NationStates Jolt Archive

Ah just like the UN of real life. Trying to control the mental thoughts of the free. Even here in the U.S. they do the same. You know the State is supposed to make the law and the congress to make federal judgments on the laws.

How would a person sit there and define marriage as a joining regardless of *Sex, creed, religion, nation, etc. With no discrimination but age. I disagree with this. A marriage is defined already in the dictionary. I for one am against this for two reasons. You propose a solution that discriminates against age.

This was brought to light due to the same sex marriage people. I strongly disagree with this as the definition and religious values behind this term explicitly state male and female. Although I am not totally against same sex joinings. This is the current downfall of the issues in the U.S. The laws would have passed to grant the same sex unions provided they were not called "marriages".

The U.N. was never designed to govern the world. It was set to make peace treaties and trade easier. Later on it thought it was big and bad and could govern the world. Let's keep to the basic at what the UN should be able to do and not do. I say someone should propose a vote to the UN to limit it's powers and what people can propose.

I seriously would remove my country if this passes as it just represents what is currently wrong in the world. The UN has this problem, the US, and many other nations that think they are above anyone else. The Law of a country is not dictated by the UN in real life as we all saw the ability of a Nation to finally tell the UN to go sit in a corner.

Before voting for this proposal think about this. They saw it is civil rights section. I say it is descrimination. If you say regardless of sex and then put an age limit on it you are still discriminating. Vote down on this amendment due to wording, and due to what this represents. UN should not have this power to tell the governments what to do. If the people are not happy they can leave, or they can revolt. Either way it is not a group of foreigners right to tell someone how to live. Yes I agree the U.S. is no exception and If I was able to I would yank all military personel out of other lands and tell the world Your on your own. Anything not authorized that comes toward our boarders would be destroyed however.

Yours Truly,
BinaryAssassin

Ah just like the UN of real life. Trying to control the mental thoughts of the free. Even here in the U.S. they do the same. You know the State is supposed to make the law and the congress to make federal judgments on the laws.

How would a person sit there and define marriage as a joining regardless of *Sex, creed, religion, nation, etc. With no discrimination but age. I disagree with this. A marriage is defined already in the dictionary. I for one am against this for two reasons. You propose a solution that discriminates against age.

This was brought to light due to the same sex marriage people. I strongly disagree with this as the definition and religious values behind this term explicitly state male and female. Although I am not totally against same sex joinings. This is the current downfall of the issues in the U.S. The laws would have passed to grant the same sex unions provided they were not called "marriages".

The U.N. was never designed to govern the world. It was set to make peace treaties and trade easier. Later on it thought it was big and bad and could govern the world. Let's keep to the basic at what the UN should be able to do and not do. I say someone should propose a vote to the UN to limit it's powers and what people can propose.

I seriously would remove my country if this passes as it just represents what is currently wrong in the world. The UN has this problem, the US, and many other nations that think they are above anyone else. The Law of a country is not dictated by the UN in real life as we all saw the ability of a Nation to finally tell the UN to go sit in a corner.

Before voting for this proposal think about this. They saw it is civil rights section. I say it is descrimination. If you say regardless of sex and then put an age limit on it you are still discriminating. Vote down on this amendment due to wording, and due to what this represents. UN should not have this power to tell the governments what to do. If the people are not happy they can leave, or they can revolt. Either way it is not a group of foreigners right to tell someone how to live. Yes I agree the U.S. is no exception and If I was able to I would yank all military personel out of other lands and tell the world Your on your own. Anything not authorized that comes toward our boarders would be destroyed however.

Yours Truly,
BinaryAssassin

THERE-IS-ALREADY-A-THREAD-ON-THIS-TOPIC

Get with the program.

This is the NSUN not the "Real UN".... the NSUN was designed to...

mold the rest of the world to your vision....

Umm Hello, Everyone does of course trealize that this Bill oversteps the bounds of the UN's Charter, as the UN has No right to make such a definition.

Umm Hello, Everyone does of course trealize that this Bill oversteps the bounds of the UN's Charter, as the UN has No right to make such a definition.

Of the real UN, yes... this UN has no charter... and therefore, potentially, no boundries, except those imposed by the floor.