• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the European Union a good thing?

Is the European Union a good thing?

  • Total voters
    28
  • Poll closed .
Inferno said:
Yes this is true. The common good is where we fall short. We do everything we can to stay at opposite ends of everything. Time to join hands and work as a world.
Click to expand...

Del, there are to many people in the world to work together for anything. I think religion this show us that people do not work well together even when the god they pray to is the same god.
 
Inferno said:
We should have made them stronger to temper the ignorance of the voting public.
Click to expand...

No.....wow, fascist much?

They should have term limits for sure, lifetime appointments are BS. And there should be some way by which the People can directly remove them; say if 80% vote to oust a judge, he's gone. It has to be a high percentage, but it should be there. Make the judges more accountable to the People.
 
As soon as the human species roundly rejects socialism, populism, collectivism, multiculturalism, religious fundamentalism, and statism I will welcome a one-world government, until then, I will die before I submit to its authority.
 
Lopettaa said:
Democracy is fine but it is to have all element to work in a government that is difficult. How can you get democracy to work for people if the people they don't work for democracy?
Click to expand...

Democracy is mob rule Jefferson was right. It has to be tempered by strong laws that cannot be voted down easily.
 
Inferno said:
WHY?........................ Is there a reason?
Click to expand...

It champions individual liberty and decentralizes government power by subordinating it to the will of the people.
 
Ikari said:
No.....wow, fascist much?

They should have term limits for sure, lifetime appointments are BS. And there should be some way by which the People can directly remove them; say if 80% vote to oust a judge, he's gone. It has to be a high percentage, but it should be there. Make the judges more accountable to the People.
Click to expand...

Democracy is mob rule. Laws are the stable structure that the framework of a nation is built. The laws need to be held as the highest power. Not some silly straw vote by imbeciles that think Lesbians and gays will destroy marriage ad institution that has already failed. Rights are rights and judges need to be in place to define such laws.

No not fascist a realist and a Utopian socialist that knows that most people haven't the brains to come in from the rain without being instructed. That is how 47M people voted for Bush a second time because people are basically ignorant to what is going on.
 
Ethereal said:
As soon as the human species roundly rejects socialism, populism, collectivism, multiculturalism, religious fundamentalism, and statism I will welcome a one-world government, until then, I will die before I submit to its authority.
Click to expand...

Do you actually know what all of those forms of rule are?
 
Inferno said:
WHY?........................ Is there a reason?
Click to expand...
Yes. Three words: "We the People".

President Reagan said it better than I ever will:

"Ours was the first revolution in the history of mankind that truly reversed the course of government, and with three little words: 'We the people.' 'We the people' tell the government what to do, it doesn't tell us. 'We the people' are the driver, the government is the car. And we decide where it should go, and by what route, and how fast. Almost all the world's constitutions are documents in which governments tell the people what their privileges are. Our Constitution is a document in which 'We the people' tell the government what it is allowed to do. 'We the people' are free. This belief has been the underlying basis for everything I've tried to do these past eight years."
Click to expand...
Consider the Preamble to the Treaty of Lisbon:
HIS MAJESTY THE KING OF THE BELGIANS,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC,
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF DENMARK,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA,
THE PRESIDENT OF IRELAND,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE HELLENIC REPUBLIC,
HIS MAJESTY THE KING OF SPAIN,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA,
HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE GRAND DUKE OF LUXEMBOURG,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF HUNGARY,
THE PRESIDENT OF MALTA,
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF THE NETHERLANDS,
THE FEDERAL PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF AUSTRIA,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE PORTUGUESE REPUBLIC,
THE PRESIDENT OF ROMANIA,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC,
THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF FINLAND,
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF SWEDEN,
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN
IRELAND,
DESIRING to complete the process started by the Treaty of Amsterdam and by the Treaty of Nice with a view to enhancing the efficiency and democratic legitimacy of the Union and to improving the coherence of its action,
HAVE RESOLVED to amend the Treaty on European Union, the Treaty establishing the European Community and the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and to this end have designated as their Plenipotentiaries:
Click to expand...
Thus from its very beginning the Treaty of Lisbon is government(s) reaching down to dictate rights, privileges, and powers from on high.

Consider the closing paragraph of the Preamble to the Constitution of the People's Republic of China:
This Constitution, in legal form, affirms the achievements of the struggles of the Chinese people of all nationalities and defines the basic system and basic tasks of the state; it is the fundamental law of the state and has supreme legal authority. The people of all nationalities, all state organs, the armed forces, all political parties and public organizations and all enterprises and institutions in the country must take the Constitution as the basic standard of conduct, and they have the duty to uphold the dignity of the Constitution and ensure its implementation.
Click to expand...
In China, the civic duty flows from the people to government, not from the government to the people.

We can argue the imperfections of the US Constitution ad infitum, but we can never deny the reality that such argument persists because of three little words: "We the People".
 
Ethereal said:
Indeed I do, hence my rejection of their implementation.
Click to expand...

Really okay i will take your word for that. I will stick with socialism because i think it is far and away better. The road to socialism is through a failed America I think and we are at the cusp of Americas greatness. The star has tarnished and we will become what we become and i think that will be better than what we were.
 
Inferno said:
Democracy is mob rule. Laws are the stable structure that the framework of a nation is built. The laws need to be held as the highest power. Not some silly straw vote by imbeciles that think Lesbians and gays will destroy marriage ad institution that has already failed. Rights are rights and judges need to be in place to define such laws.
Click to expand...

