|73 posts found|
2/15/11 10:37:49 AM#61
What about this then?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ....",
If your country is so free.... so democratic..... why can't you vote for that?
I want a state religion. Why can't you vote for one in the U.S.?
All the other democracies can.
And this...""no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." Why can't I elect someone to represent the church to my government?
All the other democracies do.
Why is there no political or religious freedom in the U.S.? Why are such fundamental institutions of the community outlawed from power?
Each country has it's own hiostory you see. Germany is free to have a religious democracy, but Nazi's are banned.
Your lot are free to have Nazi's but religion is banned.
2/15/11 10:45:35 AM#62
Originally posted by baff
Well, you can't vote for that because America is a democracy, with rights for discrete and insular minorities. Just like all free liberal democracies.
Democracy is not a suicide pact.
You can't vote to take away human rights. That's called a "Tyranny of the Majority".
America is not a Tyranny of the Majority, because our citizens have rights, like freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and so on.
You can't vote to enslave people either. That doesnt' amke it less of a democracy, it makes it a democracy with rights and freedoms for it's citizens.
This is the saem with ALL the liberal democracies, like the EU countries, Israel, Japan, Australia, Switzerland, New Zealand, and so on. In none of those countries can you vote to enslave people. If you gota majority vote on it, then it would be overturned by the Judiciary branch of government.
They are not, like Iran, a Theocracy that does not respect human rights, they are not a Tyranny of the Majority.
2/15/11 10:46:08 AM#63
Each country has it's own history you see. Germany is free to have a religious democracy, but Nazi's are banned.
Your lot are free to have Nazi's in government but religion is banned.
2/15/11 10:47:06 AM#64
Originally posted by Ihmotepp
No. All other democracies can vote for that.
It's only America that is not democratic about it.
Israel voted for it. Why can't you?
2/15/11 10:49:36 AM#65
A Majority votes to skin anyone alive using the handle baff on an internet forum, just for fun.
We should all support that, becaue it's a democracy. There's nothing wrong with that, becaue the majority voted. Right?
Well, in Iran the answer is yes, and that's what you are supporting.
In the EU countries, America, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, Australia, Switzerland and all the liberal free democracies, the anwwer would be no.
They would say, that this is a violation of human rights, and even if a majority votes for it, this will not be allowed.
THAT is the difference.
2/15/11 10:54:59 AM#66
And all those countries have no ban on religion in their governments.
Why don't you?
Iran doesn't have thwe tyranny of the najority either. It has more safe gurds against this than your country does.
Tyranny of the majority, your country democratically supported slavery. It democratically wiped out the indians. It violates human rights with murder and slavery and torture.
Lectures on hu,an rights from a yank is ROFLworthy.
2/15/11 11:08:49 AM#67
Originally posted by baff
It's not black and white, it is rather a spectrum.
I would put Israel on the bottom of the list of free and liberal democracies, but still leaps and bounds ahead of Iran when it comes to Human Rights, and protecting the freedoms of individuals. No, you can't run for office if you're not Jewish (I think that's correct). Oh, googled it, apprantly I'm wrong. You can be non-Jewish and run for office, in fact there are non-jews in political office in Israel.
however, unlike Iran, Israel isn't going to put you in jail for not following Jewish customs. No one is going to make you go to temple ,or wear a jarmulke, or eat kosher. In Iran you will go to Mosque, you will wear a Hijab, and you will not drink alcohol or you will go to jail, and possibly be killed.
No liberal democracy has 100% total free speech. For example, in no country is it going to be ok to yell fire in a crowded public place, adn cause a stampede that kills people.
America has a little bit more free speech than Germany. Americans can advocate for a Nazi party, and Germans can't.
However, that is a minor difference. The similarities are what is more relevant. In Both the US and Germany, you can say your government or your President, sucks.
It is again, a million miles apart from Iran, where speaking out against the government will get you jailed or killed.
2/15/11 11:13:46 AM#68
Originally posted by baff
Why stop there?
Why not also go on to Brown v Board of education? Because you are either ignorant, or simply being beligerant.
During the Civil Rights movement blacks were put in separate schools.
At the time, a majority of Americans, mostly white, thought this was a good idea. You could not win office and change this law politically.
However, the Supreme Court in Brown V Board of Education, said separate is not equal. EVEN if the voters want this, they cannot have it becaues it violates the Constitution and human rights.
Or how about Lawerence V Texas?
