__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
It's about abolishing the death penatly under certain circumstances, specifically these circumstances:
"Condemning in particular the use of the death penalty against persons with mental or intellectual disabilities, persons below 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the crime, and pregnant women,
Condemning the imposition of the death penalty as a sanction for specific forms of conduct, such as apostasy, blasphemy, adultery and consensual same-sex relations, and expressing serious concern that the application of the death penalty for adultery is disproportionately imposed on women"
So basically it's a matter of the UN not wanting people killed for being gay, reckless teens, or praying to a different God. Abolishing it altogether isn't what's going to happen.
Once again, perfectly reasonable. Why Trump would oppose this given he's supposedly against the radicals and extremes of Islam, is beyond me.
__________________
"Hello, Starlight."
Last edited by MythLord on Oct 5th, 2017 at 06:38 AM
Lol dude, it says specific forms "such as" and lists some. Why would they word it like that if it specifically only applied to those things?
We aren't cackling super villains, and even Trump doesn't want to execute gays. Have you seen *any* other rationale for why this was done? At all? Since the explanation given is more or less exactly what is said in the article I gave.
And uh, lets take what you just said at face value. Dipshits are still trying to push this as merely "they want gays to be executed!" when it entails more than just executing gay people. How is that not dishonest? This is being painted as failing the LGBT community. It sounds like utter bullshit.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Last edited by Surtur on Oct 5th, 2017 at 12:33 PM
The examples given are of things that aren't really crimes and that thus shouldn't be punished, and it even says specific forms of conduct. So no, it's still not abolishing it completely, which is the main reason a lot of countries were against it.
Also, I'm certain the UN would leave out important details and specifics in their resolution.
The problem is there isn't a rational explanation for not wanting to abolish the death penalty under these circumstances. Nobody's asking them to completely abolish it, just don't kill innocent people for being gay, of a different faith, etc.
Actually, a lot of articles note it's also abolishing the death penalty for teens, pregnant women, mentally ill and people of other religions. The major emphasis is the LGBT, of course, since that's currently the most widespread out of these categories.
I get what you are saying, but then I guess really it comes down to this. Think of all the things in this country that can get you a death sentence. Is there any possible way this resolution could be abused when it comes to death sentences for crimes that we also execute people for?
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Gender: Male Location: The Proud Nation of Kekistan
Not saying I agree with Surtur here, but having some vagueness that's open for interpretation, so it can then be exploited, isn't an unheard of thing in legislation or policy making.
__________________
Shadilay my brothers and sisters. With any luck we will throw off the shackles of normie oppression. We have nothing to lose but our chains! Praise Kek!
THE MOTTO IS "IN KEK WE TRUST"
No, because the resolution doesn't condemn the death penalty for those crimes. If a rapist claims that the resolution protects him, well then he'd be lying as no legal document supports that idea. With the exception if the rapist was mentally ill or a teenager, but the US doesn't execute them either, if I remember correctly.
I mean I will say this: if this is 100% clear cut and would have only made things like: gay sex, adultery, apostasy, and blasphemy not punishable by death I'd agree it is wrong to oppose it.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
The problem the administration has here is it asks states to consider abolishing capital punishment due to the potential for it to be exploited to conduct human rights violations. A perfectly reasonable request given there are many states with capital punishment that abuse it.
Not signing on because we're asked to consider something is full-on snowflakeness.
KMC Community Forums
Oct 4th, 2017 10:08 PM
