The U.N. recently accorded two homosexual-rights groups “consultative status,” raising opposition from pro-family advocates who see the move as a weakening of national sovereignty that could result in lowering the age of consent for homosexual sex.

U.N. watchdogs also cite homosexual-rights groups’ historical alignment with organizations advocating pedophilia.

The U.N.’s Economic and Social Council, the organ facilitating international cooperation on standards-making and problem-solving in economic and social issues, has accepted COC Netherlands and the State Federation of Lesbians, Gays, Transexuals and Bisexuals of Spain.

This “means we can join the efforts at the U.N. to address human rights violations against people with an alternative sexual orientation or gender identity,” said Björn van Roozendaal, COC Netherlands international advocacy officer.

But members of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute accuse homosexual groups of attempting to weaken sovereignty and impose “gay rights” through a “well-coordinated” international stealth campaign tainted by associations with pro-pedophilia groups.

The pro-homosexual lobby consistently has attempted to advance through the U.N. since 1993, when an umbrella homosexual advocacy group, the International Lesbian Gay Association, or ILGA, achieved U.N. consultative status.

But after revelations that several ILGA members were pedophile organizations, the late Republican Sen. Jesse Helms of North Carolina led a campaign to suspend ILGA’s U.N. status.

Four pro-pedophile groups were associated with ILGA.

  • The American NAMBLA, the North American Man-Boy Love Association, advocates for intergenerational “consensual sexual relations.”
  • The Dutch-based MARTINJN works “for acceptance of pedophilia and adult-child love relationships.”
  • U.S.-based Project TRUTH 
  • The German Verein für Sexuelle Gleichberechtigung, or Association for Sexual Equality.

In 1994, the U.N. took the unusual step of suspending ILGA membership. ILGA then, by a vote of 214-30, voted out all of its pro-pedophile groups, except for VSG. The German group, however, later was suspended for its vocal support of NAMBLA.

Following the revelations and suspension of ILGA’s NGO consultative status, NAMBLA issued statements detailing its working relationship with ILGA and claimed to have helped draft ILGA’s constitution.

In 2003, IGLA petitioned to have its consultative status reinstated but was denied by a vote of 29 to 17.

Cameroon, China, Cuba, Iran, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Senegal, Sudan, the U.S. and Zimbabwe cast votes against ILGA, while France, Germany and Romania voted for the organization.

Following the vote, a U.N. communiqué stated, “The vote in favor of not granting status to that NGO would reaffirm the will and commitment of the international community to protect children.”

In 2006, however, the U.N. granted consultative status to a gay-rights Danish group associated with ILGA-Europe.

Well-coordinated campaign

Responding to the newly granted status given the Spanish and Dutch group, Boris Dittrich, advocacy director of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Program at Human Rights Watch, said “This vote ensures that two more voices will be raised to defend basic human rights at the U.N.”

But critics see a reason for concern in what has been called “well-coordinated international campaign.”

As director of government relation for Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute – which advocates for “the preservation of international law by discrediting socially radical policies at the United Nations and other international institutions” – Samantha Singson has worked on pro-life, pro-family international policy for over eight years.

Singson told WND there is a great concern for screening LGBT, or “lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual,” groups for any ties to pedophilia.

“These nominations are getting a lot more scrutiny, because of the past affiliations,” she said.

Responding to the concern, Scott Long, director of the LGBT rights program for Human Rights Watch, wrote in a statement to WND, “ILGA has made clear that it supports the right of all children to be free of abuse, including sexual abuse.”

But it’s clear that none of the pedophile groups consider sex with a minor “abuse.” On the NAMBLA website, the association calls itself a “voice testifying to the benevolent aspects of man/boy love.”

Brend Varma, the human rights spokesman for the U.N. secretary-general, told WND that Ban Ki-Moon will always advocate that “we believe in human rights for all people; specific policies towards sexual orientation throughout the world is a matter for the member states.”

Yet it’s not clear that “all people” includes all ages. In Canada, Israel, the UK and Australia, homosexual activists consistently have pushed for lowering age of consent laws, to align the homosexual age for consensual sex with that of heterosexuals.

International advocacy coupled with local activism could pressure governments to lower the age.

Piero Tozzi observed that the UK is particularly active in pushing for the inclusion of LGBT non-governmental organizations into the U.N. system.

In an interview with WND, Tozzi said the representatives from Egypt, Poland and Malta have been “very prepared” in defending their opposition to LGBT activism under the guise of “non-discrimination.”

Human Rights Watch’s Long criticized the Egyptian delegation for asking, “Is your organization forcing people to adopt a particular lifestyle that will lead to the eventual extinction of the human race?”

Long called the question “ridiculous.”

Singson said “non-discrimination” and “in the spirit of inclusion” have become “code terms for sneaking in pro-LGBT language into important international human rights documents.”

“There is a tendency for LGBT advocates to change terms like ‘husband’ and ‘wife’ to the ambiguous ‘partner,'” she said.

“We’ve even had lively debates about the term ‘family’ vs. ‘families,’ a term that could include same-sex arrangements, she added.

“There’s a crisis in human rights,” said Singson. “Countries agree to universal rights, but they get something entirely different when they agree to recognize these groups.”


Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.