Republican opposition downs UN disability treaty

MotoDC

So, by enacting the treaty which was brought forth originally by the ADA brings the rest of the world up to the American standard.

But it doesn't. It has no legal, enforceable bearing on anything, right? Like redrock said, it's nothing more than an "affirmation". Given that the ADA was the blueprint, I think we've already sufficiently affirmed our commitment to the rights of the disabled.

That said, I'm surprised those folks voted against it, just from a political career perspective. Meaningless as the treaty is, it gives ammo to your opponents for the ol' spinny spin spin.

unsung

I FULLY support the end of our participation in the UN. Since NOTHING will change like you guys say then there is no reason for us to be involved, again. Let others follow our example, that is how we become leaders in the world, not by dropping bombs and forcing our way to the top.

polaris_x

MotoDC wrote:

But it doesn't. It has no legal, enforceable bearing on anything, right? Like redrock said, it's nothing more than an "affirmation". Given that the ADA was the blueprint, I think we've already sufficiently affirmed our commitment to the rights of the disabled.

That said, I'm surprised those folks voted against it, just from a political career perspective. Meaningless as the treaty is, it gives ammo to your opponents for the ol' spinny spin spin.

depending on the language ... the treaty is indeed enforceable ... it's why countries sign treaties ... if every treaty is strictly symbolic - it would mean nothing ...

aerial

unsung wrote:

I FULLY support the end of our participation in the UN. Since NOTHING will change like you guys say then there is no reason for us to be involved, again. Let others follow our example, that is how we become leaders in the world, not by dropping bombs and forcing our way to the top.

:thumbup:

fear4freedom

HMMMMMMMMMMMM

The first thing I do is hear both sides from a few different places before judging and throwing bombs!

This cant just be all one sided good for the DEMS cause they care about the disabled and all BAD for the REPUBLICANS cause they are mean, and dont care about anybody! There has to be two good sides and COSTS to this leglislation. Anytime the word TREATY comes up, I see a big red flag! So come on now...who's being fair and whos being unfair here on AMT on this thread?

Im sure that those dirty, old, white Republicans want dirty air and dirty water, im sure they dont want our children to have what they need, im sure they dont the disabled to have what they need, im sure they dont want Sandra Fluk to have free contreception.....

As Im sure many people here on AMT dont look into both sides adaquately on each issue!

Jeanwah

fear4freedom wrote:

HMMMMMMMMMMMM

The first thing I do is hear both sides from a few different places before judging and throwing bombs!

This cant just be all one sided good for the DEMS cause they care about the disabled and all BAD for the REPUBLICANS cause they are mean, and dont care about anybody! There has to be two good sides and COSTS to this leglislation. Anytime the word TREATY comes up, I see a big red flag! So come on now...who's being fair and whos being unfair here on AMT on this thread?

Im sure that those dirty, old, white Republicans want dirty air and dirty water, im sure they dont want our children to have what they need, im sure they dont the disabled to have what they need, im sure they dont want Sandra Fluk to have free contreception.....

As Im sure many people here on AMT dont look into both sides adaquately on each issue!

You make it pretty obvious that you didn't read the OP. :roll:

fear4freedom

Jeanwah wrote:

fear4freedom wrote:

HMMMMMMMMMMMM

The first thing I do is hear both sides from a few different places before judging and throwing bombs!

This cant just be all one sided good for the DEMS cause they care about the disabled and all BAD for the REPUBLICANS cause they are mean, and dont care about anybody! There has to be two good sides and COSTS to this leglislation. Anytime the word TREATY comes up, I see a big red flag! So come on now...who's being fair and whos being unfair here on AMT on this thread?

Im sure that those dirty, old, white Republicans want dirty air and dirty water, im sure they dont want our children to have what they need, im sure they dont the disabled to have what they need, im sure they dont want Sandra Fluk to have free contreception.....

As Im sure many people here on AMT dont look into both sides adaquately on each issue!

You make it pretty obvious that you didn't read the OP. :roll:

Yes i didnt read it all, however my response was to the responses! I am critiquing the responders! Im sure there is a reason for all this and IM sure that many people jump to conclusions, just like any other scenario!

pjl44

unsung wrote:

I FULLY support the end of our participation in the UN. Since NOTHING will change like you guys say then there is no reason for us to be involved, again. Let others follow our example, that is how we become leaders in the world, not by dropping bombs and forcing our way to the top.

