Diabolos.Sovereign said:
or maybe some of you guys should stop *** other guys and we wouldnt have this problem...
UN Votes To Allow Gays To Be Executed Without Caus |
||
フォーラム » Everything Else »
Politics and Religion
»
UN votes to allow gays to be executed without caus
UN votes to allow gays to be executed without caus
Diabolos.Sovereign said: or maybe some of you guys should stop *** other guys and we wouldnt have this problem... This has nothing to do with the US. It's just about African and Islamic nations removing some red tape for their cause. For anyone who didn't already know, the UN has been a joke for at least the past twenty years.
Ramuh.Nesya said: hi Vinvv, like your avatar ^^ I think they should make robot death not be included as a hate crime. Darwinism, YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG!
Ramuh.Nesya said: so basically without the LGBT part of the resolution its now legal to execute white men for being gay? cant see that happening tbh... maybe im too optimistic tho also, isnt all murder a hate crime? never thought you could murder someone because your really happy and content. Actually it doesn't make it legal, its saying they are no longer protected by the UN, so for instance, if someone in the Middle East (a dictator) started a homosexual genocide, the UN would not be obligated to step in and stop it in any way. As for being a hate crime, yes all crimes are done out of some sort of hate, but the specific definition of a "Hate Crime" by legal terms, is a crime that is directed toward a group of people. So i could punch say a black guy in the face for picking a fight with me, but if i punched him then called him something racist, then it would be a "Hate Crime" because i directed my hate to a group of people instead of an individual. (Im not racist btw, well maybe a little, but shhh it's a secret) Also if you notice, the vote was a vast majority of Middle East, African, and Carabeian (sp) countries, all of which have huge Homophobic tendencies, it's just sad that some more progressed nations were not represented or this atrocious amendment would not have taken place Bismarck.Elanabelle
Offline
Phoenix.Excelior said: Honestly, I think it would be a move in the right direction. We can't actually get over our differences if we have to put blacks, gays, lesbians, and every minority but white people up on a protected pedestal. We shouldn't accept arbitrary violence against ANYONE. You're right, in an ideal/Utopian world, you couldn't be more right. Problem with the logic is, we live on Earth, and a LOT of people on Earth are simply NOT ready to accept all men as worthy of equal rights. I wish we, as a species, were ready for that, because the world would be better, and I'd get to enjoy it during my lifetime. I have hope that I may see the day, but I'm not getting younger, so I have reasonable doubts about humanity's ability to mature/evolve vs. my expected lifespan. Diabolos.Sovereign said: or maybe some of you guys should stop *** other guys and we wouldnt have this problem... See, Example A right here. Bismarck.Elanabelle said: Phoenix.Excelior said: Honestly, I think it would be a move in the right direction. We can't actually get over our differences if we have to put blacks, gays, lesbians, and every minority but white people up on a protected pedestal. We shouldn't accept arbitrary violence against ANYONE. Diabolos.Sovereign said: or maybe some of you guys should stop *** other guys and we wouldnt have this problem... Well the only way to make it happen is to stop making it an issue. However, it's a common strategy of the democrats to make gays/blacks an issue. You don't see it quite as much on the internation level, I was surprised by this. Ramuh.Laffter said: Bahamut.Kara said: There have been executions in the world because a person was homosexual. In fact many countries have laws specifically stating execute a homosexual. Uganda has a proposal for one which will allow execution and Nigeria seeks harsher laws towards homosexuals. While this article is skewed towards LGBT support this does not negate the fact that the UN basically said "Yes, when you kill those homosexuals for being homosexual in your country, that is ok". Wrong. It actually means you just won't be charged for a hate crime if you murder a homosexual. No I was not wrong. It is a hate crime, however these crimes can be committed by the government. Which means according to that government it is perfectly OK to kill someone for being homosexual or having same-sex relations. UN said: The representative of Benin, on behalf of the African Group, the main sponsor of the amendment, said that sexual orientation had no legal foundation in any international human rights instruments and there was no legal justification to highlight it. St. Lucia stated that listing specific groups was dangerous because it could lead to the omission of some people and legal manipulation by following the letter of the law in an unintended way, while Morocco asserted that such selectivity should be avoided because it accommodated particular interests and groups over others. South Africa added that a formal process to define sexual orientation and its parameters under human rights law was needed to prevent future division on the issue. On the other hand, the representative of Sweden stated that sexual orientation had often been the motive for extrajudicial killings, and the deletion of the reference would amount to the Committee looking the other way concerning arbitrary executions based on sexual orientation. Both Finland and France noted that the reference to sexual orientation had been included in the resolution since 1999, based on the Special Rapporteur’s concern for homosexuals that had been victims of such crimes – a concern that still persisted. Switzerland pointed out that homophobic violence was still a reality caused by law enforcement forces in many countries. General Assembly GA/SHC/3997 From wiki : Extrajudicial killings are the illegal killing of leading political, trade union, dissident, religious, and