NYC gay pride parade celebrates historic vote

New York (CNN) -- Forty-two years after a police raid sparked rioting and perhaps the birth of the American gay rights movement, New Yorkers rejoiced at their city's annual pride parade Sunday in celebration of same-sex couples' newly-acquired right to wed.

The parade, or march, meandered along Manhattan's Fifth Avenue and passed in front of the famous Stonewall Inn in Greenwich Village, where the rioting took place in 1969.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed a bill into law on Friday that made New York the sixth state to legalize same-sex marriage, more than doubling the number of Americans living in states that permit such unions.

The measure will take effect 30 days after it was signed, on July 24, providing same-sex couples with a slew of new rights that include employer health benefits, easier inheritance and a host of state tax breaks.

Federal recognition, however, was not a part of Friday's vote, leaving benefits like Social Security and ease of immigration largely out of reach for same-sex couples.

Marching with supporters on Sunday, Cuomo told reporters that the country looks to New York as a guide for many of its progressive politics.

Gay rights supporters take part in New York's pride parade on Sunday, two days after the state legalized same-sex marriage.

"The point of civil rights laws is to protect everybody -- both the people who look like us or who we relate to and the people who don't," said Suzanne Goldberg, a professor at New York's Columbia Law School. "The point of a parade that celebrates gay pride is to make room for all people who identify themselves as gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender."

The controversial bill passed a Republican-controlled Senate before reaching Cuomo's desk, in an extended legislative session that left many skeptical over whether lawmakers would bring the measure to a vote.

Its passage also sparked sharp criticism from opposition lawmakers, who warned of potential lawsuits against religious institutions -- a question that delayed deliberations and ultimately resulted in an amendment to the bill to protect religious groups from litigation

Religious leaders also cautioned against the wider implications of redefining the legal parameters of marriage.

"We worry that both marriage and the family will be undermined by this tragic presumption of government in passing this legislation that attempts to redefine these cornerstones of civilization," the state's Catholic bishops said in a joint statement released late Friday. It was signed by Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan and seven other bishops.

Asked what his message was for the gay community, Dolan said Sunday morning, "I tell the gay community I love you very much, and every single morning when I say my prayers, I pray for (the) health and happiness of everyone in New York.

"I'm very sorry that our opponents succeeded in reducing this to anti-gay sentiment," he said. "It's not. It's pro-marriage, it's not anti-gay."

But, he said, there was "sadness and disappointment" when the bill passed.

"We as Catholics would oppose any attempt by anybody to redefine marriage," Dolan said. "We don't believe marriage can be changed or radically altered to accommodate any lifestyle. If anything I've said would lead you to believe I have nothing but love and respect, then I apologize."

The bill passed by a narrow 33-29 vote -- a first for a GOP-led state Senate.

Meanwhile, those in attendance for Sunday's parade were largely one-sided in their perspective.

"I think it's better because there should be equality," said Katie Worral, 17, who was visiting New York from Liverpool, England. "At the end of the day, we're all human beings."

"I think it's awesome," said Robin Rosser, 49, who traveled to New York from Union, New Jersey, for the parade. "This is number six and there will be many more to come."

"It's a total breakthrough," said Kathryn Flowers, 22, of Queens, New York, who stood beside her partner as they cheered on marchers. "There's so many people who have been together for years. It's about time they get married."

Asked whether she and her partner will marry, Flowers said, "Anything's possible now."

Others traveled from abroad to attend Sunday's events.

"This is hugely important," said Jorge Perez, 44, who traveled from Costa Rica specifically to watch the city's annual parade. "It's good to see a big state like New York finally get this sort of thing into law."

Whether or not Friday's vote reflects new momentum and the national model that Cuomo projects, it seemed that many still had a lot to cheer about during the city's annual parade.

CNN's Miguel Susana contributed to this report.

CNN

U.N.'s 'historic' gay rights resolution

People celebrate during a gay pride march this month in Strasbourg, France.U.N. Human Rights Council resolution passes 23-19, with three abstentionsSome African nations criticize South Africa, which introduced the gay rights measureThe move "puts the issue squarely on the U.N.'s agenda," a U.S. official says"This is really a critical beginning of a universal recognition of a new set of rights," she says

(CNN) -- In what the U.S. State Department is calling a "historic step," the U.N. Human Rights Council passed a resolution Friday supporting equal rights for all, regardless of sexual orientation.