What we have is a Democratic Republic, but even in a Republic there has to be some way for the People to exert pressure onto the government. What you have described here is the definition of oligopoly. You are defining things through the State and that is a sure sign of fascism. The State must recognize our rights and uphold our free exercise there of. But what you are saying is that the Courts need to legislate and define what is right and what is wrong. Strictly speaking, their role is not to legislate but to watch the other two branches and prevent those two branches from doing something they cannot. They do not make policy, they merely say if an Executive Order or a piece of Legislation is proper and within the confines of the Constitution. What you want is oligopoly dominated by a few who are untouchable by the People. That is very very dangerous fascism, it's nothing I can support.
 
Lopettaa said:
It is Religion keep more people apart and to fight then anything alse in the world. Nationalism is not near as bad to separate people then religion.
Click to expand...

It's not religion, it's people.

If religion, borders etc disappeared tomorrow I guarantee in a week or so we would find something else to fight about. It is just human nature.
 
Ikari said:
What we have is a Democratic Republic, but even in a Republic there has to be some way for the People to exert pressure onto the government. What you have described here is the definition of oligopoly. You are defining things through the State and that is a sure sign of fascism. The State must recognize our rights and uphold our free exercise there of. But what you are saying is that the Courts need to legislate and define what is right and what is wrong. Strictly speaking, their role is not to legislate but to watch the other two branches and prevent those two branches from doing something they cannot. They do not make policy, they merely say if an Executive Order or a piece of Legislation is proper and within the confines of the Constitution. What you want is oligopoly dominated by a few who are untouchable by the People. That is very very dangerous fascism, it's nothing I can support.
Click to expand...

I want a system of laws that morons can't vote for something stupid and change the rights of others. I don't want idiots to be voting changing your rights or mine. That is what I am saying. I what courts that enforce laws not write laws.

I do not want a fascist society. I want what it says in the ruling documents to be followed . That is exactly what you want. Don't tell me that we are thinking differently on this point. You want the laws of the land followed, is that true? Yes or No would be the answer. Not telling me what i am thinking and what I am not thinking. Do you want the constitution followed. Yes or No. If your answer is yes we are on the same page.
 
The EU is guud eaten:)
 
My hope for the Future of Europe: A United Federal Europe.

I am a dual citizen of the USA and Germany. I like the idea of a united Europe. The first step to getting people to start thinking about what the world needs rather than just what their country needs is to see continents unite. The continent that is closest to this is of course Europe. My vision for this is based on a combination of how the United Kingdom and the United States are organized:

Captial: Brussels

Anthem: "Est Europa nunc unita" Latin for "Europe is United Now." Set to the tune of "Ode to Joy"

Flag: Blue background with 12 gold stars arranged upright in a clock circle

Relations between member-states: These states are independant in relation with one another. Issues that pertain to only one of these member-states are to be handled by that state's government, with no input from the European Federation's government. Disputes between two or more states are mediated by the European Court of Justice, which is now the European Federation's supreme court.

Legislative Branch: The legislative branch consists of the European Parliament (elected by direct popular vote, representation proportioned by population) and the European Council (appointed by state legislatures, equal representation). These two institution form a bicameral legislative branch called the European Congress. This institution by only pass laws that pertain to atleast two member-states, not just one. Laws passed by the Congress can not be vetoed by the European President, but they can but nullified by the European Court of Justice.

Executive branch: The executive branch consists of the European Commision (appointed by state executive heads), which becomes the adisory board of the European President (elected by direct popular vote). This branch is in charge of carrying out the laws passed by the European Congress. This branch is also in charge of creating European Foreign policy with the consent of the EC, such as drafting treaties.

Judicial Branch: The judicial branch consists of the European Court of Justice, which serves as the supreme court of the European Federation. This is the final court of appeal for cases pertaining to two or more states of the Federation. The Court also serves as a mediator between disputes between two or more state governments. Cases pertaining to only one state can not be heard in the European Court of Justice. The final court of appeal in these cases are the supreme court of the state in question.

National Identity: While the European Federation has one representative in international political organizations such as the United Nations, the individual member-states can retain their identity in two main ways. 1) The member-states can keep their national anthem and national flag. 2) Member-states compete separately in international sporting competitions such as the FIFA World Cup and the Olympics.

In the face of growing animosity and agressive nationalism (Pakistan vs. India), Europe must become an example of how nations that were once major rivals (Germany vs. France) can look past the animosity and become partners. I am not just a German or an American or even a European. I am a human and a citizen of the world. We must take steps to create a world order based on cooperation rather than competition, and the next step is getting nations to set aside pride and fully work together.
 
C. Gerstle said:
The European Union has provided a common market for European goods and has increased the standard of living in many of the member-states. Many "Eurosceptics," however, fear that as the EU's central government grows stronger as the organization evolves, the member-states lose their independance and their individual national identity.

What do you think?
Click to expand...

EU is good for economic benefits. No doubt.
But no to a United, federal Europe.
 
Europe could be a superpower that can surpass the United States. The pieces are there. All we need is a push and then Europe can realize its full potential.
 
C. Gerstle said:
Europe could be a superpower that can surpass the United States. The pieces are there. All we need is a push and then Europe can realize its full potential.
Click to expand...
No offense, dude, but no thanks on that.

The last time Europe had a "push" like that an Austrian runt touched off a World War.
 
celticlord said:
No offense, dude, but no thanks on that.

The last time Europe had a "push" like that an Austrian runt touched off a World War.
Click to expand...

And that was Europe's fault for pushing Germany down.
 
I will be happy when Croatia, then Serbia join Slovenia in the family, followed by Turkey it is happening.

The dead ottomans can turn in their graves, the nationalists pizda's in Croatia and Serbia can rot, and the little englanders can read the Mail and Telegraph fall asleep and dream of our lost colonies:lol:

Can you imagine peace and stability in the Balkans:2party:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom