Chief Adviser Prof Muhammad Yunus has said the interim government, formed through a mass uprising of students-labourers-people, is firmly committed to identifying and solving the issues like negligence to children, child labour, malnutrition and child marriage that hinder the proper development of children. "If the children grow up with the spirit of love, compassion and free thinking, they will be able to play a positive role in building the future Bangladesh," he said, adding that today's children will become tomorrow's artists, writers, philosophers, economists, scientists, doctors and engineers. Prof Yunus made the remarks in a message marking the World Children's Day-2024 that is being observed on October 7. In 2024, World Children's Day calls on adults to listen to the future. "By listening to children, we can fulfil their right to self-expression, understand their ideas for a better world and include their priorities in our actions today," said UNESCO. Read: 105 children killed in July-Aug uprising: Adviser Sharmin Murshid On the occasion of the celebration of World Children's Day 2024' in Bangladesh, Prof Yunus expressed love and affection to all the children of the world including Bangladesh. At the dawn of the construction of a new Bangladesh, the importance of observing the World Children's Day has reached a new level, he said. "Children are the architects of prosperous Bangladesh. It is the responsibility of all of us to give importance to proper development of children to build Bangladesh anew," Prof Yunus said. Therefore, he said, there is no alternative to proper environment, education, safety, nutrition and healthy entertainment in the physical, mental and cultural development of children. Prof Yunus hoped that the programmes undertaken to celebrate 'World Children's Day 2024' will contribute to the overall development of children. Read more: 70% of children in Bangladesh face discrimination, says Kochi Konther Asar "May all the children of the world, including Bangladesh, grow up in safe and loving care - this is my hope today. I wish World Children's Day and Children's Rights Week 2024 a success," he said.

US Ambassador to Bangladesh Peter Haas is holding a meeting with Foreign Secretary Masud Bin Momen at State Guesthouse Padma. The meeting began around 11 am today (November 30, 2023). Issues being discussed at the meeting could not be known immediately.   It is worth noting that the Bangladesh Embassy in Washington, DC has said the political context of the US “Presidential Memorandum on Advancing Worker Empowerment, Rights, and High Labor Standards Globally” has many reasons “to be alarmed.” “Politics is behind what is said about labor rights in the memorandum, and the US would try to use the political purpose in different ways,” said the embassy in a letter based on observation it made on the recently launched US initiative. Read: US Ambassador Peter Haas returns to Dhaka The US Presidential Memorandum was rolled out on November 16. The United States said it will work to “hold accountable those who threaten, intimidate, attack union leaders, labor rights defenders, labor organizations – including using things like sanctions, trade penalties and visa restrictions” – all the tools in their kit. Read: Repeatedly raised concerns about threatening rhetoric directed at Peter Haas with Bangladesh govt: US Embassy The “memorandum” is a signal for Bangladesh as the US may take any measure as described in it with the excuse of labor issues, the letter from Bangladesh embassy in Washington, seen by UNB, reads. “The memorandum may also have an impact on Bangladesh’s apparel sector, and it should be taken into cognizance with priority by the concerned stakeholders,” it said. Read more: Try to figure out a way to have dialogue without pre-conditions: Peter Haas urges parties

The powerful lower house of Japan's parliament on Tuesday passed a bill to promote understanding of LGBTQ+ issues amid protests by activists that last-minute revisions by Prime Minister Fumio Kishida's conservative party favored opponents of sexual equality instead of guaranteeing equal rights. The passage followed only a few hours of debate in a lower house committee last Friday, an unusually short period. The bill is expected to be approved quickly by parliament's upper house, which is also controlled by Kishida's governing bloc. Also Read: Japan aims to refocus its foreign aid on maritime and economic security and national interests Japan is the only member of the Group of Seven leading industrialized nations which does not have LGTBQ+ legal protections. Support for same-sex marriage and other rights has grown among the Japanese public, but opposition remains strong within the governing Liberal Democratic Party, known for conservative values and a reluctance to promote gender equality and sexual diversity. LGBTQ+ activists have increased their efforts to achieve an anti-discrimination law since a former Kishida aide said in February that he wouldn't want to live next to LGBTQ+ people and that citizens would flee Japan if same-sex marriage were allowed. Also Read: Japan provides $500,000 to Cyclone-affected Rohingyas, host communities through IOM  The final version of the bill passed Tuesday states that "unjust discrimination" is unacceptable but doesn't clearly ban discrimination, apparently because some governing party lawmakers oppose transgender rights. Some party members said more consensus building is needed before anti-discrimination measures are introduced. The bill states that the public's understanding of various sexual orientations and gender identities is "not necessarily sufficient." It says conditions should be created so that "all citizens can live with peace of mind," which critics say shows the governing party prioritized the concerns of opponents of equal rights over the rights of sexual minorities. "We have sought the enactment of an anti-discrimination law," the Japan Alliance for LGBT Legislation said in a statement. "This bill does not focus on the people concerned, and instead focuses on the side that has discriminated against us and caused our suffering. It's the complete opposite of what we need." Also Read: Japan wants to understand what’s happening in Bangladesh and where it’s headed, BNP says as ambassador meets Fakhrul Recent surveys show a majority of Japanese back legalizing same-sex marriage and other protections. Support among the business community has rapidly increased. A court in Fukuoka in southern Japan ruled last Thursday that the lack of legal protections for LGTBQ+ people appears to be unconstitutional. It was the last of five court cases brought by 14 same-sex couples in 2019 that accused the government of violating their equality. Four of the courts ruled that current government policy is unconstitutional or nearly so, while a fifth said a ban on same-sex marriage was constitutional.

A committee of British lawmakers said Sunday that the U.K. will break its international human rights commitments if it goes through with government plans to detain and deport people who cross the English Channel in small boats. Parliament's Joint Committee on Human Rights said the Illegal Migration Bill "breaches a number of the U.K.'s international human rights obligations and risks breaching others." Also Read: UK’s Sunak vows to halve inflation, tackle illegal migration Scottish National Party lawmaker Joanna Cherry, who chairs the committee, said the law would leave most refugees and victims of modern slavery with no way of seeking asylum in Britain. "By treating victims of modern slavery as 'illegal migrants' subject to detention and removal, this bill would breach our legal obligations to such victims and would risk increasing trafficking of vulnerable people," she said. The committee urged the government to make sweeping amendments to the bill, including exempting trafficking victims and curbing the government's power to detain people indefinitely. The government, which had pledged to "stop the boats," is unlikely to heed the recommendations. The legislation bars asylum claims by anyone who reaches the U.K. by unauthorized means, and compels officials to detain and then deport refugees and migrants "to their home country or a safe third country," such as Rwanda. Once deported, they would be banned from ever re-entering the U.K. Also Read: Asylum seeker accommodation in UK ‘racialised segregation and de facto detention’: Report Britain's Conservative government says the law will deter tens of thousands of people from making perilous journeys across the Channel and break the business model of the criminal gangs behind the trips. Critics, including the United Nations' refugee agency, have described the legislation as unethical and unworkable. The parliamentary committee questioned whether the law would act as a deterrent and said it "could lead to people taking other, potentially more dangerous, routes into the UK." The bill has been approved by the House of Commons, where the governing Conservatives have a majority, but is facing opposition in Parliament's upper chamber, the House of Lords. The Lords can amend the legislation but not block it. Also Read: EU+ saw 1 million asylum applications, including record 34,000 from Bangladeshis, in 2022 More than 45,000 people, including many fleeing countries such as Afghanistan, Iran and Syria, arrived in Britain in small boats last year, up from 8,500 in 2020. The government has housed many of those awaiting asylum decisions in hotels, which officials say costs taxpayers millions of pounds (dollars) a day. Authorities have said they plan to place new arrivals in disused military camps and a barge docked on the southern English coast.

