or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Ashcroft's done it again
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ashcroft's done it again

post #1 of 37
Thread Starter 
I found this article on the New York times site. It's obvious that Atty. General Ashsroft is not the greatest example of humanity and if he had been born in Afghanistan, he would have become a highranking Taliban official; he is of a similar mindset, re. narrow-minded religious fundamentalism. Some of my friends and acquaintances are 'middle of the road' moderate conservatives, but in general don't relate to Ashcroft's, confrontational and medieval approach.

This Ashcroft guy was even defeated by a dead person at the last election, yet he ends up in one of the most powerful positions in the nation, and even endorsed by the ultra-wimpy Democrats who rolled over at the slightest push. What the hell is a vicious extremist who supports thuggery like this doing in the position of America's top cop?. He's no better than Mullah Mohammad Omar.



[quote]Women's Rights: Why Not?

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan We now have a window into what President Bush and America's senators think of the world's women: Not much.

An international women's treaty banning discrimination has been ratified by 169 countries so far (without emasculating men in any of them!), yet it has languished in the United States Senate ever since President Carter sent it there for ratification in 1980. This month the Senate Foreign Relations Committee got around to holding hearings on it, but the Bush
administration, after shyly supporting it at first, now is finding its courage faltering.

The support came from Colin Powell's State Department, but then John Ashcroft's Justice Department found out about the treaty and seems to be trying to defend America from the
terrifying threat of global women's rights. You'd think he might have other distractions, like fixing the F.B.I., but the Justice Department is conducting its own review of the treaty in what looks suspiciously like an effort to eviscerate it.

I wish Mr. Ashcroft could come here to Pakistan, to talk to women like Zainab Noor. Because, frankly, the treaty has almost nothing to do with American women, who already enjoy the rights the treaty supports opportunities to run for political office, to receive an education, to choose one's own spouse, to hold jobs. Instead it has everything to do with the half
of the globe where to be female is to be persecuted until, often, death.

Mrs. Noor, a pretty woman with soft eyes and a gold nose ring, grew up in the Pakistani countryside, and like her three sisters she never received a day's education. At the age of 15 she was married off by her parents, becoming the second wife of the imam of a local mosque. He beat her relentlessly.

"He would grab my hair, throw me on the floor and beat me with sticks," she recalled. Finally she ran away.

Her husband found her, tied her to the bed, wired a metal rod to a 220-volt electrical outlet and forced it into her vagina. Surgeons managed to save her life, but horrific internal burns forced them to remove her bladder, urethra, vagina and rectum. Her doctor says she will have to carry external colostomy and urine bags for the rest of her life.

At least she survived. Each year about one million girls in the third world die because of mistreatment and discrimination.

In societies where males and females have relatively equal access to food and health care, and where there is no sex-selective abortion, females live longer and there are about 104
females for every 100 males. In contrast, Pakistan has only 94 females for every 100 males, pointing to three million to seven million missing females in that country alone. Perhaps 10 percent of Pakistani girls and women die because of gender discrimination.

In most cases it is not that parents deliberately kill their daughters. Rather, people skimp on spending on females just like Sedanshah, a man at an Afghan refugee camp I visited near here. When his wife and son were both sick, he bought medicine for the boy alone, saying of his wife, "She's always sick, so it's not worth buying medicine for her."

At Capital Hospital here in Islamabad, a nurse named Rukhsana Kausar recalled fraternal-twin babies she had treated recently. At birth, the girl twin weighed one pound one ounce more than the boy. At seven months, their position was reversed: the boy weighed one pound 13 ounces more than his sister.

Critics have complained that the treaty, in the words of Jesse Helms, was "negotiated by radical feminists with the intent of enshrining their radical anti-family agenda into international
law" and is "a vehicle for imposing abortion on countries that still protect the rights of the unborn."

That's absurd. Twenty years of experience with the treaty in the great majority of countries shows that it simply helps third-world women gain their barest human rights. In Pakistan, for example, women who become pregnant after being raped are often prosecuted for adultery and sentenced to death by stoning. But this treaty has helped them escape execution.

How can we be against that? Do we really want to side with the Taliban mullahs, who, like Mr. Ashcroft, fretted that the treaty imposes sexual equality? Or do we dare side with third-world girls who die because of their gender, more than 2,000 of them today alone?<hr></blockquote>
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
post #2 of 37
From the article:

"I wish Mr. Ashcroft could come here to Pakistan, to talk to women like Zainab Noor. Because, frankly, the treaty has almost nothing to do with American women, who already enjoy the rights the treaty supports opportunities to run for political office, to receive an education, to choose one's own spouse, to hold jobs. Instead it has everything to do with the half
of the globe where to be female is to be persecuted until, often, death."

If American women already enjoy the rights the treaty supports, what is the issue here? Just as Saudi Arabia can't determine millage rates in Connecticut, we can't expect other societies to fall in line just because we sign some treaty.

I guess that point is the key here -- folks must think that just because we sign some treaty, things will automatically change and the world will be bent to our will. There MUST BE some aspects of this treaty that would be detrimental to US interests. What are they? They MUST exist, or the administration wouldn't let this thing languish.

I'm sure that there are some deeper issues involved (possibly involving US financial commitments or perhaps losses of sovereignty) that require some actual THINKING here. But it sounds good to just say that "they" are at it again, behind some huge right-wing conspiracy to keep women subjugated.
Never had ONE lesson.
Reply
Never had ONE lesson.
Reply
post #3 of 37
Of course it would be the likes of Finboy to actually find a eason to support the Party Line . . . even on this issue . . as long as that's what the Party wants.

By signing the treaty we would be sending a message to the world that abuses like those mentioned are not right. What's wrong with this? and how is that anti-family??? . . . unless your idea of a family is allowing a husband to torture his wife, or blame victims of rape for having the children that result from the rape I don't understand where women's rights are anti-family.

Perhaps someone can post a link to the actual treaty and we can read it for ourselves.
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #4 of 37
post #5 of 37
To be fair and spread the blame for this (even if it is just a symbolic act), it's been around since 1980, and obviously all those men and women in Washington have done nothing about it.
post #6 of 37
It looks like some folks need more than a treaty.
We're investigating reports of indecent acts being committed at the YMCA.
Reply
We're investigating reports of indecent acts being committed at the YMCA.
Reply
post #7 of 37
The full text of the treaty, from un.org's gopher(!) server:

[quote] CONVENTION ON THE ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF
DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN


"...the full and complete development of a country, the welfare of the world
and the cause of peace require the maximum participation of women on equal
terms with men in all fields "

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION
Content and Significance of the Convention ...................... 1

PREAMBLE .................................................. ...... 4

PART I
Discrimination (Article 1) ...................................... 6
Policy Measures (Article 2) .................................... 6
Guarantee of Basic Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
(Article 3) .................................................. . 6
Special Measures (Article 4) .................................... 7
Sex Role Stereotyping and Prejudice (Article 5) ................. 7
Prostitution (Article 6) ........................................ 7

PART II
Political and Public Life (Article 7) ........................... 7
Representation (Article 8) ...................................... 8
Nationality (Article 9) ......................................... 8