I'm with you, hombre. We already have it covered here. Other countries are free to handle it however they wish without us or anyone else sticking their noses in. It's just an excuse to get outraged at "Republicans."

Paul Andrews

It's quite simple really. You can be leaders of the free world by signing up to UN treaties as a statement of your values and ethics or you can just go and bomb places or be isolationist.

I for one would rather you signed treaties rather than follow the Bush doctrine. You cannot just exploit, oppress and bomb your way to supremacy. You cannot in all good faith unilaterally stand up for free enterprise and democracy when it suits you yet walk away from diplomatic efforts like the UN to make a cheap and misleading political point.

By signing treaties you lead the way by showing the best of America. It appears republicans are more than happy to show the world the worst of America.

America is not the best country in the world - very very far from it, but it could be - just get rid of the corrupt, lying Republican dicks who have caused you and the rest of the world so much pain - they are an embarrassment and undo all the good that your country used to stand for.

pjl44

Paul Andrews wrote:

It's quite simple really. You can be leaders of the free world by signing up to UN treaties as a statement of your values and ethics or you can just go and bomb places or be isolationist.

I for one would rather you signed treaties rather than follow the Bush doctrine. You cannot just exploit, oppress and bomb your way to supremacy. You cannot in all good faith unilaterally stand up for free enterprise and democracy when it suits you yet walk away from diplomatic efforts like the UN to make a cheap and misleading political point.

By signing treaties you lead the way by showing the best of America. It appears republicans are more than happy to show the world the worst of America.

America is not the best country in the world - very very far from it, but it could be - just get rid of the corrupt, lying Republican dicks who have caused you and the rest of the world so much pain - they are an embarrassment and undo all the good that your country used to stand for.

Unfortunately the exploitation, oppression, and bombing transcend party lines. Some light research would uncover how getting rid of corrupt lying Republican dicks only seems to clear space for corrupt lying Democrat dicks.

Paul Andrews

pjl44 wrote:

Paul Andrews wrote:

It's quite simple really. You can be leaders of the free world by signing up to UN treaties as a statement of your values and ethics or you can just go and bomb places or be isolationist.

I for one would rather you signed treaties rather than follow the Bush doctrine. You cannot just exploit, oppress and bomb your way to supremacy. You cannot in all good faith unilaterally stand up for free enterprise and democracy when it suits you yet walk away from diplomatic efforts like the UN to make a cheap and misleading political point.

By signing treaties you lead the way by showing the best of America. It appears republicans are more than happy to show the world the worst of America.

America is not the best country in the world - very very far from it, but it could be - just get rid of the corrupt, lying Republican dicks who have caused you and the rest of the world so much pain - they are an embarrassment and undo all the good that your country used to stand for.

Unfortunately the exploitation, oppression, and bombing transcend party lines. Some light research would uncover how getting rid of corrupt lying Republican dicks only seems to clear space for corrupt lying Democrat dicks.

Yes I agree about the lack of values on both sides - your political system appears to favour the corrupt and bribeable politicians.

My point about the Republicans in this instance is related directly to this issue only. Watching the excuses and make believe of the Republicans was laughable. They did this to be obstructionist dicks - nothing else.

aerial

Paul Andrews wrote:

pjl44 wrote:

Paul Andrews wrote:

It's quite simple really. You can be leaders of the free world by signing up to UN treaties as a statement of your values and ethics or you can just go and bomb places or be isolationist.

I for one would rather you signed treaties rather than follow the Bush doctrine. You cannot just exploit, oppress and bomb your way to supremacy. You cannot in all good faith unilaterally stand up for free enterprise and democracy when it suits you yet walk away from diplomatic efforts like the UN to make a cheap and misleading political point.

By signing treaties you lead the way by showing the best of America. It appears republicans are more than happy to show the world the worst of America.

America is not the best country in the world - very very far from it, but it could be - just get rid of the corrupt, lying Republican dicks who have caused you and the rest of the world so much pain - they are an embarrassment and undo all the good that your country used to stand for.

