In this anti-rights publication, Family Watch International (FWI) try to argue that progressive actors at the UN are undermining national sovereignty.
FWI is a Mormon-led anti-rights organisation based in Gilbert, Arizona, USA. Their key activities include lobbying in international human rights spaces for “the family” and anti-LGBTQ and anti-CSE policies, training civil society and state delegates (for example, ‘The Resource Guide to UN Consensus Language on Family Issues’), information dissemination and knowledge production.
This policy brief claims that “the right of UN Member States to national sovereignty is increasingly being undermined by the actions of rogue UN agencies, Special Rapporteurs and treaty monitoring bodies that are attempting to create new rights to which UN Member States have not consensually agreed.”
In this anti-rights publication, Family Watch International (FWI) target the international advocacy of progressive actors campaigning for pro-choice policies.
FWI is a Mormon-led anti-rights organisation based in Gilbert, Arizona, USA. Their key activities include lobbying in international human rights spaces for “the family” and anti-LGBTQ and anti-CSE policies, training civil society and state delegates (for example, ‘The Resource Guide to UN Consensus Language on Family Issues’), information dissemination and knowledge production.
This document summarises anti-rights victories at the UN, which are related to anti-abortion policies or recommendations.
In this anti-rights publication, Family Watch International (FWI) attack The Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, the Maputo Protocol.
FWI is a Mormon-led anti-rights organisation based in Gilbert, Arizona, USA. Their key activities include lobbying in international human rights spaces for “the family” and anti-LGBTQ and anti-CSE policies, training civil society and state delegates (for example, ‘The Resource Guide to UN Consensus Language on Family Issues’), information dissemination and knowledge production.
FWI claims that “the Maputo Protocol is an assault on the African family and unborn children and where instituted fully will contribute to the continued breakdown of the traditional family resulting in myriad of negative consequences to men, women and children throughout Africa.” Progressive actors regard the Maputo Protocol as guaranteeing comprehensive rights to women including social and political equality and sexual health and reproductive rights.
In this anti-rights publication, Family Watch International (FWI) petition for a Declaration on the Rights of Children and Families which counters progressive international documents.
FWI is a Mormon-led anti-rights organisation based in Gilbert, Arizona, USA. Their key activities include lobbying in international human rights spaces for “the family” and anti-LGBTQ and anti-CSE policies, training civil society and state delegates (for example, ‘The Resource Guide to UN Consensus Language on Family Issues’), information dissemination and knowledge production.
In this anti-rights publication, Family Watch International (FWI) summarise their critique of the report on the right of the child to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health published by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in 2012.
FWI is a Mormon-led anti-rights organisation based in Gilbert, Arizona, USA. Their key activities include lobbying in international human rights spaces for “the family” and anti-LGBTQ and anti-CSE policies, training civil society and state delegates (for example, ‘The Resource Guide to UN Consensus Language on Family Issues’), information dissemination and knowledge production.
In this brief, FWI object to sexual an dreproductive health and rights fro children and sexuality education. They claim the OHCHR report “facilitates abortion” and “undermines the role of the family”.
In this anti-right discourse Family Watch International (FWI) present anti-rights arguments against the report on “Discriminatory laws and practices and acts of violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity” which was published by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in 2011.
FWI is a Mormon-led anti-rights organisation based in Gilbert, Arizona, USA. Their key activities include lobbying in international human rights spaces for “the family” and anti-LGBTQ and anti-CSE policies, training civil society and state delegates (for example, ‘The Resource Guide to UN Consensus Language on Family Issues’), information dissemination and knowledge production.
According to FWI, “the purpose of this brief is to show how the OHCHR report presents a grave threat to national sovereignty, parental rights, cultural and moral values, religious liberty, and public health and safety of UN Member States. This brief will also provide facts to counteract a number of the false claims and harmful recommendations in the OHCHR report.”
In this anti-rights discourse publication Family Watch International (FWI) present their anti-choice position.
FWI is a Mormon-led anti-rights organisation based in Gilbert, Arizona, USA. Their key activities include lobbying in international human rights spaces for “the family” and anti-LGBTQ and anti-CSE policies, training civil society and state delegates (for example, ‘The Resource Guide to UN Consensus Language on Family Issues’), information dissemination and knowledge production.
FWI claim to be ‘debunking the myths’ about maternal mortality and abortion, which they say have wrongly influenced international decision-making bodies. They demand that “UN Member States must resist attempts to liberalize abortion laws under the guise of protecting women’s health and instead focus on providing basic health care to women that will enable them to safely deliver their babies.”