PART III
Education (Article 10) .......................................... 8
Employment (Article 11 ) ........................................ 9
Health (Article 12) ............................................ 10
Economic and Social Benefits (Article 13) ...................... 10
Rural Women (Article 14) ....................................... 10

PART IV
Law (Article 15) ............................................... 11
Marriage and Family Life (Article 16) .......................... 12

PART V
Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women
(Article 17) ................................................. 12
National Reports (Article 18) .................................. 14
Rules of Procedure (Article 19) ................................ 14
Committee Meetings (Article 20) ................................ 14
Committee Reports (Article 21) ................................. 14
Role of Specialized Agencies (Article 22) ...................... 14

PART Vl
Effect on Other Treaties (Article 23) .......................... 15
Commitment of States Parties (Article 24) ...................... 15
Administration of the Convention (Articles 25-30) .............. 15


INTRODUCTION

On 18 December 1979, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women was adopted by the United Nations General
Assembly. It entered into force as an international treaty on 3 September 1981
after the twentieth country had ratified it. By the tenth anniversary of the
Convention in 1989, almost one hundred nations have agreed to be bound by its
provisions.

The Convention was the culmination of more than thirty years of work by
the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women, a body established in
1946 to monitor the situation of women and to promote women's rights. The
Commission's work has been instrumental in bringing to light all the areas in
which women are denied equality with men. These efforts for the advancement of
women have resulted in several declarations and conventions, of which the
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women is
the central and most comprehensive document.

Among the international human rights treaties, the Convention takes an
important place in bringing the female half of humanity into the focus of
human rights concerns. The spirit of the Convention is rooted in the goals of
the United Nations: to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the
dignity,v and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women.
The present document spells out the meaning of equality and how it can be
achieved. In so doing, the Convention establishes not only an international
bill of rights for women, but also an agenda for action by countries to
guarantee the enjoyment of those rights.

In its preamble, the Convention explicitly acknowledges that "extensive
discrimination against women continues to exist", and emphasizes that such
discrimination "violates the principles of equality of rights and respect for
human dignity". As defined in article 1, discrimination is understood as "any
distinction, exclusion or restriction made o.1 the basis of sex...in the
political, economic, social, cultural, civil or any other field". The
Convention gives positive affirmation to the principle of equality by
requiring States parties to take "all appropriate measures, including
legislation, to ensure the full development and advancement of women, for the
purpose of guaranteeing them the exercise and enjoyment of human rights and
fundamental freedoms on a basis of equality with men"(article 3).

The agenda for equality is specified in fourteen subsequent articles. In
its approach, the Convention covers three dimensions of the situation of
women. Civil rights and the legal status of women are dealt with in great
detail. In addition, and unlike other human rights treaties, the Convention is
also concerned with the dimension of human reproduction as well as with the
impact of cultural factors on gender relations.

The legal status of women receives the broadest attention. Concern over
the basic rights of political participation has not diminished since the
adoption of the Convention on the Political Rights of Women in 1952. Its
provisions, therefore, are restated in article 7 of the present document,
whereby women are guaranteed the rights to vote, to hold public office and to
exercise public functions. This includes equal rights for women to represent
their countries at the international level (article 8). The Convention on the
Nationality of Married Women - adopted in 1957 - is integrated under article 9
providing for the statehood of women, irrespective of their marital status.
The Convention, thereby, draws attention to the fact that often women's legal
status has been linked to marriage, making them dependent on their husband's
nationality rather than individuals in their own right. Articles 10, 11 and
13, respectively, affirm women's rights to non-discrimination in education,
employment and economic and social activities. These demands are given special
emphasis with regard to the situation of rural women, whose particular
struggles and vital economic contributions, as noted in article 14, warrant
more attention in policy planning. Article 15 asserts the full equality of
women in civil and business matters, demanding that all instruments directed
at restricting women's legal capacity ''shall be deemed null and void".
Finally, in article 16, the Convention returns to the issue of marriage and
family relations, asserting the equal rights and obligations of women and men
with regard to choice of spouse, parenthood, personal rights and command over
property.

Aside from civil rights issues, the Convention also devotes major
attention to a most vital concern of women, namely their reproductive rights.
The preamble sets the tone by stating that "the role of women in procreation
should not be a basis for discrimination". The link between discrimination and
women's reproductive role is a matter of recurrent concern in the Convention.
For example, it advocates, in article 5, ''a proper understanding of maternity
as a social function", demanding fully shared responsibility for child-rearing
by both sexes. Accordingly, provisions for maternity protection and child-care
are proclaimed as essential rights and are incorporated into all areas of the
Convention, whether dealing with employment, family law, health core or
education. Society's obligation extends to offering social services,
especially child-care facilities, that allow individuals to combine family
responsibilities with work and participation in public life. Special measures
for maternity protection are recommended and "shall not be considered
discriminatory". (article 4). "The Convention also affirms women's right to
reproductive choice. Notably, it is the only human rights treaty to mention
family planning. States parties are obliged to include advice on family
planning in the education process (article l O.h) and to develop family codes
that guarantee women's rights "to decide freely and responsibly on the number
and spacing of their children and to hove access to the information, education
and means to enable them to exercise these rights" (article 16.e).

The third general thrust of the Convention aims at enlarging our
understanding of the concept of human rights, as it gives formal recognition
to the influence of culture and tradition on restricting women's enjoyment of
their fundamental rights. These forces take shape in stereotypes, customs and
norms which give rise to the multitude of legal, political and economic
constraints on the advancement of women. Noting this interrelationship, the
preamble of the Convention stresses "that a change in the traditional role of
men as well as the role of women in society and in the family is needed to
achieve full equality of men and women". States parties are therefore obliged
to work towards the modification of social and cultural patterns of individual
conduct in order to eliminate "prejudices and customary and all other
practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of
either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women" (article 5).
And Article 1O.c. mandates the revision of textbooks, school programmes and
teaching methods with a view to eliminating stereotyped concepts in the field
of education. Finally, cultural patterns which define the public realm as a
man's world and the domestic sphere as women's domain are strongly targeted in
all of the Convention's provisions that affirm the equal responsibilities of
both sexes in family life and their equal rights with regard to education and
employment. Altogether, the Convention provides a comprehensive framework for
challenging the various forces that have created and sustained discrimination
based upon sex.

The implementation of the Convention is monitored by the Committee on the
Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). The Committee's mandate
and the administration of the treaty are defined in the Articles 17 to 30 of
the Convention. The Committee is composed of 23 experts nominated by their
Governments and elected by the States parties as individuals "of high moral
standing and competence in the field covered by the Convention".

At least every four years, the States parties are expected to submit a
national report to the Committee, indicating the measures they have adopted to
give effect to the provisions of the Convention. During its annual session,
the Committee members discuss these reports with the Government
representatives and explore with them areas for further action by the specific
country. The Committee also makes general recommendations to the States
parties on matters concerning the elimination of discrimination against women.

The full text of the Convention is set out in the pages that follow.


