TIGblogs TIG | TIGblogs GROUP TIGBLOGS LOGIN SIGNUP
Bahamas Blog International
Bahamas Blog International


« previous 5


CUBA SIGNS INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS AGREEMENTS
Related to country: Cuba

Translations available in: English (original) | French | Spanish | Italian | German | Portuguese | Swedish | Russian | Dutch | Arabic

Sovereign decision of a government that is not acting under pressure
• Emphasizes Foreign Minister Pérez Roque, adding that the U.S. blockade and hostility constitute the main obstacle to the Cuban people’s enjoyment of the rights covered by those agreements




UNITED NATIONS. — Foreign Minister Felipe Pérez Roque said that Cuba’s signing of human rights agreements was a sovereign decision by a government that has never acted and will never act under pressure.

In a press conference shortly after signing the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Pérez Roque referred to the reason that such a step was being made.

He explained that the decision "has been taken now that the selective and unjust mandate against Cuba imposed by the brutal pressure and blackmail of the United States in the former Human Rights Commission has been clearly defeated, representing a historic victory for the Cuban people."

In his encounter with the accredited press in the United Nations, the foreign minister said that the island made the following statement, valid for both:

"The Republic of Cuba declares that it was the Revolution that made it possible for its people to enjoy the rights formulated in the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

"The economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed by the United States of America and its policy of hostility and aggression against Cuba constitute the most serious obstacle to the Cuban people’s enjoyment of the rights formulated in the covenants."

The statement also says that the Cuban Constitution and its legislation establish the rights protected by those pacts and that the politics and programs of the Cuban state guarantee the effective realization and protection of those rights for all Cubans.

He emphasized that with respect to the scope and application of some postulates of those international instruments, Cuba will register any reservations or interpretative statements that it considers pertinent.

In response to a question about the possibility of relations with the United States in response to a change of government in that country in 2009, Pérez Roque said that Cuba is willing, but clarified that it would never negotiate its sovereignty and that the blockade must be lifted.

In that respect he insisted that Cuba has generalized international support, reiterated by the UN General Assembly last November, when 184 of its members voted for a resolution against the U.S. blockade, imposed almost 50 years ago.

Foreign Minister Pérez Roque announced the Cuban government’s decision to sign both pacts this past December 10.

The island abstained from taking that step while the mandate of a special rapporteur imposed on Cuba under the pressure of the United States remained in the former Human Rights Commission, without the existence of any violations to justify it.

In that respect, Pérez Roque said that this decision had been made now that the selective and unjust mandate against Cuba had been clearly defeated.

The Human Rights Council, based in Geneva, is formed by the representatives of 47 countries, including Cuba, which was elected to that body by more than two-thirds of the 192 members of the General Assembly.

On the day of the signing, February 28, Pérez Roque met with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and also with the Coordination Bureau of the Non-Aligned Movement, of which Cuba currently holds the presidency.


Translated by Granma International

February 29, 2008 | 5:44 PM Comments  0 comments



The Old Testament Versus The New
Translations available in: English (original) | French | Spanish | Italian | German | Portuguese | Swedish | Russian | Dutch | Arabic

Old vs New:
By KARAN MINNIS, Guardian Lifestyles Reporter -
Nassau, Bahamas:



For years scholars, clergy and members of the public have debated which is better? The Old Testament or the New? Some argue that because the Old Testament was first, that makes it the foundation of the Bible and religion;while others say it's for that very reason it should be ignored because there is something new.

"I've always wondered what's the point for having two sections of the Bible," says Christina Dean, 23. "I mean, I know one was before Christ and the other is after. But if that's the case why do I need to worry about what happened before Jesus. I just want to read what he taught and what I'm suppose to do. I just don't know or see the benefits of having both or reading both."

According to Genieus Wells, senior pastor of Chapel on the Hill many people simply don't understand the reason behind both testaments, and that is usually the cause for debate.

Wells says both the Old and New Testament should be followed, as they enhance each other.