The resolution, introduced by South Africa, is the first-ever U.N. resolution on the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered persons.

It passed with 23 votes in favor, 19 opposed and three abstentions amid strong criticism of South Africa by some African nations.

Suzanne Nossel, deputy assistant secretary of state for international organizations, told CNN, "It really is a key part in setting a new norm that gay rights are human rights and that that has to be accepted globally."

"It talks about the violence and discrimination that people of LGBT persuasion experience around the world," she said, "and that those issues ... need to be taken seriously. It calls for reporting on what's going on, where people are being discriminated against, the violence that is taking place, and it really puts the issue squarely on the U.N.'s agenda going forward."

Divided opinion continues among some countries about whether the time has come to take up gay rights in the U.N. forum, Nossel said, "so this resolution is really significant as far as gaining widespread support for doing just that."

The State Department lobbied intensively for the resolution, and Nossel said the United States was pleased to see African leadership, from South Africa in particular, as well as strong support from South America, Colombia and Brazil.

The resolution also will commission the first-ever U.N. report on the challenges that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people face around the globe. Nossel said the Obama administration hopes it will "open a broader international discussion on how to best promote and protect the human rights of LGBT persons."

In March the U.N. Human Rights Council adopted a statement, supported by 85 countries, on gay rights called "Ending Violence Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity."

Friday's vote "marks a victory for defenders of human rights," said Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. "It sends a clear message that abuses based on sexual orientation and gender identity must end."

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has made gay rights a key focus of the State Department's human rights agenda, expressing her view that "gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay rights."

At a gay pride event this month at the State Department, Clinton said, "Men and women are harassed, beaten, subjected to sexual violence, even killed, because of who they are and whom they love. Some are driven from their homes or countries, and many who become refugees confront new threats in their countries of asylum. In some places, violence against the LGBT community is permitted by law and inflamed by public calls to violence; in others, it persists insidiously behind closed doors."

Nossel told CNN, "it's not like discrimination or violence are going to end overnight" because of the U.N. resolution, "but now ... when there are proposals in parliaments or legislatures around the world to illegalize gay activity or repress people because of their sexual orientation, opponents can point to this and say, 'Hey, the U.N. has spoken out, there is a resolution that rejects this squarely.'

"That is the way these international norms are built," she said. "It's not from scratch. On women's rights, on minority rights, it builds up over time. So this is really a critical beginning of a universal recognition of a new set of rights that forms part of the international system."

.

CNN

Arizona wildfire close to historic milestone

(CNN) -- As firefighters continued battling a massive wildfire in eastern Arizona Sunday, authorities said the threat of spreading flames had decreased enough to allow thousands of residents in some of the hardest-hit areas to return home.

"After consulting with fire officials, it has been determined that the fire risk has diminished enough that it will no longer be a threat to the citizens of the towns," said Cmdr. Webb Hogle of the Apache County Sheriff's Office.

But he said smoke from the wildfire "still poses serious health hazards" in Springerville, Eagar and South Fork, where authorities expect thousands to return home after evacuating.

"If they return, they do so at their own risk," he added.

The 15-day-old blaze in eastern Arizona inched closer Sunday to becoming the worst fire in the state's history.

The second-largest blaze had scorched 430,171 acres, firefighters said late Saturday, an area bigger than most of the largest cities in the United States.

The so-called Wallow fire is 38,467 acres shy of matching the Rodeo/Chediski wildfire of 2002, Arizona's biggest.

Firefighters said they are making progress as they dig trenches, set their own fires to take away natural fuels from the advancing blaze and dump retardants from the air on the flames.

It "has been chasing us around, but after today we're feeling very optimistic," Jerome MacDonald told reporters late Saturday.

The fire, which broke out May 29 in the Apache National Forest, is 6% contained, said MacDonald, the operations chief for the Southwest Interagency Incident Management team fighting the fire.

Air quality for much of New Mexico and eastern Arizona was expected to worsen over the weekend because of wildfires, the New Mexico health and environment officials said.

