NationStates Jolt Archive

As someone who loves children, I felt inclined to introduce a bill protecting the rights of children world wide.

1) Children have the right to live in a home free from abuse.

2) Children have the right to get at least a basic education.

3) Children should have the right to basic health care.

4) Children have the right to be free of sexual exploitation.

5) Children have the right not to work in hazardeous conditions

Thank you.

Children have no rights. They are the property of their parents.

Children have no rights. They are the property of their parents.

:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:
YOU OWN SLAVES, YOU AUTHORIAN CHILD ABUSER! STOP PERPETUATING HIEARARCHY!
:tantrum: :tantrum: :tantrum: :tantrum: :tantrum: :tantrum:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kûk‡xenisi n!ok‡x'osi xno-k‡xek‡emi.
The state only exists to serve itself.
Racism-the other stupid ideology
Peace, love, and girls with small waists and really big butts!
http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg
I'm male. Note the pic
of attractive women.

I would be willing to lend my support to such a proposal.

I can understand the thought that children are the property of the parents, however, I disagree with it. Parents have a responsibility to provide for their offspring, not take advantage of them.

I do, however, think that Letila's outburst trivialized the debate. Everyone is allowed to have their own opinion, no matter how stupid someone else might think it to be.

Then what do you do with your kids? Dump them helplessly into the street?

STOP PERPETUATING HIEARARCHY!


One thing I forgot to address: What does hierarchy have to do with providing for -- or not providing for -- one's children.

This proposal simply protects children from abuse, ensures basic medical care, and protects them from danger. It does not otherwise tell a parent how to raise thier children. If you support children being abused, lacking medicine, and being endanger maybe you should look at yourself not others.

Don't get me banned for flaming unless you are willing to ban a neonazi, too.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kûk‡xenisi n!ok‡x'osi xno-k‡xek‡emi.
The state only exists to serve itself.
Racism-the other stupid ideology
Peace, love, and girls with small waists and really big butts!
http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg
I'm male. Note the pic
of attractive women.

Don't get me banned for flaming unless you are willing to ban a neonazi, too.

What?

Who said anything about flaming?

Neonazi?

What?

(P.S. Flaming and expressing misguided ideas are different.)

I have submitted this bill as a proposal. Support would be appreciated.

Soltak, you have my support on the Child Rights Bill.
I agree that children have rights and they are people, no matter how young they are. They are the future and when you raise the youth of today in the right way, the future will be prosperous.

Inuana I agree. The children are our future.

Thank you, Inauna. You've expressed the spirit of the bill quite eloquently.

Indeed. The fools who treat children as nothing but property to be used and exploited at will, lead their nation along the violent path to destruction. Regardless of what many of you may think of my autocracy, I understand that our children are our future and if we fail them, our nations shall not grow and prosper. In the Commonwealth of the Pure Existence, I endeavor to extend all opportunity to our children that none shall be hungry or neglected for any reason. The Commonwealth's future relies on our children as they are the ones who shall maintain the unity when my time has passed. I would support such a resolution if it came to vote.

Yours,
Maestro Proteus
Progenitor and Caretaker of the Commonwealth of the Pure Existence

You have my full support.

Same here.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kûk‡xenisi n!ok‡x'osi xno-k‡xek‡emi.-The state only exists to serve itself.
"Oppose excessive military spending, yet believe in excessive spending on junk food and plastic surgery to make all your women look like LARDASSES!"-Sino, when I criticized excessive military spending.
http://www.sulucas.com/images/steatopygia.jpg
I'm male. Note the pic of attractive women.

Children have no rights. They are the property of their parents.

I am going to have to agree with Possums and company. Children often have no rights.

Stating the OPINION that viewing children as property leads to destruction, though, from the other fellow, I will not agree with. The child being property, in almost any case, is usually for the child, and parents, benefit. Imagine if they werent property. Someone could just take them away, and the loving parents might never see them again. And the children could just wander off, and the police and parents would not be legally responsible for bringing them back. Tisk.

Children also have the right to be protected from themselves. Though this is not an issue for me, provisions are in place to account for all possible scenarios.

Yours,
Maestro Proteus
Progenitor and Caretaker of the Commonwealth of the Pure Existence

A large portion of this strikes me as redundant -- the United Nations has already recognized the rights of basic education and healthcare, outlawed pedophilia, and established union's rights (which I know isn't quite the same as it is here, but it bears mentioning).

The next problem to deal with is, as is common, definitions: What constitutes "abuse?" What is a "basic education?" What is "basic healthcare?" What are "hazardous conditions?" Who defines all of these terms? The state? The UN? Parents? Children? Not that it would have to be the same for each point, but it is an important thing to consider.

If this thread is a good indication (the forums can be, but aren't always), there's not much consensus as to the roles and rights of children in society.

I'm with the Possums on this one.

Whiny socialism and unfunded mandates coupled with absurd idealism is why our glorious Reich refuses to join the UN. It's good for region-crashing and not much else.

Might i remind you all that children have the right not to be spoiled ?

If you keep shielding them from life they'll never become true adults.

The next problem to deal with is, as is common, definitions: What constitutes "abuse?" What is a "basic education?" What is "basic healthcare?" What are "hazardous conditions?" Who defines all of these terms? The state? The UN? Parents? Children? Not that it would have to be the same for each point, but it is an important thing to consider.


I agree that this proposal is far too vague and we will not support it unless definitions are given.

Desdemona,
UN representative,
The Back New World

Catholic Europe strongly support this proposal. Children are the most important members of our society as they will lead it in the future, but they are also the most vulnerable people in our society. This proposal finally grants them rights and protects them from evil.

As someone who loves children, I felt inclined to introduce a bill protecting the rights of children world wide.

1) Children have the right to live in a home free from abuse.

Does that include leaving the child alone for one second and during that one second the child, oh let's say, sticks his or her slips on the floor and dies? That falls under a strict definition of neglect.

2) Children have the right to get at least a basic education.

What is a basic education? They can get a "basic" education from watching TV or throwing them into the street and let them fend for themselves. The very process of education can fall into the classification of "abuse."

3) Children should have the right to basic health care.

Here's a bandage. Now go play.

One person's definition of "basic" can vary drastically from what other people would argue it is.

4) Children have the right to be free of sexual exploitation.

As with all of these up until this point, what exactly is a child and when are they no longer considered children? You can't protect them from everything. At some point shouldn't they be able to make that decision for themselves?

5) Children have the right not to work in hazardeous conditions

Just getting out of bed can be hazardous or even breathing. Are we supposed to place all children into bubbles?

In addition to that, what counts as work? Is school work or can work be classified as "basic education"?


A larger overall problem could be that the children involved live in a third world country so this proposal would force the UN to invade their homes and relocate them into a "better" environment; removing entire generations of citizens from a nation. That could even be abuse. Then we are little better than before.

The Rogue Nation of Greenspoint would like to know why point 3) of the proposal contains the word 'should'. That completely nullifies any right to health care that we believe is the intent of the author.

Also, we recognize that while children have certain human rights, they have no civil rights, being minors, and that their parents have certain rights regarding their own children.

We also recognise that along with rights come responisibilities. All the rights that are listed in the proposal are the responsibility of the parents of the children to provide, and in the case where the parents are violating those same rights, that responsibility falls on the national government.

The Rogue Nation of Greenspoint would like to see those points added to the proposal before we can consider supporting it.

James Moehlman
Assistant Manager in charge of U.N. Affairs
Greenspoint