Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

The role of the US in the world Follow

#102 Jun 09 2011 at 8:05 AM Rating: Excellent
Aripyanfar wrote:
nonwto wrote:
I think you'll find that you meant practice, ladmate.

Sincere question: is the "practise" here, "even though America has in practise sidelined and undermined them" a verb, or an adjective to a verb?

Or is it a noun?

Please answer the question according to English English rules, and not American English rules. American English is of course, absolutely legitimate, when written by Americans. But I am not American, and would like to be correct in the English way.

practise is proper in the British English usage.
#103 Jun 09 2011 at 8:38 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,952 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
So should the US Congress/Senate/Senate Inquiries lose all credibility because someone whose beliefs and actions you abominate are sitting on them?

No, because the members of those commissions were duly elected by the people they represent and govern/serve at the pleasure of same.
We don't have a governing One World Democracy with one adult, one vote, split by political parties. So the closest the UN comes is giving one nation, one vote. Under the circumstances, I think that's fair enough.
MoebiusLord wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
To me Iran on a Human Rights committee is like an anti-abortionist, who belongs to group that has bombed and killed doctors and nurses, sitting on a Roe Vs Wade committee.

Except in that as the aggressor (represser?) Iran would be like the abortion provider who sits on the board of a Pro-Life charity.
Potatoe, Potatah. In either case a small minority dissenting view is neither a catastrophe nor an illigitemiser. It is the opportunity for minorities to give their dissenting opinions that legitimises representative bodies. Now if we had a Human Rights committee that comprised of Gaddafi, Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler, Mugabe and Mao, I wouldn't be inclined to listen to it.
MoebiusLord wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
Australia has had its extremist nut-jobs in parliament, but being minorities, they haven't done too much damage there. (Pauline Hanson probably doesn't mean much to you.)

Oddly enough, I am familiar with her. Henry Rollins riffs on her pretty good in one of the Talk Is Cheap releases.
Quelle horreur. Oh the embarrasment!
MoebiusLord wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
"I [extremely and fundamentally] disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Speaking of talk is cheap...
The metaphorical philosophy of the sentiment is still legitimate.
#104 Jun 09 2011 at 8:43 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
15,952 posts
nonwto wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
Please answer the question according to English English rules, and not American English rules. American English is of course, absolutely legitimate, when written by Americans. But I am not American, and would like to be correct in the English way.


'Fraid that's a bit out of my range.

No worries, mate, I hold you in no rancoUr. Smiley: tongue

Edited, Jun 9th 2011 11:09am by Aripyanfar
#105 Jun 09 2011 at 8:48 AM Rating: Good
Aripyanfar wrote:
We don't have a governing One World Democracy with one adult, one vote, split by political parties. So the closest the UN comes is giving one nation, one vote. Under the circumstances, I think that's fair enough.

But that's just it, under the circumstances it becomes even more important. One is a group of similarly selected representatives, the other is not. To suggest that it is right and proper to allow the people and practices of a free and open(ish) republic to be judged by representatives of a totalitarian regime is ridiculous.
Aripyanfar wrote:
The metaphorical philosophy of the sentiment is still legitimate.

Again, in these circumstances no, for the above reason.
#106 Jun 09 2011 at 9:17 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,952 posts
Eurgh. Anyone else want to clue Moebius in to why we give Libya a say as well as Japan, Australia, the USA, Germany, France, Spain, Norway, Sweden, and Bhutan?

Why Tea-Partiers and Varus get a vote, why Reublicans and all their factions, and Democrats and all their factions, why independents get their vote? Pick the party/parties/candidates/voters you hate and loathe and despise and think have dangerous, catastrophic and immoral policies. Think why they get votes and representation in your Republic.

Edited, Jun 9th 2011 11:17am by Aripyanfar
#107 Jun 09 2011 at 9:20 AM Rating: Good
***
3,053 posts
Ari, You mean the UN also has something like our Bill of Rights?