Lawrence v Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003), is a landmark United States Supreme Court case. In the 6-3 ruling, the justices struck down the sodomy law in Texas. The court had previously addressed the same issue in 1986 in Bowers v. Hardwick, where it upheld a challenged Georgia statute, not finding a constitutional protection of sexual privacy.
The Supreme Court said, EVEN IF A MAJORITY VOTED FOR IT, you can't do it because it violates the Constitution and Human rights.
So yes, I do have the authority to lecture Iran on this issue.
And, if you choose to do so, you do as well.
In Europe they also protect Human rights.
You can go to the European Court of Law, the Human Rigths Commission, or appeal to the Judiciary in your Country.
Now, you show how Iran protects the rights of minorities in a similar way.
You can't, because they do not.
2/15/11 11:18:43 AM#69
Originally posted by baff
iran works like this:
1. No free elections. You may vote for Candidate A that thinks it's ok to discriminate against women, or you may vote for Candidate B that thinks it's ok to discriminate against women.
What if I want to vote for Candidate C that thinks discrimination against women is wrong? That candidate is NOT APPROVED by the Mullahs, you cannot vote for him.
2. EVEN IF there were free elections, there are no protections for minorities. There is no constitution, no Human rights Act of 1998 (that's in the UK in case you don't know), no European Court of Human Rights.
If the majority votes to discriminate against women, there's nothing they can do about it, no where to appeal.
2/15/11 11:21:44 AM#70
EU publishes an Annual Report on Human Rights which is an assessment of the Human Rights situation in the EU and in the world. In 2007, the Annual ReportAll available translations. reached the following conclusion for Iran:
“Serious violations of human rights have continued to occur in Iran. There has been little or no progress in the EU’s main areas of concern since the last Annual Report, in many respects the situation has worsened. Use of the death penalty is frequent, including in the case of child offenders. Freedom of expression is severely restricted. Reports of torture are frequent. Human rights defenders continue to report harassment and intimidation.”
2/15/11 12:27:53 PM#71
Oh my. Look what happens to be in the news today.
baff's idea of "democracy". I'm sure this is exactly the same way they do it in the UK:
TEHRAN (Reuters) – Iranian lawmakers urged judiciary on Tuesday to hand out death penalties to opposition leaders for fomenting unrest in the Islamic state after a rally in which one person was killed and dozens were wounded, state media said.
Clashes broke out between security forces and protesters when thousands of opposition supporters rallied in sympathy for popular uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia on Monday, reviving mass protests that shook Iran after a presidential vote in 2009.
"(Opposition leaders) Mehdi Karroubi and Mirhossein Mousavi are corrupts on earth and should be tried," the official IRNA news agency quoted lawmakers as saying in a statement.
The loose term "Corrupt on Earth," a charge which has been leveled at political dissidents in the past, carries the death penalty in the Islamic Iran.
But hey, I'm sure this is justified in a "democracy". If you speak out against the government, you're Corrupt on Earth. So of course you have to be put to death.
Ruh Ro! Looks like baff's own country, Britain, is responsible for this unrest!
"We have information...that America, Britain ad Israel guided the opposition leaders who called for the rally," said deputy police chief Ahmadreza Radan, the semi-official Fars news agency reported.
"Adjusts ponytails and pulls the lollipop out of my mouth"
2/17/11 2:44:00 AM#72
Originally posted by baff
The russians stood against the Facists before Britain did. Noo.. according to Britain at the time " Germany was just developing their strong national identity and were not anything to worry about."
An army fighting an army is easier to deal with than organized terrorists refusing to stand and fight the army but instead targeting unarmed civilians. There is a grave difference. An Army is willing to take on other armed opponenets, wheras blowing up children for " their cause" or sport is not something you can fight the same way.
2/17/11 9:06:10 AM#73
Originally posted by deviliscious
Exactly. it's not something you can fight from the outside with an army.
The army is for regime change, to put a government in place that will fight terrorism from the inside.
Although Egyptians have suffered many hardships, and it would have been preferred that they had a real democracy, Mubarik had a regime that fought Islamic terrorism from the inside.
He was largely successful. The police rounded up or killed Islamic extremists, and that works.
America couldnt' go into Egypt and round up or kill all the Islamic extremists, but Egyptians can.
That's why regime change was critical in Afghanistan. America can't go into Afghanistan and kill all the radical Islamists, but it can put a government in place that will.
That's the only thing that works. Otherwise you have a country run by radical Islamists, and they use the resources of an entire country to kill civilians internationally, nad to support other terrrist groups.