Wide Area Networks
18-11-2004, 02:04
I am very surprised to see so many people supporting the current UN resolution. I will comment on the resolution article by article.
ARTICLE I- No one race or culture is better than another.
This sounds great as a simple statement, but what will happen to patriotic events and speech? If a national leader speaks of how great our country is will that be a violation? Would signs saying "USA #1" be allowed to be printed?
ARTICLE II- Males and Females should be treated as equals. Whether it be in the workplace or at home.
Again, this sounds like a great statement. But, how do countries enforce this? How does the government regulate the restrictive nature of Islam and other religions?
ARTICLE III- Not a single religion or belief is better or more right than another.
As mentioned before, how would a country enforce this? Would you have monitors in all public gatherings, turning people in? The 3 largest religions in the world, Christianity, Islam and Judaism, all see themselves as the "one true path". Will these religions be banned in UN countries?
ARTICLE IV- One should have the right to express their love for a member of the same sex.
This statement seems to show the full hand of cards. It seems that the last three Articles all sound great on the outside, but this one is controversial. It seems the author is trying to "sneak" this one past the voters. I feel that the governments of all nations should allow their people to choose who they "love". So, why does an Article in this resolution specifically speak to something that has been happening for centuries? What is next, gay and lesbian rights to marry?
I feel that all nations who have already voted for this need to think again. The point of this Nation States activity is to ponder the real implications of our votes. Vote against this resolution. Thank you.
First of all, there is already a thread on this resolution...
Second of all...
I am very surprised to see so many people supporting the current UN resolution. I will comment on the resolution article by article.
And many of us do not, though not quite for the same reasons that we are per se "against" the ideas of this document.
ARTICLE I- No one race or culture is better than another.
This sounds great as a simple statement, but what will happen to patriotic events and speech? If a national leader speaks of how great our country is will that be a violation? Would signs saying "USA #1" be allowed to be printed?
Redundant
NSUN Resolution #53 "Universal Freedom of Choice"
Description: Aware that sometimes, all choices we face are an illusion, but nonetheless strongly believing that as humans, we are entitled to make them ourselves,
Reiterating that freedom of choice is a defining element of our very humanity and the inalienable right of all humanity,
Alarmed that there are those among us who seek to limit our ability to choose, including but not limited to political, educational and consumer choice,
Further alarmed that individuals can be influenced and their ability to decide limited through cultural conditioning,
Deeply disturbed that the practice of subliminal advertising appears to erode the fundamental human trait of free will,
Noting with concern that in the wider world, the populations of entire nations repeat non sequitors issued by the State and remain in profound ignorance of the world around them,
Recalling the Resolution "Universal Bill of Rights" and Articles 1, 2 and 3 in particular,
Approving of past Resolutions restricting personal freedoms in the interests of moral decency,
Stressing that humanity has an innate curiosity about the world, and welcoming all efforts to permit this curiosity to reach its full potential,
1) Urges all members of the United Nations to recognise that a populace granted the freedom to make choices in life is a happier, more content and more productive society;
2) Strongly encourages leaders to imagine how different the world could be, if from an early age, people were free to exercise genuine choice in what they read, watched and learnt;
3) Recognises that the most basic human characteristic is that of curiosity - the ability to wonder, ask questions, and seek answers, and affirms its belief that no State should limit its people's freedom to do this;
4) Expresses its conviction that individuals should not be judged by society for the decisions they make, provided these decisions meet the condition set in Clause 5a of this document;
5) Declares and enshrines in law the freedom of all people to make choices according to their own conscience, particularly with regard to their philosophy of life, social/cultural development and awareness of the world, without unreasonable interference from the State, subject to the following limitations:
a) The decisions taken do not directly inflict physical harm on the individual making them or physical or psychological harm on others; where this is the case, normal criminal law of the country in question applies,
b) The legal guardian of any minor or physically or mentally incapable individual, the latter as defined in the Resolution "Fair Treatment of Mentally-Ill", remains responsible to make informed choices and decisions on their behalf, in accordance with any applicable rights and health and safety legislation laid down by the State,
c) The right to choose with regard to services only extends to existing services, and does not mandate the creation of private health and education sectors in nations where provision of public services is a State monopoly, while the right of the State to later deregulate nationalised services, or choose not to do so, remains unaffected;
6) Declares a moratorium on the use of subliminal advertising pending independent internationally-coordinated research into its effects on the capacity of individuals and wider society to make rational decisions.
Votes For: 9,314
Votes Against: 8,213
Implemented: Fri Mar 26 2004
ARTICLE II- Males and Females should be treated as equals. Whether it be in the workplace or at home.
Again, this sounds like a great statement. But, how do countries enforce this? How does the government regulate the restrictive nature of Islam and other religions?
Redundant
NSUN Resolution #69 "The Sexes Rights Law"
Description: The United Nations notes with much sorrow the precedent in both distant and recent history, as well as contemporary times, where cultures dominated by one or more sexes infringe upon the rights of one or more other sexes. The following document is intended to both relieve and resolve much of these discriminative actions, not for one sex, but for all, acting in the interests of promoting equality in all society and eliminating gender bias from said society at large.
The United Nations :
Is Deeply Disturbed By : The possibility or action of the with-holding of citizenship and ethnicity-recognition based on the sex of a individual or collective of other-ethnic origins or of origin within the borders of a nation state.
Does Formally Recognise and Declare : That the rights of all sexes in society are equal, excepting only in the conditions below and that this equality must be preserved in the interests of the social and community rights of all citizens of Nation States United Nation member states.
Thus the Nation States United Nations :
Re-affirms and Re-states : Article 4 of The Universal Bill of Rights, implemented by the Nation States United Nations on Fri Aug 8 2003.
