at the hands of the skinheads. Mock died of burns five hours after the firebombing.14 In Douglas County, Oregon a group of rural Women were repeatedly harassed and terrorized by neo-Nazis. On July 18, 1992, two large sticks and a number seven pool ball were found inexplicably stuffed into their rural mailbox a mile and a half from the main house. On July 27, a note in the mailbox was left which read, "Lezzy Queer Nigger-Jews Die Young!!" The note was made with a stencil and red marker, with a strange smiley face design and swastikas all over it. One of the women told the San Francisco Gay Newspaper "The Bay Area Reporter," that, "From that day on there were daily harassments and threats --calls to the house and signs of them coming closer and closer to the house." She indicated that they lived remotely, and had no houses or neighbors nearby. She also stated that, "Some women were followed down the road by a truck -- a friend who came to visit and give support was followed home and found her headlights smashed the following morning." The women then received a second note in the mailbox which said, "Hey Nigger-Jew We Are Coming To Get You!!! We Are [swastika] Power. We Are Watching YOU!!!" The note, was illustrated with swastikas and eerie smiley faces, as was the previous one. After reporting the written threats and the telephone calls to the local police, the women described the police response as one that made them "feel even more isolated and unsafe," and were unsure as to whether or not the police reported the death threats received in the mailbox to the postal authorities or whether reports had been passed on to the Federal Bureau of Investigation based on civil rights violations. One of the officers was of the opinion that the threats possibly came from 'a rejected lesbian.' A third death threat was delivered on a road, closer to the house, and then, says one of the victims, "...after the fourth death threat was found they painted a swastika on the door of the farmhouse." On August 3, 1992 starting at 9:20 p.m. the women heard noises and yells from the wooded area bordering the road. At 9:30, Ruth grabbed a rifle and left the house to investigate. Six shots were fired at her by three men standing in the trees. She was not injured. Ruth fired back at flashes in the dark. The women then packed their belongings in terror and fled to a "safe house" in Roseburg, Oregon. A few hours later they found a note telling them that they had been traced. Again they fled, this time to Eugene, Oregon, where a note was slipped under their door reading, "You Are Dead Jew Bitch!!! We Are [swastika] Power." They then fled south to the San Francisco, California Bay Area where they remain in hiding.15 In an article by Jim Hunger in the October issue of "just out," witnesses and a victim describe incidents in August, 1992 of Portland Police officers beating gay men in a city park. In one incident, Arleen Curths, who lives across the street from the park, reported that: "...she was awakened by somebody outside her home screaming for help as he was being beaten by a group of six men. Noting the time, she called 911 and was put on hold for five minutes while the beating continued. 'I thought he would be dead by the time someone answered,' she said. When she asked the dispatcher to send the police out, she was told that the men doing the beating were the police. 'They looked and acted like goons,' she said."16 Those on the front lines against repressive measures (like Measure 9) have tried to point out the severe dangers they pose to the general public; though many people, (including some members of the press) seemed unable to understand that these objections, (which have included comparing the CFV/OCA/Christian Coalition to Nazis) were accurate and relevant, and were not being made merely to emphasize a position. For example, Oregon Governor Barbara Roberts spoke out against Measure 9, saying, "Literally, almost like Nazi Germany, if we sit idly by while one group of people is discriminated against, then we risk that each one of us, whatever group we belong to, may be next." In response to her speech, "The Oregonian" columnist Phil Stanford, in the context of opposing the ballot measure, made reference to "frantic do-gooders" who "seem to think that the best way to combat Measure 9 is to invoke the terrors of Nazi Germany." There is a vast difference, he said, between "killing six million Jews and Gypsies, and requiring the state not to promote homosexuality. One is deadly, the other mischievious."17 The San Francisco Chronicle reported that "both sides are using apocalyptic language to drive their point home," and goes on to say that: "Gay rights advocates compare what is happening to the situation of Jews in Nazi Germany and to the 'ethnic cleansing' taking place in the former Yugoslavia."11 While it is true that many people have made ridicules and unfair comparisons of varies persons and groups to "Hitler and Nazism" over the years, it should also be noted that comparing the rise of Nazism to a contemporary movement which "lawfully strips away the rights of free citizens and dehumanizes them; and censors and destroys books by and about the group being persecuted" is completely accurate, and should be acknowledged as such. For those who believe that the prospect of the CFV/OCA and the "Christian Coalition" succeeding in their anti-democracy agenda is nil, consider this fact: the Colorado measure did pass (though it has been legally challenged in court) and the OCA earlier passed a similar measure in the city of Springfield Oregon. The Springfield measure passed in the primary election of 1992, and shortly afterwards, the "No on 9 