Reacting to Bangladesh Nationalist Party’s Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir calling the Ahmadiyya community’s recent religious event in Panchagarh “controversial”, a spokesperson of the community said it “goes against their constitutional right”. “The government gave permission to hold this controversial event,” Fakhrul said in a press conference on March 13, video of which has generated reaction among netizens on social media. Speaking on the issue, Ahmad Tabsir Chowdhury, a spokesperson for the Ahmadiyya community, said, “First, Mirza  Fakhrul puts the blame squarely on the government, saying the attack on our religious event was staged by the government to divert public attention, and now he finds it convenient to call our congregation ‘controversial’.” Also Read: Fakhrul says govt allowed the Ahmadiyya religious event, calls it ‘controversial’ Referring to their constitutional right, Ahmad said, “Our religious gathering was set to be held within our premises. We have a right to hold such peaceful events.” Ahmad questioned: “How can he disregard our rights by calling our congregation ‘controversial’? We didn’t seek permission from the government to hold our event in a busy commercial area like Paltan in Dhaka. Rather, we planned to hold it inside our premises, it was on our property.” “When such irresponsible remarks come directly from a major political leader like Fakhrul, we are gravely disheartened,” the Ahmadiyya community spokesperson said. He further requested all political parties to at least maintain a modicum of decency while making comments on issues involving any minority community. Also Read: Govt orchestrated attacks on Ahmadiyya only to gain political mileage: Fakhrul Fakhrul’s remark came at a time when Basherkella – a pro-Jamaat-e-Islami Twitter account – condemned police action to stop the violence over the Ahmadiyya religious event and called for “boycotting” the community. The Ahmadiyya community has called it a “hate campaign” against them. Meanwhile, Jamaat-e-Islami’s Acting Secretary General Maulana ATM Masum issued a statement on March 5, asking the government to officially declare the Ahmadiyya community “non-Muslim”.

UN human rights chief Volker Türk Thursday expressed serious concerns about a proposed law in Italy that could hinder the provision of life-saving assistance by humanitarian search and rescue (SAR) organisations in the Central Mediterranean, resulting in more deaths at sea. “We all watch with horror the plight of those crossing the Mediterranean, and the desire to end that suffering is profound. But this is simply the wrong way to address this humanitarian crisis,” said Türk. “More people in distress will be made to suffer and more lives risk being lost because timely help is not available if this law is passed.” “The law would effectively punish both migrants and those who seek to help them. This penalisation of humanitarian actions would likely deter human rights and humanitarian organisations from doing their crucial work,” the high commissioner added. The proposed law – which was passed by the Chamber of Deputies of the Italian Parliament Wednesday and is scheduled to be considered by the Senate next week – also requires humanitarian rescue ships to head to port immediately after each rescue, foregoing additional rescues even if they are in the immediate vicinity of people in distress. In the past, SAR vessels carried out multiple rescue operations over days. At the same time, Italy recently designated distant ports of disembarkation for people rescued at sea – sometimes days sailing away from the original rescue site – making it all the more difficult for vessels who may seek to conduct multiple rescues. “Under international law, a captain is duty-bound to render immediate assistance to people in distress at sea, and states must protect the right to life,” said Türk. “But under this new proposal, a nearby SAR vessel would be obliged to ignore the distress calls of those at sea simply by having already saved others.” Türk added: “Those left stranded at sea would be forced to endure prolonged exposure to the elements and risk losing their lives. Those who survive face increased delays in accessing adequate medical care and rehabilitation, including for victims of torture, sexual violence and other human rights violations.” The high commissioner said the proposed law also risked increased interceptions and returns to Libya – a location the UN Human Rights Office repeatedly said cannot be considered a safe port of disembarkation. Under the proposed law, crews on board the ships must register every person who is planning to ask for international protection. Non-governmental organisations that do not comply with the new rules would be subject to administrative sanctions, and fines and have their vessel seized. The high commissioner urged the government of Italy to withdraw the proposed law, and to consult civil society groups, in particular search and rescue NGOs, to ensure any proposed legislation complies fully with international human rights law, international refugee law, and other applicable legal frameworks, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue. Read more: Greece: 3 dead after boat with migrants hits rocks

