Wednesday, July 10, 2019
As we reported earlier, the Commission on Unaliable Rights is gearing up to start work. On July 8th Secretary Pompeo, a Christian Evangelical made an announcement that he appointed Prof. Mary Ann Glennon (Harvard Law) as chair. Prof. Glendon is a former ambassador to the Vatican. The makeup of the other commission members reveals that the Commission's focus is religious dominance over all other rights.
Alarms are sounding. Democrats are promoting a bill that would prohibit State Department funds from being used to support the commission. The American Jewish World Service denounced the commission due to its religious nature. One member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee bemoaned that the administration "has taken a wrecking ball to America's global leadership on promoting fundamental rights across the world."
There is good reason to be worried. Mr. Pompeo published an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal on Sunday which does nothing to soothe human rights advocates. The article makes clear that US dominance in defining what rights anyone is entitled to is the goal. A portion o the "Yet after the Cold War ended, many human-rights advocates turned their energy to new categories of rights. These rights often sound noble and just. But when politicians and bureaucrats create new rights, they blur the distinction between unalienable rights and ad hoc rights granted by governments. Unalienable rights are by nature universal. Not everything good, or everything granted by a government, can be a universal right. Loose talk of 'rights'
unmoors us from the principles of liberal democracy."
To accomplish this weeding out of human rights, Commission members will examine the Universal Declaration of Human Rights among other documents to determine what rights are fundamental and, among other questions, who has the power to grant rights. The likely answer is God, who no doubt will be wispering in the ears of commission members.
Mr. Pompeo goes on to say: "Human-rights advocacy has lost its bearings and become more of an industry than a moral compass. And 'rights talk' has become a constant element of our domestic political discourse, without any serious effort to distinguish what rights mean and where they come from." Conclusions will no doubt be drawn that the only rights that exist are those specifically stated in US drafted documents. The very documents that exclude any form of diversity. Anything else will no doubt undermine fundamental US freedoms.