Sorry I lost my copy of the Declaration of Human Rights, that I used to keep in my back pocket.
____________________________
In the place of a Dark Lord you would have a Queen! Not dark but beautiful and terrible as the Morn! Treacherous as the Seas! Stronger than the foundations of the Earth! All shall love me and despair! -ElneClare

This Post is written in Elnese, If it was an actual Post, it would make sense.
#108 Jun 09 2011 at 9:26 AM Rating: Good
Aripyanfar wrote:
Eurgh. Anyone else want to clue Moebius in to why we give Libya a say as well as Japan, Australia, the USA, Germany, France, Spain, Norway, Sweden, and Bhutan?

I'm well aware of the why. It's not difficult to understand the emotion behind the rationalizations used as justification.
Aripyanfar wrote:
Why Tea-Partiers and Varus get a vote, why Reublicans and all their factions, and Democrats and all their factions, why independents get their vote? Pick the party/parties/candidates/voters you hate and loathe and despise and think have dangerous, catastrophic and immoral policies. Think why they get votes and representation in your Republic.

You, however, appear either unable or unwilling to comprehend the difference between your precious international bodies and a representative government of, by, and for the people with representatives arrived at under a relatively common set of guidelines and with the same rights and privileges being represented in the body whole.
#109 Jun 09 2011 at 9:39 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
15,952 posts
No You. Americentric Idiot

Edited, Jun 9th 2011 11:48am by Aripyanfar
#110 Jun 09 2011 at 9:48 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,952 posts
ElneClare:
Quote:
PREAMBLE

Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.



Article 1.

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.


Article 2.

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.


Article 3.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.


Article 4.

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.


Article 5.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.


Article 6.

Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.


Article 7.

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.


Article 8.

Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.


Article 9.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.


Article 10.

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.


Article 11.

(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.


Article 12.

No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.


Article 13.

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.


Article 14.

(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.


Article 15.

(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.


Article 16.

(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.


Article 17.

(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.


Article 18.

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.


Article 19.

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.


Article 20.

(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.


Article 21.

(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.


Article 22.

Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.


Article 23.

(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.


Article 24.

Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.


Article 25.

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.


Article 26.

(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.


Article 27.

(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.


Article 28.

Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.


Article 29.

(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.


Article 30.

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.
#111 Jun 09 2011 at 9:50 AM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
tl;dr
#112 Jun 09 2011 at 10:05 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,952 posts
The short version:

Most of the first lot pretty much most Americans would agree with. Several of the amendments are pretty much identical, except reworded or spread among several amendments. The major difference between the two bills is that there is no U.N. "Human Right" to bear arms.

There's some stuff towards the end that would give conservative Americans conniptions.

Edited, Jun 9th 2011 12:09pm by Aripyanfar
#113 Jun 09 2011 at 10:08 AM Rating: Good
Aripyanfar wrote:
No You. Americentric Idiot

As long as you put some thought in to your name calling.
#114 Jun 09 2011 at 10:09 AM Rating: Good
Aripyanfar wrote:
The short version:

Most of the first lot pretty much most Americans would agree with. The major difference between the two bills is that there is no "Human Right" to bear arms.


Funny, that's what I read here:
Quote:

Article 3.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
#115 Jun 09 2011 at 10:20 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,952 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
The short version:

Most of the first lot pretty much most Americans would agree with. The major difference between the two bills is that there is no "Human Right" to bear arms.


Funny, that's what I read here:
Quote:

Article 3.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Interesting interpretation. I like living in a place where I don't have to personally secure my safety from strangers or the government. Sadly personal security from my family and classmates was failed me from my baby-hood up. But I doubt shooting or brandishing a gun at both my parents, at the age of 2 and 3, for separate reasons, would have fixed the problem, somehow.

And the 9 year old class mates? Exclude me, menace me, call me names, dunk my books in the toilet... BAM! Take that motherfuckers!

Not that I can't visualise someone else feeling that a right to a personal gun would give them personal security.
#116 Jun 09 2011 at 10:27 AM Rating: Good
It's bizarre to talk of America undermining the UN when its foundation was never sound.