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) recently arranged a webinar on how rivers are legal, living persons with rights. Justice Md Ashraful Kamal, who delivered the judgment on the River Turag in 2019, presented the keynote at the "Legal Personhood of River." He highlighted the importance of the landmark ruling by the High Court Division that granted "legal personhood" to all rivers, declaring that all rivers in Bangladesh are entitled to legal protection under the Public Trust Doctrine (PTD). The judgment also included 17 key directives to the executive for dealing with river pollution and encroachment issues and for the survival of rivers as continuing ecosystem elements. "Because of these directives, river polluters have been banned from participating in the elections, the National River Conservation Commission as the 'guardian' of all rivers has been established, and polluters have been barred from receiving bank loans among other measures," Ashraful said. The concept of the legal personhood of the river is based on the legal recognition of the planetary ecosystems and other non-human entities as legal persons who have legal rights to protect the environment. Proponents of the concept say that legal systems should recognise the inherent value of the environment, including its survival as well as its enrichment. This means that certain entities cannot be harmed, corrupted or degraded without their consent. Sustainable rivers: Dhaka for 'just sharing' of waters, basin-wise river management For example, granting personhood status to ecosystems and animals can lead to greater protection from environmental degradation as well as a stronger voice in environmental decision-making. Against this backdrop, diplomats, scholars and activists are pushing to give nature legal personhood, with some countries such as Ecuador and Bolivia recently passing laws recognising the rights of nature. Foreign Secretary Masud Bin Momen said with the remarkable verdict Bangladesh had joined a growing number of communities, tribal nations, and countries, in securing a new form of legal protection for nature which recognises that nature is a living entity with legal rights. Syed Muntasir Mamun, director general of International Trade, Investment and Technology and ICT wings of MoFA, highlighted how the verdict is very much in line with Bangladesh's strong commitment to upholding the rights of all and maintaining the autonomy and agency of the human ecosystem under the guardianship of the public. Read more: HC delivers landmark verdict, declares Turag as living being

The U.N. accused China of serious human rights violations that may amount to “crimes against humanity” in a long-delayed report examining a crackdown on Uyghurs and other mostly Muslim ethnic groups. Beijing on Thursday denounced the assessment as a fabrication cooked up by Western nations. Human rights groups have accused China of sweeping a million or more people from the minority groups into detention camps where many have said they were tortured, sexually assaulted, and forced to abandon their language and religion. The camps were just one part of what the rights organizations have called a ruthless campaign against extremism in the far western province of Xinjiang that also included draconian birth control policies and all-encompassing restrictions on people's movement. The assessment from the Geneva-based U.N. human rights office was released in the final minutes of High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet's four-year term. It largely corroborated earlier reporting by researchers, advocacy groups and the news media, and it added the weight of the world body to the conclusions. But it was not clear what impact it would have. Still, among Uyghurs who have fled overseas, there was a palpable sense of relief that the report had finally seen the light of day since many worried that it would never be published. Several saw it as a vindication of their cause and of years of advocacy work. “The report is pretty damning, and a strong indictment on China’s crimes against humanity,” said Rayhan Asat, a Uyghur lawyer whose brother is imprisoned in Xinjiang. “It’s a really long-awaited recognition of the Uyghurs and their unimaginable suffering, coming from the world’s most authoritative voice on human rights." Human rights groups, the U.S., Japan and European governments also welcomed the report. It had become caught up in a tug-of-war between China and major Western nations as well as human rights groups that have criticized the repeated delays in releasing the document. Many Geneva diplomats believe it was nearly complete a year ago. The assessment released late Wednesday concluded that China has committed serious human rights violations under its anti-terrorism and anti-extremism policies and calls for “urgent attention” from the U.N., the world community and China itself to address them. Human rights groups renewed calls for the U.N. Human Rights Council, which meets next month, to set up an independent international body to investigate the allegations. But China showed no sign of backing off its blanket