************************************************** ************************
CONVENTION ON THE ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN
************************************************** ************************

The States Parties to the present Convention,

Noting that the Charter of the United Nations reaffirms faith in
fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and
in the equal rights of man and women,

Noting that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirms the principle
of the inadmissibility of discrimination and proclaims that all human
beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights and that everyone is
entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth therein, without
distinction of any kind, including distinction based on sex,

Noting that the States Parties to the International Covenants on Human
Rights have the obligation to ensure the equal right of men and women to
enjoy all economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights,

Considering the international conventions concluded under the auspices of
the United Nations and the specialized agencies promoting equality of
rights of men and women,

Noting also the resolutions, declarations and recommendations adopted by
the United Nations and the specialized agencies promoting equality of
rights of men and women,

Concerned, however, that despite these various instruments extensive
discrimination against women continues to exist,

Recalling that discrimination against women violates the principles of
equality of rights and respect for human dignity, is an obstacle to the
participation of women, on equal terms with men, in the political, social,
economic and cultural life of their countries, hampers the growth of the
prosperity of society and the family and makes more difficult the full
development of the potentialities of women in the service of their
countries and of humanity,

Concerned that in situations of poverty women have the least access to
food, health, education, training and opportunities for employment and
other needs,

Convinced that the establishment of the new international economic order
based on equity and justice will contribute significantly towards the
promotion of equality between men and women,

Emphasizing that the eradication of apartheid, of all forms of racism,
racial discrimination, colonialism, neo-colonialism, aggression, foreign
occupation and domination and interference in the internal affairs of
States is essential to the full enjoyment of the rights of men and women,

Affirming that the strengthening of international peace and security,
relaxation of international tension, mutual co-operation among all States
irrespective of their social and economic systems, general and complete
disarmament, and in particular nuclear disarmament under strict and
effective international control, the affirmation of the principles of
justice, equality and mutual benefit in relations among countries and the
realization of the right of peoples under alien and colonial domination and
foreign occupation to self-determination and independence, as well as
respect for national sovereignty and territorial integrity, will promote
social progress and development and as a consequence will contribute to the
attainment of full equality between men and women,

Convinced that the full and complete development of a country, the welfare
of the world and the cause of peace require the maximum participation of
women on equal terms with men in all fields,

Bearing in mind the great contribution of women to the welfare of the
family and to the development of society, so far not fully recognized, the
social significance of maternity and the role of both parents in the family
and in the upbringing of children, and aware that the role of women in
procreation should not be a basis for discrimination but that the
upbringing of children requires a sharing of responsibility between men and
women and society as a whole,

Aware that a change in the traditional role of men as well as the role of
women in society and in the family is needed to achieve full equality
between men and women,

Determined to implement the principles set forth in the Declaration on the
Elimination of Discrimination against Women and, for that purpose, to adopt
the measures required for the elimination of such discrimination in all its
forms and manifestations,

Have agreed on the following:


PART I

Article 1. For the purposes of the present Convention, the term
"discrimination against women" shall mean any distinction, exclusion or
restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of
impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women
irrespective of their marital status, on a basis of equality of men and women,
of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social,
cultural, civil or any other field.

Article 2. States Parties condemn discrimination against women in all its
forms, agree to pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy
of eliminating discrimination against women and, to this end, undertake:

(a) To embody the principle of the equality of men and women in their
national constitutions or other appropriate legislation if not yet
incorporated therein and to ensure, through law and other appropriate
means, the practical realization of this principle;

(b) To adopt appropriate legislative and other measures, including
sanctions where appropriate, prohibiting all discrimination against
women;

(c) To establish legal protection of the rights of women on an equal
basis with men and to ensure through competent national tribunals and
other public institutions the effective protection of women against
any act of discrimination;

(d) To refrain from engaging in any act or practice of discrimination
against women and to ensure that public authorities and institutions
shall act in conformity with this obligation;

(e) To take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against
women by any person, organization or enterprise;

(f) To take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to modify or
abolish existing laws, regulations, customs and practices which
constitute discrimination against women;

(g) To repeal all national penal provisions which constitute
discrimination against women.

Article 3. States Parties shall take in all fields, in particular in the
political, social, economic and cultural fields, all appropriate measures,
including legislation, to ensure the full development and advancement of
women, for the purpose of guaranteeing them the exercise and enjoyment of
human rights and fundamental freedoms on a basis of equality with men.

Article 4. 1. Adoption by States Parties of temporary special measures
aimed at accelerating de facto equality between men and women shall not be
considered discrimination as defined in the present Convention, but shall
in no way entail as a consequence the maintenance of unequal or separate
standards; these measures shall be discontinued when the objectives of
equality of opportunity and treatment have been achieved.

2. Adoption by States Parties of special measures, including those measures
contained in the present Convention, aimed at protecting maternity shall
not be considered discriminatory.

Article 5. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures:

(a) To modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and
women, with a view to achieving the elimination of prejudices and
customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the
inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on
stereotyped roles for men and women;

(b) To ensure that family education includes a proper understanding of
maternity as a social function and the recognition of the common
responsibility of men and women in the upbringing and development of
their children, it being understood that the interest of the children
is the primordial consideration in all cases.

Article 6. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures, including
legislation, to suppress all forms of traffic in women and exploitation of
prostitution of women.


PART II

Article 7. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate
discrimination against women in the political and public life of the
country and, in particular, shall ensure to women, on equal terms with men,
the right:

(a) To vote in all elections and public referenda and to be eligible for
election to all publicly elected bodies;

(b) To participate in the formulation of government policy and the
implementation thereof and to hold public office and perform all
public functions at all levels of government;

(c) To participate in non-governmental organizations and associations
concerned with the public and political life of the country.

Article 8. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure to
women, on equal terms with men and without any discrimination, the
opportunity to represent their Governments at the international level and
to participate in the work of international organizations.

Article 9. 1. States Parties shall grant women equal rights with men to
acquire, change or retain their nationality. They shall ensure in
particular that neither marriage to an alien nor change of nationality by
the husband during marriage shall automatically change the nationality of
the wife, render her stateless or force upon her the nationality of the
husband.

2. States Parties shall grant women equal rights with men with respect to
the nationality of their children.


PART III

Article 10. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate
discrimination against women in order to ensure to them equal rights with
men in the field of education and in particular to ensure, on a basis of
equality of men and women:

(a) The same conditions for career and vocational guidance, for access to
studies and for the achievement of diplomas in educational
establishments of all categories in rural as well as in urban areas;
this equality shall be ensured in preschool, general, technical,
professional and higher technical education, as well as in all types
of vocational training;

(b) Access to the same curricula, the same examinations, teaching staff
with qualifications of the same standard and school premises and
equipment of the same quality;

(c) The elimination of any stereotyped concept of the roles of men and
women at all levels and in all forms of education by encouraging
coeducation and other types of education which will help to achieve
this aim and, in particular, by the revision of textbooks and school
programmes and the adaptation of teaching methods;

(d) The same opportunities to benefit from scholarships and other study
grants;

(e) The same opportunities for access to programmes of continuing
education including adult and functional literacy programmes,
particularly those aimed at reducing, at the earliest possible time,
any gap in education existing between men and women;

(f) The reduction of female student drop-out rates and the organization
of programmes for girls and women who have left school prematurely;

(g) The same opportunities to participate actively in sports and physical
education;

(h) Access to specific educational information to help to ensure the
health and well-being of families, including information and advice
on family planning.

