₦airaland Forum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_rights

protected by a legal system of a particular constitution.

Fundamental human right as declared by the UN charter in 194x

Incest laws are made for very obvious reasons. To protect children. Its as simple as that. if you examine Incest laws in the US, you would notice that some states do not prohibit incest for those over the "age of consent." Even more interesting is that incest is a "taboo law" introduced in the legal systems of most countries but has not being challenged. You must be aware that some countries have laws as old as 100 years which they do not change except some notable case leads to the change.

These laws were made before the fundamental human right charter were made. Incest laws can be challenged under the fundamental human rights charter to right to privacy, if two cousins want to marry, no one will stop them.

Incest is legal in Belgium, Brazil, Germany and a large number of "western nations" as long as you pass the age of consent and if you are not a direct line relative.

You are just clutching on straws. By the way why are you presenting like harmful examples to back up your claims: Polygamy, bestiality and incest are all harmful to society. Incest can cause in-breeding and disease, bestiality- one of the causes of AIDs, polygamy undermines women.

Whats up with homosexuality?

^ So that was what my statement was about- going back to my question:

What are you arguing?

So consenting adults is not a fundamental human rights then?

It is. As I used it in the context of this debate. Please reread what I said from the beginning you must not even know why the malawi people were arrested. I was discussing the malawi case.

Please which parts of Nigeria is polygamy illegal?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy_in_Nigeria

It is not recognized under civil law. I will point out that i misspoke that it's illegal. You mix both of them up continuously so I am tempted to do so. But not to be sloppy.

Malawi has also ban homosexuality for moral protection. They feel it damages their society.

in what way? They "feel" or they have strong facts?

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

I was talking about "GAY ACTIVITY" I quoted the article, and attacked obasanjo's assertion on homosexuality and comparing it to bestiality. I made no reference to marriage, YOU DID. YOU STARTED THIS INANE ARGUMENT ON POLYGAMOUS MARRIAGE. MARRIAGE AND INTIMACY relations ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS LAST TIME I CHECKED.

When people talk of consent we talk about intimacy not consenting to shoot a friend who is dying from terminal cancer, not consenting to engage in multiple marriage. When people talk of "age of consent" we dont mean the age when you can say yes to anything , we mean the age to "say yes to intimacy."

I apologize- the mistake is mine, assuming everyone understands basic lingo

The question is very simple, why would a government of a free country, engage in interfering in the decision of "two consenting adults" under the pretext of informed consent?

Your argument is too weak!

Worse still when coming from the same person that postulated the assertion:

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

Or was that not YOUR OWN statement?

LOL, At least I have an argument you are just going roundabout. What exactly are your trying to say. Please articulate it clearly. When I spoke of consenting adults i was referring to intimacy not marriage. You are referring to marriage I guess since you are so adamant on polygamy.


Nna bros are you confused- my statement was on the legality of gay intimacy which was the reason the malawi people got imprisoned. I blame myself though for not catching your spurious logic that since polygamy is illegal in the US, then homo activity can be illegal in malawi.

Let me humor your daftness:

The US made polygamy illegal for various, and well presented reasons which was also focused on human rights protection. Go and read up on them. That is also why bestiality is illegal worldwide to protect people. Polygamy is illegal even in several places in Nigeria. It is bad for women especially. Gay marriage does have its demerits too and that's why it has not been fully legalized in most countries.

The question is very simple, why would a government of a free country, engage in interfering in the decision of "two consenting adults" under the pretext of informed consent?

Stop being nitpicky. I used informed consent because usually laws are based after significant and superior debate. One of these arguments would be informed consent. It would not be the only reason the Government would ban polygamy. Euthanasia is also an action done by consenting individuals but it is illegal due to large debates by bio ethicist on the importance of human life.

So I guess you don't realise that since they are from the West, they will carry a prevailing Western ideology.

So lets agree that you misspoke when you said "People who criticize the discrimination against gays are not the "West", they are mainly human rights organizations". As the human rights orgs carry a Western ideology.

I searched the internet, and I finally figured why y'all are adamant on polygamy. Its a rehashed argument but a poor one. Its like comparing oranges to agbalumo. It would be better if you were comparing gay marriage to polygamy.

