Active Users:683 Time:16/09/2026 01:19:19 AM
To clarify for you SilverWarder Send a noteboard - 10/08/2010 05:36:14 AM
and granted, the UN is not the US, but the US falls under the UN, does it not? I've never really understood exactly how that relationship works out, but we're really not supposed to violate the UN declarations of human rights, are we?


This is a very common misconception. The US (and for that matter any other nation) is not 'under' the UN in any way. Sovereign states are just that. Sovereign.

The entire UN is basically a big committee where member governments get together and agree on 'stuff'. How things should be. How things are. etc. Thing is, not everyone agrees on every element of every treaty. Many states are not signatories to certain treaties (while they may be to others) basically saying 'That rule is bunk and we aren't following it'.

Of course, lots of other states push agreements into place or sign them and then have no intention whatsoever of actually following them. Saudi Arabia is a signatory to the treaty on the rights and status of women, for instance.

The UN, by its own charter, has no enforcement arm of any kind, nor is it ever allowed one. The only thing that can happen is a bunch of states get together and do whatever needs doing on their own possibly with the UN's blessing.

This is why 'International Law' is a joke. People think of it like criminal law, a set of rules put out by the government with an enforcement body to make sure they're followed. Really it' has no similarity to this at all.

It's far closer to international treaty law which for all intents and purposes says: "If you're strong enough to break this, the weaker party is humped unless they can get a big enough gang of friends together to do something about you."

It's more schoolyard bully than it is Cop arresting Murderer.
May God stand between you and harm in all the empty places you must walk.