Article 11. 1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to
eliminate discrimination against women in the field of employment in order
to ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women, the same rights, in
particular:

(a) The right to work as an inalienable right of all human beings;

(b) The right to the same employment opportunities, including the
application of the same criteria for selection in matters of
employment;

(c) The right to free choice of profession and employment, the right to
promotion, job security and all benefits and conditions of service
and the right to receive vocational training and retraining,
including apprenticeships, advanced vocational training and recurrent
training;

(d) The right to equal remuneration, including benefits, and to equal
treatment in respect of work of equal value, as well as equality of
treatment in the evaluation of the quality of work;

(e) The right to social security, particularly in cases of retirement,
unemployment, sickness, invalidity and old age and other incapacity
to work, as well as the right to paid leave;

(f) The right to protection of health and to safety in working
conditions, including the safeguarding of the function of
reproduction.

2. In order to prevent discrimination against women on the grounds of
marriage or maternity and to ensure their effective right to work, States
Parties shall take appropriate measures:

(a) To prohibit, subject to the imposition of sanctions, dismissal on the
grounds of pregnancy or of maternity leave and discrimination in
dismissals on the basis of marital status;

(b) To introduce maternity leave with pay or with comparable social
benefits without loss of former employment, seniority or social
allowances;

(c) To encourage the provision of the necessary supporting social
services to enable parents to combine family obligations with work
responsibilities and participation in public life, in particular
through promoting the establishment and development of a network of
child-care facilities;

(d) To provide special protection to women during pregnancy in types of
work proved to be harmful to them.

3. Protective legislation relating to matters covered in this article shall
be reviewed periodically in the light of scientific and technological
knowledge and shall be revised, repealed or extended as necessary.

Article 12. 1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to
eliminate discrimination against women in the field of health care in order
to ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women, access to health care
services, including those related to family planning.

2. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 1 of this article, States
Parties shall ensure to women appropriate services in connexion with
pregnancy, confinement and the post-natal period, granting free services
where necessary, as well as adequate nutrition during pregnancy and
lactation.

Article 13. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate
discrimination against women in other areas of economic and social life in
order to ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women, the same rights,
in particular:

(a) The right to family benefits;

(b) The right to bank loans, mortgages and other forms of financial
credit;

(c) The right to participate in recreational activities, sports and all
aspects of cultural life.

Article 14. 1. States Parties shall take into account the particular
problems faced by rural women and the significant roles which rural women
play in the economic survival of their families, including their work in
the non-monetized sectors of the economy, and shall take all appropriate
measures to ensure the application of the provisions of this Convention to
women in rural areas.

2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate
discrimination against women in rural areas in order to ensure, on a basis
of equality of men and women, that they participate in and benefit from
rural development and, in particular, shall ensure to such women the right:

(a) To participate in the elaboration and implementation of development
planning at all levels;

(b) To have access to adequate health care facilities, including
information, counselling and services in family planning;

(c) To benefit directly from social security programmes;

(d) To obtain all types of training and education, formal and non-formal,
including that relating to functional literacy, as well as, inter
alia, the benefit of all community and extension services, in order
to increase their technical proficiency;

(e) To organize self-help groups and co-operatives in order to obtain
equal access to economic opportunities through employment or
self-employment;

(f) To participate in all community activities;

(g) To have access to agricultural credit and loans, marketing
facilities, appropriate technology and equal treatment in land and
agrarian reform as well as in land resettlement schemes;

(h) To enjoy adequate living conditions, particularly in relation to
housing, sanitation, electricity and water supply, transport and
communications.


PART IV

Article 15. 1. States Parties shall accord to women equality with men
before the law.

2. States Parties shall accord to women, in civil matters, a legal capacity
identical to that of men and the same opportunities to exercise that
capacity. In particular, they shall give women equal rights to conclude
contracts and to administer property and shall treat them equally in all
stages of procedure in courts and tribunals.

3. States Parties agree that all contracts and all other private
instruments of any kind with a legal effect which is directed at
restricting the legal capacity of women shall be deemed null and void.

4. States Parties shall accord to men and women the same rights with regard
to the law relating to the movement of persons and the freedom to choose
their residence and domicile.

Article 16. 1. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to
eliminate discrimination against women in all matters relating to marriage
and family relations and in particular shall ensure, on a basis of equality
of men and women:

(a) The same right to enter into marriage;

(b) The same right freely to choose a spouse and to enter into marriage
only with their free and full consent;

(c) The same rights and responsibilities during marriage and at its
dissolution;

(d) The same rights and responsibilities as parents, irrespective of
their marital status, in matters relating to their children; in all
cases the interests of the children shall be paramount;

(e) The same rights to decide freely and responsibly on the number and
spacing of their children and to have access to the information,
education and means to enable them to exercise these rights;

(f) The same rights and responsibilities with regard to guardianship,
wardship, trusteeship and adoption of children, or similar
institutions where these concepts exist in national legislation; in
all cases the interests of the children shall be paramount;

(g) The same personal rights as husband and wife, including the right to
choose a family name, a profession and an occupation;

(h) The same rights for both spouses in respect of the ownership,
acquisition, management, administration, enjoyment and disposition of
property, whether free of charge or for a valuable consideration.

2. The betrothal and the marriage of a child shall have no legal effect,
and all necessary action, including legislation, shall be taken to specify
a minimum age for marriage and to make the registration of marriages in an
official registry compulsory.


PART V

Article 17. 1. For the purpose of considering the progress made in the
implementation of the present Convention, there shall be established a
Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (hereinafter
referred to as the Committee) consisting, at the time of entry into force
of the Convention, of eighteen and, after ratification of or accession to
the Convention by the thirty-fifth State Party, of twenty-three experts of
high moral standing and competence in the field covered by the Convention.
The experts shall be elected by States Parties from among their nationals
and shall serve in their personal capacity, consideration being given to
equitable geographical distribution and to the representation of the
different forms of civilization as well as the principal legal systems.

2. The members of the Committee shall be elected by secret ballot from a
list of persons nominated by States Parties. Each State Party may nominate
one person from among its own nationals.

3. The initial election shall be held six months after the date of the
entry into force of the present Convention. At least three months before
the date of each election the Secretary-General of the United Nations shall
address a letter to the States Parties inviting them to submit their
nominations within two months. The Secretary-General shall prepare a list
in alphabetical order of all persons thus nominated, indicating the States
Parties which have nominated them, and shall submit it to the States
Parties.

4. Elections of the members of the Committee shall be held at a meeting of
States Parties convened by the Secretary-General at United Nations
Headquarters. At that meeting, for which two thirds of the States Parties
shall constitute a quorum, the persons elected to the Committee shall be
those nominees who obtain the largest number of votes and an absolute
majority of the votes of the representatives of States Parties present and
voting.