Treaties are not meant to tell others how to run there country. The agenda for the UN is New World Order, Globe Government. Which is dangerous to Freedom. It is pointless to sign? Americas values and ethic are already clear. We have nothing to prove.

Unfortunately the exploitation, oppression, and bombing transcend party lines. Some light research would uncover how getting rid of corrupt lying Republican dicks only seems to clear space for corrupt lying Democrat dicks.

Yes I agree about the lack of values on both sides - your political system appears to favour the corrupt and bribeable politicians.

My point about the Republicans in this instance is related directly to this issue only. Watching the excuses and make believe of the Republicans was laughable. They did this to be obstructionist dicks - nothing else.

aerial

Paul Andrews wrote:

pjl44 wrote:

Paul Andrews wrote:

It's quite simple really. You can be leaders of the free world by signing up to UN treaties as a statement of your values and ethics or you can just go and bomb places or be isolationist.

I for one would rather you signed treaties rather than follow the Bush doctrine. You cannot just exploit, oppress and bomb your way to supremacy. You cannot in all good faith unilaterally stand up for free enterprise and democracy when it suits you yet walk away from diplomatic efforts like the UN to make a cheap and misleading political point.

By signing treaties you lead the way by showing the best of America. It appears republicans are more than happy to show the world the worst of America.

America is not the best country in the world - very very far from it, but it could be - just get rid of the corrupt, lying Republican dicks who have caused you and the rest of the world so much pain - they are an embarrassment and undo all the good that your country used to stand for.

Unfortunately the exploitation, oppression, and bombing transcend party lines. Some light research would uncover how getting rid of corrupt lying Republican dicks only seems to clear space for corrupt lying Democrat dicks.

Yes I agree about the lack of values on both sides - your political system appears to favour the corrupt and bribeable politicians.

My point about the Republicans in this instance is related directly to this issue only. Watching the excuses and make believe of the Republicans was laughable. They did this to be obstructionist dicks - nothing else.

Treaties are not meant to tell others how to run there country. The agenda for the UN is New World Order, Globe Government. Which is dangerous to Freedom. It is pointless to sign? Americas values and ethic are already clear. We have nothing to prove.

fear4freedom

.


Democrats play off of ones emotions and they are masterful at it! They divide us and demogogue the Republicans! Guess what....I wouldnt vote for this either cause there is no way that the UN govt. body is going to tell me or my loved ones how to treat my disabled family member. Treaty is a bad word for signing over our freedoms little by little....so noone notices! We accept things slowly until one day...we wake up and wonder what happened!

pjl44

Paul Andrews wrote:

pjl44 wrote:

Paul Andrews wrote:

It's quite simple really. You can be leaders of the free world by signing up to UN treaties as a statement of your values and ethics or you can just go and bomb places or be isolationist.

I for one would rather you signed treaties rather than follow the Bush doctrine. You cannot just exploit, oppress and bomb your way to supremacy. You cannot in all good faith unilaterally stand up for free enterprise and democracy when it suits you yet walk away from diplomatic efforts like the UN to make a cheap and misleading political point.

By signing treaties you lead the way by showing the best of America. It appears republicans are more than happy to show the world the worst of America.

America is not the best country in the world - very very far from it, but it could be - just get rid of the corrupt, lying Republican dicks who have caused you and the rest of the world so much pain - they are an embarrassment and undo all the good that your country used to stand for.

Unfortunately the exploitation, oppression, and bombing transcend party lines. Some light research would uncover how getting rid of corrupt lying Republican dicks only seems to clear space for corrupt lying Democrat dicks.

Yes I agree about the lack of values on both sides - your political system appears to favour the corrupt and bribeable politicians.

My point about the Republicans in this instance is related directly to this issue only. Watching the excuses and make believe of the Republicans was laughable. They did this to be obstructionist dicks - nothing else.

Not necessarily. I can't speak to each individual's motivation, but there's a strong case to be made for not involving yourself with the notion of a global authority. It may come across as odd on some issues, but there's a very principle-based argument for such a decision.

Sludge Factory

brianlux wrote:

A vote against this is a vote for cruelty.

Actually, no it is not. A vote against this is just that: a vote against it. You have to make some leaps in logic to equate the two which is disingenuous.