Campaign" reported that: "Within days of the Springfield Ordinance's passage, the OCA moved to investigate and censor the holdings in the Springfield public library. Then the OCA declared that the City's participation in organizing a regional meeting of the Northwest Coalition Against Malicious Harassment violates the Springfield Ordinance because the conference includes two workshops regarding homosexuality. We've heard that the OCA is planning now to sue the City of Springfield for their participation in the conference."1 In September 1992, the Corvallis-Benton County Library in Oregon experienced the destruction of four books in their collection about lesbian and gay issues. The books were ripped cut and mangled. One had been flushed in a toilet. Library Board Chairman Thomas McClintock commented on the vandalism, "The destruction of books does violence to the very purpose of a library: to make available printed and other materials for the enlightenment and pleasure of its users."18 Springfield resident Jean Marchant has been repeatedly taunted and spat upon in the street since the campaign began. On one occasion she was cursed and then told by a man, "We don't want you in Springfield." Her partner Sandy Shirley, one of Springfields few open gays, who has appeared on "Donahue" and network TV news shows said she got a phone call in September 1992 from a man who said: "If you don't like what people voted in, then get out of town."2,11 Despite the failure by some to fully grasp the full implications of Measure 9, Oregon's major newspapers have made an effort to warn the public about the dangers that Measure 9 poses to all Oregonians. As was stated in the May 28, 1992 addition of the "East Oregonian": "It is no surprise that the Oregon Citizens Alliance anti-homosexuality initiative in Springfield has quickly led to an attempt to censor reading material deemed inappropriate by self-proclaimed morality police. After all, a limit on freedom of speech is at the heart of the OCA's campaign of hate. "And if you think that only homosexuals should be worried about the OCA's attack on this most precious American right--think again."1 Part 3. Full Text of the OCA's Ballot Measure 9 A copy of the Measure 9 follows 19: Ballot Title Amends Constitution: Government cannot facilitate, must discourage homosexuality, other "behaviors." Question: Shall Constitution be amended to require that all governments discourage homosexuality, other listed "behaviors," and not facilitate or recognize them? Summary: Amends Oregon Constitution. All governments in Oregon may not use their monies or properties to promote, encourage or facilitate homosexuality, pedophilia, sadism, or masochism. All level of government, including public education systems, must assist in setting a standard for Oregon's youth which recognizes that these "behaviors" are "abnormal, wrong, unnatural and perverse" and that they are to be discouraged and avoided. State may not recognize this conduct under "sexual orientation" or "sexual preference" labels, or through "quotas, minority status, affirmative action, or similar concepts." An Act Be it enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: Paragraph I. The Constitution of the State of Oregon is amended by creating a new section to be added to and made a part of Article I and to read: Section 41 (1) This state shall not recognize any categorical provision such as "sexual orientation," "sexual preference," and similar phrases that includes homosexuality, pedophilia, sadism or masochism. Quotas, minority status, affirmative action, or any similar concepts, shall not apply to these forms of conduct, nor shall government promote these behaviors. (2) State, regional and local governments and their properties and monies shall not be used to promote, encourage, or facilitate homosexuality, pedophilia, sadism or masochism. (4) State, regional and local governments and their departments, agencies and other entities including specifically the State Department of Higher Education and public schools, shall assist in setting a standard for Oregon's youth that recognizes homosexuality, pedophilia, sadism and masochism as abnormal, wrong, unnatural, and perverse and that these behaviors are to be discouraged and avoided. (5) It shall be considered that it is the intent of the people in enacting this section that if any part thereof is held unconstitutional, the remaining parts shall be held in force. Part 4. Colorado Amendment Number 2 Be it Enacted by the People of the State of Colorado: Article 2, of the Colorado Constitution is amended by the addition of Sec. 30, which shall state as follows: No protected status based on homosexual, lesbian, or bisexual orientation. Neither the State of Colorado, through any of its branches or departments, nor any of its agencies, political subdivision, municipalities or school districts, shall enact, adopt or enforce any statute, regulation, ordinance or policy whereby homosexual, lesbian, or bisexual orientation, conduct, practices or relationships shall constitute or otherwise be the basis of, or entitle any person or class of persons to have or claim any minority status, quota preferences, protected status or claim or discrimination. This Section of the Constitution shall be in all respects self-executing. Part 5. Analysis of Specific Human Rights Agreements Which Both Measures Violate Both of the repressive measures discussed in this report are fundamentally repugnant to the very concept of human rights and directly violate a number of International agreements which the United States is party to. In this initial analysis of the human rights impact of such measures, I will concentrate on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which was ratified by the United States Senate on April 2, 1992. Further updates of this report may include additional analysis and references to other international instruments. Following are specific articles which both the Oregon and Colorado Measures (or similar measures) would be in direct violation of, should they be enforced as law within the jurisdiction of the United States of America (or any other Country which recognizes the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights). There may also be additional articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which these repressive measures violate; this report is only meant to educate the public as to some of the many ways in which these measures pose a real threat to human rights. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966) G.A. Res. 2200 (XXI), 21 U.N. GAOR, Supp. (No. 16) at 52, U.N. Doc A/6315 (1966). In Force 23 March 1976 in accordance with Article 49. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ratified by the United States Senate with reservations on April 2, 1992. Congressional Record-Senate, S 4783-4784, April 2, 1992 Preamble The States Parties to the Present Covenant, Considering that, in accordance with the principles proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world. Recognizing that, in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ideal of free human beings enjoying civil and political freedom and freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his civil and political rights, as well as his economic, social and cultural rights, Considering the obligation of States under the Charter of the United Nations to promote universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and freedoms, Realizing that the individual, having duties to other individuals and to the community to which he belongs, is under a responsibility to strive for the promotion and observance of the rights recognized in the present Covenant, Agree upon the following articles: S 4784 Senate reservations to the preamble: III. The Senate's advice and consent is subject to the following declarations: (1) That the United States declares that the provisions of Articles 1 through 27 of the Covenant are not self-executing. IV. The Senate's advice and consent is subject to the following proviso, which shall not be included in the instrument of ratification to be deposited by the President: Nothing in this Covenant requires or authorizes legislation, or other action, by the United States of America prohibited by the Constitution of the United States as interpreted by the United States. Part I [International Covenant] Article 1 1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. 2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may people be deprived of its own means of subsistence. 3. The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations. Part II Article 2 1. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to respect and to ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the present Covenant, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. 2. Where not already provided for by existing legislative or other measures, each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to take the necessary steps, in accordance with its constitutional processes and with the provisions of the present Covenant, to adopt such legislative or other measures as may be necessary to give effect to the rights recognized in the present Covenant. S 4783 reservations to Part II, Article 2 (1) II. The Senate's advice and consent is subject to the following understandings, which shall apply to the obligations of the United States under this Covenant: (1) That the Constitution and laws of the United States guarantee all persons equal protection of the law and provide extensive protections against discrimination. The United States understands distinctions based upon race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or any other status--as those terms are used in Article 2, paragraph 1 and Article 26--to be permitted when such distinctions are, at minimum rationally related to a legitimate governmental objective. The United States further understands the prohibition in paragraph 1 of Article 4 upon discrimination, in time of public emergency, based "solely" on the status of race, color, sex, language, religion or social origin not to bar distinctions that may have a disproportionate effect upon persons of a particular status. Part II [International Covenant continuted] Article 5 1. Nothing in the present Covenant may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms recognized herein or at their limitation to a greater extend than is provided for in the present Covenant. 2. There shall be no restriction upon or derogation from any of the fundamental human rights recognized or existing in any State Party to the present Covenant pursuant to the law, conventions, regulations or custom on the pretext that the present Covenant does not recognize such rights or that it recognizes them to a lesser extent. Article 12 1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State Shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence. 3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (ordre public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant. Article 17 1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation. 2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. Article 18 1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individual or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching. 2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice. 3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others. 4. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions. Article 25 Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any of the distinctions mentioned in article 2 and without unreasonable restrictions: a. To take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives; b. To vote and to be elected at a genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors; c. To have access, on general terms of equality, to public service in his country. Article 26 All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Part 6. Analysis of the Factual Similarities Between the CFV/OCA/Christian Coalition and Nazism A 1964 English translation of 10 essays about Nazism by German historians entitled "The Road to Dictatorship," which describes the rise of fascism in Germany from 1918 to 1933, provides an excellent factual source from which to draw comparisons between the tactics and tendencies of Nazis rise to power, to those of the CFV/OCA/Christian Coalition now. I will refer frequently to essays found in "The Road to Dictatorship," to establish a solid, factual and fair comparison between the two movements; which, though separated by time and country - can be shown to have significant similarities worthy of the immediate attention and concern of all those who care about Democracy and Human Rights in modern society.20 In Kurt Sontheimer's essay entitled "Anti-democratic Thought in the Weimar Republic," 20.39 he explains how anti-democratic thought in the Weimar Republic contributed greatly to it's fall from Democracy to Hitler's dictatorship. He notes that "It was neither the world economic crisis," nor post-war policies, "nor alone the failure of the political parties," nor President Hindenburg's actions in the months preceding Hitler's elevation to the Chancellorship which led to the destruction of the Republic. He further states: "Neither would the structural weaknesses of the Republic have been sufficient on their own to make its collapse inevitable if they had not coincided with fateful political decisions made by individuals. But again these were only so serious because they paved the way for Hitler's dictatorship..." In it's rise to power, the National Socialist ideology became a "conglomerate of ideas" which attracted many factions of German citizens unhappy with current conditions. On page 45, Sontheimer writes: "But many of those people who for the time being had no means of releasing their aspirations and expressed their discontent with the existing form of government through anti-democratic tracts and pamphlets finally gave their support to the National Socialist mass movement. In many cases they did not do this because they sympathized entirely with the ideas of the movement, but because they saw in Hitler's party the growth of a political force which they confidently hoped would bring the tottering Weimar democracy to its fall." Sontheimer points out that much of the anti-democratic thought in Germany came from "right-wing nationalists," which is also an accurate description of many of those (like Pat Buchanan) at the central core of the current United States political-religious intolerance forces behind "anti-homosexual measures." Sontheimer describes the "anti-democratic thought of the right-wing nationalists" as "richer and more differentiated" then that of the Communists and others that opposed the Weimar Republic, stating that "It ranged from deep speculation on the philosophy of politics down to the primitive antisemitic pamphlet. The broad effect which it exerted on the intellectual life of the Weimar Republic would have been inconceivable without the intellectual and cultural upheaval which took place in every sphere of life at the beginning of the twentieth century." Indeed the right-wing forces behind these repressive measures have assembled an onslaught of materials to justify outright attacks and discrimination against lesbians and gay men. As an example of the incredible volume of literature that these groups produce; during an earlier campaign against queers in Oregon, the OCA and their backers reported in "The Oregon Alliance" that in the last six weeks of the campaign: "...almost 1 million pieces of literature were placed in the hands of Oregon voters by No Special Rights Committee volunteers and Oregon Citizens' Alliance members."6.24 When looking at the behavior of Pat Robertson and his zealous young supporters passing out fliers denouncing "queers" and "feminazis"7 combined with a condemnation of political opponents for failing to combine religion and politics into some sort of conglomerate ideology, we see a disturbing consistent adherence to the principles of Nazism. Also note that the right-wing tactics and tendencies of the CFV/OCA/Christian Coalition members is identical to that of the Nazis in that they occur simultaneously on two levels: 1. "Respectable leaders" such as Pat Buchanan and Pat Robertson call for the legalizing of discrimination against a group targeted for oppression (in this case queers or Jews). 