Re: Take Back Your Time Day

test5253 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: 

> it is a crime against humanity if you bother to interpret the charters
> of the united nation. 

You are diluting the concept of "crime against humanity". 

Here's the Encarta definition (the other dictionaries give similar 
definitions): 

     crime a·gainst hu·man·i·ty 
 
     noun  
 
     atrocity: a cruel and immoral act, for example, torture, murder, or
     expulsion, committed against a large number of people 

Look at the list of crimes: torture, murder, expulsion. 

Failing to send enough food is not one of them. It's not mentioned
anywhere in any of the definitions of "crime against humanity" I was
able to find. But here's another useful word for you: 

     hy·per·bo·le [ hi púrb?lee ] 
 
     noun  
 
     exaggeration: deliberate and obvious exaggeration used for effect, 
     for example, "I could eat a million of these" 

Calling failing to send humanity could be defended as "hyperbole", but
the person making the claim would need to admit to speaking
hyperbolically when challenged, and no one did that, people just kept
defending the use of the term "crime against humanity" to describe
failing to send enough food. 

> the  individuals are all of us in the developed world. 
> 
> we failed to push our elected officials to help people who die because
> of our consumption and lack of compassion. 

As an aside, if you want to help people in other parts of the world, then do so. 
You don't need to wait for "elected officials" to do it.

> more often than not considered a crime in most societies. 

Bullshit. You can't make voting for the wrong person a "crime"; that would be 
self-contradictory, it wouldn't be a genuine election.

> I'm no judge so I'm in no position to know what punishment if any is 
> "correct" according to yours or any other peoples societys norms. 
> 
> but a fitting punishment would perhaps be that we all either did away 
> with most of our overinflated military expenditures (including jobs in
> the industry) or had to pay taxes enough to better all  the global 
> evironmental, healthproblems and social devastation we've created. 
> 
> history will judge us. 

Who is history, that he will judge us? Future generations will be too concerned 
with their own problems to think much about us. Looking around, even people 
interested in history don't seem to be spending much time passing judgement on 
past societies.

> our only punishment will be the shaming and naming by most generations
> to come more likely than not.