The Friedrich Ebert Stiftung published this report on religious fundamentalisms and their gendered impacts in Asia in 2010.
Amidst growing uncertainties in a globalised world, fundamentalist convictions have been gaining ground in many religions. Reinforced by the threat from international terrorism, this renaissance of religious fundamentalisms has created ideological conditions for polarisation between ‘us’ and ‘them’, from community to transnational level. At national level, it has affected both politics and society, leading to something of a ‘retraditionalisation’ of gender roles.
The understanding of fundamentalism is often one-dimensional, however, and dominated by the figure of the male Muslim. In fact, fundamentalism is multifaceted and rooted in different religious and cultural contexts. However, among the vast diversity of religions, cultures and peoples in Asia, a number of common features can be discerned with regard to religious fundamentalisms and gender:
- The authority to interpret sacred religious texts in order to construct an ideology is often monopolised by and enforced to sustain patriarchal structures, and therefore it is a question of authority and power.
- Women are often the first target of fundamentalist forces in an effort to demonise all difference and to prescribe codes of behaviour, thus either restricting or exaggerating the role of women.
The stereotypical assignation of gender roles limits the space for diversity, dissent and socio-political participation on the part of women. This gradually leads to the erosion of the democratic polity and respect for human rights, reversing many improvements that have been made in Asian societies in recent decades.
The Regional Office for Cooperation in Asia of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung and the country offices in the region are trying to help foster gender equality in Asia and to promote women’s rights in accordance with the Beijing Declaration and the Platform for Action. Religious fundamentalisms are jeopardising these goals and making the struggle for universality of women’s human rights more difficult, but also more important.
Table of Contents
- Preface 5
- Religious Fundamentalisms and Their Gendered Impacts in Asia 7
- Sanctifying Moral Tyranny: Religious Fundamentalisms and the Political Disempowerment of Women 13
- Sinhala Buddhist Nationalism/‘Fundamentalism’ and Its Impact on Gendered Political Participation in Sri Lanka 27
- Malaysia – Trajectory towards Secularism or Islamism? 44
- Islam and Women’s Political Participation in Indonesia: Discourses and Practices 68
- Catholic Fundamentalism and Its Impact on Women’s Political Participation in the Philippines 88
- Religion, Women and Politics: An Observer’s Analysis 107
The Women’s UN Report Network published this paper dealing with freedom of religion or belief and international law in 2016.
Across the globe, the practice of religion or belief “is one of the fundamental elements in [a person’s] conception of life.” In some parts of the world, however, the practice of a religion by some conflicts with the freedoms and rights of others, including the right not to profess any religion or belief. Currently, no international, legally binding text explicitly addresses the right to freedom of religion or belief. Past attempts to address this void have largely failed, and as a result religious intolerance and extremism continue to dominate public discourse.
Following a brief outline of the relevant international law acknowledging and establishing a framework for freedom of religion or belief, this paper addresses the continued and urgent need for ratification of Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as the need for an international treaty or convention on the elimination of all forms of intolerance or discrimination on the basis of religion or belief.
The Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies of the European University Institute published the Working Paper on Faith-based Organisations at the United Nations in 2013.
This working paper examines faith-based organisations (FBOs) and their attempts to seek to influence debate and decision-making at the UN. Increasing attention on FBOs in this context has followed what is widely understood as a widespread, post-Cold War ‘religious resurgence’, which characterises a novel ‘postsecular’ international environment. One aspect of the new postsecular environment is increasing focus on global public policy at the UN, from FBOs from various religious traditions, especially Christianity, Islam, and Judaism.
The paper focuses on Christian, Muslim and Jewish FBOs at the UN because: (1) it is the largest inter-governmental organisation, with 193 member states, (2) it is the most important global public policy focus, and (3) hundreds of FBOs have an institutionalised presence at the UN, via official status with the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). Overall, the UN regularly engages with more than 3,000 non-governmental organisations afforded ‘official’ UN status. Around 10 per cent are classified as FBOs, implying that their activities and goals are significantly moulded by religious orientations and principles. This does not necessarily imply however that FBOs at the UN are ‘religiously pure’, that is, unwilling to work with non-religious entities, including both states and non-state actors. Many FBOs are willing to interact at the UN with both state and non-state entities which share their ideological although not religious proclivities. The paper conceptualises and examines two categories of FBO: ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’, in the context of three separate issue areas: women’s sexual and reproductive human rights; international development; and ‘defamation of religions.’