5. The members of the Committee shall be elected for a term of four years.
However, the terms of nine of the members elected at the first election
shall expire at the end of two years; immediately after the first election
the names of these nine members shall be chosen by lot by the Chairman of
the Committee.

6. The election of the five additional members of the Committee shall be
held in accordance with the provisions of paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of this
article, following the thirty-fifth ratification or accession. The terms of
two of the additional members elected on this occasion shall expire at the
end of two years, the names of these two members having been chosen by lot
by the Chairman of the Committee.

7. For the filling of casual vacancies, the State Party whose expert has
ceased to function as a member of the Committee shall appoint another
expert from among its nationals, subject to the approval of the Committee.

8. The members of the Committee shall, with the approval of the General
Assembly, receive emoluments from United Nations resources on such terms
and conditions as the Assembly may decide, having regard to the importance
of the Committee's responsibilities.

9. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall provide the necessary
staff and facilities for the effective performance of the functions of the
Committee under the present Convention.

Article 18. 1. States Parties undertake to submit to the Secretary-General
of the United Nations, for consideration by the Committee, a report on the
legislative, judicial, administrative or other measures which they have
adopted to give effect to he provisions of the present Convention and on
the progress made in this respect:

(a) Within one year after the entry into force for the State concerned;
and

(b) Thereafter at least every four years and further whenever the
Committee so requests.

2. Reports may indicate factors and difficulties affecting the degree of
fulfilment of obligations under the present Convention.

Article 19. 1. The Committee shall adopt its own rules of procedure.

2. The Committee shall elect its officers for a term of two years.

Article 20. 1. The Committee shall normally meet for a period of not more
than two weeks annually in order to consider the reports submitted in
accordance with article 18 of the present Convention.

2. The meetings of the Committee shall normally be held at United Nations
Headquarters or at any other convenient place as determined by the
Committee.

Article 21. 1. The Committee shall, through the Economic and Social
Council, report annually to the General Assembly of the United Nations on
its activities and may make suggestions and general recommendations based
on the examination of reports and information received from the States
Parties. Such suggestions and general recommendations shall be included in
the report of the Committee together with comments, if any, from States
Parties.

2. The Secretary-General shall transmit the reports of the Committee to the
Commission on the Status of Women for its information.

Article 22. The specialized agencies shall be entitled to be represented at
the consideration of the implementation of such provisions of the present
Convention as fall within the scope of their activities. The Committee may
invite the specialized agencies to submit reports on the implementation of
the Convention in areas falling within the scope of their activities.


PART VI

Article 23. Nothing in this Convention shall affect any provisions that are
more conducive to the achievement of equality between men and women which
may be contained:

(a) In the legislation of a State Party; or

(b) In any other international convention, treaty or agreement in force
for that State.

Article 24. States Parties undertake to adopt all necessary measures at the
national level aimed at achieving the full realization of the rights
recognized in the present Convention.

Article 25. 1. The present Convention shall be open for signature by all
States.

2. The Secretary-General of the United Nations is designated as the
depositary of the present Convention.

3. The present Convention is subject to ratification. Instruments of
ratification shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United
Nations.

4. The present Convention shall be open to accession by all States.
Accession shall be effected by the deposit of an instrument of accession
with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Article 26. 1. A request for the revision of the present Convention may be
made at any time by any State Party by means of a notification in writing
addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

2. The General Assembly of the United Nations shall decide upon the steps,
if any, to be taken in respect of such a request.

Article 27. 1. The present Convention shall enter into force on the
thirtieth day after the date of deposit with the Secretary-General of the
United Nations of the twentieth instrument of ratification or accession.

2. For each State ratifying the present Convention or acceding to it after
the deposit of the twentieth instrument of ratification or accession, the
Convention shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after the date of
the deposit of its own instrument of ratification or accession.

Article 28. 1. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall receive
and circulate to all States the text of reservations made by States at the
time of ratification or accession.

2. A reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of the present
Convention shall not be permitted.

3. Reservations may be withdrawn at any time by notification to this effect
addressed to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall then
inform all States thereof. Such notification shall take effect on the date
on which it is received.

Article 29. 1. Any dispute between two or more States Parties concerning
the interpretation or application of the present Convention which is not
settled by negotiation shall, at the request of one of them, be submitted
to arbitration. If within six months from the date of the request for
arbitration the parties are unable to agree on the organization of the
arbitration, any one of those parties may refer the dispute to the
International Court of Justice by request in conformity with the Statute of
the Court.

2. Each State Party may at the time of signature or ratification of this
Convention or accession thereto declare that it does not consider itself
bound by paragraph 1 of this article. The other States Parties shall not be
bound by that paragraph with respect to any State Party which has made such
a reservation.

3. Any State Party which has made a reservation in accordance with
paragraph 2 of this article may at any time withdraw that reservation by
notification to the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Article 30. The present Convention, the Arabic, Chinese, English, French,
Russian and Spanish texts of which are equally authentic, shall be
deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned, duly authorized, have signed the
present Convention.
.

<hr></blockquote>
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
"...within intervention's distance of the embassy." - CvB

Original music:
The Mayflies - Black earth Americana. Now on iTMS!
Becca Sutlive - Iowa Fried Rock 'n Roll - now on iTMS!
Reply
post #8 of 37
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by finboy:
From the article:

I wish Mr. Ashcroft could come here to Pakistan, to talk to women like Zainab Noor. Because, frankly, the treaty has almost nothing to do with American women, who already enjoy the rights the treaty supports opportunities to run for political office, to receive an education, to choose one's own spouse, to hold jobs. Instead it has everything to do with the half
of the globe where to be female is to be persecuted until, often, death."


[quote]If American women already enjoy the rights the treaty supports, what is the issue here? Just as Saudi Arabia can't determine millage rates in Connecticut, we can't expect other societies to fall in line just because we sign some treaty.<hr></blockquote>

Well, 169 other nations (most of humanity) seem to agree with the treaty, so it looks as if plenty of thought and attention in the last 22 years has gone into it.

[quote]I guess that point is the key here -- folks must think that just because we sign some treaty, things will automatically change and the world will be bent to our will.<hr></blockquote>

The United States is the worlds most influential, prosperous and wealthy nation, the largest economy, has the most powerful and visible and persuasive media, has a population of some 260 million, and what we tend to do and believe in gets noticed short order, (specially when we put the big boot in, which we have done on numerous occasions sonce WW2). It would really help the cause of civilization to support a simple and basic principle of civilized behavior like this. There can be NO JUSTIFICATION for this kind of boorish attitude.

[quote]There MUST BE some aspects of this treaty that would be detrimental to US interests. What are they? They MUST exist, or the administration wouldn't let this thing languish. I'm sure that there are some deeper issues involved (possibly involving US financial commitments or perhaps losses of sovereignty) that require some actual THINKING here. <hr></blockquote>

Furtherance of human rights perhaps? Wow...what hardship for us. Unfortuately, the U.S. traditionally only supports human rights issues when it is economically advantageous to do so. Even the issue of banning landmines has been vetoed by the USA, presumably because US defense contractors are the biggest traffickers in these instruments of death. What the *hell* is wrong with showing some support for the basic human rights of 50% of humanity??????

