With the rejection of the “Personhood Amendment” in Mississippi and the rejection of Measure 3 in North Dakota, we see proof that Americans have a profound respect for religious freedom as the founders intended it.
Arguments against Title IX are based on two premises that are, in turn, grounded in cultural tradition: 1) Men and boys are the rightful "owners" of sports, and 2) Males are superior to females in athletic ability.
Religious freedom means that the government should not privilege the teachings of one religion over another or deny individual religious freedom. Individuals must have the right to accept or reject the principles of their own faith without legal restrictions.
Yet international support for such programs has not kept pace with the need for family planning. As a result, many developing countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, continue to face rapid population growth and other impediments to social and economic development.
Although most people know that Title IX requires schools to provide girls and boys with equal athletic opportunities, it goes much further and is intended to ensure that our schools are free of gender-based discrimination and harassment across all educational and extra-curricular programs. It's time to put more effort into making this a reality.
Something new is starting to happen. The last two months have hosted a collection of headlines where one group has stepped up in active support of the rights of another group. Any movement – whether old or new – has only succeeded when actively embraced by allies beyond the most targeted group. What are the possibilities of this new road we’re walking down? What does it mean for all of us to “build that circle of our common safety that all of us deserve”?
Not only is the Rio +20 outcome document, “The Future We Want,” silent on sexual and reproductive rights, but during the negotiations many of the EU and G77 countries who have been progressive on these issues in the past were completely silent.