Heavy smoke could affect those in sensitive groups, including children, pregnant woman, asthma sufferers and people with lung and heart diseases, the New Mexico Environment Department said.

The National Weather Service said smoke plumes from Arizona wildfires will continue moving toward Santa Fe and Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Heavy smoke has permeated communities around the Arizona blaze.

"We have not seen the sun clearly for several days," said Rita Baysinger, a spokeswoman for the Southwest Interagency Incident Management team.

MacDonald said changing winds are likely to start clearing out the smoke.

"All the smoke from the fire has basically been funneling through Eagar in the valley and it settles there in the morning," MacDonald said. "I don't expect the same kind of smoky conditions over the next couple of days."

At least 9,114 people were evacuated from Springerville, Eagar, Nutrioso, Alpine, Greer and surrounding areas.

The wildfire has consumed 29 homes, 22 of them in the evacuated city of Greer.

CNN's Phil Gast and journalist Craig Johnson contributed to this report.

CNN

Obama's Middle East speech missed 'historic opportunity,' say many Arabs (The Christian Science Monitor)

Cairo – President Obama pledged American support for pro-democracy uprisings in the Middle East Thursday, trying to put the US on the right side of history as he laid out his vision for US involvement in the region after the Arab Spring.

Those from nations where opposition movements are fighting brutal crackdowns welcomed the president’s messages of support. But what was billed as a major speech left some in the region nonplussed. They said that the speech didn’t cover new ground, was short on policy prescriptions, and that the president missed a chance to apologize for America’s history of supporting the dictators people revolted against.

RECOMMENDED: What Arabs wanted to hear (or not hear) from Obama speech

“Obama really had an opportunity to reshape and reframe the debate and ... he gave it away,” says Shadi Hamid, director of research at the Brookings Doha Center, adding that there was nothing distinctive or imaginative about the address. “This speech was an opportunity to say to Arabs, ‘We as Americans made mistakes, we did not support democratic aspirations as much as we should have, but we’re going to do better.’ Obama didn’t say that.”

Marked difference from Obama's 2009 Cairo speech

The muted response to the speech differed markedly from the widespread interest and pockets of hope generated by Obama's landmark speech to the Muslim world from Cairo two years ago. Many felt that Obama has failed to follow through on the promises he made in 2009, and declined to give him another chance.

The protests that began six months ago have imparted to Arabs a strengthened sense of independence, even as subsequent uprisings have stalled with a bloody conflict in Libya, prolonged and brutal crackdowns in Syria and Yemen, and the near-total crushing of a protest movement in Bahrain. Obama said that the US aimed to throw its full weight behind supporting those uprisings.

Sign up for our daily World Editor's Picks newsletter. Our best stories, in your inbox.

a€?It will be the policy of the United States to promote reform across the region, and to support transitions to democracy,a€

Still, his words rang hollow to some in the region who see that US support for uprisings is not consistent across the region. But regarding Bahrain, where US criticism of the regime's crackdown on protesters has been muted, he spoke more forcefully than any US official has since the uprising began in February. He specifically criticized mass arrests and the use of "brute force."

“The only way forward is for the government and opposition to engage in a dialogue, and you can’t have a real dialogue when parts of the peaceful opposition are in jail,” he said. Later, he added, “Shia must never have their mosques destroyed in Bahrain.”

“I’m shocked because this is the first time we’ve seen such clear remarks about Bahrain,” says Mohammed Al Maskati, head of the Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights in the country's capital, Manama.

Yet Mr. Maskati said there was much left to be desired from the speech as well. Obama did not mention Saudi Arabia’s intervention in Bahrain, where more than 1,000 Saudi troops remain who helped quell the uprising, or make clear how the government could be compelled to talk with the opposition when its actions imply that it is decidedly opposed to negotiations.

'He can't say now that he was with the revolution'

In Egypt, where the US strongly supported former President Hosni Mubarak for 30 years, and resentment of that support still runs high, relatively few people paid attention to the speech. Some who did were critical.

“He gave a speech as if he was with the revolutions from the beginning,” says Emad Gad, an analyst at the Al Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo. “But we know his administration was with Mubarak totally. He can’t say now that he was with the revolution.”