denials or portraying the criticism as a politicized smear campaign. “The assessment is a patchwork of false information that serves as political tools for the U.S. and other Western countries to strategically use Xinjiang to contain China," Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin said. "It again shows that the U.N. Human Rights Office has been reduced to an enforcer and accomplice of the U.S. and other Western countries.” In a sign of China’s fury, it issued a 122-page rebuttal, entitled "Fight against Terrorism and Extremism in Xinjiang: Truth and Facts," that was posted by the U.N. along with the report. The U.N. findings were drawn in part from interviews with more than two dozen former detainees and others familiar with conditions at eight detention centers. They described being beaten with batons, interrogated while water was poured on their faces and forced to sit motionless on smalls stools for long periods. Some said they were prevented from praying — and were made to take shifts through the night to ensure their fellow detainees were not praying or breaking other rules. Women told of being forced to perform oral sex on guards or undergo gynecological exams in front of large groups of people. The report said that descriptions of the detentions were marked by patterns of torture and other cruel and inhumane treatment and that allegations of rape and other sexual violence appeared “credible." Read: China rejects UN report on Uyghur rights abuses in Xinjiang “The extent of arbitrary and discriminatory detention of members of Uyghur and other predominantly Muslim groups ... in (the) context of restrictions and deprivation more generally of fundamental rights ... may constitute international crimes, in particular crimes against humanity,” the report said. It made no mention of genocide, which some countries, including the United States, have accused China of committing in Xinjiang. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken welcomed the report, saying in a statement that it “deepens and reaffirms our grave concern.” He added: “We will continue to work closely with our partners, civil society, and the international community to seek justice and accountability for the many victims.” The rights office said it could not confirm estimates that a million or more people were detained in the internment camps in Xinjiang, but added it was “reasonable to conclude that a pattern of large-scale arbitrary detention occurred” at least between 2017 and 2019. U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres believes the assessment “clearly identifies serious human rights violations in the Xinjiang region,” U.N. spokesman Stephane Dujarric said Thursday. He said the U.N. chief “very much hopes” China will follow recommendations in the assessment. Beijing has closed many of the camps, which it called vocational training and education centers, but hundreds of thousands of people continue to languish in prison, many on vague, secret charges. The report called on China to release all individuals arbitrarily detained and to clarify the whereabouts of those who have disappeared and whose families are seeking information about them. “Japan is highly concerned about human rights conditions in Xinjiang, and we believe that it is important that universal values such as freedom, basic human rights and rule of law are also guaranteed in China,” Chief Cabinet Secretary Hirokazu Matsuno said. Germany and Britain also welcomed its publication. British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss, who is also the frontrunner in the contest to replace Boris Johnson as prime minister, noted that the report “includes harrowing evidence, including first-hand accounts from victims, that shames China in the eyes of the international community.” Human Rights Watch said the report laid a solid foundation for further U.N. action to establish accountability for the abuses. “Never has it been so important for the U.N. system to stand up to Beijing, and to stand with victims,” said John Fisher, the deputy director of global advocacy for the group. Rahima Mahmut, U.K. director of the World Uyghur Congress, said she was relieved the report is finally out -- but had no hope it would change the Chinese government’s behavior and called on the international community to send a signal to Beijing that “business cannot be as usual.” That the report was released was in some ways as important as its contents. Outgoing rights chief Bachelet said she had to resist pressure both to publish and not publish. She had announced in June that the report would be released by end of her four-year term on Aug. 31, triggering a swell in back-channel campaigns — including letters from civil society, civilians and governments on both sides of the issue. Why she waited until the last minute to release the report remains unclear. Critics had said a failure to publish the report would have been a glaring black mark on her tenure. “The inexcusable delay in releasing this report casts a stain" on the record of the U.N. human rights office, said Agnès Callamard, the secretary-general of Amnesty International, “but this should not deflect from its significance.”  

