danivon wrote:I wish you would stop expecting everyone to have the same opportunities and luck you did.

For every Carson, you or Kiblawi, how many dozens, tens, or hundreds do not manage to get out?

It was not luck. It was hard work. And lots of it. But you, Sir, are certainly welcome to your opinion.

No, A government should not have the responsibility to ensure all have a high, or even a middle standard of living.

Kind of interesting that you speak of social equality on issues, but did not address the worst violators.

bbauska

No, A government should not have the responsibility to ensure all have a high, or even a middle standard of living.

Are you a proponent of democracy?
In a democracy would you expect that people would vote for their own self interest?
If the vast majority of voters are working class,or middle class .... wouldn't they then vote into power governments that would work to ensure them the opportunities and services that would provide them an acceptable standard of living ?
Should the government, once elected, then ignore the people who elected them and pursue policies that don't deliver on the wishes of the voters?

Where democracies are healthy, and where nations are prospering, its because the needs of the voters are being met. The index I linked you to, makes an attempt to show which nations are succeeding in delivering social progress... Its mostly democracies at the top.
Presumably because they are meeting the needs of their voters.

Am I a proponent of Democracy? Yes.

Do you support the will of the people being followed when voiced in an election?

bbauska

Do you support the will of the people being followed when voiced in an election

As long as the will of the people does not trespass on the individual rights that every citizen should have and usually does have through constitutional protections and bills of rights.
Most modern democracies and many illiberal democracies have such. And those with these rights are ranked higher in the index I provided. (Those who have hateful laws discriminating against gays are obviously not included in this group, and rank lower)
You`ll be familiar with these rights through your own constitutional protections.

Since you are a proponent of democracy you`ll see how your position is contradictory to democracy then .
Unless you think that there are a majority of people some wheres who aren`t interested in their government working to improve their personal circumstance.

What constitutional rights or bill of rights? Does Yemen have that? How about Iran, Perhaps Somalia?

My point is that you denounce the American and Israeli views on certain topics, but do not say anything about Arab nations about the same topics.

Which do you think is worse; the Iranian legal standing on homosexuality or the American legal standing on homosexuality?

Answer my question, and I will answer yours...

Boy thats some tangent Bbbauska But I`ll play a little.

bbauska

What constitutional rights or bill of rights? Does Yemen have that? How about Iran, Perhaps Somalia

Yemen and Somalia are effectively in anarachy. So ...I`ll say no to them.
But Iran
http://www.iranhrdc.org/english/english ... n.html?p=7

Have a read. It may surprise you. (Now whether the rights are always respected is another matter. ...)

There are laws against homosexuality in Iran. Its illegal, as it was in the UK, the US and many other Western nations until the 60s... (Penalty for sodomy is a little severe. death,. I`m sure many would prefer to pay a fine.)
But until 1962 laws against homosexuals were pretty tough in the US.

Prior to 1962, sodomy was a felony in every state, punished by a lengthy term of imprisonment and/or hard labor. In that year, the Model Penal Code (MPC) — developed by the American Law Institute to promote uniformity among the states as they modernized their statutes — struck a compromise that removed consensual sodomy from its criminal code while making it a crime to solicit for sodomy. In 1962 Illinois adopted the recommendations of the Model Penal Code and thus became the first state to remove criminal penalties for consensual sodomy from its criminal code,[4] almost a decade before any other state. Over the years, many of the states that did not repeal their sodomy laws had enacted legislation reducing the penalty. At the time of the Lawrence decision in 2003, the penalty for violating a sodomy law varied very widely from jurisdiction to jurisdiction among those states retaining their sodomy laws. The harshest penalties were in Idaho, where a person convicted of sodomy could earn a life sentence. Michigan followed, with a maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment while repeat offenders got life

There was a gradual liberalization and some states excised their sodomy and homosexual laws. But It wasn`t till 2003 that the SCOTUS actually ruled these laws,still in force in 14 states, unconstitutional. Despite that there are still laws on the books in 17 states against homosexual sex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_law ... ted_States

So Iran does have to catch up to the US. But they haven`t been out of step for all that long... And Its still legal to fire someone in Indiana and other states for being gay... So there`s that...

Honestly though...

Which do you think is worse; the Iranian legal standing on homosexuality or the American legal standing on homosexuality?

If you want to consider the current state of law and protections for minorities, specifically gays and lesbians..
I`d prefer Canada or Sweden or the Netherlands.
Compare versus the highest bar not the lowest.

Great insight into your thoughts. You only compare the countries you disagree with to the ones that are the highest in your opinion, and disregard the rest who are worse. Insightful...

http://www.iranhrdc.org/english/lgbt.html

In the present day world, there is, apparently, still a problem in Iran.

But since you posted the link...
Article 4 [Islamic Principle]

All civil, penal financial, economic, administrative, cultural, military, political, and other laws and regulations must be based on Islamic criteria. This principle applies absolutely and generally to all articles of the Constitution as well as to all other laws and regulations, and the wise persons of the Guardian Council are judges in this matter.

What if the US Constitution stated the same with Christian replacing Islamic? Do you feel the same?

