| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Short Attention Span Theater- |
| U.N. OKs Call to Ban Human Cloning |
| 2005-03-10 |
| UNITED NATIONS — The U.N. General Assembly (search) on Tuesday approved a nonbinding resolution that seeks to ban human cloning, capping a four-year struggle that saw divided governments abandon efforts for stronger action. {SNIP} How each nation voted from UN website: Vote on Declaration on Human Cloning The United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning (document A/59/516/Add.1) was adopted by a recorded vote of 84 in favour to 34 against, with 37 abstentions, as follows: In favor: Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brunei Darussalam, Burundi, Chile, Comoros, Costa Rica, CÃŽte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Georgia, Germany, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lesotho, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Madagascar, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Mexico, Federated States of Micronesia, Monaco, Morocco, Nicaragua, Palau, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, San Marino, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Sudan, Suriname, Switzerland, Tajikistan, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Timor-Leste, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, United States, Uzbekistan, Zambia. Against: Belarus, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Canada, China, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Gabon, Iceland, India, Jamaica, Japan, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Republic of Korea, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, Tonga, United Kingdom. Abstain: Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Barbados, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Colombia, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Malaysia, Maldives, Mongolia, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Oman, Pakistan, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Serbia and Montenegro, Somalia, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, Uruguay, Yemen, Zimbabwe. Absent: Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Bhutan, Botswana, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Dominica, Fiji, Gambia, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Libya, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mozambique, Nauru, Niger, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Russian Federation, Senegal, Seychelles, Swaziland, Togo, Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Vietnam. |
| Posted by:BigEd |
| #6 And if I meant "Communist regimes" or "dictatorships" I would have said that So which characteristic of China, Cuba and the DPRK, were you referring to? If, among thirty-something nations, you choose to mention the three that share a specific characteristic, you shouldn't blame other people for making assumptions. comments are not necessarily arguments. Some of them are just jabs, hmm? Btw, I don't have your email or I'd have done this in private, but I'd like to apologize for the "Have a nice death" of a few days ago. I read something in the Screwtape letters that made me reconsider the viewpoint of the various attacks/curses against whole continents and nations -- I always saw attacks against groups of millions as a million times worse than attacks against individuals. Anyway, a chapter in the Screwtape Letters made me consider that the expression of abstract hatred on people that they'll never meet may not be always as harmful as similar expression on specific individuals one knows. Mind you, I still disagree with such logic, but I now understand why some people may have found it horrible that I reduced the range of my attack to the specific one person rather than generalize and made it abstract. So, anyway, I apologize for that comment. Btw, why is Greece absent? Inherently apathetic? Having a government that exemplifies "wimpy", I think. |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2005-03-10 9:30:52 PM |
| #5 I removed "pathetic", "twit", and a few other choice words from my first draft of #3. Didn't want to upset the lad. He has enough problems as it is. |
| Posted by: Tom 2005-03-10 9:25:03 PM |
| #4 Tom, it may be inherently pathetic, the jury is still out on this one. ;-) |
| Posted by: Sobiesky 2005-03-10 9:17:00 PM |
| #3 My comment was a comment, not an "argument". And if I meant "Communist regimes" or "dictatorships" I would have said that. You still don't understand that threads and comments are not necessarily arguments. Btw, why is Greece absent? Inherently apathetic? |
| Posted by: Tom 2005-03-10 9:14:20 PM |
| #2 Probably because Communist regimes may very well be tyrannical, but (unlike the Islamofascists)they don't tend to be inherently anti-science as well. Anyway your argument's nonsensical. Dictatorships exist on both sides of the issue: I might just as well say that there are some folk on the "in favour" list that ought to be wondering why they are there with the likes of Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Uzbekistan. Btw, why are some countries in bold? |
| Posted by: Aris Katsaris 2005-03-10 8:58:32 PM |
| #1 There are some folks on the "against" list that ought to be wondering why they are there with the likes of China, Cuba, and the DPRK. |
| Posted by: Tom 2005-03-10 8:40:47 PM |