social figures by either the state government, state authorities like the armed forces and police as a form of extrajudicial punishment. Carbuncle.Sevourn said: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AG0BB20101117 article from a source that isn't overtly biased removing the article specifically referring to gays isn't a good thing by any means but the amendment is nowhere as extreme as OPs link makes it out to be as others have said, it essentially removes "hate crime" status from the killing of LBGT EDIT: Reuters said: But this year, Morocco and Mali introduced an amendment on behalf of African and Islamic nations that called for deleting the words "sexual orientation" and replacing them with "discriminatory reasons on any basis." honestly, "discriminatory reasons on any basis," works just as well for me. still covers LBGT. much ado about nothing, etc. Why still include protection for religions, nationality, and sex in the resolution if "discriminatory reasons on any basis" should cover them as well? Are those still categorized as hate crimes where LGBT executions are not now? If so that isn't working just as well for me. The vote to me scratches at a larger issue of the UN -- that is how do you effectively pursue human rights in an international sphere when some country's laws are based in a religious and cultural dogma that denies human rights to every human? Phoenix.Excelior said: Bismarck.Elanabelle said: Phoenix.Excelior said: Honestly, I think it would be a move in the right direction. We can't actually get over our differences if we have to put blacks, gays, lesbians, and every minority but white people up on a protected pedestal. We shouldn't accept arbitrary violence against ANYONE. Diabolos.Sovereign said: or maybe some of you guys should stop *** other guys and we wouldnt have this problem... Well the only way to make it happen is to stop making it an issue. However, it's a common strategy of Politicians to make gays/blacks an issue. You don't see it quite as much on the international level, I was surprised by this. Ramuh.Vinvv said: Phoenix.Excelior said: Bismarck.Elanabelle said: Phoenix.Excelior said: Honestly, I think it would be a move in the right direction. We can't actually get over our differences if we have to put blacks, gays, lesbians, and every minority but white people up on a protected pedestal. We shouldn't accept arbitrary violence against ANYONE. Diabolos.Sovereign said: or maybe some of you guys should stop *** other guys and we wouldnt have this problem... Probably more accurate over all, yes. Offline
Posts: 124
Titan.Eiryn said: If you look past the horrible reporting and read between the lines (if you read the article at all) you would see the UN isn't saying anything like that at all. Not to mention that being Republican has nothing to do with that decision, lol. I didn't understand what the republican item had to do with it either... Is Nancy Pelosi playing FFXI and hanging out in the forums? Valefor.Lynkux said: Ramuh.Nesya said: so basically without the LGBT part of the resolution its now legal to execute white men for being gay? cant see that happening tbh... maybe im too optimistic tho also, isnt all murder a hate crime? never thought you could murder someone because your really happy and content. The term hate crime is stupid. If you beat someone up its because you're pissed at them, no matter what color they are, and no matter who/what they like to *** when they get home at night. "Mom... He's calling me names QQ" Pandemonium.Spicyryan said: Diabolos.Sovereign said: or maybe some of you guys should stop *** other guys and we wouldnt have this problem... Ragnarok.Blindphleb said: Carbuncle.Sevourn said: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AG0BB20101117 article from a source that isn't overtly biased removing the article specifically referring to gays isn't a good thing by any means but the amendment is nowhere as extreme as OPs link makes it out to be as others have said, it essentially removes "hate crime" status from the killing of LBGT EDIT: Reuters said: But this year, Morocco and Mali introduced an amendment on behalf of African and Islamic nations that called for deleting the words "sexual orientation" and replacing them with "discriminatory reasons on any basis." honestly, "discriminatory reasons on any basis," works just as well for me. still covers LBGT. much ado about nothing, etc. Why still include protection for religions, nationality, and sex in the resolution if "discriminatory reasons on any basis" should cover them as well? Are those still categorized as hate crimes where LGBT executions are not now? If so that isn't working just as well for me. The vote to me scratches at a larger issue of the UN -- that is how do you effectively pursue human rights in an international sphere when some country's laws are based in a religious and cultural dogma that denies human rights to every human? i'll be the first to agree with you that the motives aren't pure however--and correct me if i'm wrong, i might be, though i don't think i am it's a largely ceremonial/symbolic declaration i just can't see the change in wording changing anything arab and african countries would continue to persecute gays if you very slightly changed the wording in an unenforced resolution and they're not going to step up their persecution over a wording change either things will continue exactly as they would have if the UN got distracted and completely forgot to do this years generic condemnation of killing people it's a reflection of an attitude we(most of us anyway) were already aware of yup lolafrica/lol extreme islam and their 5th century attitudes but that's nothing new i don't believe it changes anything from a practical standpoint either way to answer your second question, you don't at least not as the world stands today Offline
Posts: 506
Ramuh.Vinvv said: hehe hate Tupac, but I think this fits the thread perfectly. Offline
Posts: 255
just means they aren't shielded in those countries. I don't think this is anything against lgbt.