[quote] But it sounds good to just say that "they" are at it again, behind some huge right-wing conspiracy to keep women subjugated.<hr></blockquote>

John Ashcroft has a wife and a daughter. George Bush has a wife and two daughters. I doubt that either of these two men would like to see their women family members treated in the vile and filthy ways that this treaty is trying to eliminate. If it's not OK for women to be treated like animals here at home, then why the hell does this administration seem to think that it is OK in other countries? State approved violence against women is another form of terrorism, probably one of the most widespread on the planet. Bush, Ashcroft, etc, if you have any humanity about you, which seems less and less probable each day, then put your money where your mouth is and put that pen to paper and join the rest of the civilized world. It may not be be the usual 'on your knees before big business' type of signing, but it really would be a welcome change.

C'mon, be real men.

.....

Edit:
Thanks for posting the wording of the treaty, Amorph. I have just read it and there seems to be nothing there that diminishes or compromises the sovereign integrity of the US or its territories and dependencies. There is also nothing that threatens the US on economic grounds either.

However, I did see the red flag of "family planning". This may be the 'problem', born out of plain and simple bigotry, medieval religious fundamentalism and paranoia of 'feminists' perhaps?

[ 06-18-2002: Message edited by: Samantha Joanne Ollendale ]</p>
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
post #9 of 37
[quote] However, I did see the red flag of "family planning". This may be the 'problem', born out of plain and simple bigotry, medieval religious fundamentalism and paranoia of 'feminists' perhaps?<hr></blockquote> I think that's definitly it... but there is also some stress put on the 'states' responcibility to help in dismantling the propogation of stereotypes that lead to the real abuse of women . . . I can almost see the flags going up here . . . I'm sure that many conservatives are afraid that that somehow means that the state might be given the right to tell you not to have your wife in the kitchen barefoot... in other words they are afraid that it means that the evil socialistas are really behind this, waiting to spring the clamp on the freedom to role play in the bedroom, its the Liberal agenda: first we free the women, then we enslave the world!! . . . .its so typical but I can bet that's what they are afraid of
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #10 of 37
[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:
<strong>

John Ashcroft has a wife and a daughter. George Bush has a wife and two daughters. I doubt that either of these two men would like to see their women family members treated in the vile and filthy ways that this treaty is trying to eliminate. If it's not OK for women to be treated like animals here at home, then why the hell does this administration seem to think that it is OK in other countries?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Obviously, since these folks DO have daughters and wives (and mothers), they must be LESS THAN HUMAN to want to neglect this treaty and not ratify it.

As for the 169 other countries who've signed it -- if everyone else jumped off a cliff, would you advocate a similar plan? Majority rule? That's a good plan.

We cannot extend our Constitution to other countries by signing treaties. Recognize the mindset here: it's assumed that by signing a treaty, suddenly other countries would be required to "fall in line" and get with the program. That doesn't happen. We can't WISH our prosperity upon others. We can, however, erode our quality of life by allowing politicians from other countries to determine what we do here at home.
Never had ONE lesson.
Reply
Never had ONE lesson.
Reply
post #11 of 37
[quote]Originally posted by pfflam:
<strong>Of course it would be the likes of Finboy to actually find a eason to support the Party Line . . . even on this issue . . as long as that's what the Party wants.

By signing the treaty we would be sending a message to the world that abuses like those mentioned are not right. What's wrong with this? and how is that anti-family??? . . . unless your idea of a family is allowing a husband to torture his wife, or blame victims of rape for having the children that result from the rape I don't understand where women's rights are anti-family.

Perhaps someone can post a link to the actual treaty and we can read it for ourselves.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Painting me as some kind of "Party" guy helps things, pointing out once again that people on the left are as guilty of name-calling as anyone else.
Never had ONE lesson.
Reply
Never had ONE lesson.
Reply
post #12 of 37
[quote]Originally posted by AirSluf:
<strong>Well, despite knowing nothing of the treaty, there must be something odd about if it hasn't been ratified through 5 Presidential administrations and several Congresses. Both parties have had the helm during those years, so the problems don't look to be Democrat/Republican or liberal/conservative in nature.</strong><hr></blockquote>

No...looks male in general...

I AM THE Royal Pain in the Ass.
Reply
I AM THE Royal Pain in the Ass.
Reply
post #13 of 37
SJO,

First, you need to relax - try a couple of beers, a joint, or some really good sex. You strike me as a bitter and paranoid person.

Second, your statements are those of someone who's lost perspective and the ability to argue rationally. The fact that you disagree with John Ashcroft doesn't mean he's the personification of evil you seem to think he is

Third, the reason the treaty is stalled in the U.S. is, as someone pointed out, the issue of reproductive rights.

Fourth, these types of treaties do little to help women around the world. States that respect women's rights already do so. Those states where women really need help simply won't. At best these treaties offer a moral guidepost since they lack any sort of enforcement mechanism.


p.s. please stop citing the NYT - we all know it's part of the radical right-wing press.

[ 06-19-2002: Message edited by: gobble gobble ]</p>
20" iMac G5, 2 GB Ram, OS X 10.4.11, .Mac
Reply
20" iMac G5, 2 GB Ram, OS X 10.4.11, .Mac
Reply
post #14 of 37
[quote]Originally posted by gobble gobble:
<strong>SJO,

First, you need to relax - try a couple of beers, a joint, or some really good sex. You strike me as a bitter and paranoid person.

[ 06-19-2002: Message edited by: gobble gobble ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

And you strike me as a real jerk.
"..do you remember where you parked the car?"
Reply
"..do you remember where you parked the car?"
Reply
post #15 of 37
[quote]Originally posted by tmp:
<strong>

And you strike me as a real jerk.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Please, your witty comebacks are hurting my feelings.
20" iMac G5, 2 GB Ram, OS X 10.4.11, .Mac
Reply
20" iMac G5, 2 GB Ram, OS X 10.4.11, .Mac
Reply
post #16 of 37
Just thought I'd continue your tradition of bitchy and inappropriate flames in the middle of honest debate. Glad it had the intended effect.
"..do you remember where you parked the car?"
Reply
"..do you remember where you parked the car?"
Reply
post #17 of 37
Personally I feel that something must be done. The fact that there is no defined enforcement doesn't matter as the first step is to identify that the treatment of Women in this fashion is Morally unacceptable.

If reproductive rights are the issue then we certainly have recourse to seek an amendment of the treaty right? This relatively minor issue should not deter our involvment. It makes no sense to trade lives for lives. There is a workable solution.

SJO is passionate and I respect that. Beer and "good sex" may make your day but others live at a higher moral standard.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #18 of 37
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />

Hilarious, this feel-good treaty has sat through 20+ years of government and, of course, it's the Republicans' fault. Wonderful logic.

I will never support any politician that signs away internal issues on feel-good treaties.

