US votes against UN resolution condemning gay sex death penalty, joining Iraq and Saudi Arabia

Reply to jorndoe There is no USA. This is the default firmware of imbeciles.

The USA currently has an authoritarian, science-denying, racist, conspiracy-theorist in the white house, and there is about 25% of the country who does not care how many lies he tells, as long as he supports an agenda of bigotry and hatred. As an American, I am completely disgusted with Trump and his followers. I've never hated a president so much as I hate Trump. I stand for liberty, equal rights for everyone, and democratic institutions, which means I am against everything Trump and his followers stand for.

Reply to jorndoe Reply to LD Saunders America First and the rest doesn't matter.

It is not difficult to parse the logic of Donald Trump:

1. Forget about logic.

2. Trump can rely on the permanent government continuing to function; he is free to impose his not-very-deep not-very-smart very-low-brow politics on the politically appointed parts of the government.

3. The very-low-brow portion of the electorate (20% to 25%) have found their prince: someone who heaps derision on everything they have long disliked but have been too disunited to jeer openly. Trump plays to that audience.

4. Consistency is the hobgoblin of thinking governed by integrity. Trump doesn't have that problem. He sees no problem in denouncing mail bombers in one sentence, then turning on a dime to repeat exactly the kind of inflammatory comments that inspired one certifiably antisocial mail bombing Trump fanboy.

5. Trump did not create his core electorate. These are an enduring sector of the population occupying a dismal swamp of "the old time religion". Their roots reach back well into the 19th century. They tend to be low-mobility working class; conservative (of course); religious; morally rigid. They are the classic crackers, hicks, hillbillies, economic losers.

6. Trump has helped his core electorate latch on to a more politically conscious view of themselves. Of course their new-found consciousness was torqued for the purposes of an opportunistic politician who does not belong to his important core demographic.

7. Trump has been aided by the Republican's Party's continued transition toward immoderate positions.

It always helps to take a long term view. The US has seen waves of anti-immigration, racial hatred, ruthless manipulation of the electorate, fundamentalist religion, extreme-right wing politics, and so on ever since the latter quarter of the 19th century. That along with periods of extreme economic inequality (the Gilded Age) and episodes of endemic waste, fraud, and abuse. Following such episodes there tends to be a movement back toward some sort of center, sometimes sliding into left-wing territory (like the New Deal some 80+ years ago, or the Great Society 50+ years ago). Back and forth.

What's the upshot?

Stay tuned.

Reply to Blue Lux Excellent.

Reply to LD Saunders Ditto.

Reply to jorndoe
The US voted against the resolution because of concerns that it contains language which may condemn the death penalty generally, a position the US (which still carries out judicial executions, making it an outlier in the developed world) is reticent to take.

Trump Administration spokespeople (including Nikki Haley) stated that they unequivocally oppose the death penalty for homosexuality.

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/following-backlash-us-clarifies-un-vote-death-penalty-gays-n807151

Reply to jorndoe This story is a fake. First, the vote happened over a year ago. Second, the article, and especially the scandalous title, misrepresents the content of the resolution. It was directed broadly against the death penalty:

Quoting UN resolution, 22 September 2017

1. Urges all States to protect the rights of persons facing the death penalty and other affected persons by complying with their international obligations, including the rights to equality and non-discrimination;
2. Calls upon States that have not yet acceded to or ratified the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights aiming at the abolition of the death penalty to consider doing so;
3. Calls upon States that have not yet abolished the death penalty to ensure that it is not applied on the basis of discriminatory laws or as a result of discriminatory or arbitrary application of the law;
4. Calls upon States to ensure that all accused persons, in particular poor and economically vulnerable persons, can exercise their rights related to equal access to justice, to ensure adequate, qualified and effective legal representation at every stage of civil and criminal proceedings in capital punishment cases through effective legal aid, and to ensure that those facing the death penalty can exercise their right to seek pardon or commutation of their death sentence;
5. Urges States that have not yet abolished the death penalty to ensure that the death penalty is not applied against persons with mental or intellectual disabilities and persons below 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the crime, as well as pregnant women;
6. Also urges States that have not yet abolished the death penalty to ensure that it is not imposed as a sanction for specific forms of conduct such as apostasy, blasphemy, adultery and consensual same-sex relations;
7. Calls upon States to comply with their obligations under article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, and to inform foreign nationals of their right to contact the relevant consular post;
8. Also calls upon States to undertake further studies to identify the underlying factors that contribute to the substantial racial and ethnic bias in the application of the death penalty, where they exist, with a view to developing effective strategies aimed at eliminating such discriminatory practices;
9. Calls upon States that have not yet abolished the death penalty to make available relevant information, disaggregated by gender, age, nationality and other applicable criteria, with regard to their use of the death penalty, inter alia, the charges, number of persons sentenced to death, the number of persons on death row, the number of executions carried out and the number of death sentences reversed, commuted on appeal or in which amnesty or pardon has been granted, as well as information on any scheduled execution, which can contribute to possible informed and transparent national and international debates, including on the obligations of States with regard to the use of the death penalty;
10. Requests the Secretary-General to dedicate the 2019 supplement to his quinquennial report on capital punishment to the consequences arising at various stages of the imposition and application of the death penalty on the enjoyment of the human rights of persons facing the death penalty and other affected persons, paying specific attention to the impact of the resumption of the use of the death penalty on human rights, and to present it to the Human Rights Council at its forty-second session;
11. Decides that the upcoming biennial high-level panel discussion to be held at the fortieth session of the Human Rights Council will address the human rights violations related to the use of the death penalty, in particular with respect to the rights to non-discrimination and equality;
12. Requests the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to organize the high-level panel discussion and to liaise with States, relevant United Nations bodies, agencies, treaty bodies, special procedures and regional human rights mechanisms, as well as with parliamentarians, civil society, including non-governmental organizations, and national human rights institutions with a view to ensuring their participation in the panel discussion;
13. Also requests the Office of the High Commissioner to prepare a summary report on the panel discussion and to submit it to the Human Rights Council at its forty-second session;
14. Decides to continue its consideration of this issue in accordance with its programme of work.

That said, I fully support the resolution and can't see any good reason for the US to oppose it. The resolution does not require states to abolish the death penalty; it only urges them to "consider doing so."

Sorry, yes, I hadn't gone through the motions (and it's a bit old).
It's just that, among the things having come out of the White House, it seemed like yet another medieval'ification.

Quoting jorndoe

It's just that, among the things having come out of the White House, it seemed like yet another medieval'ification.

Supporting the death penalty in the U.S. isn't new.