Re-affirms and Re-states : Gay Rights, implemented by the Nation States United Nations on Sat May 3 2003.
RESOLVES :
1. The Nation States United Nations does here-by greatly encourage each member state to establish a minimum of one centre for each sex in their borders, in which people of the sex of the respective designated centre could seek shelter, medical care, and counselling for both themselves and their children or other dependants if they should find themselves without a home or shelter or reasonable support or care, due to any sexually motivated violence or discrimination from the home or work-place, or from such violence or lack of care stemming from society at large. These centres must be sensitive and cater to the needs of intersex people.
2. The Nation States United Nations calls upon all employers within member-states to abide by the following regulations :
a) Equal wages for all sexes.
b) Equal benefits for all sexes.
The above conditions are recommendations applicable within reason in that they are open to interpretation by a member states legal system in regards to each individual case, under the condition that the legal system must act in an un-biased fashion in regard to these cases.
3. The Nation States United Nations does applaud and protect the actions of any charity based organisation that is dedicated to furthering the education of any and all sexes in countries where one or more sex may not given an equal chance at attaining an education in a society.
4. Said protection in clause 3 is to be considered symbolistic in nature, and this protection of said charity organisations is conditional in that they may only provide opportunity for equality, they may not raise one sex or sexes above another or others. Such would be contrary to the spirit of the legislation and is not encouraged.
5. The Nation States United Nations recognises that gender is not just a physical manifestation but also a mental manifestation, and recognises that people of self proclaimed gender are also equally protected by the regulations and recommendations bound here in.
Votes For: 10,604
Votes Against: 3,942
Implemented: Sun Aug 15 2004
ARTICLE III- Not a single religion or belief is better or more right than another.
As mentioned before, how would a country enforce this? Would you have monitors in all public gatherings, turning people in? The 3 largest religions in the world, Christianity, Islam and Judaism, all see themselves as the "one true path". Will these religions be banned in UN countries?
Redundant
NSUN Resolution #19 "Religious Tolerance"
Description: Whereas,
Freedom of Religion does not exist
in all countries in the world.
Whereas,
Too many wars are started and fought
because of religious differences.
Whereas,
There is a need for more religious
tolerance on Earth.
Therefore be it resolved that the United
Nations support and promote a greater understanding
of all religions and promote more tolerance of
differences of religion.
Be it further resolved that the United Nations oppose
all wars fought in the name of God and religion.
Votes For: 12,297
Votes Against: 3,380
Implemented: Sat Jun 21 2003
NSUN Resolution #26 Universal Bill of Rights
Description: Recalling the many egregious infringements of human rights,
Recognizing the need to protect basic human rights,
Deploring any acts by government at the sake of human rights,
Determined to put an end to the violation of human rights,
The United Nations shall endorse what will be called the Universal Bill of Rights, the articles of which are as follows:
Article 1 -- All human beings have the right to choose worship any faith, and to change their religious beliefs at any time without punishment on the part of the state.
Article 2 -- All human beings have the right to express themselves through speech and through the media without any interference.
Article 3 -- All human beings have the right to peacefully assemble.
Article 4 -- All human beings have the right to be treated equally under the law of any member nation.
Article 5 -- All human beings must not be subjected to torture or to cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment.
Article 6 -- No human beings will be subjected to arrest or exile without an explicit list of their offenses.
Article 7 -- Any arrested person must be assumed innocent until proven guilty.
Article 8 -- A human beings family members cannot be held accountable for the crimes of their relative.
Article 9 -- Any persons who violate any of these articles shall be held accountable by the law.
Article 10 -- The Universal Bill of Rights does not override the existing Bill of Rights of United Nations members. If any of these stated rights do not exist in a member nation, they are herby protected. If any nation has rights that go beyond these universal rights, the Universal Bill of Rights will not remove those rights.
Votes For: 11,169
Votes Against: 3,649
Implemented: Fri Aug 8 2003
ARTICLE IV- One should have the right to express their love for a member of the same sex.
This statement seems to show the full hand of cards. It seems that the last three Articles all sound great on the outside, but this one is controversial. It seems the author is trying to "sneak" this one past the voters. I feel that the governments of all nations should allow their people to choose who they "love". So, why does an Article in this resolution specifically speak to something that has been happening for centuries? What is next, gay and lesbian rights to marry?
This article is redundant... "What is next, gat and lesbian rights to marry?"... No it isn't, because it's already a legal and protected right in the NSUN
NSUN Resolution #12 "Gay Rights"
Description: WHEREAS it has been clearly witnessed there is an outspoken minority who wish to oppress gays.
We, the People's Republic of Kundu and the other peoples of the world wishing for the preservation of freedom and the respect of all hereby resolve that all member nations of the United Nations must pass laws protecting people from discrimination in all parts of life. We also resolve that gay marriages be protected and endorsed by law in the member nations.
Votes For: 12,705
Votes Against: 7,734
Implemented: Sat May 3 2003
and
NSUN Resolution #7 "Sexual Freedom"
Description: What goes on between two (or more) consenting adults in the privacy of their homes should not be the concern of the state unless it is neccesary to enquire about the afore mentioned activities for medical reasons (e.g. if the individuals wish to give blood etc.).
Votes For: 2,538
Votes Against: 318
Implemented: Thu Mar 13 2003
I feel that all nations who have already voted for this need to think again. The point of this Nation States activity is to ponder the real implications of our votes. Vote against this resolution. Thank you.
Every article of this document is already enacted in one or more other resolutions. Which is why we, and many others, are against it. It is a pointless document that accomplishes nothing...
However, given that it all is already enacted, acting against, or arguing the principles, is a showing of ignorance of already present legislation.
Unfree People
18-11-2004, 06:10
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=373945