slowlulz said: just means they aren't shielded in those countries. I don't think this is anything against lgbt. the thing is, they wouldn't be shielded in those countries if the resolution said to treat lbgt like gods among men Offline
Posts: 255
Pandemonium.Spicyryan said: Ragnarok.Blindphleb said: *** the UN. Ifrit.Kungfuhustle said: Ramuh.Haseyo said: Now my brain hurts. What's going on >_> *** the Republicans. Diabolos.Sovereign said: or maybe some of you guys should stop *** other guys and we wouldnt have this problem... And *** you too. ^was offended slowlulz said: Pandemonium.Spicyryan said: Ragnarok.Blindphleb said: *** the UN. Ifrit.Kungfuhustle said: Ramuh.Haseyo said: Now my brain hurts. What's going on >_> *** the Republicans. Diabolos.Sovereign said: or maybe some of you guys should stop *** other guys and we wouldnt have this problem... And *** you too. ^was offended Offline
Posts: 124
Ifrit.Kungfuhustle said: slowlulz said: Pandemonium.Spicyryan said: Ragnarok.Blindphleb said: UN general assembly votes to allow gays to be executed without cause Thoughts? Opinions? Ifrit.Kungfuhustle said: Ramuh.Haseyo said: Now my brain hurts. What's going on >_> Diabolos.Sovereign said: or maybe some of you guys should stop *** other guys and we wouldnt have this problem... Don't hate the gay men-- it is all about supply and demand. Less available men will lead to more available women, enlarging out potential dating pool! Sounds like a win for gay population and a win for heterosexual men! Did it say anything about lesbians or were they grouped the same? They should leave them alone too, esp. the lipstick lesbians. I like them a lot! OMG I am a pig… just had that self revelation-- be happy for me, I have grown emotionally! So let me get this straight, its ok to beat my wife, its not ok for strange women to address me for any reason and their testimony can't be used against me in court, and now its legal to kill homos all I have to do is give up pork?
While this rewording may not actually change anything, it symbolically condones these behaviors. Africa and islam have been our worlds running joke for centuries now, we can't cure them with out becoming what it is that makes them horrible excuses of human beings. What bothers me are the appeasers in cultures that should *** know better. Wow I'm disappointed by the lack or real reporting I'm seeing on this. All sources I'm finding simply copy and paste the same information.
I'm left searching for information on the UN to find out what the actual ramifications are of this vote. LGBT sites claim that it will increase the human right violations, but don't support their claims with any sources or logic. Neutral sites don't reveal any insight into why the changes were sought, or how or if it effects international law. I'm woefully ignorant in regards to international law and the UN, so if any of you are more enlightened in these matters and wish to correct me that would be appreciated. So far I've come to the conclusion that this vote was held by a committee of the General Assembly, which is one of the 5 principal organs of the UN. Of the 5 organs it looks as though only 1 organ, the Security Council has the ability to vote on binding resolutions that carry legal consequences. The other organs only pass "recommendations" that carry no legal consequences but carry considerable political weight. These organs can refer an issue to the Security Council to put in place a binding resolution. So I again am left with these questions: Without any real enforcement what is to gain in these proceedings? What is to lose? You know those 5 W's of journalism? Well where is they "Why?" in these reports. Offline
Posts: 255
Sylph.Cossack said: So let me get this straight, its ok to beat my wife, its not ok for strange women to address me for any reason and their testimony can't be used against me in court, and now its legal to kill homos all I have to do is give up pork? While this rewording may not actually change anything, it symbolically condones these behaviors. Africa and islam have been our worlds running joke for centuries now, we can't cure them with out becoming what it is that makes them horrible excuses of human beings. What bothers me are the appeasers in cultures that should *** know better. I *** hate this kind of talk. "We can't cure them" It's there culture! They've been that way along *** time more so then we've been established here in america. Seriously, stop thinking we need to change everyones culture and the way they've done things just because "America, or any other country" doesn't like it. *** mind your own buisness slowlulz said: Sylph.Cossack said: So let me get this straight, its ok to beat my wife, its not ok for strange women to address me for any reason and their testimony can't be used against me in court, and now its legal to kill homos all I have to do is give up pork? While this rewording may not actually change anything, it symbolically condones these behaviors. Africa and islam have been our worlds running joke for centuries now, we can't cure them with out becoming what it is that makes them horrible excuses of human beings. What bothers me are the appeasers in cultures that should *** know better. I *** hate this kind of talk. "We can't cure them" It's there culture! They've been that way along *** time more so then we've been established here in america. Seriously, stop thinking we need to change everyones culture and the way they've done things just because "America, or any other country" doesn't like it. *** mind your own buisness I guess I'd be fine being white and all...lol Offline
Posts: 255
Ramuh.Vinvv said: slowlulz said: Sylph.Cossack said: So let me get this straight, its ok to beat my wife, its not ok for strange women to address me for any reason and their testimony can't be used against me in court, and now its legal to kill homos all I have to do is give up pork? While this rewording may not actually change anything, it symbolically condones these behaviors. Africa and islam have been our worlds running joke for centuries now, we can't cure them with out becoming what it is that makes them horrible excuses of human beings. What bothers me are the appeasers in cultures that should *** know better. I *** hate this kind of talk. "We can't cure them" It's there culture! They've been that way along *** time more so then we've been established here in america. Seriously, stop thinking we need to change everyones culture and the way they've done things just because "America, or any other country" doesn't like it. *** mind your own buisness I guess I'd be fine being white and all...lol guess your either gonna face getting killed or move to another country? |
||
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.
|