2. Currently illegal crimes of physical violence, censorship and terrorism which are not formally endorsed by the "respectable leaders" of this movement are committed against the "targeted group." One of the more obvious examples of the Nazi/CFV/OCA/Christian Coalition connection is the fact that many of the hateful attacks against lesbians and gays have been committed by neo-Nazis. Numerous examples have already been given of modern-day attacks by right-wing forces, which like the attacks of right-wing German nationalists, could be accurately described as "rich and differentiated"; and range from the illegal destruction of public library materials to the terrorizing, murder and firebombing of free citizens. While some may describe these two primary tactics as being "vastly different," their effects are essentially the same. The targeted class (queers and those who defend them) are silenced, censored, marginalized and become increasingly susceptible to attacks; while at the same time, they are less and less able to find individuals, groups or governmental agencies who are willing and able to defend their most basic civil and human rights. Writing on this subject in 1938, Mahatma Gandhi observed: "Germany is showing to the world how efficiently violence can be worked when it is not hampered by any hypocrisy or weakness masquerading as humanitarianism. It is also showing how hideous, terrible and terrifying it looks in its nakedness."21.328 When offering his opinion on how Jews might resist "this organized and shameless persecution" Gandhi suggested, "...If I were a Jew and were born in Germany and earned my livelihood there, I would claim Germany as my home even as the tallest gentile German might, and challenge him to shoot me or cast me in the dungeon; I would refuse to be expelled or to submit to discriminating treatment. And for doing this I should not wait for the fellow-Jews to join me in civil resistance, but would have confidence that in the end the rest were bound to follow my example..."21.328 Gandhi's views on this subject are very instructive in understanding how quickly civil unrest can develop in a situation where political forces threaten the fundamental civil and human rights of a "targeted group." This is true because given a situation of inherent injustice, even the most law-abiding and non-violent citizens become morally compelled to rise up against this type of outrage. Then, as social unrest escalates, the "respectable fascists" justify the use of police repression to restore "law and order." This helps to explain the strategic importance of these two distinctively different right-wing tactics in achieving the common goal of institutionalized oppression against a targeted group. Physical thugs create social unrest, while "respectable fascists or thugs" offer a swift and strong authoritarian resolution, which becomes tempting to the public at large. Such a scenario poses a very real threat to democracy. As Gandhi wrote in 1922, "...Democracy is not a state in which people act like sheep. Under democracy individual liberty of opinion and action is jealously guarded..."21.221 This process of "blunting people's minds to the inviolable rights of the individual," is described by Sontheimer in detail near the end of his essay. He notes that the intellectual atmosphere that prevailed in German politics were rife with anti-democratic ideas, and that they contributed greatly to the rise of the National Socialist movement which was "later raised to the status of a religion." Sontheimer further observes that, "In its contempt for everything liberal it had blunted people's minds to the inviolable rights of the individual and the preservation of human dignity. It had sacrificed the idea of humanity as weak and incompatible with its heroic attitude, it had paralyzed the feeling for freedom because it held that subordination to a whole was more fundamental and important."20.39 The right-wing attacks against queers takes the same course as that of the Nazis. In speeches, literature and other forms of expression the right-wing CFV/OCA/Christian Coalition forces decry "liberals" and oppose "humanism" at every opportunity. They hysterically blame homosexuals, "the media elite" (even though most of them have direct media access and influence) and educators for the decline of "traditional values." In August, for example, Pat Robertson, (along with the Vice President of the United States) criticized a political opponent for his support by teachers unions; which they oppose on the grounds that public schools teach "humanism" in classrooms.7 Another historical parallel which is important to note, is that the United States, like Germany during the rise of Hitler, is experiencing a "major upheaval" due to the end of the cold war, a deterioration in the standard of living due to job losses, poor health care coverage for millions of U.S. citizens, racial tensions, the rise in violent crimes, (including hate crimes) and other social problems. Part 7. Conclusions It is reasonable to conclude that, based upon the facts, the number and severity of violent crimes committed against lesbians and gay men would increase dramatically, should either of these measures be enacted and enforced as law. Indeed, merely by allowing these repressive measures to reach the ballot, both Colorado and Oregon have allowed hate groups to endanger the lives and liberty of many of their citizens, some of whom have already lost their lives. This conclusion is further reinforced by the fact that this is exactly what has happened in the wake of the passage of Amendment 2 in Colorado. Furthermore, should any State legally sanction the notion that "homosexuality is wrong" on the grounds of "morality," it stands to reason that the number of assaults committed against lesbians and gay men committed by the police will escalate. "Equal justice under the law" would become another causality for all lesbians and gays in that State, because the State Government would officially pre-define them as "abnormal, wrong, unnatural and perverse," or would otherwise make it impossible to take legal recourse against discrimination. Once the process of stripping away Civil and Human rights has been sanctioned by a government, (state sponsored terrorism) it is relatively simple for the anti-democracy