Jeanwah

Sludge Factory wrote:

brianlux wrote:

A vote against this is a vote for cruelty.

Actually, no it is not. A vote against this is just that: a vote against it. You have to make some leaps in logic to equate the two which is disingenuous.

Clearly, you aren't disabled. Because this treaty is for equal treatment worldwide for those who are disabled. Any idiot with a heart would have voted yes on this treaty and that goes for republicans. Bob Dole, McCain, they voted for it, not sure why McCain did, but Dole is in a wheelchair. But the losers without a heart? They use politics to vote, not only because they don't have a heart, but because they refuse to understand the basis of what this treaty is all about: those who are not given the same rights as everyone else! Voting against human rights is a selfish and dirty tactic.

Sludge Factory

Jeanwah wrote:

Sludge Factory wrote:

brianlux wrote:

A vote against this is a vote for cruelty.

Actually, no it is not. A vote against this is just that: a vote against it. You have to make some leaps in logic to equate the two which is disingenuous.

Clearly, you aren't disabled. Because this treaty is for equal treatment worldwide for those who are disabled. Any idiot with a heart would have voted yes on this treaty and that goes for republicans. Bob Dole, McCain, they voted for it, not sure why McCain did, but Dole is in a wheelchair. But the losers without a heart? They use politics to vote, not only because they don't have a heart, but because they refuse to understand the basis of what this treaty is all about: those who are not given the same rights as everyone else! Voting against human rights is a selfish and dirty tactic.

Yes, insult those that would even dare to come to different conclusions than yourself. That's sure to get people to be convinced you are right. As has been pointed out before, the US already set the precedent with passage of the ADA. Not ratifying this treaty doesn't magically repeal that, does it?

My point still stands, this was not a treaty where the vote was to be for cruelty. It was a vote to ratify a disability treaty. Voting against that does not inherently mean you support cruelty.

brianlux

brianlux wrote:

A vote against this is a vote for cruelty.

More on that below.

Sludge Factory wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

Sludge Factory wrote:

Actually, no it is not. A vote against this is just that: a vote against it. You have to make some leaps in logic to equate the two which is disingenuous.

Clearly, you aren't disabled. Because this treaty is for equal treatment worldwide for those who are disabled. Any idiot with a heart would have voted yes on this treaty and that goes for republicans. Bob Dole, McCain, they voted for it, not sure why McCain did, but Dole is in a wheelchair. But the losers without a heart? They use politics to vote, not only because they don't have a heart, but because they refuse to understand the basis of what this treaty is all about: those who are not given the same rights as everyone else! Voting against human rights is a selfish and dirty tactic.

Yes, insult those that would even dare to come to different conclusions than yourself. That's sure to get people to be convinced you are right. As has been pointed out before, the US already set the precedent with passage of the ADA. Not ratifying this treaty doesn't magically repeal that, does it?

My point still stands, this was not a treaty where the vote was to be for cruelty. It was a vote to ratify a disability treaty. Voting against that does not inherently mean you support cruelty.

I'll grant you that my choice of words may not be perfect or perfectly accurate but having worked with people with disabilities and with myself having acquired a permanent partial disability with hearing issues I know how it feels to be dismissed, even by medical "professionals". My injury initially lead to life threatening depression and anxiety and it was very difficult for me to find adequate help. I received some pretty rough and severe abuse a few times while going though that trauma. To often, people with difficult problems or disabilities are treated as a nuisance (or worse). And I'm not talking about people who are sometimes described as "bottomless pits"- the kind of people that no matter what you do for them, they will find a reason to me miserable and seek negative attention. (That's a different and even more difficult situation but reasonable care should be extended, even then.) I mean a typical person with a disability seeking a way to make the most of their life. There's no reason those people should not universally be given the kind of treatment we receive under the ADA. And even that, here in the US, in my experience, is often marginal in its scope and yes, sometimes cruelty is what is extended to some with disabilities-- even in this country.

fear4freedom

policies should never win your emotions! Use common sense. This treaty puts power in the hands of the UN govt. body to make decisions on peoples kids and family members who are US citizens! They dont want this! The family members and parents of the disabled, DONT WANT THIS TREATY!

Cmon people dont use your emotions here or ever! Thats when you are BOUGHT

BE SMART