Posted by: goddamn November 16, 2011
Login in to Rate this Post:
0 
? 
?
I will vote whenever I can and if only if I see a competent policy. But if I don't vote and something wrong happens, i will still try whatever i can do to protest it. Conflict is at the heart of democracy and i don't believe in:
1: We should move ahead coz it will slow the momentum. Then blame PM, he brought the issue at the wrong time. If this is the problem let finish the peace process first and then decide the amnesty later. Dhungel is a criminal and he can wait. Its not like an innocent man waiting for a pardon.
2: Its legal and PM can do it. You answered this question yourself. I replaced victim sister's right to justice with widow's right to property. You quickly said its unethical and law of Nepal won't allow to do it. I want people of Nepal to have same confidence that they will get justice no matter what. You know that law comes with ethics as power comes with responsibility. Yo
3: we are 100 years behind western country and we should learn to live by it. I give you 100 more years and talk about the US constitution which is around 200 years older.. Do you think Nepalese law allows you to confiscate property from a widow and use it for business? It doesn't. It also values individual over government (Its different that it had issues with racism). By saying we are under developed and we need to learn to abide by unethical decision then I have to say nothing.
4. You voted and did your job, so stop complaining and ignore everything whatever government does. You know why Nepal became Republic, to safe guard the rights of minority. So that 51% do not kick other 49% out. Every minority gets equal rights as every one else. It does includes right to protest. And about going to the representatives, sajha is so popular so i am doing the same thing here. I think more attention it gets bigger the voice is. I didn't vote that doesn't take my right from protesting.
1: We should move ahead coz it will slow the momentum. Then blame PM, he brought the issue at the wrong time. If this is the problem let finish the peace process first and then decide the amnesty later. Dhungel is a criminal and he can wait. Its not like an innocent man waiting for a pardon.
2: Its legal and PM can do it. You answered this question yourself. I replaced victim sister's right to justice with widow's right to property. You quickly said its unethical and law of Nepal won't allow to do it. I want people of Nepal to have same confidence that they will get justice no matter what. You know that law comes with ethics as power comes with responsibility. Yo
3: we are 100 years behind western country and we should learn to live by it. I give you 100 more years and talk about the US constitution which is around 200 years older.. Do you think Nepalese law allows you to confiscate property from a widow and use it for business? It doesn't. It also values individual over government (Its different that it had issues with racism). By saying we are under developed and we need to learn to abide by unethical decision then I have to say nothing.
4. You voted and did your job, so stop complaining and ignore everything whatever government does. You know why Nepal became Republic, to safe guard the rights of minority. So that 51% do not kick other 49% out. Every minority gets equal rights as every one else. It does includes right to protest. And about going to the representatives, sajha is so popular so i am doing the same thing here. I think more attention it gets bigger the voice is. I didn't vote that doesn't take my right from protesting.