forces at work to further widen the scope of who is not to be tolerated, and inevitably, more groups and individuals then become the victims of hate and intolerance. Considering the National and International attention which vocal supporters of both measures now enjoy, groups like the OCA, CFV and their close allies (such as the "Christian Coalition") should be recognized as much more dangerous than just political-religious lunatic fringe groups. They represent a political-religious intolerance movement which has gained considerable political power in the United States in recent years. The illegal mixing of religion and law in the United States by these intolerant groups is a potent recipe for disaster. These people are modern day crusaders who feel that they have the right to override human and civil rights in furtherance of their religious ideology. In the words of OCA chairman Lon Mabon, "Christians who oppose homosexuality are not "judging" homosexuals. They are simply acknowledging what God has judged and fulfilling a biblical mandate to warn others of the consequences of their sins....Support for OCA's No Special Rights initiative by Christians is not based on an attitude of moral superiority. It is based on a desire to please God and to save other people from the consequences of acting in ways that God has judged."6.24.2 Pat Robertson and the "Christian Coalition" have proven to be enormously effective in using the tax exempt "Christian Coalition," (which is supposedly a non-partisan "citizen action" organization) for partisan political purposes. Their accomplishments to date include the sponsorship and election of right-wing Republican members to Congress, the registration and distribution of over 40 million "voter guides" in churches, and having tapped into state and local affiliates; to achieve majorities or near majorities on Republican central committees in more than a half-dozen states. The executive director of the Christian Coalition said: "I think this will be the most effective coordinated activity by evangelical Christians that we've ever seen," Ralph Reed Jr,. executive director of the Christian Coalition, said of the group's electoral activities. "I don't want to belittle Jerry Falwell or the Moral Majority. But the Christian Coalition as a model represents a more mature, more developed and more politically sophisticated vehicle for Christian political activism."22 Finally, considering the fact that one of the two largest political parties in the United States (the Republican Party) and the sitting President and Vice President of the United States (George Bush and Dan Quayle) have offered aid, comfort and credibility to these anti-democracy forces, it should be clear to anyone concerned with human and civil rights that this hate movement poses a clear and present danger not only to the lesbian and gay citizens of the United States, but to Democracy itself in the United States. NOTES 1Letter from "No on 9 Campaign: The Campaign for a Hate Free Oregon," signed by Peggy A. Norman - Campaign Manager. 2"Oregon Battleground for anti-gay measure," San Francisco Examiner, (California, U.S.A.) - article by Carol Ness. October 1, 1992. Pages: 1, A19 3"Colorado Tries to Avert Boycott By Tourists Over Anti-Gay Law," San Francisco Chronicle, (California, U.S.A) - Article by Louis Sahagun. November 10, 1992. Page A7. 4Information sheet from "No on 9 Campaign: The Campaign for a Hate Free Oregon," entitled "SAY NO TO THE OCA - NO ON 9." 5"Pat Robertson's perversity," SF Weekly, (San Francisco, California, U.S.A.) - article by L.A. Kauffman. September 30, 1992. Page 12. 6"ROLLING BACK CIVIL RIGHTS - The Oregon Citizen's Alliance at Religious War," Coalition for Human Dignity, (P.O. Box 40344, Portland, Oregon 97240, U.S.A.) - report by S.L. Gardiner. 1992. 6.24Page: 24 (quoted from Wiley, Mike. "Measure 8 vote Reaffirms Traditional Values," in The Oregon Alliance. January/February 1989, Vol. 2, No. 1, p. 5.) 6.24.2Page: 24 (quoted from a Letter from OCA chairman Lon Mabon to "Alternative Connections," a Portland monthly that serves the Lesbian/Gay community. February, 1992. p. 5.) 6.36Page: 36 7"Pulpit Politics," TIME Magazine, (U.S.A.) - article by Laurence I. Barrett. August 31, 1992. Pages: 34, 43 8"Unhumbled, Buchanan Backs Bust," New York Times -Article by Richard L. Berke. August 18, 1992. 9"GOP Drafting Panel Puts Final Touches on Platform," Los Angeles Times, (California, U.S.A.) - article by Robert Shogan. August 14, 1992. Pages: A16, A17 10Information sheet from "No on 9 Campaign: The Campaign for a Hate Free Oregon," entitled "No on 9" 11 "Anti-Gay Measure Divides Oregon," San Francisco Chronicle, (California, U.S.A.) - article by David Tuller. October 2, 1992. Pages: 1, A8, A9 12"Quayle discusses future of the GOP," San Jose Mercury News, (California, U.S.A.) - interview by Cal Thomas. November 8, 1992. Page: 5P. 13Information sheet from "No on 9 Campaign: The Campaign for a Hate Free Oregon," entitled "NO ON DISCRIMINATION-NO ON 9" 14"First Two Martyrs in Oregon," an article which appeared in the October 19, 1992 issue of the "New York Native". Published in New York, New York. Pages: 1, 4. 15"Oregon Lesbians Terrorized by Bigots, Forced To Flee," An article by Marghe Covino assisted by Keith Clark, which appeared in the October 15, 1992 issue of the "BAY AREA REPORTER". Published in San Francisco, California. Pages: 13, 14 16"Cops 'sting' in Laurelhurst," an article by Jim Hunger, which appeared in the October 1992 addition of the monthly newspaper "just out," published in Portland, Oregon. Page: 21. 17"NEVER AGAIN." An article by Marilyn Davis, which appeared in the October 1992 addition of the monthly newspaper "just out," published in Portland, Oregon. Pages: 14, 15. 