OF COURSE beating women is bad, who the hell in the U.S. government says otherwise?
That doesn't appear to be the total purpose of this treaty, though, as it seems to push a consensus on abortion rights on a nation that hasn't decided just yet. (Damned if I read it all right now )

I'm sure Bubba "I feel yer pain" Clit-on would have signed a treaty that only said "Treating women mean is bad" as fast as you can say "sex scandal."

Maybe, just maybe, this isn't about Ashcroft being a Nazi.
Maybe, just maybe, this isn't about men being pigs.

Just maybe...
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #19 of 37
I glad he doesn't endorse it and that the Bush administration does not either. I'm sick and tired of all these freaking pointless treaties. The UN is a joke, where garbage countries like the Sudan sit on the Human Rights Council and criticize us. Or where our enemies sponsor countries like Syria to join the Security Council where they hope to negate our influence; how is Syria going to contribute to the security of the world? We should pull out of the UN and eject all those useless diplomats.
post #20 of 37
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by gobble gobble:
SJO,

[quote]First, you need to relax - try a couple of beers, a joint, or some really good sex. You strike me as a bitter and paranoid person.<hr></blockquote>

I do enjoy a beer now and again, I don't smoke, but I enjoy a brownie if offered (don't tell John Ashcroft please ), and as far as good sex goes, there's probably not a single human being on the planet who doesn't enjoy that. But as far as been paranoid and bitter? Sorry to disappoint you; just because I take the time to rail against things that I feel are wrong with the world hardly makes me a paranoid.

[quote]Second, your statements are those of someone who's lost perspective and the ability to argue rationally. The fact that you disagree with John Ashcroft doesn't mean he's the personification of evil you seem to think he is<hr></blockquote>

I read that Treaty in it's entirety (as quoted by Amorph anyway), and I cannot see anything in there that would be a compromise to American values. I feel that our signing it would help matters rather than hinder them, and even if it did nothing, as you suggest, it would do no harm. Why are so so scared (paranoid?) of women's reproductive rights? What have you against family planning? Is it because you are locked into that old-fashioned view of keeping women "barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen"? Are you against the education of women, knowing that an educated woman tends to stand up for herself more? Or are you a 'right-to-life' advocates, and you have to drag the abortion debate into anything, and try to scupper or negatively brand human rights issues in the process?

Several members of my family are involved in charity work (I'm not), including the IRC; it is so plain that one of the most dangerous issues facing humanity is overpopulation, specially in areas with machismo traditions, such as in Islamic and Hispanic cultures. The over-riding problem is lack of education and knowledge, specially amongst females, who are considered in these paternalistic-dominator cultures to be inferior, and not worthy of equal opportunity or schooling. When women become educated, families tend to get smaller. Educated women tend *not* to have litters of 5, 6, 7, 8 or more kids. The evidence is plain, in that Western industrialized nations where education standards are the highest, indigenous populations remain relatively stable.

Religion is also a barrier, in that hardline fundamentalism also stands firmly in the way of reproductive rights/knowledge/family planning etc.

This next statement is not intended as an anti-Catholic bash but the Pope's stance against birth control (who is so hugely influential amongst poor 3rd world nations with a tradition of raising massive and impracticably large families) is one of the most irreponsible, damaging, outmoded and anti-human race attitudes imaginable.

[quote]Third, the reason the treaty is stalled in the U.S. is, as someone pointed out, the issue of reproductive rights.<hr></blockquote>

If you looked back at the thread a teeny little more carefully, it was *me* who raised the "reproductive rights" issue in my second post. Why are you so opposed to the support of womens' rights? A real answer would be welcome, as opposed to dragging that unresolvable abortion debate into this thread, where it patently does not belong.

[quote]Fourth, these types of treaties do little to help women around the world.<hr></blockquote>

Can you prove that sweeping statement? Signing these treaties can surely do no harm, and potentially do one whole lotta good.

[quote]States that respect women's rights already do so. Those states where women really need help simply won't. At best these treaties offer a moral guidepost since they lack any sort of enforcement mechanism.<hr></blockquote>

And what is so wrong with moral guideposts? Are you now agreeing with the treaty or something, because you now see some kind of moral underpinnings within it?

[quote]p.s. please stop citing the NYT - we all know it's part of the radical right-wing press.<hr></blockquote>

The only time I have never quoted the NYT was it's motto: "All the news that's fit to print".

If you want to join in a debate on a rational and sensible basis, even if you disagree with what has been said, or what I posted, your arguments would look a lot healthier if you didn't resort to personal attacks on people who you have never even met.
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
post #21 of 37
[quote]We should pull out of the UN and eject all those useless diplomats. [/QB]<hr></blockquote>

Because isolationism has always worked to preserve peace and prosperity in the past...
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />

Thoth
You can fly?!?
No. Jump good.
Reply
You can fly?!?
No. Jump good.
Reply
post #22 of 37
Abortion isn't necessarily a women's rights issue, that's the point of contention. And of course it belongs in this thread. You can't simply pass it off as a "women's rights" issue, that's ridiculous.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #23 of 37
The problem with this treaty (and, for the most part, all global treaties), is that they erase individual citizen's rights in favor of socialistic "we know what's best for you" global supervision.

In the United States, the citizen's are not granted rights by the Government; rather, the citizen's grant the Government certain powers. If the US Government signs a treaty like this (or like Kyoto, for example), it signs away that particular right of the citizen. The individual citizen's of the USA no longer grant powers to the Government, because the government is no longer in a position of authority.

In other words, if the US government signs the treaty, the US citizen's no longer have any way of protecting their rights; they've handed all of those rights over to a global organization which "knows what's best" for us.
post #24 of 37
That's one of the stupidist op-ed's I think I ever read.
post #25 of 37
Golf claps.

And also:
"reproductive rights issues" (ie abortion rights) is an absolutely relevant line of questioning here. Why hasn't this thing passed? There's your answer. Plus, there are lots of other ways that this treaty would impair our sovereignty.

Unfortunately, SJO, it isn't so simple as "they're a buncha dumb right-wing men." This thing hasn't passed for a reason. Just because you don't see those reasons doesn't mean that they don't exist.
Never had ONE lesson.
Reply
Never had ONE lesson.
Reply
post #26 of 37
Common Scott. Clearly John Ashcroft and President Bush hate women from third world countries. If the Democrats had a shot at passing thi....uh...never mind.

Aldo is watching....
Reply
Aldo is watching....
Reply
post #27 of 37
someone needs to post Roe v. Wade
post #28 of 37
Thread Starter 
[quote]Common Scott. Clearly John Ashcroft and President Bush hate women from third world countries.<hr></blockquote>

Never a truer word was spoken in jest?

Actually, I don't believe that those two actually *hate* women from 3rd world countries. But since a number of members of Bush's Cabinet (including John Ashcroft himself) cite Charles Murray and Richard Hernstein's "The Bell Curve" as one of their favorite or most influential/inspiring books, then I would imagine that they would probably view 3rd World women as a racially, morally and intellectually inferior variety of humans.

