Active Users:564 Time:17/06/2026 07:44:53 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 1805 Views
Nice satire, but it raises another point for me. - 07/08/2010 07:20:49 AM 1187 Views
One small problem... - 07/08/2010 08:02:34 AM 1192 Views
Re tax. - 07/08/2010 08:47:22 AM 1239 Views
That seems sensible to me. - 09/08/2010 08:13:26 PM 1136 Views
Not sure what you mean by "demoted." - 07/08/2010 03:50:02 PM 1263 Views
Nice. *NM* - 07/08/2010 08:58:20 AM 683 Views
That would only be appropriate if Christians wanted to ban secular unions of normal people. - 07/08/2010 11:51:29 AM 1446 Views
Hey, look! There was a point over there! - 07/08/2010 03:46:41 PM 1267 Views
Who else should make those decisions? - 07/08/2010 08:00:39 PM 1209 Views
I'd totally... - 08/08/2010 04:14:15 AM 1115 Views
I'd totally... - 08/08/2010 06:17:30 AM 1276 Views
You'd defend this idiot? *NM* - 08/08/2010 06:40:34 AM 570 Views
Indeed - 08/08/2010 06:43:53 AM 1217 Views
I used to think Joel was the biggest rambler on this site. I am seriously reconsidering. - 08/08/2010 05:24:56 AM 1220 Views
And my assessment of one poster as the most content-poor, non-contributing slug is unchanged - 08/08/2010 07:17:02 PM 1126 Views
Um, ok. *NM* - 10/08/2010 12:48:19 AM 570 Views
*Shakes Head* - 08/08/2010 06:23:47 AM 1084 Views
I highly doubt Cannoli is "scared" of homosexuals *NM* - 08/08/2010 06:29:54 AM 603 Views
Perhaps not in the physical sense. - 08/08/2010 06:35:53 AM 1190 Views
Re: Perhaps not in the physical sense. - 08/08/2010 06:46:56 AM 1144 Views
Gah! You did that on purpose! - 09/08/2010 01:05:13 AM 1087 Views
whoops *NM* - 09/08/2010 02:22:49 AM 528 Views
Re: *Shakes Head* - 08/08/2010 07:43:11 PM 1146 Views
This must be the "thought out reaction" I've heard so much about. - 08/08/2010 10:45:59 PM 1078 Views
You cannot be that stupid. - 11/08/2010 03:10:55 PM 1356 Views
Incorrect. Genders are not treated equally. - 11/08/2010 07:53:00 PM 1472 Views
all you need is enough support to pass an amendment - 08/08/2010 02:46:08 PM 1065 Views
A lot of the arguments would seem to justify polygamy and incest too - 08/08/2010 11:51:24 PM 1124 Views
And what is wrong with polygamy? *NM* - 09/08/2010 10:36:53 AM 579 Views
Did I say there was anything? - 09/08/2010 11:03:10 AM 1227 Views
Plolygamy and incest are not on the same level of bad. - 09/08/2010 11:00:07 AM 1166 Views
Is that assumption valid? - 09/08/2010 11:36:26 AM 1093 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? - 09/08/2010 11:46:42 AM 1086 Views
Re: Is that assumption valid? - 09/08/2010 12:07:22 PM 1197 Views
Not really - 09/08/2010 01:20:46 PM 1053 Views
Re: Not really - 09/08/2010 01:27:04 PM 1180 Views
Re: Not really - 09/08/2010 02:14:43 PM 1048 Views
Re: Not really - 09/08/2010 03:06:31 PM 1235 Views
Spoken like someone who does not have to insure an employee's six wives. - 11/08/2010 03:11:57 PM 1228 Views
... - 11/08/2010 03:22:50 PM 1117 Views
Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage - 09/08/2010 06:13:30 PM 1238 Views
Re: Mmm, but when you're strictly discussing marriage - 10/08/2010 01:24:06 AM 1046 Views
Now I think about it, I'm not sure. - 10/08/2010 04:09:43 PM 1162 Views
Re: Now I think about it, I'm not sure. - 10/08/2010 06:12:39 PM 1059 Views
Great post Danny - 09/08/2010 08:22:27 PM 924 Views
It should be noted again... - 09/08/2010 08:59:32 PM 1208 Views
and how is it not a right? - 09/08/2010 09:19:12 PM 1112 Views
My definition of rights... - 09/08/2010 10:47:16 PM 1205 Views
mmm, but the UN has legally stated marriage as a right. - 10/08/2010 02:52:03 AM 967 Views
+1 - 10/08/2010 03:11:22 AM 1264 Views
Article 16 probably not a great example - 10/08/2010 03:44:04 AM 1070 Views
You could just as easily move the emphasis... - 10/08/2010 04:08:46 AM 1216 Views
If we need a more specific resolution... - 10/08/2010 04:22:12 AM 1401 Views
It doesn't say a man can only marry a woman or vice versa, though. - 10/08/2010 04:24:17 AM 1081 Views
It also doesn't say they can - 10/08/2010 04:41:18 AM 1081 Views
You're missing the point. It's not about gay marriage. - 10/08/2010 11:20:59 AM 1101 Views
No, I got that, I'm pointing out how it does so - 10/08/2010 01:47:00 PM 1090 Views
To clarify for you - 10/08/2010 05:36:14 AM 1067 Views
The UNSC is actually the UN's enforcement body... - 10/08/2010 07:16:31 PM 1454 Views
What the UN thinks is *completely* worthless.... - 10/08/2010 06:43:15 PM 1022 Views
and the Constitution dictates nothing about marriage. *NM* - 10/08/2010 11:46:24 PM 552 Views
That means it is up to the people. And they say "No." *NM* - 11/08/2010 03:13:12 PM 563 Views
No, but it does dictate things about rights and discrimination - 12/08/2010 03:48:02 PM 1259 Views
The actual ruling on Prop 8 specifices marriage as a freedom, not a right. - 10/08/2010 12:02:17 AM 1190 Views
Out of curiosity, what would you say to using the Ninth Amendment, possibly in conjunction... - 10/08/2010 12:20:19 AM 1248 Views
I agree - 10/08/2010 06:11:19 PM 948 Views
Yeah but this can't be used to prove that it IS a right... - 10/08/2010 07:30:57 PM 1373 Views
Note it all you want... - 10/08/2010 06:43:53 AM 942 Views
The best one yet. - 10/08/2010 07:59:17 PM 1202 Views
Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane - 10/08/2010 08:49:24 PM 1068 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane - 10/08/2010 09:03:11 PM 1172 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane - 11/08/2010 04:35:03 PM 1085 Views
Re: Yeah, I'd agree that's pretty insane - 11/08/2010 04:41:23 PM 1212 Views
Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel - 11/08/2010 05:06:47 PM 1187 Views
Re: Hmm - been a long time since I read my copy of the graphic novel - 11/08/2010 05:09:23 PM 1130 Views

Reply to Message