18"oca watch" a series of news briefs which appeared in the October 1992 addition of the monthly newspaper "just out," published in Portland, Oregon. Pages: 12, 13. (18.7) "Vandals assault library" by Jeff Williamson 19Information sheet from "No on 9 Campaign: The Campaign for a Hate Free Oregon," entitled "FULL TEXT OF THE OCA'S BALLOT MEASURE 9." 20"The Road to Dictatorship, Germany 1918 to 1933. A symposium by German historians" First published in Germany by R. Piper & Co. Verlag, Munich, 1962. 1964 English translation by Oswald Wolff (Publishers) Ltd., London. 20.39"Anti-democratic Thought in the Weimar Republic" by Kurt Sontheimer. Begins on Page 39. 21"The Essential Gandhi," (excerpts of Mahatma Gandhi), Edited by Louis Fischer. 1962, Random House, Inc. 21.221From "Young India," March 2, 1922. Page 221. 21.328From "Harijan," November 26, 1938. Begins on page 328. 22Information sheet from "The Equal Protection Campaign," of Denver, Colorado. Dated October 9, 1992. Quote taken for the Thursday, September 10, 1992 addition of the Washington Post. Queer Planet's Human Rights Day Message, 1992 On December 10th, 1992 Queer Planet gave a press conference on the sidewalk in front of the Veterans War Memorial Opera House in San Francisco. What follows is the press release and list of demands that we made of the United Nations. The news media in America has been closely following the ever evolving civil rights issue of whether queer people should be allowed to serve in the military. This is not our only issue. But it has delineated a link of two traditional foes of the queer communities, the old guard in the Defense Department and the Southern Baptist Church. The military and the christians. Just a few weeks before we were targets of laws introduced into Oregon and Colorado by so-called christians, which would limit our rights and prevent anti-discrimination legislation from taking place. These are civil and political rights issues that we have been dealing with for the length of our movement's existence. But these struggles form only the superstructure--the tip of the iceberg--because queer people lack basic human rights. Queer people in most parts of the world aren't allowed the simplest human rights let alone civil or political rights, and are denied a process to appeal human rights violations, when these violations occur. A few human rights organizations are beginning to deal with victimized queer people as clients, and even fewer are advocating for their protection. Much work needs to be done even with the few groups that have begun to advocate for queer human rights. The United Nations, the world's largest human rights body has done the least amount of work on our issues. The United Nations has, in the past, produced some very exciting and noble declarations worthy of all peoples of the world. The Universal Declaration of the Human Rights of Man, signed on December 10, 1948, set the standard from which other declarations have evolved, such as The Declaration on the Elimination of Discrimination based on Religion or Belief, and The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. These declarations "include the elimination of discrimination based on race or on sex; violations of human rights; promotion of the right of self-determination; realization of economic, social and cultural rights; the adverse consequences for human rights of assistance given to racist regimes; rights of detained or imprisoned persons, including freedom from torture; rights of persons belonging to minorities; human rights of migrant workers; rights of the child; and human rights and scientific and technological developments." 1 "In December 1965, the General Assembly adopted the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination." It also adopted Declarations on the elimination of discrimination against women, on the protection of women and children in emergency and armed conflict, on the rights of children, on torture and on the rights of disabled persons."1 But in the 44 years since the signing of the Universal Declaration the United Nations has said and done nothing regarding the human rights of queer people. In fact, the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities heard its first testimony from a gay person, a Canadian professor, this past July about discrimination that is leveled at all of us through immigration laws. Our goal at Queer Planet is to bring light to the fact that the arbiter of human rights and values, operates as if we do not exist. We do in fact exist in each of the above mentioned categories as minorities within minorities. And in places of the world where human rights violations go unchecked, we are often the first detained, tortured or murdered, and no one is there to speak for us. The United Nations maintains the illusion that it helps everyone, but the reality is quite different. This may not be a flaw of their ability as people to care about our human rights abuses, but may have more to do with the representative nature of the United Nations bureaucracy-because we have no representation at the United Nations we will not be heard. Two years ago the International Lesbian and Gay Association was denied NGO status due to religious bigotry. We will have to use other ways and means to get the seriousness of our message understood at the United Nations. Next year the Centre for Human Rights is holding a World Conference on Human Rights. The last conference of this kind was 24 years ago. It is imperative that our human rights concerns be told at this gathering, we simply cannot wait another quarter-century for the next conference. Notes 1 "Everyone's United Nations: A Handbook on the United Nations, Its Structure and Activities" published by the United Nations, Department of Information, page 235. Queer Planet's List of Demands for the United Nations Presented to the Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali and Under Secretary General Antoine Blanca on December 10th, 1992 What follows is a partial list of demands that we are making of the United Nations at this time. This list is by no means a complete, nor is it immutable. This list will be added to by us and other groups in the future. We demand that: 1. The United Nations formally recognize the global discrimination, persecution, imprisonment, torture and murder of queer people by their governments and societies. 