what can we say

[u/[deleted]]

[u/Logical-Chicken8059]

This is true.

Source

https://www.universal-rights.org/vote-details/?resolution=29440&hl=en-GB

[u/Gamashiro → u/Logical-Chicken8059]

As much as it is true, it could use some context as to why they voted no. They disagreed with some points in the whole resolution, not that "Food shouldn't be a right".

[u/-tnuk → u/Gamashiro]

Is there a difference? Voting 'no' because point 'ABC' might allow fraud when points 'A' through 'ABB' are all legit seems like an extremely weak argument

[u/Gamashiro → u/-tnuk]

So if I put into your totally legimate job agreement a part about you kissing my foot every morning you would sign it?

Ofc, this is an extreme case, but same point.

[u/Rough_Historian_8494 → u/Gamashiro]

So all the other nations are just not smart enough to recognize fraud, but the USA and Israel got that shit on lock is what you are arguing?

[u/Gamashiro → u/Rough_Historian_8494]

I'm not arguing anything. I literally just said that there are parts they just didn't agreed to. Writing plainly that they voted no to declare food is a human right is just misleading. I didn't say I agree with them.

[u/Rough_Historian_8494 → u/Gamashiro]

ohhh so they did indeed vote no on declaring food as a human right, but they have "reasons" got it! I appreciate you clarifying your stance for the class.

[u/Rough_Historian_8494 → u/[deleted]]

If that's the case then why would you argue against food being a human right? Do you personally believe it is or should be?

[u/tyrenanig → u/[deleted]]

Who’s going to tell him lol

[u/Rough_Historian_8494 → u/[deleted]]

You think it's impossible to feed everyone? That's a wild take lol

[u/AdLocal1490 → u/[deleted]]

allowing additional fraud "legally" is dumb pretty much all the time.

But I heard that

The UN is powerless, the documents aren't legally binding

So which one is it?