The UN General Assembly approved a Canadian draft resolution Tuesday expressing "deep concern" at alleged human rights violations in Iran, including torture, flogging, amputations, stoning and public executions.
The 192-member world body adopted the resolution by a vote of 73-53 with 55 abstentions.
The resolution is not legally binding, but carries moral weight and reflects the majority view of world opinion.
The resolution was introduced by Canada and backed by the United States and other Western countries. It was opposed by many countries whose human rights records have been criticized and who object to the General Assembly targeting specific countries, including Cuba, North Korea, Sudan, Syria and Zimbabwe.
The resolution expresses "very serious concern" that despite previous assembly resolutions on human rights in Iran, there have been "confirmed instances" of violations including the use of stoning as a method of execution, "torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including flogging and amputations," and multiple public executions.
The resolution calls on the government "to eliminate, in law and practice, all forms of discrimination and other human rights violations" against minorities.
It also calls on Iran to abolish public executions and stoning and "to end the harassment, intimidation and persecution of political opponents and human rights defenders, including by releasing persons imprisoned arbitrarily or on the basis of their political views."
To me personally stonning people to death etc. isn't something I am for promoting, but what they are extreme on in some cases, we are slack and vice versa.
Where someone can be whipped or jailed for visual modesty and gender seperation violations we can think are harsh or too strong for the crime, yet in our society, objectifying women and looks is the norm.... where does this bring us to?
And in other aspects, we can also seem quite slack where in our culture, someone who goes out and molests children or rapes, may only get a few months in jail and they're back on the street, but somehow this is acceptable punishment?
If the people of Iran or any other country don't like how their lives are being run, then they can alway move to another country that suits them, or they can step up their game and try and make change within their countries.
Which is the big problem. We have our own leaders saying people in a paticular country are oppressed and want our help..... but if they have not first attempted to make major change on their own, then how do we know this? A perfect example would have been the incident a month or so ago in relation to the Monks fighting for democracy. That would be a situation which could be justified to be stepping in for..... but situations where we point our fingers at Iran, or Iraq for their way of life, just doesn't work.
We all heard the story about going into Iraq to take out Saddam and give these people democracy and a great life.... yet national polls state they feel their lives were much better off before the invasion, that they didn't have to fear about getting blown up just from walking down the streets.... and basically they've lived their way of life for so long, it's starting to be clear that democracy isn't working very well for them at this stage.
So what's the point in villianizing other countries on details that we do not agree on? It's their country, not ours.... and it'd be no different then them trying to tell us to all wear Hijabs or what have you..... we wouldn't listen to them, so why would they listen to this?