Then be clear- so western ideology is wrong right? Western Ideology involves logically debate on issues which involve comparing oranges to oranges. Apples to apples. Not "Gay relations" to "polygamous marriage." Around 6 European countries allow gay marriages FYI. In America several states do not recognize gay marriage FYI. There are human right organizations in Africa, in China, in the Middle East- do all these carry western ideologies? Is freedom an exclusively western ideology? Or could it also be a Confucian one? I believe you could find arguments for freedom in African ideology if we actually have one or can construct one.

I ask again- what is your argument because you dont have one.

If you are referring to the Malawi case- you missed the point. They were arrested because they were gay. They engaged in "gay relations" not because they were married. But there is a right to consenting adults engaging in relations under the UN Human rights charter which Malawi signed to. This is therefore a violation of their basic human right. The right to privacy and the right to freedom from discrimination. No this does not have to do with bestiality/zoosexuality as some people claim. "Beasts" cannot make informed consents, and could lead to disease jumps which could threaten society.

I am afraid I don't understand you write up here. This is what I asked you:

LOL, seems you would never understand leave it as it is:

If this is your argument about how polygamy cause limitations on the autonomy of women, then I am afraid I have to agree with Sagamite that you are failing your alma mater.

You claim arrogantly to be an intelligent person but yet are not aware Africans and other peoples have been practicing polygamy before Islam came? Jews practiced polygamy in the past. So did the Chinese.

Since when do governments start self-appointing to determine whether adults have informed consent? Is that philosophical theory that makes you intelligent? What happened to "two consenting adults"? So what stops a government from stopping gay marriage by claiming it is not informed consent since there is frequent injury of anal muscles? I hope you are not a lawyer as you will be thrown out of court with such shallow and inept arguments.

So? Does that mean it is good? Because polygamy is was practiced in the past by the chinese/jews (china/israel have bans on polygamy and they are not the west) that serves as an argument for what?  You are not arguing anything lol. Whats your argument?

I have told you the statement "consenting adults" does not refer to marriage of sorts. It refers to sexual relations. If you cannot tell the difference sorry.

Polygamy affects the autonomy of women. Most women who engage in polygamy are socialized to do so. Period. Go and pick up a book on modern philosophy and autonomy to learn what you need to know why polygamy is bad, and rarely the ideal situation for an woman. If you deny that polygamy as preconceived has been a male construct then you really dont know much.

I am afraid I don't understand you write up here. This is what I asked you:

Your question does not make sense. Consenting adult is an argument for "gay intimacy" not "gay marriage" are you that daft? Let me hammer it again in your head until it penetrates it. Repeat it like a nursery rhyme:

"CONSENTING ADULT IS AN ARGUMENT FOR THE LEGALITY OF GAY S.E.XU.AL RELATIONS. , NOT GAY MARRIAGE. HENCE I CANNOT BRING FALLACIOUS ARGUMENTS LIKE POLYGAMY (A TYPE OF MARRIAGE SYSTEM) INTO THIS DEBATE. MY PREMISE IS WRONG. EVEN MORESO I AM TOTALLY IGNORANT TO ASSUME THAT GAY MARRIAGE IS ACCEPTED IN ALL PARTS OF THE WEST AND IS NOT A HOTLY DEBATED TOPIC. I APOLOGIZE MY IQ IS BELOW THE AVERAGE THRESHOLD"

The Malawi people were not married.

But nike oshinowo is fine, would not mind  

Anyways back to topic

So Gamestart you just wasted time typing lol. Consenting adult as used in the article talks about "gay activity." I dont think there is anything like "polygamous activity" except triple sins or foursomes or whatever. Which is secured in every constitution in the world. I doubt any Nigerian legislator will present otherwise when they prolly engage in double these activities.

ilugunboy:
SEFAGO, see what you moronic friend (Phd man) aka mekusfoolish is writing Here

Abeg I dey come, the people here are boring, the same low IQ arguments. Most dont even know what they are talking about b4 they rush and start typing hehe. Why I like mekusxxxy is that he is actually slightly fun.

Polygamy is a type of marriage and so is gay marriage. Your claims about consenting adults refers to se.x.ua.l activity and not marriage. The "West" was telling the Malawi that these people have the right to "Gay activity  " but not to gay marriage. The "West" where homosexual rights are strongly debated would definitely not make such a suggestion.

Infact which priest will marry two homos in malawi?  

Is it not the case that a lot of Western countries now have same intimacy marriage under the subterfuge - civil union? And those that do not yet, the prevailing agitation by the vocal liberals is for this to exist?

