On the right of Iran to acquire nuclear technology:

. . . .Obama added that there is a danger "when the United States, or any country, thinks that we can simply impose these values on another country with a different history and a different culture."


But then Hillary Clinton said this on gay rights:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pledged Monday to fight for gay rights and called on the world to stop discrimination and violence based on sexual orientation.

"As secretary of state, I will advance a comprehensive human rights agenda that includes the elimination of violence and discrimination against people based on sexual orientation or gender identity," Clinton said in a written statement.


How does Clinton aim to win on this path against countries that vehemently oppose gay rights and refuse to acknowledge their cause? Will she introduce sanctions against such countries? Third, by pursuing gay cause as a human rights value Clinton is attempting to impose American values on other countries with a different history and a different culture. A complete contradiction to what her boss outlined above.

This will escalate suspicions of President Obama's intent around the globe. He says one thing but his foreign minister comes from behind and counter that idea. More disturbing is the fact that majority of the world population see gay cause as immoral and damaging to family life and they don't want it in their neighborhood.

I think you're taking Clinton's words too critically. But all in all, there is nothing wrong with calling "on the world to stop discrimination and violence based on sexual orientation."
Just as long as war in Iraq type thing isn't repeating itself which I doubt.

More disturbing is the fact that majority of the world population see gay cause as immoral and damaging to family life and they don't want it in their neighborhood.

but it's sad to hear that they are being burnt alive etc in some countries.
It's a complicated issue nevertheless.

One of the problems I often have with America is their desperation to, almost force, everyone else to follow their own ways.

They seem to have a mentality that says: If you're doing things the American way, you're not doing it right!

Why must other countries be made to legitimize sodomy simply because Americans have bowed to sodomy?

Will it become right, if Iran was to become the next super power, for Iran to force Americans to kill gay people? or would it be right, if Afghanistan suddenly becomes the next world super power, to force/compel every nation to make women wear masks?
These western countries are setting precedents of enforcing their values on others which, if other nations embark upon later, will only lead to further chaos and destruction in the world. Its one of the reasons millions have been killed in Iraq.

@topic,

There are so many facets to this story post that I don't know where to start.

Let's tackle the nuclear power first. Aint it funny that Obama said Iran has the right to use nuclear technology to produce power but won't let same be done in the US? Others can use the technology which is clean and cheap, but you have to subject your subjects, I meant citizens to the unreliable sources of power that costs even much more! I just don't get it.

As to the gay issue. I agree that gays have the right to be gay, but I am against gay marriage. Period. Trying to make this a case of human rights is to use a back door way to call mariages between gays a human right issue as well. The former is, the latter is not.

As to imposing American values on others, this is only an extension of the anomaly that the United States has become. The Federal Govt has become all too powerful and dictates its will on the States. That was never the intention of the founding fathers. The same FG is only extending the bullying beyond its borders to other countries. Granted this was not started by Obama, but he is obviously continuing in that footstep.

there is nothing wrong with calling "on the world to stop discrimination and violence based on sexual orientation

Oyinda,

The keyword here is sexual orientation! The human anatomy and physiology at birth is a special endowment and as the individual grows so does these parts grow and mature, inwardly (hormones) and outwardly (sexual organs) and they serve as the fundamental definition of gender and social roles. When a child is born the gender is identified by the organ between its thighs. So under those terms there can be only one definition for sexual orientation.

When you seek gender alteration through surgical or hormone therapy process to grow breasts on a man or grow penniss on a woman then you are violating the birthright imposed by nature. When a man seeks sexual pleasure with another man, then indeed he has violated the protocol of human ethics as well as the aesthetics of beauty and balance or what in high circle is termed "Grace". Therefore it is better that you violate the rights of a few gay activists than have the rights of a multiple people in a sexually moral setting violated by the unethical acts of sodomites.

One of the problems I often have with America is their desperation to, almost force, everyone else to follow their own ways.

They seem to have a mentality that says: If you're doing things the American way, you're not doing it right!

Why must other countries be made to legitimize sodomy simply because Americans have bowed to sodomy?

Will it become right, if Iran was to become the next super power, for Iran to force Americans to kill gay people? or would it be right, if Afghanistan suddenly becomes the next world super power, to force/compel every nation to make women wear masks?
These western countries are setting precedents of enforcing their values on others which, if other nations embark upon later, will only lead to further chaos and destruction in the world. Its one of the reasons millions have been killed in Iraq.

Justgood,

Brilliant response! This is one of the underlying problems why the Arabs push back on democracy. At least in the way it is defined by the West. They do not agree that democracy is just about civic and society. . .they see it as a wholesale packaging of American lifestyle that include such anomalies as gay and lesbian, liquor and nudity, guns and violence, capitalism and usury and so on and so forth. . . . and embracing these lifestyles can only mean one thing. . . abandon Islam! In fact they view America as a evangelical society, not as a christian society. Big difference! They abhor American presence on their soil for this particular reason.

There are so many facets to this story post that I don't know where to start.

Tayo, yep. . . I agree! On this topic, I know you have far more to say than just the few sentences below. I will be patient and let you tackle it on your own terms and I am sure your response will elicit good participation from the general audience. Go ahead!

Let's tackle the nuclear power first. Aint it funny that Obama said Iran has the right to use nuclear technology to produce power but won't let same be done in the US? Others can use the technology which is clean and cheap, but you have to subject your subjects, I meant citizens to the unreliable sources of power that costs even much more! I just don't get it.

