Gamesmart:

But you are not allowed to express your (so-called) fundamental human rights as you can not formalise it in the eyes of the law? So it is not a fundamental human right then, it is a right you are allowed to have as long as the government decides to ignore/tolerate it?

Errm you dont get it. I have the fundamental right to free speech does not mean I can engage in seditious speech or treasonous speech in a country.

The reason why I cannot defend the Malawi people is because I am sure they were fully aware that their country was homophobic and so knew the repercussion of there actions.

Anyways . . . when you speak of "rights to consenting adults" nothing is hampered in the US. Individual can consent to engage in polygamous relationships, but just because the Government does not endorse it, does not mean that their fundamental right is being impaired or that it is void.

Obasanjo's statement on animals is stupid- when can animals "consent" lol, and see how all of you are agreeing with baba like zombie.

Another problem:

1. Fundamental human right is usually determined by Human rights courts
2. This has nothing to do with the US law. You assume that the UN=US

My initial statement is perfectly correct. The UN asserts that consenting adults should have privacy in there homes. Some states might decide not to uphold this, and as Obasanjo pointed out- states do have the right to decide there laws. However these laws violate fundamental human rights set forth by the UN.

Why is it so hard for people to get lol?

Let me help: China by censoring info violates a fundamental human right. However if china decides to criticize Nigeria for censoring- although this is hypocritical- they are perfectly legit- censoring info violates a fundamental human right to free speech.

US does not even violate those human rights- only in severe cases are polygamist arrested and prosecuted. A state does not have to recognize something b4 its a fundamental right. I dont know where you get that idea from gamesmart.

1. Consenting adults should have a right to privacy in their homes. Its a fundamental human right.

Please all of you should go and learn what a fundamental human right is. I never stated its a universal law lol. Google could help you start.

YOUR ARGUMENT IS MOOT 

Beaf:

Nonsense! Make dem leave our uncle shege jare! The thing that is grinding us right now, is how an ex-gov turned senator has successfully organised an international "marriage" to a 13 year old child. How come there is little noise about this in the West? Is it more acceptable than homophobia?

Thank You, abi.

Beaf:

Nonsense! Make dem leave our uncle shege jare! The thing that is grinding us right now, is how an ex-gov turned senator has successfully organised an international "marriage" to a 13 year old child. How come there is little noise about this in the West? Is it more acceptable than homophobia?

thats something I think should be addressed in Africa the most- pedophilia by a large number of people. I believe laws should be made to protect young children from preying sick adults.

SEFAGO:

Errm you dont get it. I have the fundamental right to free speech does not mean I can engage in seditious speech or treasonous speech in a country.

No, this is really not a valid argument.

Free speech is not banned under the law. Polygamy is.

What you just said is more analogous to a crime like alfresco intimacy. intimacy with a wife/husband is fundamental human right, but if it is done in an offensive way then it can be punished.

That example was poor. I suggest you try again.

SEFAGO:

The reason why I cannot defend the Malawi people is because I am sure they were fully aware that their country was homophobic and so knew the repercussion of there actions.

I agree with you.

SEFAGO:

Anyways . . . when you speak of "rights to consenting adults" nothing is hampered in the US. Individual can consent to engage in polygamous relationships, but just because the Government does not endorse it, does not mean that their fundamental right is being impaired or that it is void.

As long as the law forbids them to formalise the union, it is not a fundamental human rights.

As long as government officials can choose to prosecute an individual on it, it is not a fundamental human rights, it is a granted privilege.

Is that not true?

Fundamental human rights is defined as human rights which humans have by the fact of being human, and which are neither created nor can be abrogated by any government.

So your claim that something at the mercy of arbitrary/discretional decision of government officials to prosecute is not a fundamental human right. Right or wrong?

SEFAGO:

Please all of you should go and learn what a fundamental human right is. I never stated its a universal law lol. Google could help you start.

I have. It is here in my argument:

Gamesmart:

Fundamental human rights is defined as human rights which humans have by the fact of being human, and which are neither created nor can be abrogated by any government.

Do you have a different definition?

Do you have a different definition?

That sounds like something from an 8 year old social studies book.

Fundamental human rights are those set forth by the United nations (Universal declaration of human rights) which are acknowledged by member countries.

