Nice ASSumption. Actually, yeah, I’d say exactly the same. Human rights are human rights. Fortunately, it isn’t up to people like you to decide who gets them
In my defense, it was before dawn here. I’ll do better next time :D
FWIW, I generally agree with you about “Why bother?” With regard to Americans. We seem to have become a population dominated by zealots of one ilk or another in all the federally overrepresented states. It’s exhausting.
Most days, I think the US would be better off if Cornwallis hadn’t surrendered.
Say what you will about the US. It’s far from perfect. But their legal model for human rights is more robust than many of their peer countries. The fact that free speech is constitutionally protected there is good thing and the fact that free speech is dependent on majority support is a weakness of the UK system; that is, after all, how the UK got themselves into this current situation.
(I’m not American btw, and I’m by no means a big fan of the US. But still, you have to give credit where credit is due.)
If you read my original comment, you’ll notice that I said the US is far from perfect and I’m not a big fan. That said, it’s an incredibly unnuanced take to think that literally everything the US does is evil. They do at least some things right, even if you want to argue that, on balance, they suck. And one of the things that they do do right is their protections of free speech. This prevents a situation where you can arrest people for protesting in support of Palestine, as currently happens in the UK and Australia.
Would you say the same if one member of a group was a Nazi? No, you’d rightly assume they’re all nazis.
Nice ASSumption. Actually, yeah, I’d say exactly the same. Human rights are human rights. Fortunately, it isn’t up to people like you to decide who gets them
Guy who wants to not ban groups that assault people doesn’t want people to have the right to decide and vote on human rights. The irony.
Since they’re rights, they are inherent. You don’t get to vote on them
Oh, you’re an American. I don’t know why anyone bothers.
We vote for them by voting for the parties propose legislative changes.
See the Human Rights Act.
Edit: And just for the record I 100% support Palestine. I don’t support Palestine Action.
And yet, here you are. Feel free to stop at any time
For a “professor” that was pretty weak response xD
In my defense, it was before dawn here. I’ll do better next time :D
FWIW, I generally agree with you about “Why bother?” With regard to Americans. We seem to have become a population dominated by zealots of one ilk or another in all the federally overrepresented states. It’s exhausting.
Most days, I think the US would be better off if Cornwallis hadn’t surrendered.
Well we’re not doing much better over here. Thr world has gone mad.
Say what you will about the US. It’s far from perfect. But their legal model for human rights is more robust than many of their peer countries. The fact that free speech is constitutionally protected there is good thing and the fact that free speech is dependent on majority support is a weakness of the UK system; that is, after all, how the UK got themselves into this current situation.
(I’m not American btw, and I’m by no means a big fan of the US. But still, you have to give credit where credit is due.)
They literally murdered their own citizens in broad daylight and it was filmed.
But yes, in theory they can say what they want. See how it’s often used to belittle minorities and gay people.
Brilliant system. Couldn’t fault it.
If you read my original comment, you’ll notice that I said the US is far from perfect and I’m not a big fan. That said, it’s an incredibly unnuanced take to think that literally everything the US does is evil. They do at least some things right, even if you want to argue that, on balance, they suck. And one of the things that they do do right is their protections of free speech. This prevents a situation where you can arrest people for protesting in support of Palestine, as currently happens in the UK and Australia.