...The United Nations’ Human Rights Council voted 27-13 in favor of the measure, which called for countries to reconsider the death penalty being applied in certain circumstances, including as a punishment for same-sex relations. Haley’s delegation joined Saudi Arabia and Iraq in voting “no.” (Unquote).
...The resolution at issue—"The question of the death penalty"—was approved by the United Nations' Human Rights Council on September 29, over the opposition of the United States and 12 other countries.
The first provision of the resolution, and the source for the outrage over the U.S.'s vote, "Urges all States to protect the rights of persons facing the death penalty and other affected persons by complying with their international obligations, including the rights to equality and non-discrimination." It goes on to list a number of specific behaviors for which the use of the death penalty is objectionable, including blasphemy, adultery, and—yes—"same-sex relations."
But then the next provision "Calls upon States that have not yet acceded to or ratified the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights aiming at the abolition of the death penalty to consider doing so." That Second Protocol, as can be gleaned from that description, requires that signatories abolish the death penalty...
... Unsurprisingly, every member of the Human Rights Council that retains the death penalty voted against the resolution. That includes nasty regimes like Saudi Arabia. But it also counts democracies such as Japan and India. (Unquote).
Returning to Patheos...
..After looking at the measure itself, however, it is clear that it does not condemn the death penalty in all circumstances. Instead, it recommends states that have not yet set up a plan “aiming at the abolition of the death penalty” to “consider doing so.” Even a nation that utilizes the death penalty could have signed off on it.
Haley also pointed out in a tweet that it was “the same US vote that took place under the Obama admin” — suggesting that it was hypocritical to criticize her for doing exactly what the previous administration did — but the fact is the death penalty for homosexuality was never mentioned in previous measures. Earlier votes were focused on the death penalty more generally, which is legal in the U.S., so it really isn’t the “same US vote.”
Surely even the current US Administration would not fail to vote for a measure that would condemn very specific discriminatory use of the death penalty?