Saudi Arabia to execute woman for 'witchcraft'

[DeadPoolX 9]

The only reason there are any 'human rights' at all Gary is because of the UN. The fact that globally 'human rights' are not respected is because of two things. One, there are states who have not signed up to any part of the human rights resolution and two those who have signed up to it are not consistant in applying these standards to themselves. However, be absolutely clear, if you abolished the UN any notion of 'human rights' would be abolished with it unless you replaced it with something similar.

This has got to be one of the most ridiculous things I have ever seen written on the Internet. I'd laugh if I didn't think you were serious and delusional enough to actually believe your misplaced words.

I don't hate the United Nations. I think it's a somewhat impotent pseudo-governmental body that rarely gets anything worthwhile accomplished, but it's heart is generally in the right place. Regardless, human rights did not begin with the creation of the UN and to state such only shows gross ignorance on the part of human capability, history, society, structure, and laws. I seriously doubt you'll acknowledge that, though. It's become increasingly apparent that you see the UN as the "end all, be all" of mankind and that without it, the Earth would implode or some such nonsense.

The concept of human rights is valid on its own, it doesn't require universal enforecment to make it worthwhile although obviously it's important to keep reaching to get there. Your statement is another of those "because something doesn't work completely then it's not worth having arguments" which is simply wrong. You seem to not get the idea that without a vehicle for arbitration, however imperfect, the concept itself becomes void.

Well, now... that's interesting. If the concept of human rights are valid on their own and don't require any universal enforcement to make worthwhile, what use do we have of the United Nations? Wouldn't they be, more or less, unnecessary in this capacity since human rights (by your own admission) are "valid on their own and do not require universal enforcement."

The words have huge meaning and significance even without total compliance. To try to 'force' people to adhere to the principals of UDHR goes against its very meaning. There is no 'power' required beyond the acceptance of the principals of human rights. The fact that you even recognise the idea of human rights is because of the UN and the agreement.

I find it amusing that you say that. Because it seems to me that using either sanctions or military action would count as attempting to "force people to adhere to the UDHR" when they had little-to-no interest in doing so. Regardless of whether or not you may see it as the so-called "right" thing to do, it's still utilizing force in some respect to gain the outcome we desire. So if that goes against the UDHR, perhaps we need to rethink our tactics.

I think it's very difficult to believe that no one, in the history of mankind, ever thought of or recognized human rights as we know them today. Yet, if what you say is true, human rights (circa 2008) have never existed until the creation of the UN. Maybe I'm alone in this, but I just find that a little hard to swallow.

I didn't need the UN for my idea of Human Rights. I had it already. I got it from a thing called the Bible.

That statement right there totally negates any understanding you think you have as to what human rights are.

How so? True, the Bible could be used as an example of terrible violence and catastrophe, but at the same time, there are numerous passages and stories that exhibit compassion and love for one's fellow man. In other words, the Bible is a multifaceted document, which could be used in a variety of ways.

[Peikko 1,575]

Another one who doesn't understand it. I guess the US education system really is as bad as they say.

[GaryC 7]

I didn't need the UN for my idea of Human Rights. I had it already. I got it from a thing called the Bible.

That statement right there totally negates any understanding you think you have as to what human rights are.

Bullsh!t. How do you know what is in my mind? Your arrogance is showing.

[Peikko 1,575]

I am sorry what I say makes you angry but you are trying to equate christianity to human rights. They are simply not the same thing.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

lol this conversation is really silly

Alexandra! How many times do I have to tell you to behave yourself . this is the forum of all wisdom, with no room for fanaticism and stultified bickering.....

[Peikko 1,575]

What it is, and what it isn't. The UN established human rights. The UN did not establish the concepts of good and evil.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

I am sorry what I say makes you angry but you are trying to equate christianity to human rights. They are simply not the same thing.

PH.... Can I have your autograph???? :thumbs: :thumbs:

Pretending any religious covenant is all-encompassing of human rights (and wrongs) is, in my opinion, quite a fundamentalist view. People's belief systems are so diverse, that no one can really claim to hold the truth and nothing BUT the truth. but then again, I am a Liberal, so I guess I should just be shot.

[Jenn! 918]

Another one who doesn't understand it. I guess the US education system really is as bad as they say.

How right you are! I just had to look up the definition of stultified!

[DeadPoolX 9]

I am sorry what I say makes you angry but you are trying to equate christianity to human rights. They are simply not the same thing.

I'm not Christian, but I find that comment offensive. Christianity can go hand-in-hand with human rights very easily. It just depends on the people practicing it. That's the key with all religions, really. Many times you have zealots (who often make the most noise, so they get heard on the news or make it into the history books) who pervert the religion in question and use it for their own terrible deeds. Usually, the basic premise behind the religion was nothing like what those who twisted the religion made it into at all!

[Peikko 1,575]

Re education.

I was being argumentative with that post. Any lawyer would have shouted it down!

Why do you find it offensive? They are not the same thing it's really that simple. I am not making any quantitative statement about the inherent goodness or lack thereof of christians by saying it though.

Edited February 14, 2008 by Purple_Hibiscus

[Jenn! 918]

Venn diagram time again?

[Amby 490]

come on people my plan is the best plan!

[Peikko 1,575]

Yes, a Venn diagram at this point might prove extremely useful. However, one would have to be sure not to have any spelling mistakes in the labels for fear this might add to the confusion.

[Peikko 1,575]

I am sorry what I say makes you angry but you are trying to equate christianity to human rights. They are simply not the same thing.

PH.... Can I have your autograph????

Pretending any religious covenant is all-encompassing of human rights (and wrongs) is, in my opinion, quite a fundamentalist view. People's belief systems are so diverse, that no one can really claim to hold the truth and nothing BUT the truth. but then again, I am a Liberal, so I guess I should just be shot.

Shot? No, it's not an incurable disease you just need more money.

[GaryC 7]

I am sorry what I say makes you angry but you are trying to equate christianity to human rights. They are simply not the same thing.

PH.... Can I have your autograph???? :thumbs: :thumbs:

Pretending any religious covenant is all-encompassing of human rights (and wrongs) is, in my opinion, quite a fundamentalist view. People's belief systems are so diverse, that no one can really claim to hold the truth and nothing BUT the truth. but then again, I am a Liberal, so I guess I should just be shot.

I said I got MY human rights views from my faith. What others do is their business. My God taught be that all men are equal and that you should treat others as you would want to be treated. Do you have a different idea of what human rights are?