("The Bell Curve" has been denounced by the vast proportion of the scientific world with commentary such as 'racist claptrap', 'pseudoscience', and 'bad science with little or no valid foundation').
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
post #29 of 37
And further we find SJO ignoring the actual refutations and dealing with off-topic spats and politicking.

*tsk* *tsk* *tsk*
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #30 of 37
[quote]Originally posted by Thoth2:

We should pull out of the UN and eject all those useless diplomats.

Because isolationism has always worked to preserve peace and prosperity in the past...
<hr></blockquote>

Pardon me but what peace and prosperity has the U.N. preserved?

[quote]Originally posted by sjpsu:

someone needs to post Roe v. Wade<hr></blockquote>

What does Roe have to do with an international treaty?
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
shooby doo, shooby doo
Reply
post #31 of 37
The U.N. has gone on plenty of peace-keeping missions. It's a wonderful club to beat our enemies over the head with.

And besides that, the U.N. legitimizes the U.S. as the essential leader of the free world. Without the U.N., our beloved nation wouldn't be as powerful as it is now.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #32 of 37
[quote]Originally posted by groverat:
<strong>And besides that, the U.N. legitimizes the U.S. as the essential leader of the free world. Without the U.N., our beloved nation wouldn't be as powerful as it is now.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I think you have that backwards; without the US, the UN wouldn't be as powerful as it is now.
I was promised flying cars. Where are the flying cars?
Reply
I was promised flying cars. Where are the flying cars?
Reply
post #33 of 37
Thread Starter 
[quote]Originally posted by beer:
The problem with this treaty (and, for the most part, all global treaties), is that they erase individual citizen's rights in favor of socialistic "we know what's best for you" global supervision. In the United States, the citizen's are not granted rights by the Government; rather, the citizen's grant the Government certain powers.
If the US Government signs a treaty like this (or like Kyoto, for example), it signs away that particular right of the citizen. The individual citizen's of the USA no longer grant powers to the Government, because the government is no longer in a position of authority. In other words, if the US government signs the treaty, the US citizen's no longer have any way of protecting their rights; they've handed all of those rights over to a global organization which "knows what's best" for us.<hr></blockquote>

And yet the US goes rushing headlong to sign and hold international conventions, meetings and treaties to further the cause of global trade and the power of multinational private corporations, many of which are *NOT* even American owned. I suppose you think that signing international treaties when it comes to economic causes and further enrich the wealthiest global elites are just fine and dandy, but anything which smacks of simple human rights, or promotes environmental awareness is out of order because of the dreaded 'socialist' connotations?? You reckon we should abandon the Geneva Convention also? There's no economic advantage to abiding by it's rules also; if anything, it hinders US weapons manufacturers.
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a...
Reply
post #34 of 37
[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:
<strong>

And yet the US goes rushing headlong to sign and hold international conventions, meetings and treaties to further the cause of global trade and the power of multinational private corporations, many of which are *NOT* even American owned. I suppose you think that signing international treaties when it comes to economic causes and further enrich the wealthiest global elites are just fine and dandy, but anything which smacks of simple human rights, or promotes environmental awareness is out of order because of the dreaded 'socialist' connotations?? You reckon we should abandon the Geneva Convention also? There's no economic advantage to abiding by it's rules also; if anything, it hinders US weapons manufacturers.</strong><hr></blockquote>


Predictable. You didn't particularly like what I said, but rather than refuting it, you simply attacked me. Bravo! Par for the course.

--

Believe it or not, "global trade" and "multinational private corporation" aren't the vile curse words you seem to think they are; they're the the reasons you have things like, say, food, a job, computers, and a home. Capitalism and rational self-interest are the cornerstones of true freedom and allow us to protect the little things like "human rights" which you don't seem to think I don't believe in.

The point I was trying to make in the post you appear to have only lighly skimmed was that any action which attempts to solve issues of human rights and a lack of freedom by removing ones freedom is inherently self-defeating. At best, all you're doing is exchanging short term benefits for slavery down the road.
post #35 of 37
do I believe my eyes: he is literally saying what I joked about "first we free the women then we enslave the world" <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

anyway
[quote] Believe it or not, "global trade" and "multinational private corporation" aren't the vile curse words you seem to think they are; they're the the reasons you have things like, say, food, a job, computers, and a home. Capitalism and rational self-interest are the cornerstones of true freedom and allow us to protect the little things like "human rights" which you don't seem to think I don't believe in<hr></blockquote> It may be hard for many of you to understand, but I think that many Liberals know this about capitalism: also, to throw in more supporting ideas held by myself (perhaps a 'liberal') about capitalism: it is the organic expression of otherwise undifinable human desires, wants and needs: as opposed to such miss-directed definitions of humanity like those which make Communism inherently flawed.

However, when Capitalism is unbounded by concern for the sort of issues that do not, and cannot fit into simple economic translation: cannot be measured by simple exchange value, commodity value there needs to be machanisms that balance the potential for economic tyrrany . . . . in the same way that Communism's catch all translation of values to its terms results in tyranny, the same could happen with the wholesale translation of every value in terms of Capital. Hence the notion of balance.

The will of people can, in many instances, be expressed through markets but there are other needs that do not translate into cash: hence there are infrastructural systems and regulations on the potential for the mass conversion of every value into cash.
I know... wordy as usual.... but think about rather than simply dismiss it.

With this in mind . . . signing this treaty has symbolic value... it does not obligate the US in any way (as far as I could discern).. . . it merely seems to say that we will not allow the devaluation of the humanity of 50% of our population based on restricted notions of what that humanity is, and, that we think that its a good idea for other countries to do so as well.

[

[ 06-20-2002: Message edited by: pfflam ]</p>
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #36 of 37
[quote]Originally posted by pfflam:
<strong>
With this in mind . . . signing this treaty has symbolic value... it does not obligate the US in any way (as far as I could discern).. . . it merely seems to say that we will not allow the devaluation of the humanity of 50% of our population based on restricted notions of what that humanity is, and, that we think that its a good idea for other countries to do so as well.


[ 06-20-2002: Message edited by: pfflam ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

I kinda think that when we sign this thing, it obligates us to behave in a certain manner. Maybe that's just me.
Never had ONE lesson.
Reply
Never had ONE lesson.
Reply
post #37 of 37
jasperas:

[quote]I think you have that backwards; without the US, the UN wouldn't be as powerful as it is now.<hr></blockquote>

Both are true.

-----

SJO:

This isn't directed at me, but...

[quote]I suppose you think that signing international treaties when it comes to economic causes and further enrich the wealthiest global elites are just fine and dandy, but anything which smacks of simple human rights, or promotes environmental awareness is out of order because of the dreaded 'socialist' connotations?<hr></blockquote>

Economic things are actually important and the international treaties about them will have an actual impact on something.

You really end up alienating your audience by abandoning reason with such inanity.

"but anything that smacks of simple human rights"...

And what's with bringing socialism in here? You sound like Jerry Falwell bitching about queers, not realizing that his own fervor and ignorance is basically the same as those he is busy chastising.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Ashcroft's done it again