Go and read all the articles of the human rights then come back lol. Then we can debate. You are not even on the right platform lol.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

The US does violate fundamental human rights, I do agree they get less attention than we do. But several of the fundamental human rights are protected in the US. Less so in Nigeria especially during dictatorial regimes.


By the way I think you are mixing fundamental human rights with[b] fundamental rights[/b] in terms of application.

Please dont come back with a primary school textbook definition of human rights. I go vex no be small

SEFAGO:

That sounds like something from an 8 year old social studies book.

Fundamental human rights are those set forth by the United nations (Universal declaration of human rights) which are acknowledged by member countries.

Go and read all the articles of the human rights then come back lol.  Then we can debate. You are not even on the right platform lol.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

The US does violate fundamental human rights, I do agree they get less attention than we do. But several of the fundamental human rights are protected in the US. Less so in Nigeria especially during dictatorial regimes.
 

By the way I think you are mixing fundamental human rights with[b] fundamental rights[/b] in terms of application.

Please dont come back with a primary school textbook definition of human rights. I go vex no be small

It makes sense to present your case with sound links with your arguments.

So how does this document you produce justify the practice in the West of allowance and recognition, by the state, of marriage between same intimacy, but yet refusal to do such for polygamy? Despite both being of consenting adults.

Secondly, from the same article:

Article 2.
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, intimacy, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.


Article 16.
(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family.

Article 7.
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Are laws banning polygamy in the West not a breach of these rights above affecting muslims and cultures that practice polygamy?

I am going to be lazy today because your statements are a bit ignorant:

So how does this document you produce justify the practice in the West of allowance and recognition of marriage between same intimacy but yet refusal to do such for polygamy.

The West does not recognize same-intimacy marriage in every place. Please specify the country. I know in the US same-intimacy marriage varies across each state. Some states do not recognize it and its illegal in some places while some are very liberal about it.

Are laws banning polygamy in the West not a breach of these rights above affecting muslims and cultures that practice polygamy?

Please do your research you are wasting my time again. The UK recognizes foreign polygamy marriages but will not allow it to go on in their country. Also they are very lax for muslims lol.

Come October, when the Human Rights Act comes into force, British law on such matters will be open to challenges, under article eight of the act which says everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life.

Noshaba Huseein says that if the government refuses to accept the legality of polygamous marriages then the Muslim parliament will take it to the European court of human rights.

"There will be a need to do something much more, in the way of a campaign, if there is a denial of rights and certainly people will be taking actions to the European court to ensure that we have the rights of freedom of religion.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/791263.stm

Yes, it can be argued in international human right courts that polygamy is a human right. I would however tell any lawyer trying to do so that a stronger and contrary argument can also be proposed- that polygamy violates several human rights . However, there has been to precedent in international courts. The main reason being that the law is rarely enforced.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90886407

Lots of polygamy going on in the US. They even have suggestive statistics on this.

If you think polygamy laws are really enforced when they cause no harm anyone you must be unaware of how laws in the west works. You will only see polygamy issues when a guy has done some major f.u.ck ups

Are laws banning polygamy in the West not a breach of these rights above affecting muslims and cultures that practice polygamy?

I would state- yes they might breach some fundamental human rights. But whats your point? People who criticize the discrimination against gays are not the "West", they are mainly human rights organizations.

Also usually when a court determines a precedent case, they usually weigh superior human rights- which supersedes what. This involves significant debate in court- you cannot ensure the right to polygamy if polygamy could cause significant limitations on the autonomy of women.

Me, as a liberal, my position on homosexuality is:

They are free to do any sick thing they want to as long as:

a) It does not promote their sick acts (no favourable legislations, no propagandish reporting by stewpid media)

b) It does not try to make it mainstream (that is not on TV, not in public, not teaching my kids in school to accept)

c) It does not come close to me arse or any show interest in me!

If what they are doing in that sick companionship does not fail these 3 tests, I am liberal. Otherwise clamp down on them.

@sagamite,
now i know why u reason like an ode. u use ur ass my dear. stop been stylish abt it. come out straight.