"We should listen to the whole Bible. The New [Testament] does not contradict the Old [Testament]" he said. "Everything from the old rolls into one person, because every book of the Bible from Genesis straight to Malachi has one central figure — Jesus Christ.

"And when Jesus came all that the Old Testament said was fulfilled. He came to fulfill the Old Testament [and] the New Testament shows that. This is why we need to read and understand both Testaments to see why what happened in the New Testament happened."

St. Barnabas Parish priest Canon Basil Tynes says that even in 100 A.D there was a debate about the Old and New Testament.

"Two Gnostics during the first few centuries of the church, Basilides (100-139 A.D.) and Valentinus (100-175 A.D.) were known to have rejected the Old Testament because they believed that the God of the Old Testament could not be the God of love that is found in the New Testament. However, their ideas were rejected later on by the early Church because they saw the scriptures, including the 15 books of the Apocrypha as important in terms of the movement from the covenant of the law to the covenant of grace within its pages.

"The truth is that we will never understand the New Covenant without grasping what made up the elements of the Old, nor will we understand the debate over salvation by grace and salvation by works of the law by removing or ignoring the books of the Bible [Old Testament] that makes up our Judean-Christian heritage."

Adding that the Old Testament finds its fulfillment in the New Testament, and therefore it is necessary that we take it seriously if only for this fact, Canon Tynes said that like the Book of Hebrews eloquently says, what came before is simply a shadow or pattern of the reality that is found in Jesus Christ and Christianity.

"How we view the Old Testament is crucial for our understanding of how it should be used. The Old Testament is a library of books that contains history, laws, poetry and wisdom literature. The various books were written at a particular time in a particular place to answer questions of faith as the authors attempted to provide divinely inspired materials to answer these burning questions. The real argument behind the debate in our present context over the Old Testament has to do with the place of the law in the light of the new covenant of grace."

Tynes says there are several things that need to be remembered about the law as viewed by Jesus and members of the early church.

"In the sermon on the Mount in Matthew 5:21-48, Jesus expressed his own objections to the interpretation of the Laws of the Old Testament. In Acts of the Apostles 15, the first ecumenical council decided that Gentile Christians would not be required to follow the Laws of Moses. St. Paul on numerous occasions had to correct a misconception that Law was needed after the dispensation of Grace. In other words there were persons who believed that after their conversion to Christianity they needed to go back and keep the laws of the Old Testament. The Law may have instructed people in the need for a Saviour, but by itself it cannot save us; we need Christ and Him alone," he says.

However, he said we should think of the Laws of the Old Testament like a chain-link fence along the sides of a bridge.

"No one really thinks that the fence can save them from plunging into the water below, but it serves to clearly identify the correct path. The law may tell us how to live but it did not provide the power for us to keep it.

"A study of Paul's reply to the Galatians who faced this same issue will help us: Galatians 2:16 "Yet we know that a man is not justified through works of the Law but through faith in Jesus Christ ... because by works of the Law will no one be justified. Galatians 2:21 If justification were through the Law, then Jesus died in vain! Galatians 3:1-5 St. Paul asks several questions. Life is spirit-directed [from above], and not flesh directed [working the law from below] for a Christian. Galatians 3:10-14 St. Paul states, 'For all who rely on works of the Law are under a curse.' Why you may ask? Because they cannot keep the entire law. The law will never put them right with God. Only Christ can redeem people from the curse of the law; and finally the promise of the spirit is through faith and not by works of the law."

However, Tynes said, the law was good, but it lacked the power to lead people to the life that God intended. Later on, in Galatians 5:22-23, Paul would tell his readers that those who live by the Spirit needed no law.

"These were the decisions of the church from its earliest days, and still remain the same today. Make no mistake, the Old Testament provides us with great insights that help us in terms of our spiritual worship, walk, witness and work, but it is the grace that enables us to reach to where God expects us to be. Part of the problem in understanding the Old Testament is that persons have not develop proper exegetical skills. Passages must be placed into their historical backgrounds and allowed to speak to the people of its time. The abiding message needs to be identified, and then that message needs to be applied," he said.