2. The United Nations amend existing human rights declarations and covenants to include specific language (i.e. sexuality, sexual minorities, sexual orientation, sexual preference) recognizing and acknowledging queer people as part of the human family. 3. The United Nations establish a non-governmental organization (NGO) comprised of queer people, queer organizations and queer positive organizations within the United Nations that would advise the United Nations in regards to queer issues. 4. The United Nations establish a pro-active queer human rights investigative group that will investigate and document human rights abuses against queer people throughout the world and report these findings directly to the United Nations Human Rights Commission. 5. That the United Nations agree to give serious consideration to queer human rights in the 1993 World Conference on Human Rights by: a. inviting queer people to give personal testimony regarding human rights issues and abuses in their countries. b. inviting representatives of queer organizations to give testimony regarding human rights issues and abuses in the world. c. providing panel discussions and workshops during the conference and allowing queer speakers to address the full conference at the opening plenary. 6. That the United Nations advocate for the guarantee, preservation, and expansion of queer culture in all its diversity by insisting that member States work to: a. allow for the peaceful association and assembly of queer people and queer groups. b. allow queer people to enjoy the right of free speech and the guarantee of the right to receive and impart uncensored information through newspapers, magazines, books, all forms of artistic expression and electronic media and to ensure its unimpeded distribution nationally and internationally. c. eliminate all forms of heterosexual supremacy, heterosexist expression, and queerphobia with in their own societies and institutions. d. eliminate all sodomy or sex laws which impede sexual freedom of queer people and their full and complete expression of personality: e. eliminate all laws which suggest that queer people are mentally ill, deranged, psychologically hindered or deficient as human beings. f. ensure the right to privacy for their queer citizens. g. guarantee equal access to all institutions including, education, health care, employment, national defense, trade organizations and unions, housing and transportation. A separate demand that we are making of the City of San Francisco, is that before anymore consideration be made in regards to the United Nations using the Presidio to be used as its environmental headquarters, that it give a full accounting of why the United Nations has not begun to actively pursue the expansion of the human rights movement to include queer people, and how it plans to remediate this shortcoming. There is no place in San Francisco for an organization espousing human rights only for the heterosexual. What You Can Do Right Now Writing a letter is one of the most effective ways you can communicate as an individual. Make a case for including queer people, send newspaper clippings to show the violence and hatred we are subject to (their addresses are below). We've included posecards with this addendum that you can send. Let us know if you would like to work with us on our United Nations Project we need your help. Secretary General of the United Nations Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali United Nations New York, NY 10017 Under Secretary General Mr. Antoine Blanca Centre for Human Rights 8-14, avenue de la Paix CH-1211 Geneva 10 Switzerland John Pace World Conference Coordinator UN/World Conference on Human Rights Palais des Nations CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland Ambassador Edward J. Perkins U.S. Mission to the United Nations 799 United Nations Plaza New York, NY 10017 Subscription Information Queer Planet is a 501(c)(3) non-profit, international queer human rights organization whose purpose is to defend the human and civil rights of sexual minorities and to eliminate discrimination against transsexuals and transgender, gay, lesbian, and bisexual people. This newsletter is available on-line at no cost, on our e-mail conference on PeaceNet (queerplanet@igc.org), and on Internet's Queer Resource Directory (QRD) on File Transfer Protocol (FTP) at Nifty.Andrew.CMU.EDU (under the directory "pub/qrd/QRD/queerplanet"). Queer Planet Quarterly is a publication of Queer Planet. Our mailing address is Queer Planet, 1046 Florida St., San Francisco, CA 94110, USA. US subscription rates are $12 per year for the Quarterly; $20 for the Quarterly and special reports; Canada $15 per year for the Quarterly and $25 for the Quarterly and special reports; International $20 for the Quarterly and $30 for the Quarterly and special reports. Permission is granted to copy only if Queer Planet is credited. c 1992 Queer Planet