@topic,
i hate to see obj talk about morality. some ppl may support the act of homosexuality but no one supports the act of sleeping with one's daughter inlaw.
let obj shut his gutters and allow ppl with moral sanity to discuss issues that are moral related.

all these poster blathering about western culture probably have no problem with 'western' abominations like fornication,  not so?
Fornication and adultery are human sins. Homosexuality is an inhuman abomination. Those who engage in it should at least repent, and seek any available remedy.

They hate western culture yet that is where they run to for refuge from animals like obasanjo,same animals that are ruthlessly destroying them are the ones that teaches them morals.

What is morality anyway?

Knowing Obasanjo i wouldn't be suprised if information springs up tomorrow that him, Nuhu Ribadu and Donald Duke frequently engaged in threesomes. But then again it's his prerogative to do so and not my business.
Africa and misplaced values, people dying of hunger cos of corruption and massive looting; labelled as the dark continent cos of retrogression we continually and all we're worried about is what two consenting adult men do with their dicks and anal canals in their rooms.
The irony is that they want to use religion and culture as basis for their argument when evidence is emerging that both Jesus and Mohammed were part homosexuals who had intercourse with their followers. If you say it's against our culture just go to people who work with all these Obas, Emirs and Chiefs o they'll tell you how they regularly sleep with young boys for ritual purposes.

Triple sins = three.some nairaland censor

Africans should evolve,evolution is not a straight course.Man and the entirety of the universe is just an empty space.Think about it,what really are we for us to think that there is any big deal about us and have the right to tell others how to pleasure.

WE should only have the right to stop others from destroying us and that is what we should be doing to people like obasanjo who does not want others to live along side them,stupid,greedy,selfish,arrogant and gluttonous animals

edoyad:

Knowing Obasanjo i wouldn't be suprised if information springs up tomorrow that him, Nuhu Ribadu and Donald Duke frequently engaged in triple sins. But then again it's his prerogative to do so and not my business.
Africa and misplaced values, people dying of hunger cos of corruption and massive looting; labelled as the dark continent cos of retrogression we continually and all we're worried about is what two consenting adult men do with their dicks and anal canals in their rooms.
The irony is that they want to use religion and culture as basis for their argument when evidence is emerging that both Jesus and Mohammed were part homosexuals who had intercourse with their followers. If you say it's against our culture just go to people who work with all these Obas, Emirs and Chiefs o they'll tell you how they regularly sleep with young boys for ritual purposes.

Please what evidence is this? You have a right to blaspheme but you do not have the right to make insidious remarks without providing undisputed evidence. That one yeye and idle westerner researcher said so is not enough.

They hate western culture yet that is where they run to for refuge from animals like obasanjo,same animals that are ruthlessly destroying them are the ones that teaches them morals

If african culture is as primitive as you say, how come it is what european royal families practice? African culture, like european royal culture is all about dignity. They are also anti-gay.

Obasanjo has spoken well.

chidichris:

@sagamite,
now i know why u reason like an ode. u use your backside my dear. stop been stylish abt it. come out straight.

Weyree!

You can not even put a point across to back up your claim. Alakori!

basktmout:

They hate western culture yet that is where they run to for refuge from animals like obasanjo,same animals that are ruthlessly destroying them are the ones that teaches them morals

If african culture is as primitive as you say, how come it is what european royal families practice? African culture, like european royal culture is all about dignity. They are also anti-gay.

Would you have known that members of the royal family cheaply solicit for bribes if not for the recent exposure of the duchess of york?

The royal families of europe are guided by the code of omerter,cosa nostra,you as can never know what is going on there.

Anti gay in papar but not in practice.

redsun:

They hate western culture yet that is where they run to for refuge from animals like obasanjo,same animals that are ruthlessly destroying them are the ones that teaches them morals.

Because you have a system that has a standard structure the protects people does not mean you have to like the way people exploit that liberty of freedom.

Freedom is good, but you have to appreciate that freedom, is more often than not, abused by the beneficiaries. So liking the prospects of freedom does not automatically imply you have to like the abuse of the rights to freedom.  

redsun:

What is morality anyway?

Morality is the standard set by society of approvable behaviours, majority of morality modules are based on naturality and damage to society. Every society develops its moral codes.

Katsumoto:

Please what evidence is this? You have a right to blaspheme but you do not have the right to make insidious remarks without providing undisputed evidence. That one yeye and idle westerner researcher said so is not enough.