Old Egyptian Blessing
This message last edited by SilverWarder on 10/08/2010 at 05:36:35 AM
Reply to message
Let's ban all Christian Marriage. - 07/08/2010 06:36:13 AM 1851 Views
Nice satire, but it raises another point for me. - 07/08/2010 07:20:49 AM 1227 Views
One small problem... - 07/08/2010 08:02:34 AM 1227 Views
Re tax. - 07/08/2010 08:47:22 AM 1286 Views
That seems sensible to me. - 09/08/2010 08:13:26 PM 1173 Views
Not sure what you mean by "demoted." - 07/08/2010 03:50:02 PM 1296 Views
Nice. *NM* - 07/08/2010 08:58:20 AM 717 Views
That would only be appropriate if Christians wanted to ban secular unions of normal people. - 07/08/2010 11:51:29 AM 1484 Views
Hey, look! There was a point over there! - 07/08/2010 03:46:41 PM 1348 Views
Who else should make those decisions? - 07/08/2010 08:00:39 PM 1259 Views
I'd totally... - 08/08/2010 04:14:15 AM 1161 Views
I'd totally... - 08/08/2010 06:17:30 AM 1323 Views
You'd defend this idiot? *NM* - 08/08/2010 06:40:34 AM 595 Views
Indeed - 08/08/2010 06:43:53 AM 1255 Views
I used to think Joel was the biggest rambler on this site. I am seriously reconsidering. - 08/08/2010 05:24:56 AM 1260 Views
And my assessment of one poster as the most content-poor, non-contributing slug is unchanged - 08/08/2010 07:17:02 PM 1165 Views
Um, ok. *NM* - 10/08/2010 12:48:19 AM 601 Views
*Shakes Head* - 08/08/2010 06:23:47 AM 1135 Views
I highly doubt Cannoli is "scared" of homosexuals *NM* - 08/08/2010 06:29:54 AM 622 Views
Perhaps not in the physical sense. - 08/08/2010 06:35:53 AM 1250 Views
Re: Perhaps not in the physical sense. - 08/08/2010 06:46:56 AM 1186 Views
Gah! You did that on purpose! - 09/08/2010 01:05:13 AM 1129 Views
whoops *NM* - 09/08/2010 02:22:49 AM 556 Views
Re: *Shakes Head* - 08/08/2010 07:43:11 PM 1183 Views
This must be the "thought out reaction" I've heard so much about. - 08/08/2010 10:45:59 PM 1137 Views
You cannot be that stupid. - 11/08/2010 03:10:55 PM 1398 Views
Incorrect. Genders are not treated equally. - 11/08/2010 07:53:00 PM 1521 Views
all you need is enough support to pass an amendment - 08/08/2010 02:46:08 PM 1120 Views
A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too - 08/08/2010 11:51:24 PM 1190 Views
And what is wrong with polygamy? *NM* - 09/08/2010 10:36:53 AM 617 Views
Did I say there was anything? - 09/08/2010 11:03:10 AM 1262 Views
Plolygamy and incest are not on the same level of bad. - 09/08/2010 11:00:07 AM 1210 Views
Is that assumption valid? - 09/08/2010 11:36:26 AM 1150 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? - 09/08/2010 11:46:42 AM 1121 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? - 09/08/2010 12:07:22 PM 1235 Views
Not really - 09/08/2010 01:20:46 PM 1092 Views
Re: Not really - 09/08/2010 01:27:04 PM 1213 Views
Re: Not really - 09/08/2010 02:14:43 PM 1084 Views
Re: Not really - 09/08/2010 03:06:31 PM 1274 Views
Spoken like someone who does not have to insure an employee's six wives. - 11/08/2010 03:11:57 PM 1290 Views
... - 11/08/2010 03:22:50 PM 1158 Views
Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage - 09/08/2010 06:13:30 PM 1280 Views
Re: Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage - 10/08/2010 01:24:06 AM 1085 Views
Now I think about it, I'm not sure. - 10/08/2010 04:09:43 PM 1207 Views
Re: Now I think about it, I'm not sure. - 10/08/2010 06:12:39 PM 1133 Views
Great post Danny - 09/08/2010 08:22:27 PM 983 Views
It should be noted again... - 09/08/2010 08:59:32 PM 1244 Views
and how is it not a right? - 09/08/2010 09:19:12 PM 1157 Views
My definition of rights... - 09/08/2010 10:47:16 PM 1242 Views
mmm, but the UN has legally stated marriage as a right. - 10/08/2010 02:52:03 AM 1011 Views
+1 - 10/08/2010 03:11:22 AM 1303 Views
Article 16 probably not a great example - 10/08/2010 03:44:04 AM 1108 Views
You could just as easily move the emphasis... - 10/08/2010 04:08:46 AM 1267 Views
If we need a more specific resolution... - 10/08/2010 04:22:12 AM 1449 Views
It doesn't say a man can only marry a woman or vice versa, though. - 10/08/2010 04:24:17 AM 1120 Views
It also doesn't say they can - 10/08/2010 04:41:18 AM 1118 Views
You're missing the point. It's not about gay marriage. - 10/08/2010 11:20:59 AM 1154 Views
No, I got that, I'm pointing out how it does so - 10/08/2010 01:47:00 PM 1143 Views
To clarify for you - 10/08/2010 05:36:14 AM 1109 Views
The UNSC is actually the UN's enforcement body... - 10/08/2010 07:16:31 PM 1508 Views
What the UN thinks is *completely* worthless.... - 10/08/2010 06:43:15 PM 1072 Views
and the Constitution dictates nothing about marriage. *NM* - 10/08/2010 11:46:24 PM 577 Views
That means it is up to the people. And they say "No." *NM* - 11/08/2010 03:13:12 PM 588 Views
No, but it does dictate things about rights and discrimination - 12/08/2010 03:48:02 PM 1299 Views
The actual ruling on Prop 8 specifices marriage as a freedom, not a right. - 10/08/2010 12:02:17 AM 1229 Views
Out of curiosity, what would you say to using the Ninth Amendment, possibly in conjunction... - 10/08/2010 12:20:19 AM 1287 Views
I agree - 10/08/2010 06:11:19 PM 987 Views
Yeah but this can't be used to prove that it IS a right... - 10/08/2010 07:30:57 PM 1441 Views
Note it all you want... - 10/08/2010 06:43:53 AM 1003 Views
The best one yet. - 10/08/2010 07:59:17 PM 1244 Views
Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane - 10/08/2010 08:49:24 PM 1116 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane - 10/08/2010 09:03:11 PM 1206 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane - 11/08/2010 04:35:03 PM 1123 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane - 11/08/2010 04:41:23 PM 1257 Views
Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel - 11/08/2010 05:06:47 PM 1228 Views
Re: Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel - 11/08/2010 05:09:23 PM 1174 Views

Reply to Message