The Empire of Pretantia wrote:Chestaan wrote:
Not killing gay people is not a bad thing because it says it is on a piece of paper. It is on that piece of paper because it is a bad thing.
Didn't say anything about killing them.
They can choose whatever leader they like. What they can't do is commit human rights abuses. This really isn't hard. I'm for self-determination because it is democratic and there is no good reason to oppose it. I'm opposed to having governments ban religions or homosexuality, even if they want to, because they are human rights abuses.
You continue to claim to be for self determination despite including multiple exceptions.Is breaking free from Spain a human rights abuse?
I never argued that.But anyway, you're all for self-determination when it suits you.
I'm for self determination? That's funny coming from the guy arguing for self determination while also arguing voting for positions you don't like isn't self determination.
Killing them, banning them. Its all human rights abuses. But in any case you are deflecting. Banning homosexuality isn't bad because a piece of paper says so, the piece of paper says so because it is bad.
Its really quite simple. I like democracy and I think democracy is a good thing. Self-determination of a nation gets a plus because it's democratic and there are no negatives. Hence people should be allowed self-determination to have their own nation. Enacting laws that ban religion by popular vote get a plus because democracy but a huge negative because they violate basic human rights. Hence, as the negatives outweigh the positives, expect other nations to sanction you if you bring these laws into place.
If self-determination to choose your nation was a human rights abuse I would oppose it, since it's not I don't.
And yep, you support self-determination because you support US freedom from Britain. I'm keen to question you more on this but you seem to be avoiding this line of questioning like the plague. I wonder why?






Would you kindly? 