Actually, it's not a human rights violation, rather it's a violation of a UN convention on the rights a child. There are only two countries who haven't signed said convention: Somalia, which doesn't have a government to sign, and the US.Harmor wrote:
Don't you know that Iran is allowed to do human rights violations.
Iran has more female legislators than the US.Harmor wrote:
If the American Feminist movement isn't appalled that this is happening, or women are treated like cattle, then it must be ok.
Ya bubbs, women should move to iran to feel truly free.Bubbalo wrote:
Actually, it's not a human rights violation, rather it's a violation of a UN convention on the rights a child. There are only two countries who haven't signed said convention: Somalia, which doesn't have a government to sign, and the US.Harmor wrote:
Don't you know that Iran is allowed to do human rights violations.Iran has more female legislators than the US.Harmor wrote:
If the American Feminist movement isn't appalled that this is happening, or women are treated like cattle, then it must be ok.
So a country like Iran, like signed the document, has MORE moral authority than the U.S. who didn't; is that what you're saying Lizzard?Bubbalo wrote:
Actually, it's not a human rights violation, rather it's a violation of a UN convention on the rights a child. There are only two countries who haven't signed said convention: Somalia, which doesn't have a government to sign, and the US.Harmor wrote:
Don't you know that Iran is allowed to do human rights violations.
But can they wear what they want?Bubbalo wrote:
Iran has more female legislators than the US.
Last edited by ATG (2007-05-11 22:26:05)
Because the US is so great, sexism isn't at all rampant in the corporate world. There are so few females in upper management because they just aren't suited to it.usmarine2005 wrote:
Ya bubbs, women should move to iran to feel truly free.
You seem to forget only women can have kids.Bubbalo wrote:
Because the US is so great, sexism isn't at all rampant in the corporate world. There are so few females in upper management because they just aren't suited to it.usmarine2005 wrote:
Ya bubbs, women should move to iran to feel truly free.
Last edited by usmarine2005 (2007-05-11 22:27:51)
“Because women now hold managerial positions at most American companies, women’s advancement remains a problem that many don’t recognize as one,” said Dr. Betty Spence, President of NAFE. “In organizations where women are truly succeeding-where we find women running divisions and country operations-they have implemented tough measures, like having the board review succession planning and compensation for gender equity, and holding managers accountable with their own advancement and pay. These are policies with teeth, and I look forward to the day when all companies follow the lead of the NAFE Top 30.”Bubbalo wrote:
Because the US is so great, sexism isn't at all rampant in the corporate world. There are so few females in upper management because they just aren't suited to it.usmarine2005 wrote:
Ya bubbs, women should move to iran to feel truly free.
Where did I say that? I was pointing out to a US poster that he was criticising Iran for failing to abide by an agreement that the US won't abide by either.ATG wrote:
So a country like Iran, like signed the document, has MORE moral authority than the U.S. who didn't; is that what you're saying Lizzard?
No, I said it was sarcastic.ATG wrote:
Because that would show a consistancy of thought with you. You claim your thread about the 9/11 hijackers being heroes was a joke
The people I'm talking about are terrorists how, exactly?ATG wrote:
but show again here a general sympathy with, and advocacy for terrorist.
Based on your definition, probably. But then, based on you definition Ghandi probably is.ATG wrote:
Which could logically lead one to ask, Bubbalo, are you a terrorist?
Because the definition of freedom isn't whether you can participate in public life but what you can wear, of course.ATG wrote:
But can they wear what they want?
Which is relevant why?usmarine2005 wrote:
You seem to forget only women can have kids.
Where did I say that?usmarine2005 wrote:
Please go on and say iran is just as or more tolerant of a woman's rights.
There are top earners amongst the elite, you have the nescience to compare the freedoms of American women to Iranian women, lol.Bubbalo wrote:
You do realise you just proved my point, ATG? Even amongst the top 30 companies for women, less than a fifth of the tope earners are women.
ATG wrote:
So a country like Iran, like signed the document, has MORE moral authority than the U.S. who didn't; is that what you're saying Lizzard?
You advocate that Iran is morally superior to America, one has to assume that that is what you meant.Bubbalo wrote:
Where did I say that? I was pointing out to a US poster that he was criticising Iran for failing to abide by an agreement that the US won't abide by either.
ATG wrote:
Because that would show a consistancy of thought with you. You claim your thread about the 9/11 hijackers being heroes was a joke
Debate and serious talkBubbalo wrote:
No, I said it was sarcastic.
ATG wrote:
but show again here a general sympathy with, and advocacy for terrorist.
Are you saying the Iranian government is not a terrorist regime/ What about the recent booted islamic Courts assholes in Somalia; terrorist or freedom fighters?Bubbalo wrote:
The people I'm talking about are terrorists how, exactly?
ATG wrote:
Which could logically lead one to ask, Bubbalo, are you a terrorist?
1) it's your, and Ghandi was a pussy, not a terrorist.Bubbalo wrote:
Based on your definition, probably. But then, based on you definition Ghandi probably is.
ATG wrote:
But can they wear what they want?
What restrictions in American society for participating in public life are there on woman exactly.for crying out fucking loud bubs?Bubbalo wrote:
Because the definition of freedom isn't whether you can participate in public life but what you can wear, of course.
Or somehow a conspiracy by Jews/Americans to kill Iranian kids. . . .their is no way a peace loving religion like Islam would put children on death row. . . . . . .lolusmarine2005 wrote:
32 Children on death row? Must be Jews.
Last edited by Elamdri (2007-05-12 00:02:25)
For the women?Ottomania wrote:
this requires an invasion seriously!
http://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGAMR510472005 .. admittedly late to the party.herrr_smity wrote:
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGACT500072002
Fifteen US states were holding a total of 82 child offenders on death row as of August 2002. Eighteen executions of child offenders have been carried out in six states since 1990. One of those executed was 16 at the time of the offence; the others were all 17. Eleven of the executions were in Texas, the state which has carried out the largest total number of executions of prisoners since the resumption of executions in the USA in 1977 -- 281 up to 17 September 2002.
get down from your fucking high horse mr bill orily
goodKmarion wrote:
http://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGAMR510472005 .. admittedly late to the party.herrr_smity wrote:
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGACT500072002
Fifteen US states were holding a total of 82 child offenders on death row as of August 2002. Eighteen executions of child offenders have been carried out in six states since 1990. One of those executed was 16 at the time of the offence; the others were all 17. Eleven of the executions were in Texas, the state which has carried out the largest total number of executions of prisoners since the resumption of executions in the USA in 1977 -- 281 up to 17 September 2002.
get down from your fucking high horse mr bill orily
Ah, I forgot about that....Kmarion wrote:
http://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGAMR510472005 .. admittedly late to the party.herrr_smity wrote:
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGACT500072002
Fifteen US states were holding a total of 82 child offenders on death row as of August 2002. Eighteen executions of child offenders have been carried out in six states since 1990. One of those executed was 16 at the time of the offence; the others were all 17. Eleven of the executions were in Texas, the state which has carried out the largest total number of executions of prisoners since the resumption of executions in the USA in 1977 -- 281 up to 17 September 2002.
get down from your fucking high horse mr bill orily