250d
The European Court for Human Rights is deciding on this issue today.
3 different cases are being decided on today. All three (from seperate groups) accuse governments of not doing enough to curb the effects of climate change and that this is endangering their human rights.
What the court decides is binding for countries in the EU. And, obviously, this could have an impact on current policies.
I find it intriguing, not really because of the climate thing, but that an issue such as climate could be used to bolster human rights.
Say the court decides in favour of the accusers, does this not then open a door to wider cases, which could have the judiciary demanding political action (rather than politics deciding the judicial framework)?
For example: selling weapons to Israel, Russia or Ukraine. One could argue that this is a crime against humanity as well.
So, essentially, you can use the court system to direct policy, rather than the voting booth.
Is it a good thing or a bad thing?
I reckon in this case, that the court will be deciding if countries aren’t adhering to treaties (international law) or something. That I can see. If you sign up to a treaty, it is binding.
But I’m not sure if that’s what they are doing. Perhaps they are literally deciding on action vs human rights? And then I feel that it’s overstepping something.
What do you think?
@shavixmir saidNothing the European Court for Blah-de-Blah or the International Court for This-and-That says matters to me. The reason is we don't have a global Democracy.
The European Court for Human Rights is deciding on this issue today.
3 different cases are being decided on today. All three (from seperate groups) accuse governments of not doing enough to curb the effects of climate change and that this is endangering their human rights.
What the court decides is binding for countries in the EU. And, obviously, this could have an im ...[text shortened]... g on action vs human rights? And then I feel that it’s overstepping something.
What do you think?
I want a global Democracy. I want the UN to have a Constitution with a bill of rights. I want there to be separation of powers, checks and balances, independent judicial review.
I also want democratic innovations like single-issue legislation and ranked choice voting.
I want to elect my UN representatives. I want representatives from countries that do not have free and fair elections (i.e. dictatorships) not to be seated.
On the world court level, I want court cases to be tried within 30 days and motions to be limited by the rule of: "You have three motions. If a motion is accepted, you get another. After 3 rejections, you have no more." I want appellate reviews to be completed within 30 days.
Treaties are not a substitute for world government. Only once we have a world democratic government will I accept the authority of courts on "world" issues.
EDIT: And of course get rid of the UN Security Council. What a travesty.
250d
@shavixmir saidWhat do you think?
The European Court for Human Rights is deciding on this issue today.
3 different cases are being decided on today. All three (from seperate groups) accuse governments of not doing enough to curb the effects of climate change and that this is endangering their human rights.
What the court decides is binding for countries in the EU. And, obviously, this could have an im ...[text shortened]... g on action vs human rights? And then I feel that it’s overstepping something.
What do you think?
I think the court will do its best to find fair legal rulings, but considering the way the world is today it's nearly impossible to solve one problem without creating 3 more as a result of doing so. I don't envy those judges. 😕
250d
@spruce112358 saidIt might not matter to you, but treaties are binding and above national law. And the court’s rulings are binding to EU countries.
Nothing the European Court for Blah-de-Blah or the International Court for This-and-That says matters to me. The reason is we don't have a global Democracy.
I want a global Democracy. I want the UN to have a Constitution with a bill of rights. I want there to be separation of powers, checks and balances, independent judicial review.
I also want democratic innovatio ...[text shortened]... ourts on "world" issues.
EDIT: And of course get rid of the UN Security Council. What a travesty.
250d
@spruce112358 saidOne of the great things about there being different rules all over the world is that those that manage some travel get to see country A regulates the hell out of 'X' but they're free and easy on 'Y', then in country B it's 180 degrees opposite, the control freaks are stomping on 'Y' but they forgot about 'X'.
Nothing the European Court for Blah-de-Blah or the International Court for This-and-That says matters to me. The reason is we don't have a global Democracy.
I want a global Democracy. I want the UN to have a Constitution with a bill of rights. I want there to be separation of powers, checks and balances, independent judicial review.
I also want democratic innovatio ...[text shortened]... ourts on "world" issues.
EDIT: And of course get rid of the UN Security Council. What a travesty.