So why will they recognize gay marriage under the "consenting adults" rigmarole (i.e. where it is already in place), but yet have legislations that restrict polygamy using bigamy laws?

They do not recognize gay marriage under the consenting adult clause. You are 100% wrong on this. Arguments on gay marriage have no reference to consenting adults. You noticed I stopped because i was confused at what you were saying . . . the Malawi people did not get married you know, they "announced their engagement" which drew the eyes of the government to them, and put them in trouble. They had been committing the crime but had not yet being "discovered" until they announced it.

Consenting adult means the right to "sex" with each other, you are the one who introduced marriage into this, even Obasanjo caught that part and you cannot. The right for homosexuals to engage with each other is protected in the US but not in Nigeria. Gay marriage is now a different question.

Arguments for Gay marriage is a different cup of tea and is quite complex. An argument for gay marriage has to provide reasons why traditional marriages should include gay marriage. Its more complex in a christian nation like the US, or a very traditional and conservative nation like Nigeria or Malawi. I dont feel like trying today.

Polygamy affects autonomy a lot. Consider this- who are the people who usually practice polygamy in the US- Muslims and fundamentalist Mormons. An intelligent person well versed in standard philosophical theory like I am would catch on to the fact that Muslim women are socialized to engage in polygamy. How many women would really want to engage in polygamy if they were not pressurized by society or family? Is that really informed consent?

When people talk about consent especially when you want to present a court case they talk about infored consent- being aware of the consequences of what you are doing. Modern feminist theory would refute claims that women are authentically polygamous. Polygamy is usually one man and many women. Does this not seem wrong to you?


Further polygamy has adverse effects for the government especially welfare Governments like the UK. The Government does not want to be footing the bill for four wives of a Muslim man who does not have work.

www.californialawreview.org/assets/pdfs/98-1/Richards.pdf

http://hrbriefblog./2010/04/06/human-rights-group-challenges-uganda%E2%80%99s-polygamy-laws/


Human rights groups do challenge polygamy on its harmful grounds to women and as articulated in Article 30 of the Universal declaration of human rights that the US signs to, and including Nigeria, no right should supersede the well being of others. The freedom to practise religion does not entail that you can engage in acts that undermine the autonomy and informed consent of women.

Dede1:
SEFAGO is a disgraceful pervert who tends to exhibit ignorance on the subjects well above his/her pedigree.

Haha I doubt I am pervert. I am actually very prim and proper in character.

It will shock me you do not know that majority of Human Rights organisations are run by the West. And majority of those not run by the West are funded by them.

I will await your explanation of how polygamy cause limitations on the autonomy of women.

If you mean they are run by white people which you collectively call the west then you are correct. if you mean they are funded by the US government or the UK government then you really are hilarious. These Human right agencies also criticize the west.

What do you really mean by the west- do you mean the government or you are referring to the people?

Remember Human Right Organizations are usually NGOs. I live in a place which probably has the largest number of human right organizations in the world so I would know that these guys sit down and criticize everything the US government does. I would not be surprised if there is one that asks for polygamy rights.

ikechukwu is not a girls name lol. Na man FL Gator is wishing upon me. Tufiakwa.

Its going to be Ngozi, or Chioma, or Chi-Chi or something like that. Whatever igbo girls are called nowadays

FL Gators:
We've talked abt this. Its either you're over 6'3 or stinking rich

I am 6'3 on stilts and rich in my heart. 

Anyways playing with you. I just hate it that life dictates that we must get married especially women. Its so silly. ANd then women start worrying when they are in their late 30s about getting married which is so stupid.

why I was thinking of proposing to you ?

lolz- did these internet losers hit a nerve.

major difference between me and sjeezy- I dont plan to marry anyone. Infact i dont plan to marry at all. Women are just too much trouble, and major attention seekers hehe. + and + sign repel 

FL Gators:
You're always saying the same thing sjeezy says. In other threads, not necessarily here.

Dudeee, I didnt expect you to have high standards; Nigerian men beggars cant be choosers.

LOL, ok believe what you want. I dont beg any one lol for anything. Regardless, try and distinguish between me and sjeezy8.

Ok I am clueless, what did I say ?

I am not even that picky right now, and dont have high standards- see how I am nice to you FL Gator (Sefago runs for cover)

If I dont find a Nigerian girl whos mixed with different ethnicities and races like my mother- then im just not going to marry a Nigerian girl-

oedipus complex

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.

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

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

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.