US doesn't recognize the right for food

[abiMrsRock]

Draft resolution XX on the right to food, approved on 24 November by a recorded vote of 180 in favour to 1 against ( United States), with no abstentions, would have the Assembly reaffirm that hunger constitutes an outrage and a violation of human dignity, requiring the adoption of urgent measures at the national, regional and international level, for its elimination. (Press Releases GA/SHC/3940 and GA/SHC/3941)

Question: Why does the US consistently vote against some of the most seemingly harmless UN humanitarian resolutions such as this one. Occasionally it gets the backing of Israel and sometimes Canada/Australia but it's equally often to see the US voting alone against the world. These voting decisions are rarely discussed or mentioned in the mainstream media. Do these resolutions really contain a hidden anti-US bias?

[Renatus]

Can you provided a link to the article?

[Alan]

Of course they don't. But meh, this was from 2002.

[CptSternn]

Under bush the US was removed from the Human Rights commission at the UN due to their voting policies. They voted against banning torture, voted against a motion to ban child abuse, and of course, the above where they voted that food is not a necessity.

That has changed now. But if you look back through the previous presidencies you will see a trend. When republicans are in office (bush, bush 2, regan) they always take a very different stance in the UN than their democratic counterparts.

It just goes to show certain countries and ideas only get promoted when certain groups are in power.

[Onyx]

Originally Posted by CptSternn

Under bush the US was removed from the Human Rights commission at the UN due to their voting policies. They voted against banning torture, voted against a motion to ban child abuse, and of course, the above where they voted that food is not a necessity.

That has changed now. But if you look back through the previous presidencies you will see a trend. When republicans are in office (bush, bush 2, regan) they always take a very different stance in the UN than their democratic counterparts.

It just goes to show certain countries and ideas only get promoted when certain groups are in power.

With the exception of our votes in regards to Israel in the UNSC. When it comes to those votes it doesn't make a difference who is in office.

[alchemie]

I'm not surprised. There are some people here that don't believe health care is a right for our own people. It seems to get crappier and crappier here....

[Alan]

Seven years ago we denied in front of the whole world that food is a right and hunger a violation of human dignity.
Now the government is instating moderately acceptable healthcare reforms.
And 'it seems to get crappier and crappier'?

[Shadowslayer81]

I think universal health care is a good thing, even though i'm conservative. The problem is that most countries that have it have poor implentations of it where they have to ration to keep the cost down. The only one that i think is actually good it the one Germany has which is a hybrid system with basic care for free and more complicated stuff requiring insurance. After all most people only need basic care till they're old and gimpy.
The US healthcare reform started out as not bad, till they watered it down and tossed in payoffs for various people and generally made it a shadow of what it was suppose to be. Also they slashed Medicare coverage to help pay for all of this. See I work in the IT department of a rather large clinic and get to see how the backend of how this works. To get paid for stuff covered under medicare is already like dealing with the DMV x10 now its not covering things it used too. Good example is a cardiac test that involves scanning somebody's heart to make sure its working fine. Our cardiac doctors need it for diagnosing things so they don't have to guess. Well thats not covered anymore under medicare, and doctors definitely are not going to just guess as that would get you sued. So they're planning on not seeing patients with those sorts of problems under medicare. Out of 20 docs only 11 of them see Medicare patients because the other don't want to deal with the hassles of not getting paid because of a x wasn't completely in the check box, among other nonsense. Now it will be less, and I might possibly loose my job as lots of our revenue comes from Medicare patients.

The point is you can compromise with healthcare you either spend the money on it or you don't.

[Alan]

We've talked about healthcare before, but this isn't a thread about healthcare.

[PortraitOfSanity]

Hey let the man speak.

Stupid people trying to be idealists amuse me.

[the-nihilist]

We need to stop those eskimos... or as I like to call them: the snow Mexicans, from taking all our jobs!