A temporary waiver of the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement for the COVID-19 vaccine is essential to meet the number of doses of vaccinations required to achieve global herd immunity, according to a joint article.  Parsa Erfani, Agnes Binagwaho, Mohamed Juldeh Jalloh, Prof Muhammad Yunus, Paul Farmer, and Vanessa Kerry have written the article published in the British Medical Journal recently.  The titled of the article is "Intellectual property waiver for covid-19 vaccines will advance global health equity" thst focused on the importance of a temporary IP waiver to reach global needs, said the Yunus Centre on Monday.  Also read: Bangladesh seeks TRIPS waiver to ramp up Covid vaccine production The article stated the current vaccination figures show that the percentages of people in high income countries who have been vaccinated is 46% while 20% in middle income countries and 0.9% in low income countries.  This is largely due to acquisition of doses by high income countries in large quantities as well as production being restricted to a small number of manufacturers, it reads.  The article states that a clear scarcity of supply exists, and this exists due to intellectual property (IP) protection which currently restricts production and access to the vaccines.  Donor based models have not worked in reaching the highest risk population, due to underfunding and vaccine scarcity, said the Yunus Centre quoting the article.  To meet the current global needs it is necessary to also have production of vaccines in LMICs, it said.  A temporary waiver, will enable more manufacturers and result in yielding doses faster, according to the article.  Also read: Next 2 weeks crucial to ensure TRIPS waiver for pharma beyond LDC graduation The arguments against the waiver include, that LMICs have limited capacity to produce such complex vaccines, that a move like this could stifle further biomedical innovation and funding into such research, as there would be no return on investment and cause bottlenecks in the supply chain. However, data does not support this. Sharing of the technology and the technical know how is crucial in helping to expand production to meet global needs, according to the article.  There are LMICs who have production capacity for complex COVID-19 vaccine production. With the IP waiver, and sharing of all vaccine related knowledge and technology as well as planning, bottlenecks in raw materials can be avoided. The waiver would be temporary thus only affecting the COVID-19 vaccine, and many of the costs of research and development have been recouped.  There has also been publicly funded research which laid the ground work for the vaccine. Keeping all things in mind, this seems to be the best way forward in meeting global needs. Now, it is important that countries need to agree on a temporary IP waiver, in order to ensure the world's population can receive the vaccinations, achieving global herd immunity and facilitating global health equity.

Controlling Congress and the White House for the first time in a decade, Democrats were hopeful that this would be the year they finally secured civil rights protections for LGBTQ Americans. Then came a new debate over women’s and girls sports. Legislation that would add sexual orientation and gender identity to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is running aground in the Senate, partly knocked off course by the nationwide conservative push against transgender participation in girls and women’s athletics that has swept state legislatures and now spilled into the halls of Congress. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said the House-passed legislation would “in effect repeal Title IX” by making it easier for transgender women to play on girls teams. Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, R-Miss., said that allowing “male-bodied athletes” to compete against females would “totally undermine” girls basketball. Rep. Vicky Hartzler, R-Mo., said the bill would “decimate” female athletic competition. Also read: LGBTQ Catholics stung by Vatican rebuff of same-sex unions Democrats are frustrated by the shift in the debate, saying there’s ample evidence that the Republican claims are false and overblown. The International Olympic Committee has allowed transgender athletes to compete for years under specific parameters, and, to date, there have been no known transgender women compete in the Olympics. Only one known transgender woman has competed at the Division I level in the NCAA. And though legislators in around 30 states have introduced legislation to ban or limit transgender athletes from competing on teams that align with their gender identity, few lawmakers have been able to cite specific cases in their home states where it became an issue. “We are waiting for this avalanche of problems,” said the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, characterizing the Republicans’ argument. “They haven’t really surfaced.” But Republicans are unyielding in their opposition to the legislation, spurred on by conservative groups who are pushing anti-transgender laws nationwide. With no Republicans signed on, for now, Democrats are unlikely to win the 60 votes needed to pass the Equality Act, potentially putting the issue in limbo indefinitely. “It’s very discouraging, but in many ways not surprising, that Republicans are so focused on the trans community to build up opposition,” said Rep. David Cicilline, D-R.I. He called the GOP arguments over sports a solution in search of a problem. Also read: In blue and red states, milestone wins for LGBTQ candidates Sports are just the latest front in the decadeslong GOP culture war over LGBTQ rights that has focused increasingly on transgender Americans since 2015, when the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage. Conservative groups including The Heritage Foundation, Family Policy Alliance and the Christian legal network Alliance Defending Freedom have been engaged for much of the past two decades in advocacy against the LGBTQ rights movement. An earlier push by those groups to enact laws requiring transgender people to use public bathrooms corresponding to the sex on their birth certificate sputtered amid backlash.   Republicans contend the Equality Act would open the floodgates for transgender girls and women to play on female sports teams and hurt others’ chances to compete. While the bill does not explicitly mention sports or touch Title IX protections against sex-based discrimination, they say extending the protections to gender identity would eliminate “private spaces” for cisgender women, including sports teams. They have repeatedly pointed to one example in Connecticut, where two transgender high school runners in Connecticut won several championships. A lawsuit filed by the runners’ teammates was recently thrown out. “I have to say, as the father of two young girls, that girls sports has had a profound impact in their lives,” Cruz said at a hearing on the bill. “The discipline, the teamwork, the camaraderie, the competitiveness, that girls sports teaches, is effectively destroyed from this bill.” Christiana Holcomb, a lawyer with Alliance Defending Freedom, contends that the Equality Act would supersede Title IX “and force vulnerable girls to share intimate spaces with men who identify as female.” GOP opposition to the bill goes beyond sports, however. Republicans have stalled earlier iterations of the legislation while making different arguments, including that it would infringe on religious freedom. Also read: LGBTQI facing discrimination, harassment amid Covid-19 lockdown in Myanmar: UN Democrats say that none of those objections hold weight and that it’s long past time to make clear that the nation’s civil rights laws explicitly include sexual orientation and gender identification. Passage of the law would outlaw discrimination in employment, housing, loan applications, education, public accommodations and other areas, as it did for women and racial minorities in an earlier era. President Joe Biden pushed for the bill in his address to Congress last month, speaking directly to transgender Americans “watching at home, especially young people, who are so brave. I want you to know, your president has your back.” The lead sponsors of the bill, Democratic Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Cicilline, say they know they have work to do. Merkley says he is working with Republicans and civil rights organizations “to find a path forward that will bring senators together behind a vision of full equality for LGBTQ Americans.” The legislation has support from the Women’s Sports Foundation, a group that has advocated for women’s and girls sports for more than 40 years. The group says the GOP narrative on transgender athletes is a distraction from more important issues, including pay inequity and the harassment and abuse of female athletes. “Let us be clear, there are many real threats to girls’ and women’s access and opportunity in sports,” the group said. “However, transgender inclusion is not one of them.” Many of the state legislators who have pushed the bills to ban transgender girls from competing on girls sports teams couldn’t cite any local examples, according to a review by The Associated Press in March. The AP reached out to two dozen state lawmakers sponsoring such measures as well as the conservative groups supporting them and found only a few times it’s been an issue among the hundreds of thousands of American teenagers who play high school sports. Stella Keating, a 16-year-old transgender girl from Washington state, testified to the Senate that she wanted to join her school’s bowling team because her friends were on it. “I can tell you that the majority of transgender people who join sports just want to hang out with their friends,” Keating said. “And that’s basically it.”