Quote:
Originally Posted by skycaller23
My point in posting that snippet was to show that it was not a resolution specifically and only against death penalty for "gay sex" as the OP indicated.
It looks to me like the UN wants to ban the death penalty worldwide for everyone and anyone.
|
You're correct in that they included gay sex as one of the criteria that might be used to prejudicially give someone the death penalty but it was merely one of many specific criteria lending itself to that mentioned.
It might "look like it to you" but regardless; had that been their motivation to ban the death penalty; anyone would have advised them sneaking up on it with a motion containing a large number of conditions, all of which open the motion to debate on it's merit ,would in no way shape or form expedite that procedure but actually hinder it in the long term by exhausting delegates patience over the topic.
"The sky is falling, the sky is falling" just gave chicken little a case of laryngitis while convincing no one. So too would the same results be obtained by patterning a motion in such a way so as to allow for it to be voted against on any one of twenty individual precepts contained within.
You have to at least give some at the U.N. credit for being able to predict voting such as that acumen demonstrated by your average garden variety local union president.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
