What is your addition to the INTERNATIONAL Constitution we are pretending here to write?

Question

Pretend you are part of the U.N. Pretend you are writing a constitution (I encourage EVERYONE to share this question with as many people as you can on other sites).
What would HAVE to be on it? What would you insist on? Make it general, not nation specific. Make it workable, with reasons. I REQUEST (not demand) that people avoid commentary on other's additions. Just post an alternate idea, so we save space and reading effort. My answers sometimes upset people. Who cares! Use my question as a chance to share your view of what should go into an international constitution and bill of rights. I love free speech, but as I am asking, I refuse to add my favorite. You make it!

Let's see if we can get enough of these pretend constitutions out there that it sparks some thought in our leaders, on all sides of the Earth!

Thank you, I had totally forgotten about the U.N.'s former efforts, but my question stands. What would you put into the CONSTITUTION, which would include a bill of rights (perhaps the one already done), as a constitution covers the structuring of the government, not just the rights of the citizens. I'll look it up to refamiliarize myself, as I totally forgot about it. Thanks.

Answer 1

You may not be aware that there is already a Universal Declaration of Human Rights -- see source. (BTW, the Chair of the committee that wrote it was none other than Eleanor Rosevelt.)

Members of the UN have signed off on it.

Unfortunately, signatory countries don't necessarily abide by it. One of its provisions is that its existence and content be promulgated in public school systems.

Check it out.

Answer 2

i'm tempted to imagine this is a shaggy dog tale, or that you're a republican spending their time posting inquiries to make democrats look stupid. yet i am going to objective to respond to assuming its a severe question. it doesn't actual remember what you imagine of the structure or no matter if you agree or position self belief in it. it is the regulation of the land, which will under no circumstances change, nor ought to it. i'd with politeness propose you're uninformed and inaccurate about the structure. area of the brilliance of the structure is that quite a few parts of it were written in deliberately imprecise language, for precisely the excuses you're asking about. so as that it ought to proceed to be suitable in the course of the destiny, and be interpreted and note to those circumstances. thats why we've amended the structure, and thats why the wrote the structure in a way that allowed amendments. so it isn't any longer as if those out of contact previous adult males from thousands of years in the past are governing us. we proceed to amend the structure. i'd also propose to you that the structure is basically the definition of creative, for the excuses i purely gave you, and others. it contains rights of voters, inherent rights, no longer rights given or taken away by technique of a authorities. and then, so a procedures because the authorities, it supplies, in spite of the indisputable fact that limits their authority, places checks and balances on that authority, and the rights it does no longer specially provide to the authorities bypass to the states. i'd also argue that the framers were extremely creative thinkers. the concept of a structure is a creative concept. i'd encourage you to study the federalist papers, and also you may study many of the most ideal creative wondering ever recorded. obama has no authority to "institute an overhaul on the record to mirror what's (on your opinion) quite significant." his authority is to uphold the structure. his presidency exists because of it. if there is no structure there is no obama there is no authorities. also, obama taught constitutional regulation, and has now appointed 2 justices to the perfect court, and doubtless quite a few justices to different federal courts. its secure to assert he's a particularly solid believer in it.

Answer 3

If I could help write a world constitution my contribution to said document would require that no MAN be allowed to rule any nation and that only women would be allowed to decide the faith of the worlds citizens. Men would forever be finished reigning death and destruction on this planet.

Answer 4

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is like this. Go to UN.org and look for it.



My addition would be that in the court of law, all humans are treated equal.

Answer 5

All states are equal with only one vote,
No veto vote by the superpowers,
Equal contribution but equal distribution in benefits,
Member states provide equal number of personnel and soldiers,
All disputes to be first settled amicably, and
Member states not following rules will be under the military control of UN army.

Answer 6

Nah!