@geobear40 said in Russia rejects European Court of Human Rights order to recognise same-sex unions:
The American Experiment has worked for almost 250 years it is not perfect and it will never be perfect but their is no system in the world that compares to it.
There are other systems that compare to it (even favorably!), many of whom are indeed BASED on the success of the "American Experiment" - but the fact remains that in a "free World" (which is still a goal, not an achievement) people are free to determine their own form of Government - whether built on our example, or not.
It is hubris to dismiss all other governments "out of hand" based solely on your own patriotism - nay, your own experience, which likely includes NO OTHER examples, but certainly does not include ALL other governments!
Correct me if I am wrong but are you assuming all Patriot Americans are poorly educated citizens? Why should matter what other people think about the unique American experience. Why if we are so horrible do so many peoples around the world struggle to come here? It sounds like Liberal elitist's talking points.
You clearly cannot discriminate between being patriotic - and being proud of the achievements of our country - from being arrogant and impudent about the rest of the world.
I would say that qualifies you as an "Ugly American" - (Reference)
I am a proud American... but I am not an arrogant one!
Also, if by "elitist" you mean "educated" and with a reasonable vocabulary, then I'm guilty - 2 Masters, 4 specializations, on faculty (adjunct, but still faculty) at 3 different Universities... yes, I'm educated.
That does not make me smarter than anyone else, but it does mean I've spent more time than the average person LEARNING about things...
So, smarter? no, I would never claim that... no matter how poorly educated you may demonstrate yourself to be...
But, more knowledgeable? it would seem so, in your case anyway...
World politics effect the US since we fund NATO the defense of all those democratic socialists' countries and there would not be a United Nation if the US didn't form it and pay the lion share of it's expenses.
World politics affect the US in many ways, but the effect is usually localized to specific ways. [Gee... if only you had the elitist education to know the correct word to use.]
But, to your intended point (which is as incorrect as your word choice): NATO (as well as the UN) is funded by all member nations. That said, it is certainly true that the US has traditionally paid an outsized share to both organizations. But "outsized" does not mean we pay "most" (much less "all") of the expenses of those organizations - which serve different purposes, I might add...
The UN (United Nations) was formed after WW-II... we (the allies who beat the German Kaiser) tried to make one after WW-I. It was called the League of Nations... in spite of strong support from the US, the League of Nations failed because not enough other nations agreed with us and joined... still, the fact that the League of Nations failed serves as a perfect example of how the US could not unilaterally "form it", as you have proposed.
It took a collaboration of ALL of the winning Allied Powers after WW-II to make it happen, and currently 193 member states belong (with only a half-dozen or so either choosing to not belong - e.g. the Vatican - or, being denied membership by some other country - e.g. Taiwan & Palestine). Without a near-complete world buy-in to the UN, it just wouldn't work! The League of Nations proves that!
I don't yet see were the actual content police have commented on my posts.
While there are other staffers in the Forum, by far the biggest "policeman" is @raphjd - he's "the boss" 'round here!
But, this is the politics section... there are VERY FEW rules here!
Thus, my statement was rhetorical...
I am not upset in the least with what Russia is doing. But it goes to trust of the Russian government. If they won't honor the Treaty then they should withdrawal from it.
The Treaty agreed to certain principles. It did not give "legal jurisdiction" to the EU Courts. Honestly, no non-EU country would agree to such a thing... not the US, not the Chinese, not the Russians!
If you ask the Russians, they are abiding by the treaty - their interpretation of it.
This is often a major problem with International Treaties: enforcement!
No I don't support your agreement. The US adheres to the treaties they ratified.
Sadly, the rest of the World disagrees with you... but certainly, from our own viewpoint (just as the Russians do as I noted above), we claim as much!
So there you go... the US does whatever it wants, ignoring international treaties along the way, and then claims later that "in some way" we're compliant.... and Russia does the same thing!
No enforcement mechanism = worthless treaties!