Obama is using backdoor strategy to defuse the issue of Iran becoming a nuclear power. There are safeguards under the NPT and IAEA that are targeted to encourage nuclear seeking nations to willfully participate in a project syndication of the end-to-end process and these include incentives. For example, Iran might be made to buy its supply of uranium from France (who gets it from Niger). Iran will build its own plant but under the standards of a watchdog like IAEA. Then the reactor might be installed by Americans and the operations is left under the leadership of Iranian scientists. Then the spent fuel might be stored by the Soviets. This way any attempt by Iran to divert spent fuel to weapons grade material is defeated. . . and if for any reason it insisted in storing its own spent plutonium, the incentives are removed and the supply base from France is shut off.

So far, Iran has refused to these terms and has insisted in being the mastermind of the end-to-end operations. This is why the outside world is suspicious that Iran has other motives for refusing the syndicated option and unless there is something to hide, it should logically allow transparency. Iran says it has the sovereign right to be transparent or to be secretive without any unfair conclusion to an ominous agenda.

As to the gay issue. I agree that gays have the right to be gay, but I am against gay marriage. Period. Trying to make this a case of human rights is to use a back door way to call mariages between gays a human right issue as well. The former is, the latter is not.

Precisely! Any individual have the rights of privacy and this is both endowed in creation as well as in human protocols such as UNHR statutes. As part of that right, a gay person could do anything they want in their own enclosed privacy. No one cares. When they bring their acts into the public square, then they are inviting public opinion and feedback. For a society that is unwelcoming to acts or exhibitions of sodomy, this feedback could include physical violence. Now, in the context of Hillary's declaration, how would America respond to such a society? Is that considered human rights violation for lynching two men laying in each other's arms in Tinubu Square, caressing and kissing?

As to imposing American values on others, this is only an extension of the anomaly that the United States has become. The Federal Govt has become all too powerful and dictates its will on the States. That was never the intention of the founding fathers. The same FG is only extending the bullying beyond its borders to other countries. Granted this was not started by Obama, but he is obviously continuing in that footstep.

Tayo, you cannot do anything in America nowadays without a subtax. I dont anything I have done lately. . . beside sex, . . .that did not carry a tax surcharge. They are extending every value especially capitalism and democracy. . .the two are tied like twins!

They find every value and ideology that stand in the way of these two American ideas and give it the label "anti-American". War against communism. . . War against drugs. . . War against terrorism.

Negro_Ntns:

Oyinda,

The keyword here is sexual orientation! The human anatomy and physiology at birth is a special endowment and as the individual grows so does these parts grow and mature, inwardly (hormones) and outwardly (sexual organs) and they serve as the fundamental definition of gender and social roles. When a child is born the gender is identified by the organ between its thighs. So under those terms there can be only one definition for sexual orientation.

When you seek gender alteration through surgical or hormone therapy process to grow breasts on a man or grow penniss on a woman then you are violating the birthright imposed by nature. When a man seeks sexual pleasure with another man, then indeed he has violated the protocol of human ethics as well as the aesthetics of beauty and balance or what in high circle is termed "Grace". Therefore it is better that you violate the rights of a few gay activists than have the rights of a multiple people in a sexually moral setting violated by the unethical acts of sodomites.

there is a difference between homosexual and transvestite. please learn to distinguish between the two

ignorance is bliss

When a child is born the gender is identified by the organ between its thighs. So under those terms there can be only one definition for sexual orientation.

sex and gender quite different. learn to distinguish between those two as well.

But all in all, there is nothing wrong with calling "on the world to stop discrimination and violence based on sexual orientation."

Are you saying homosexuality is not a sexual orientation? Is transvestite not a sexual state of mind?

. . .and given the direct quote from your post above, are you saying its ignorant to call both homosexuality and transvetite a state of sexual identity?

sex and gender quite different. learn to distinguish between those two as well.

If you are filling an application form and you are asked to identify sex. . . what do you put? How about when asked on a form to identify gender. . .what do you write?

Negro_Ntns:

Are you saying homosexuality is not a sexual orientation? Is transvestite not a sexual state of mind?

. . .and given the direct quote from your post above, are you saying its ignorant to call both homosexuality and transvetite a state of sexual identity?

most homosexuals identify with their sex. ex a male sees himself as a male who is attracted to other males and vice versa

transversites do not. transversites on the other hand, for example, is born male but will claim to be female esp. if he has undergone the physical transformation.

there is a difference.

transvestism is not a sexual orientation. it is mostly a practice of crossdressing and sometimes, they alter their biological sex through surgery.
homosexuality, on the other hand, is a sexual orientation. homosexuals are attracted to the same sex.

If you are filling an application form and you are asked to identify sex. . . what do you put? How about when asked on a form to identify gender. . .what do you write?

if they ask for sex, you specify either male or female
forms don't generally ask you to identify with a gender. lol if they do, they probably meant sex.

sex: biological distinction ( male or female)
gender: social distinction (masculine or feminine)

most homosexuals identify with their sex. ex a male sees himself as a male who is attracted to other males and vice versa

transversites do not. transversites on the other hand, for example, is born male but will claim to be female esp. if he has undergone the physical transformation.

there is a difference.

transvestism is not a sexual orientation. it is mostly a practice of crossdressing and sometimes, they alter their biological sex through surgery.
homosexuality, on the other hand, is a sexual orientation. homosexuals are attracted to the same sex.

. .hhhmmmm, is that right?

if they ask for sex, you specify either male or female
forms don't generally ask you to identify with a gender. lol if they do, they probably meant sex.

sex: biological distinction ( male or female)
gender: social distinction (masculine or feminine)

, . .really? Wow!

yes o, no kidding!! learn something new everyday right?