At 11:48 AM 6/15/01 +0300 Charlie Bell wrote:
>> A few matters to clear up off-list first......
>
>None of this warrants offlist, I'm quite happy to leave it on.
Glad you feel that way about people's personal e-mails.
>> Characterizing America as unfit to sit on the UNHCHR,
>> and as being a "not-so-good democracy."
>
>That's how you read me. I didn't say the first, I said that America has no
>more right than anybody else. As I have repeatedly explained to you.
Untrue. You did say the first on Thu, 14 Jun 2001 09:58::
"Anyway, while the US refuses to even discuss abolition of the death penalty,
she has no place on a human rights commission."
There is nothing in the above that implies you are simply arguing that
America and Iraq and Cambodia and Turkey have as much right as anybody else
to sit on the UNHCHR. In the above, you are specifically singling out
America.
>The second: how can you even begin to be offended by that??? It's true!
I completely disagree. I think that the US has one of the best forms of
government in the world, and I cannot think of a single country's
Constitution that I would trade our Constitution for.
>Yes, of course I understand how representative democracy is supposed to
>work, but with referenda or proportional representation, it doesn't
>represent the views of the people at all.
So, your opinion then, is that there are *no* good democracies in the
World? Are you saying that all the governments of the world are basically
illegitimate?
>> >> Well, you aparently seem to think that women (and only
>> >> women) have the right to decide if a particular unborn
>> >> child retains the right to life.
>> >
>> >You know my views on that, and you've just lied about them. That
>> is *not* my
>> >view, and you know it.
>>
>> Actually, I don't know it. I don't seem to recall you being any less
>> pro-choice than the rest of the Brin List, but perhaps I missed something.
>> Care to restate your position in a nutshell?
>
>Yes, alright. I think abortion should be avoided, I think it's wrong, except
>in case where there is an immediate and substantial threat to the life of
>the mother.
>
>However, I don't believe banning it is going to do any good, because those
>people who are desperate will attempt to get an abortion any way they can,
>and, as with drugs, alcohol or anything else, as soon as you force anything
>underground, you lose any control. So better to have a tightly regulated
>system than no system at all.
>
>That is my position, I've explained it clearly before, and I've discussed
>that very point here before.
Unfortunately this does not hold water with me. The fact that laws
against murder do not prevent desperate people from killing other people
anyways does not (I don't think) seem to have any effect on your position
as to whether murder should be legalized.
To put it another way, the fact that a UN Declaration declaring abolition
of the death penalty would not produce abolition of the death penalty
worldwide, you still appear to support that declaration anyways.
Thus, despite your pesonal views on the subject of abortion, you de facto
support a system where for any randomly chosen unborn child, that child
might be carried by a mother who considers the unborn child to be human -
and thus has a right to life, or that child might be carried by a mother
who consider to unborn child to be inhuman, and thus, not have the right to
life. On this issue, you clearly give your support to a well-regulated
system where rights are determined on a case-by-case basis by the
individual. Thus, you are very accepting of the "right to life" (as you
put it: *the* human right) being removed on a case-by-case basis, yet
somehow removing the "right to life" in the case of the death penalty on a
case-by-case basis causes automatic disqualification from sitting on the
UNHCHR.
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
"Compassionate conservatism is the way to reconcile the two most vital
conservative intellectual traditions: libertarianism & Catholic social
thought."
-Michael Gerson, advisor to George W. Bush
