Universal Charter Of Human Rights - Printable Version
+- IDU Regional Forum (https://idugov.com/forum)
+-- Forum: The Drafting Rooms (https://idugov.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=100)
+--- Forum: WA Proposal Clinic (https://idugov.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=17)
+--- Thread: Universal Charter Of Human Rights (/showthread.php?tid=1164)
+- IDU Regional Forum (https://idugov.com/forum)
+-- Forum: The Drafting Rooms (https://idugov.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=100)
+--- Forum: WA Proposal Clinic (https://idugov.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=17)
+--- Thread: Universal Charter Of Human Rights (/showthread.php?tid=1164)
Pages:
1
2
Universal Charter Of Human Rights - Jagera - 04-10-2008
Overall should be better... but I'm really not sure about the appendix (no offense to any of our anthropomorphic friends
) I can see some people in debate interpreting that to cover other animals as well, such as dolphins and great apes, who possess human (ie emotional or physical) characteristics and are arguably intelligent. I just don't see the argument about not covering anthropomorphs coming up in general.Either that or work it into the "- DECLARES that all humans worldwide have the following rights" line.
Universal Charter Of Human Rights - Federalist - 04-10-2008
It was done mostly to satisfy the arguments of Bears Armed
Universal Charter Of Human Rights - Gerainia - 04-10-2008
So I'll remove the appendix, change the torture line and submit?
Universal Charter Of Human Rights - Antrium - 04-11-2008
Go for it. The worst that can happen is that it won't reach quorum.
I'd approve it if I were a delegate
Universal Charter Of Human Rights - Federalist - 04-11-2008
I sense there's a hint in that statement....
Universal Charter Of Human Rights - Grosseschnauzer - 04-11-2008
The easier way around the "anthropomorphs" question is to use the word "persons." (and not use "humans" or "human beings.")
Universal Charter Of Human Rights - Gerainia - 04-11-2008
It's been resubmitted.
Universal Charter Of Human Rights - Jagera - 04-12-2008
GrosseschnauzerApr 10 2008, 08:21 PM The easier way around the "anthropomorphs" question is to use the word "persons." (and not use "humans" or "human beings.") [/quote]
But wouldn't one have to define persons, then? After all, if a dictatorial regime wanted to not be bound by this even if a WA member, they could pass a law that only the dictator is a "person". On a less extreme note, women were only "persons" fairly recently in Western world history.
Universal Charter Of Human Rights - Federalist - 04-14-2008
I've been trying to gather support for your proposal. However the debate on the Jolt forums has been working against it. Sorry.
Universal Charter Of Human Rights - Gerainia - 04-14-2008
It's now failed. To be honest, I think they're right about it. I'll think of something else.
Universal Charter Of Human Rights - Jagera - 04-15-2008
Don't be discouraged. At least you put forward a proposal; as J-T I started writing 2 but didn't even get to the posting stage. Also, I don't think this draft is a write-off, it just may need some more tinkering. Also, have you been putting the draft up in the Jolt forum? Might let you know what more people are looking for.
EDIT: I know I've been kind of picking away at this. Don't think its because it's a bad proposal; rather, I've been doing this because I want this proposal to be as good as possible.
Universal Charter Of Human Rights - Gerainia - 04-15-2008
But to be honest, I now see what they were saying. We can just pass a resolution for each right, more detailed. But I'm willing to carry on working on this.