Register :: Log in :: Profile :: Mail   


Universal Declaration of Human Rights

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LVC Home // Liberals Versus Conservatives
Author Message
human_dignity
Newbie


Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Wed Dec 27, 2006 7:38 pm    Post subject: Universal Declaration of Human Rights Reply with quote
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

Universal Declaration of Human Rights Exclamation
Back to top
Lester
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 3907

PostPosted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
One of the most important documents in the world right now, if only we'd pay attention to it.
Back to top
mulch
Newbie


Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 30

PostPosted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lester wrote:
One of the most important documents in the world right now, if only we'd pay attention to it.


Well by reading that "document" the US has the right to toss out any 2 bit dictator on this planet.

Too bad the corupt and useless UN put it together.
Back to top
PeaceLoveandRockNRoll
Known Associate
Known Associate


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 300
Location: Richmond, IN

PostPosted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Article 5.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Too bad the US Government isn't big on this one.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I shall mention the things i disagree with, since i imagine there will be less of those than the things that i agree with.

"Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person."

I disagree with the first part, and i'm not sure what "security of person" means.

"No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms."

I disagree with this. I think a lifetime of servitude is an appropriate placement for someone who is too dangerous to be allowed to run around in the general public.

"No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks."

I don't think anyone has the right that others will not attack their honor or reputation. Open attacks with words are fair game, as far as i'm concerned.

"Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state."

I think this ought to apply to movement between states also.

"No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property."

'Arbitrarily' is too ambiguous for my liking.

"The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures."

I don't like this. The will of the people isn't a good thing; i think it's typically stupid and inane.

It is, however, the best solution we've come up with so far.

My objection is with listing this as an inalienable right; it shouldn't be a right. I'd like to replace this method of governance as soon as someone comes up with a better one (if that's possible).

"Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment."

I don't think anyone has an inherent right to protection against unemployment, in that it is conceiveable that a situation could arise wherein the government can not, and should not, try to alleviate employment issues for everyone.

"Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work."

On one hand, i'm inclined to agree - you're paid for what you do.

On the other hand, i don't like this being listed as an inalienable right. I think it's unfortunate that many people are paid much more than they deserve, and i think it's fair game to tax the hell out of them for it, but i don't think that translates into any sort of inalienable rights.

"Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay."

Again, it is conceiveable that a situation could arise wherein people do not inherently deserve some time off. This should not be a right.

" Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control."

This shouldn't be a right until we can work out the technological and economical problems involved with it. As things stand, the world can't support everyone on such a standard of living.

"Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children."

This contradicts the right to an education itself. If a parent can choose the kind of education that their children receive, then they can choose something that isn't really an education at all, as it is described in these rights (such as a thoroughly religious education).

"Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author."

I'm not entirely sure what this entails. I think people deserve to be given credit for what they create, but they do not have an inherent right to profit from it.
Back to top
cornopean
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 20 Dec 2006
Posts: 1131

PostPosted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 6:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
PeaceLoveandRockNRoll wrote:
Article 5.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Too bad the US Government isn't big on this one.

well that is cuz this article is so naive. terrorists have no rights that anyone is obligated to observe. a terrorist who has planted a bomb somewhere should be hung from his toes until he confesses. under the vast majority of circumstances, article is true and good.

Of course, you blaming the US is like trying to stamp out a cigarette while the house around you is burning down. The arab muslim nations are the most egregious violators of Article 5 in the whole world. the US are boy scouts compared to the islamic fundies.
Back to top
CryxicKiller
Known Associate
Known Associate


Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 315

PostPosted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 10:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
People are misunderstanding the point of the article. It's very liberal in nature and spirit, and that's about it. It's not meant to be a specific guide on how people should lead their lives or how nations should behave towards each other. Yes, it is idealistic and hopeful; there's nothing wrong with that, given what it is designed to achieve.
Back to top
Lester
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 3907

PostPosted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 6:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Exton

-The majority of your post I will leave untouched, because they would degenerate into huge issues of right and left which is not what this thread is about, there are four points I will take issue with however.

- "I disagree with this. I think a lifetime of servitude is an appropriate placement for someone who is too dangerous to be allowed to run around in the general public."

I do not think this particular right denies the ability to put someone in prison, as you seem to think it does, I think one of the reason you are disagreement with a lot of these points is that you are reading it as though it was meant to be an ironclad contract, it is not, but rather a testiment to humanity.

-The government and the will of the people, I agree with you completely, but I think there is already a system of government that is better - communism.

-"Again, it is conceiveable that a situation could arise wherein people do not inherently deserve some time off. This should not be a right."

No-one should have to work constantly and have no time to relax, what possible situation could make you put that on someone?

-"This shouldn't be a right until we can work out the technological and economical problems involved with it. As things stand, the world can't support everyone on such a standard of living."

This is a fallacy, we actually have enough money, resources, food, water, and medical equipment to provide this standard of living for the entire world, however, the 'just for profit' way of thinking has led to a huge imbalance of finances, and the current system will not allow the world to live in reasonable conditions.
Back to top
Joshua1978
Newbie


Joined: 27 Dec 2006
Posts: 14

PostPosted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 7:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
PeaceLoveandRockNRoll wrote:
Article 5.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Too bad the US Government isn't big on this one.


Oh my god please with the US government is a big bull crap.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 5:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lester wrote:
Exton

- "I disagree with this. I think a lifetime of servitude is an appropriate placement for someone who is too dangerous to be allowed to run around in the general public."