Article 624- If a doctor or midwife or pharmacist or those who act as doctor or midwife or surgeon or pharmacist provide the tools for abortion or perform the abortion, they shall be sentenced to two to five years’ imprisonment, and the diya shall be paid according to the relevant provisions.

What do you think, comparing to the US laws and your outspokenness on abortive rights?

Article 12 [Official Religion]

The official religion of Iran is Islam and the Twelve Ja'fari school, and this principle will remain eternally immutable. Other Islamic schools are to be accorded full respect, and their followers are free to act in accordance with their own jurisprudence in performing their religious rites. These schools enjoy official status in matters pertaining to religious education, affairs of personal status (marriage, divorce, inheritance, and wills) and related litigation in courts of law. In regions of the country where Muslims following any one of these schools constitute the majority, local regulations, within the bounds of the jurisdiction of local councils, are to be in accordance with the respective school, without infringing upon the rights of the followers of other schools.

More questions about your concern about US laws and culture when Iran is so much worse.

My question is why you focus on the US and not Iran when Iran is so much worse with religious persecution?

bbauska

More questions about your concern about US laws and culture when Iran is so much worse.

My question is why you focus on the US and not Iran when Iran is so much worse with religious persecution?

Buddy, you;re the one fixated on comparing everything to the US.

I introduced the social progress index as comparison of 132 countries...
You'll notice that the US ranks higher in the index than Iran. .

A lot of that has to do with personal freedoms.And i recognize that.
But I also recognize that a lot of these personal freedoms in the US, are actually fairly new in practice.
What don't you like about the social progress index that makes you want to fixate on the US?

I think that is where you are wrong. I am trying to learn about you. I have done that. I was not asking about the US's position, but your position in bringing these supposed "evils" of limiting abortion, limiting gay marriage, government health care provision, et al. and disregarding the other nations.

My question is, (and it still remains) why do you bring the "Western democracies" (your quote about Great Britain in 1830, 2nd post of this forum; right after Hacker's) and not talk about the Arab Spring shortcoming regarding Democratic Mandates? (Note the title of forum)

Even after I ask what "democracy or representative democracy that is working in the Middle East" you mention England's Monarchy.

I then mention the shortcomings of the current Middle Eastern cultures.

You brought up the westerner's expectations in your second post, and apparently are surprised that I answer your line of discussion. Perhaps I should just discount what you say and continue on with my own opinion. But that is rude, and I won't do that.

So, I will ask again. Why do you bring the minor shortcomings of a nation, and not discuss a greater shortcoming that someone as bright as you must surely be knowledge of? Is it bias? That would help me understand why you do this. I am not asking you what I think.I am asking you what you think. I am not asking about the Western nations in 1830. I am asking what RickyP's reasons are for being so one-sided.

Help us understand you. After all, we are a community.

Wishing you peace and joy,
- Brad

Boy thats some tangent

Tangents. What would Redscape be without them?

Wishing you peace and joy

Now that on the other hand....

JimHackerMP wrote:

Boy thats some tangent

Tangents. What would Redscape be without them?

Wishing you peace and joy

Now that on the other hand....

And Hacker gets the chuckle of the day!

Yeah, not often I'm the one on here getting the last laugh, lol.

The military in Egypt is unlike the military in any other nation. Its really a business.

Well, Iran, for one. According to Baer, their army within an army--I forget the exact designation--owns grocery stores to produce part of its budget.

bbauska

Why do you bring the minor shortcomings of a nation, and not discuss a greater shortcoming that someone as bright as you must surely be knowledge of?

I haven;t over looked their short comings. Their "short comings are included in the answer i origina
nlly gave you when I defined "working" . (as in a government is working...
I realize its a holisitc answer, and perhaps difficult if you fundamentally disagree, as you seem to, with the purpose and role of government as measured by the socail progress index. (New 2015 index published yesterday.

Democracy devolves power to more people and when functioning ensures that government delivers improved quality of life, liberties and well being to a broad portion of the populace. There have been attempts to measure this ;like the social progress index. You'll note that the countries with the highest showing in this index are established democracies. Usually


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... ress_Index

According to the Social Progress Index only 3 Middle Eastern countries are fairly high in rank.. They rank 37, 39 and 40. One is Israel. The others are the UAE and Kuwait. Israel is democratic (not counting the occupied territories), and the UAE and Kuwait have some liberal institutions and very limited democratic expression...
Tunis and KSA are 65th and 70th. Egypt 84th . Yemen 125 of 132...
A nation as rich as KSA, if it were democratic, would provide greater standard of living to more people if it were democratic... Being a monarchy, like England before democracy, only the elite have real quality of life.... If the middle class held political power perhaps the nation would be like the more developed democracies? I think so.

To help you better understand what I mean, try and compare the various countries on their index . (Baseball stats junkis probably love this stuff too)

http://www.socialprogressimperative.org ... ntries/USA 82.85

http://www.socialprogressimperative.org ... ntries/IRN 56.82

http://www.socialprogressimperative.org ... ntries/SAU 64.27


http://www.socialprogressimperative.org ... ntries/ISR 72.6

http://www.socialprogressimperative.org ... ntries/NOR 88.36

http://www.socialprogressimperative.org ... ntries/CAN 86.89

http://www.socialprogressimperative.org ... ntries/GBR 84.68