Mr. Obama did say that “for decades, the United States has pursued a set of core interests in the region,” adding later, “but if America is to be credible, we must acknowledge that at times our friends in the region have not all reacted to the demands for consistent change – with change that’s consistent with the principles that I’ve outlined today.”

But, says Mr. Hamid, “If you heard this speech in isolation, you would have thought that America had always naturally supported democracy. There was no acknowledgment of America’s very complex and sometimes tragic history in the Middle East."

Praise for economic aid to Egypt, support for Libya

On most topics, there were points that generated both criticism and praise. Some Egyptians welcomed the announcement of a multibillion-dollar economic assistance plan for Egypt, whose economy has struggled since the uprising as tourism and foreign investment have dried up. It will include up to $1 billion in debt relief, with the freed-up funds to be used for investment in growth and entrepreneurship. The US will guarantee $1 billion in borrowing for infrastructure and job creation, said Obama, and a $2 billion fund will be set up for investment in the private sector.

“That’s excellent news,” said taxi driver Mohamed Salem when he learned of the plan for debt relief. “Egypt is suffering. We welcome this. And I hope they will also bring all the money that Mubarak and his sons hid abroad.” Others were more skeptical, however, wondering about strings attached to the aid. Egypt was the No. 2 recipient of US aid for years after making peace with Israel.

On Libya, where the US along with NATO has undertaken military action, Obama made clear that he expected Col. Muammar Qaddafi to be removed from power, although he did not make clear how that would be accomplished.

"That reinforces in their mind that 'America is not going to leave you,' " says Mansour el-Kikhia, chairman of political science at the University of Texas, San Antonio, who has just returned from two weeks in the rebel stronghold of Benghazi in eastern Libya. "Libyans ... know they want freedom and don't need Obama to tell them that ... [but] it is good they see that the United States is supporting what they are doing, that the US is not going to let them down with regard to Qaddafi."

And on Syria, some had hoped the president would come down hard on President Bashar al-Assad for his bloody crackdown on protesters. The president did so, condemning the Syrian crackdown, but he left the door open for Assad, saying, “The Syrian people have shown their courage in demanding a transition to democracy. President Assad now has a choice: He can lead that transition, or get out of the way.”

'The Arab-Israeli conflict doesn't need speeches'

Obama, who is set to host Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tomorrow at the White House, spent a fifth of the speech discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He called for a two-phased negotiation process, in which Israeli security and Palestinian sovereignty would be agreed upon in a first round of talks using the 1967 borders as a starting point, with the stickier issues of Jerusalem and Palestinian refugees to be decided later.

He criticized both Israel and the Palestinian leadership, laying out a number of issues that need to be addressed.

But more rhetoric will not be helpful in solving the impasse, says Gad. “I think the Arab-Israeli conflict doesn't need speeches. It needs steps on the ground. If Obama wants to be effective, put pressure on all sides to resume negotiations.”

Staff writer Scott Peterson contributed reporting from Istanbul, Turkey.

Sign up for our daily World Editor's Picks newsletter. Our best stories, in your inbox.

Yahoo! News

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Queen's historic visit divides Irish

(CNN) -- It is a state visit that many in Ireland believed would never happen. But when the UK's Queen Elizabeth II lands in Dublin on Tuesday it will mark the reconciliation between two neighboring countries that once viewed each with suspicion and hostility.

Ireland's fight to free itself from its former imperial master is likely to form much of the narrative of the visit, the first by a UK monarch to the republic since it gained independence in 1921.

There will be constant reminders of the violent past. Her plane will touch down for example at Casement Aerodrome, a military airfield named after Roger Casement, who was executed for treason in 1916 for conspiring with the Germans. His fate was sealed when the queen's grandfather George V refused to commute his death sentence.

Like all foreign heads of state, the queen will then go to Dublin's Garden of Remembrance where she will pay her respects alongside Irish President Mary McAleese to "all those who gave their lives in the cause of Irish Freedom."

Ireland battens down ahead of queen's visit

She will travel to another nationalist shrine, Croke Park, where British troops opened fire on a crowd watching a Gaelic football match in November 1920, killing 14. The massacre was sparked by the murder of 14 British intelligence officers by the IRA.