I do not think this particular right denies the ability to put someone in prison, as you seem to think it does, I think one of the reason you are disagreement with a lot of these points is that you are reading it as though it was meant to be an ironclad contract, it is not, but rather a testiment to humanity.


I don't just mean prison. I mean servitude. Forced labor.
I think it's rather foolish to have someone just sit in prison for their entire life. It's an unnecessary drain on civilization's resources.

And rights, by their very nature, are ironclad. Otherwise, they're not really rights, just conveniences.

Quote:

-The government and the will of the people, I agree with you completely, but I think there is already a system of government that is better - communism.


Communism run as a democracy suffers from the same problems as any other democracy, and communism run as a dictatorship suffers from the same problems as any other dictatorship. Communism is not a solution to stupidity.

Quote:

-"Again, it is conceiveable that a situation could arise wherein people do not inherently deserve some time off. This should not be a right."

No-one should have to work constantly and have no time to relax, what possible situation could make you put that on someone?


Nuclear holocaust.

Civilization doesn't rebuild itself.

And i don't mean "no time to relax". I mean, there's no inherent right to a week of vacation, or some sucuh thing.

A person who never takes a minute out, so to speak, won't be very healthy psychologically.

Quote:

-"This shouldn't be a right until we can work out the technological and economical problems involved with it. As things stand, the world can't support everyone on such a standard of living."

This is a fallacy, we actually have enough money, resources, food, water, and medical equipment to provide this standard of living for the entire world, however, the 'just for profit' way of thinking has led to a huge imbalance of finances, and the current system will not allow the world to live in reasonable conditions.


We have the literal resources to sustain everyone for some period of time, yes.

But we do not have the resources to make the local economies of impoverished areas self-sustaining, such that they would be able to continue existing at a certain standard of living.

We could feed, clothe, give shelter to, and medicate everyone. But we'd run out of resources fairly quickly, doing that. The only real solution is to make them self-sustaining.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 5:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
cornopean wrote:

well that is cuz this article is so naive. terrorists have no rights that anyone is obligated to observe. a terrorist who has planted a bomb somewhere should be hung from his toes until he confesses. under the vast majority of circumstances, article is true and good.


Do you understand why we do not, and should not, beat confessions out of people?

Because you don't always pick up the right guy.

That's why we have trials and juries and lawyers and all that jazz. So that we don't imprison innocent people.

Of course, it still happens every now and then. But not nearly as much as it would if we just beat every suspect until he confessed.
Back to top
Lester
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 08 Dec 2006
Posts: 3907

PostPosted: Sun Dec 31, 2006 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
exton wrote:

I don't just mean prison. I mean servitude. Forced labor.
I think it's rather foolish to have someone just sit in prison for their entire life. It's an unnecessary drain on civilization's resources.

And rights, by their very nature, are ironclad. Otherwise, they're not really rights, just conveniences.


You can't force labour, it's always a choice.

Not ironclad, but inherent, they are written in plain english, not in legalese, which would make them ironclad.

Quote:

Communism run as a democracy suffers from the same problems as any other democracy, and communism run as a dictatorship suffers from the same problems as any other dictatorship. Communism is not a solution to stupidity.


True communism fits into neither our perception of democracy nor our perception of dictatorship.

Quote:

Nuclear holocaust.

Civilization doesn't rebuild itself.

And i don't mean "no time to relax". I mean, there's no inherent right to a week of vacation, or some sucuh thing.

A person who never takes a minute out, so to speak, won't be very healthy psychologically.


All the right gave them was the right to have relaxation, it didn't specify a week or whatever.

Quote:

We have the literal resources to sustain everyone for some period of time, yes.

But we do not have the resources to make the local economies of impoverished areas self-sustaining, such that they would be able to continue existing at a certain standard of living.

We could feed, clothe, give shelter to, and medicate everyone. But we'd run out of resources fairly quickly, doing that. The only real solution is to make them self-sustaining.


Not true, we would only run out of resources quickly if we wanted to hand on to our caviar and rolls royce's, if everyone would would live at an equal level then the amount of money we make now would be enough, and with the increase of the workforce(due to healthy people who used to be impoverished now working) we would make more money than needed and so increase the standard of living for all almost every year.
Back to top
exton
Forum Elder
Forum Elder


Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 2825

PostPosted: Mon Jan 01, 2007 3:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lester wrote:
exton wrote:

I don't just mean prison. I mean servitude. Forced labor.
I think it's rather foolish to have someone just sit in prison for their entire life. It's an unnecessary drain on civilization's resources.


You can't force labour, it's always a choice.


That's true. We'd have to give them a choice between labor and execution.


Quote:
All the right gave them was the right to have relaxation, it didn't specify a week or whatever.


No, it said "periodic holidays with pay".

Philosophically, I'll say it's fine.

But I'm thinking of this in terms of if congress was asked to ratify it.

Quote:

Not true, we would only run out of resources quickly if we wanted to hand on to our caviar and rolls royce's, if everyone would would live at an equal level then the amount of money we make now would be enough, and with the increase of the workforce(due to healthy people who used to be impoverished now working) we would make more money than needed and so increase the standard of living for all almost every year.


Just how do you define "need"?
Back to top
Post new topic   Reply to topic    LVC Home // Liberals Versus Conservatives All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
Add to My Yahoo!

Politics Blogs - Blog Top Sites