Edited, Jun 9th 2011 4:28pm by Kavekk
#117REDACTED, Posted: Jun 09 2011 at 10:28 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Aripya,
#118 Jun 09 2011 at 10:31 AM Rating: Good
Aripyanfar wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
The short version:

Most of the first lot pretty much most Americans would agree with. The major difference between the two bills is that there is no "Human Right" to bear arms.


Funny, that's what I read here:
Quote:

Article 3.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

Interesting interpretation. I like living in a place where I don't have to personally secure my safety from strangers or the government. Sadly personal security from my family and classmates was failed me from my baby-hood up. But I doubt shooting or brandishing a gun at both my parents, at the age of 2 and 3, for separate reasons, would have fixed the problem, somehow.

And the 9 year old class mates? Exclude me, menace me, call me names, dunk my books in the toilet... BAM! Take that motherfuckers!

Not that I can't visualise someone else feeling that a right to a personal gun would give them personal security.

Thankfully, in my country children are wards and not afforded the same rights as adults, so it's not something to worry about.
#119 Jun 09 2011 at 10:44 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
15,952 posts
varusword75 wrote:
Aripya,

You're not very bright are you?

Varus darling, any, any time you insult me, I feel the warmth of a soul deep compliment.
#120 Jun 09 2011 at 10:47 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
15,952 posts
Kavekk wrote:
It's bizarre to talk of America undermining the UN when its foundation was never sound.

There were still two ways the UN could have gone, depending on international actions: stronger, or weaker.
#121 Jun 09 2011 at 10:50 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
The short version:

Most of the first lot pretty much most Americans would agree with. The major difference between the two bills is that there is no "Human Right" to bear arms.


Funny, that's what I read here:
Quote:

Article 3.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Don't fault us if you can't interpret that properly.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#122 Jun 09 2011 at 11:01 AM Rating: Excellent
Uglysasquatch wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
The short version:

Most of the first lot pretty much most Americans would agree with. The major difference between the two bills is that there is no "Human Right" to bear arms.


Funny, that's what I read here:
Quote:

Article 3.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Don't fault us if you can't interpret that properly.

The day the rest of the world stops climbing over themselves to come and share the blessing of liberty that have been secured for ourselves and our posterity, I'll consider interpreting things in a more global manner.

Ah, the rest of the world: 6 billion people that love my culture and my freedom but can't wait to burn my flag and spit in my face because I know it.
#123 Jun 09 2011 at 11:11 AM Rating: Good
***
3,362 posts
MoebiusLord wrote:
Uglysasquatch wrote:
MoebiusLord wrote:
Aripyanfar wrote:
The short version:

Most of the first lot pretty much most Americans would agree with. The major difference between the two bills is that there is no "Human Right" to bear arms.


Funny, that's what I read here:
Quote:

Article 3.

Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Don't fault us if you can't interpret that properly.

The day the rest of the world stops climbing over themselves to come and share the blessing of liberty that have been secured for ourselves and our posterity, I'll consider interpreting things in a more global manner.

Ah, the rest of the world: 6 billion people that love my culture and my freedom but can't wait to burn my flag and spit in my face because I know it.
That was worse than a varus post, Moe. By a large margin.
#124 Jun 09 2011 at 11:20 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
I disagree, but I can understand Moe's thought process, or at least follow how I could get there myself anyhow.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#125 Jun 09 2011 at 11:23 AM Rating: Good
Drunken English Bastard
*****
15,268 posts
There really are people who still think America is anything like the America envisioned in it's founding principles. Interesting.
____________________________
My Movember page
Solrain wrote:
WARs can use semi-colons however we want. I once killed a guy with a semi-colon.

LordFaramir wrote:
ODESNT MATTER CAUSE I HAVE ALCHOLOL IN MY VEINGS BETCH ;3
#126 Jun 09 2011 at 11:31 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Wouldn't want to live anywhere else.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 162 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (162)