The Irish war of Independence that the killing was a part of directly led to partition of Ireland in 1921. The majority of the island gained independence but six of the nine counties of the province of Ulster chose to stay in the United Kingdom, eventually becoming the country of Northern Ireland.

When I was there the IRA cease-fire had collapsed, there was violence and killings, no surrender, no compromise. In those days there was no likelihood of the queen ever visiting.
--Journalist Toby Harnden

In the late 1960s the conflict between mainly Protestant unionists who want Northern Ireland to remain part of the UK and largely Roman Catholic nationalists who want the North to be reunited with the rest of Ireland exploded into a political and sectarian war, known as the Troubles.

The three decades of ensuing violence between the IRA and loyalists claimed the lives of more than 3,000 people, most of them north of the border, and while the Good Friday Agreement effectively ended the conflict, suspicions remain, and for this reason the queen's state visit is more than symbolic.

Under the terms of the landmark accord, terrorist groups on both sides dumped their weapons, and their political allies now work together in Northern Ireland's power-sharing government.

The change has been so rapid that even as recently as the late 1990s one journalist said he could never have imagined a state visit by the queen. Toby Harnden, who covered Ireland for the Daily Telegraph, said while some people on both sides still have their doubts over it -- for different reasons -- more significant is the peaceable language used in the debate.

"Some Catholics will see this as Britain cementing its claim over the Irish territory of the six counties of Northern Ireland," Harnden told CNN. Meanwhile "the Protestants will see the queen's visit as ratification of a state that they believe is constitutionally hostile to any British presence in Ireland. So on both sides there'll be qualms."

But the comment by Gerry Adams -- a pivotal figure in Northern Irish history as long-time leader of Sinn Fein, the IRA's political allies -- who said the queen's visit was "premature" speaks volumes, Harnden said, compared to incendiary language he had used in the past. For instance, "when the queen's cousin Lord Mountbatten was killed by the IRA in 1979 (Adams) said it was an execution that was fully justified."

"When I was there the IRA cease-fire had collapsed, there was violence and killings, no surrender, no compromise. In those days there was no likelihood of the queen ever visiting."

The spur for the change, Harnden believes, was the establishment in 1998 by former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair of a public inquiry into the 1972 Bloody Sunday massacre, in which British troops shot dead 13 people at a civil rights march in Londonderry. The death of another man four and a half months later was also attributed to the injuries he received on that day.

"Bloody Sunday was a running sore, so the fact that Blair had a full inquiry was a surprise. And to have Conservative prime minister (David Cameron) stand up in parliament (in 2010) and apologize for what happened in 1972 was a significant moment in Irish history. The Catholic community didn't think there would be such a comprehensive dig back into history."

Given these conditions imposed by our friends in Europe, the British look like better friends than the Germans these days.
--Roy Foster, professor of Irish history at Oxford University

Without denying the benefits of peace, others in Ireland believe the queen's visit is long overdue, with the two countries having enjoyed good relations for many years.

They believe the visits by the queen and U.S. President Barack Obama the following week, security for which will cost 30 million euros ($42 million), is a distraction for a nation that has suffered a brutal downturn since the collapse of the "Celtic Tiger" economy in 2007.

Roy Foster, professor of Irish history at Oxford University, said the queen may even ask some pointed questions to Irish leaders about their handling of the recession.

"I think the visit is overdue and it seems to be the right time now," Foster told CNN. "Ireland needs some type of distraction, if not bread and circuses. The country is in a bad state: thanks to incompetent, corrupt and compromized politicians, criminal bankers and supine government regulators, we are now in hock to European financial institutions.

"I think the queen famously asked some representatives of the city of London, why did you not see all this financial meltdown happening, it would be quite amusing if she asked one of the Irish politicians that."

Foster said amid the recession London seemed friendlier than countries in mainland Europe. "The Irish look grimly at the French and Germans now because they imposed such conditions for the so-called bail-out which was an extremely hard bargain driven by powerful financial interest which will mark and I think cripple the Irish economy for years to come.

"Given these conditions imposed by our friends in Europe, the British look like better friends than the Germans these days," Foster added.

CNN's Fionnuala Sweeney contributed to this report.

CNN Top Stories

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.