That's part of the reason I'm a libertarian, and when you speak to citizens of country A, many of them are brain washed into the controls on 'X', they're surprised there are countries where such and such is totally legal and society has not fallen apart nor succumbed to the bogeymens invented by the state in the name of control.
For eg, in NZ motor vehicle insurance is not compulsory, but just a few hours away in Aus, or slightly further, the US and the UK, it is. It's a fuggin great scam, the insurance Co's have bought that influence, they've paid for it, now they're going to make you pay.
@shavixmir saidI went to the link, to save others time, here is a summary:
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-68768598
The BBC reports that the energy that went into producing shag doodys extensive XXXL latex donkey dick dildo collection is enough to run 3 hospitals in Kenya.
250d
@shavixmir saidTreaties are not binding since there is no way to realistically penalize violating them. They are not a substitute for Democracy.
It might not matter to you, but treaties are binding and above national law. And the court’s rulings are binding to EU countries.
250d
@wajoma saidNew Jersey does not allow motorists to pump their own gas (i.e. self-service).
One of the great things about there being different rules all over the world is that those that manage some travel get to see country A regulates the hell out of 'X' but they're free and easy on 'Y', then in country B it's 180 degrees opposite, the control freaks are stomping on 'Y' but they forgot about 'X'.
That's part of the reason I'm a libertarian, and when you speak ...[text shortened]... e insurance Co's have bought that influence, they've paid for it, now they're going to make you pay.
This monstrous violation of my human rights is why I refuse to buy gas in New Jersey.
Sometimes 'local control' is just bizarre! 🙂
250d
@spruce112358 saidControl freaks gotta control freak.
New Jersey does not allow motorists to pump their own gas (i.e. self-service).
This monstrous violation of my human rights is why I refuse to buy gas in New Jersey.
Sometimes 'local control' is just bizarre! 🙂
- Joined
- 09 Sep 10
- Moves
- 2501
250d
2 edits
Firemen arrived to a building on fire and they only focused their attention on one end of the building. About 10 percent of the building was saved and the rest of the building burned to the ground.
In that example the firemen represent the 'western world' and they think they did a good job.
The rest of the building represents China, India, Pakistan and some surrounding countries.
I'm so tired of seeing these people refusing to address the real polluters of the world. Are they worried they will be called racist? What is the reason they don't go after the real polluters?
249d
@averagejoe1 saidMarch 2024 was the hottest March on record.
@Fartacus
Has it been summarily concluded that Climate is changing for the worse? Or just the UN intergovernmental panel just talking all the time? I recall that many responsible scientists are not in agreement.
February 2024 was the hottest February on record.
January 2024 was the hottest January on record
December 2023 was the hottest December on record.
...
June 2023 was the hottest June on record.
10 months where EVERY MONTH is the record breaking month.
Let's say we have been recording temperatures for 100 years (it's longer; but let's just say). 'March' has happened 100 times over those years. So that means, in a stable climate, March has 1 chance in 100 to "beat the record."
What's the chance that you beat the record 10 times in a row?!?
Yeah. It's getting hotter. Why? Well... {Ford F-350 go BRRRRR!!!} Let's just say it's hotter that it used to be.
- Joined
- 09 Sep 10
- Moves
- 2501
249d
@averagejoe1 saidI don't agree with the climate weirdos.
@Fartacus
Has it been summarily concluded that Climate is changing for the worse? Or just the UN intergovernmental panel just talking all the time? I recall that many responsible scientists are not in agreement.
The planet has been changing its temperature since its beginning. Up and Down.
I just can't stand these virtue signaling clowns that are too scared to go after the worst polluters like China.
I can't use a plastic straw but a billionaire gets to use a private jet constantly.
🤡 🌎
249d
1 edit
@fartacus saidIt should be getting colder... the ice age *was* coming.
I don't agree with the climate weirdos.
The planet has been changing its temperature since its beginning. Up and Down.
I just can't stand these virtue signaling clowns that are too scared to go after the worst polluters like China.
I can't use a plastic straw but a billionaire gets to use a private jet constantly.
🤡 🌎
I'm not unhappy that it has been cancelled.
But we don't have a grip on what we did. Nor how to stop the increase.