DON'T EVEN GO THERE!

I can guarantee you he vomitted that conjecture moronically without engaging the brain. There is no way he will provide you with concrete evidence.

And for the record, I don't do religion.

redsun:

Africans should evolve,evolution is not a straight course.Man and the entirety of the universe is just an empty space.Think about it,what really are we for us to think that there is any big deal about us and have the right to tell others how to pleasure.

WE should only have the right to stop others from destroying us and that is what we should be doing to people like obasanjo who does not want others to live along side them,silly,greedy,selfish,arrogant and gluttonous animals

So according to this "logic" (if I may call it that), why not legalise bestiality?

Sagamite:

Because you have a system that has a standard structure the protects people does not mean you have to like the way people exploit that liberty of freedom.

Freedom is good, but you have to appreciate that freedom, is more often than not, abused by the beneficiaries. So liking the prospects of freedom does not automatically imply you have to like the abuse of the rights to freedom.  

Morality is the standard set by society of approvable behaviours, majority of morality modules are based on naturality and damage to society. Every society develops its moral codes.

I don't think u truely understand the meaning of freedom,if you do you wouldn't bother with what other people do with their freedom as long as it is not interfering with yours.

Meanwhile,the set morality for africa far beyond acceptable that is why the society is sickenly backward,it needs to be updated

Sagamite:

So according to this "logic" (if I may call it that), why not legalise bestiality?

Fu-ck a pig if u like,that is no skin of my nose.

redsun:

I don't think u truely understand the meaning of freedom,if you do you wouldn't bother with what other people do with their freedom as long as it is not interfering with yours.

I do o.

I hope you know in freedom, someone has the right to walk naked on the street. Will that not offend you?

redsun:

Meanwhile,the set morality for africa far beyond acceptable that is why the society is sickenly backward,it needs to be updated

No, mate. Africa's backwardness is not due to its moral codes.

It is mainly due to a system of oppression that has squeezed/grabbed the resources that can be shared. This instinctively leads to the rise individual interests at the loss of collective interest, hence you see most people think more in their tribal identity or even in worse cases only personal interest. Hence the grand levels of corruption at all levels.

It is that corruption that is keeping Africa down.

redsun:

Fu-ck a pig if u like,that is no skin of my nose.

I can guarantee you majority of humans do not want to live in such environments, even deviants like homosexuals don't.

So unfortunately for you, your nihilistic ideology will NEVER prevail. Morality will rule.

redsun:

Would you have known that members of the royal family cheaply solicit for bribes if not for the recent exposure of the duchess of york?

The royal families of europe are guided by the code of omerter,cosa nostra,you as can never know what is going on there.
Anti gay in papar but not in practice.

European Royal families are guided by nosa costra principles? Are you serious. They follow Sicillian mafia principles?? Ye mogbe

Katsumoto:

European Royal families are guided by nosa costra principles? Are you serious. They follow Sicillian mafia principles?? Ye mogbe

What do know about the reptileans?You guys live in a world that is magical to you,the more you the less you see.

This life is funny. All these westerners were okay with promoting Obansanjo, even nominating him for a Nobel prize despite some of the callous actions (e.g Odi massacre) of his previous administrations. They were happy to allow him speak at their organizations and presented him with awards even though the average Nigerian complained bitterly. But now that he has said something contrary to their own doctrine and perspective, they are now ready to ban him. They now remember that there were purported human rights violations during his reign.

What goes around,comes around.A wise man should learn to sift through the nemesis,it is a banditary world.

montelik:

This life is funny. All these westerners were okay with promoting Obansanjo, even nominating him for a Nobel prize despite some of the callous actions (e.g Odi massacre) of his previous administrations. They were happy to allow him speak at their organizations and presented him with awards even though the average Nigerian complained bitterly. But now that he has said something contrary to their own doctrine and perspective, they are now ready to ban him. They now remember that there were purported human rights violations during his reign.

Gay rights is insanely supreme in the UK.

The media does not tolerate any gay-disapproving view. They will write and attack to destroy it at the expense of unbiase reporting.

When they have terrorised the real wishes of the masses, they now turn around and say homosexuality is now becoming more acceptable.