Ever been in a situation like "there are some people we don't want in that group chat but it's awkward to kick them out, so let's make another group chat without them and talk there instead"?
Eurovision.. Isn't apart of anything to do with the EU even though let's be honest Eurovision is very much political. Hard to argue it isn't something within the EU at this point.
Given the fact that until recently EU law concerned almost entirely economic issues (single market etc.) and not many "political" issues for everyday Europeans, the ECHR was, and in many ways still is, the only supranational European institution that makes changes to more tense and political issues. For example, my country, Greece, made a civil union possible for same-sex couples only after an ECHR decision. Also, Greece has tried to significantly hasten its domestic court procedures, which used, and in many cases still do, take years and years, exactly because the ECHR fined Greece on grounds of violating the right to a fair trial
Yep, because things like LGBT rights, and freedom of religion, are actually UNAVOIDABLE with a Rule of Law that weights rights against rights, not opinions or beleifs. What waaaay too many people don't seem to get is that our democracies aren't the tyranny of a majority. When you protests against LGBT rights, you are actually protesting against the Rule of Law and asking to install the Rule of God (in Europe, Christian Sharia), destroying freedom of religion along the way. Sad part being that, at least in my country, you learn that in high school yet we still have lots of morons that don't even understand the very basis of our democracies. Not to mention the fact those people don't even seem to have understood their religion... Like the "cast a stone if you have never sinned" Jesus Bible story. Even Jesus didn't throw one. It is only up to God to judge ANYONE as to their sins, certainly not you, a sinner - as all humans are. Christianity 101. While I can understand those political movements in East European countries where democracies are still relatively young, frail and all generations aren't educated to things like the Rule of Law I really do not in Western countries with good education until high school for everyone and generally proper religious education too. We should be the example, and generally thanksfully are nowadays, not help stir that effing pot.
@@MrTomtomtest There is some more nuance there I think. From Christians lobbying for marriage privatization (marriage would be something a bar or church could do, each with their own rules and limitations, but the state wouldn't care either way) to Christians lobbying that they should be allowed not to make a product which supports believes that are antithetical to their believes. Both those are often enough presented as 'protests against LGBT rights', but both are within the framework of the law and argue for either changes to the law or specific interpretations of the law. And at the end of the day we should never forget that 'rights' are also 'just' believes. 'Human rights' are 'just' the continuation of the 'modern' christian 'natural rights' concept, but where an attempt was made to find a common ground between a couple more people. Christians believe that the human rights flow from how God created the world, humanists believe that human rights are something that is intrinsically human and in the same way a whole group has different grounds they base themselves on, but we were able to find some common grounds. And to circle back to LGBT, most Christians will take the position that 'gay relations are morally wrong' whilst they will also take the position 'it should be legally safe to be gay'. The idea that both those things should be possible is I believe the basis of a healthy western democracy, but - despite considering myself a bit of a SJW - I feel like we have reached a point where that is becoming less and less true. I feel like we're moving further and further away from the idea that human rights and the law give us a framework how to interact with each other whilst minimally interfering with each other. Anyway, enough ranting, got to get back to work.
WRONG! The Council of Europe is an INTERNATIONAL not a supranational entity. That is why it is highly ineffective and can easily be blocked by a single member... That is why Russia, Turkey, Belarus or the UK LOVE the CoE so much.
IIRC, the 47 Member States are basically every country that's at least partially geographically in Europe (including Russia and Turkey), excluding only Belarus (human rights concerns), Kosovo (partial recognition) and Vatican City (absolute monarchy). Vatican City may take some explaining - the de facto King of Vatican City is a perk that comes with the job of being Bishop of Rome and CEO of Catholicism, Inc. - all three roles, combined, together with the administration thereof, are referred to as the Holy See. It is the Holy See (rather than Vatican City State) that is a member of various international organisations whose membership is usually reserved for States.
Don’t forget also about the Council of the European Union mate 😅😅😅😂😂😂 Nobody can convince us that this ”confusion” isn’t deliberate and aiming at the integration of every country possible to the eu… eastern countries as well, oh and the big one too, yes, Russia 😅😂
@@paulwalsh6395 someone pointed out once that 'policing Portadown [very poor godforsaken Northern Ireland district] has cost one billion pounds so far, enough to give each resident a hundred thousand pounds each instead' (numbers made up, but it was enough in those days for each of them to buy a good house)(or leave for good, as most would have because it's got no jobs, is grim, violent etc) so i guess it could be worse
I’m not going to lie prior to this video I thought the ECHR was the work of the EU. Good job on raising the profile of something no doubt many people, myself included, were ignorant of!
@Alistair Bolden I said nothing of the sort. There's a big difference between being the most influential member of an organisation and being a power grabber. The fact that the Germans happen to be the most influential members of the EU is down to a number of reasons 1) since the end of WW2, they've worked bloody hard 2) they've got continuity of government following decent policies and 3) they've concentrated on building their economy rather than pursuing outdated imperial notions. If other members are caught in debt traps, it's because of their own issues rather than because of Germany. Go and look at your own shortcomings before you blame Germany for your issues.
@Alistair Bolden It's funny that so many people only see ill in the prosperity of another. It's akin to some kind of zero sum algorithm where a win on the part of another automatically means a loss for them. As I said, keep on taking the medication for your paranoia.
@Alistair Bolden "There is a very good chance that the EU will fall within the next 10 years, and the parties in Germany currently are only one center right and one far right." People have been saying the same about the EU since it was founded as the ECSC. Strangely enough, it hasn't failed after 68 years. Let's see if it does fall before you start talking about a resulting government by the far right.
@Alistair Bolden Shall we start with basic grammar and punctuation? "Germanies puppet states " - it's actually "Germany's puppet states" and it's not "Grease", it's "Greece". Regarding Mme Le Pen, it's quite possible that she will, indeed, gain power. And then she'll be exposed as the buffoon that she truly is, just as Trump, Johnson and various other populists have been exposed before her. In any case, following the spectacle of Brexit, she and the Front National as well as various other right-wing parties in Europe have belatedly discovered the benefits of the EU and have rowed back on their Euroscepticism. It seems that the Brexit cloud has a silver lining after all.
4:42 so the other guy's freedoms of expression and freedom of conscience were both trampled on for the gay activist who could have simply got his cake from another bakery. Nice.
8:51: 'ranging from the wide-scale abolition of the death penalty, to non-discrimination, and the fight against racism and gender equality' This is why commas are important, kids.
6:56 Did you mean “Back to the Council of Europe itself”? You said “European Council”, but then immediately showed the Council of Europe logo and started talking about the key groups of that Council of Europe.
Considering there's 3 separate bodies called the Council of Europe, European Council, and Council of the European Union, you can't really blame him for getting them confused
These existence of these sorts of political structures are an important and ongoing litmus test for the state of the European solidarity in the sense of general harmony. Sure, they're not perfect and could use all manner of reform, plus their effectivity can always be questioned, but one should always keep foremost in mind that there were interest groups who profited from the World Wars. Similar interest groups could very well have a motivation to push for new conflict to emerge, but these sorts of pesky institutions tend to stand in the way of overtly aggressive behavior. Now with the worldwide recession a lot of interest groups with various agendas are looking for additional ways to generate profit, some of them with shadier methods, and it would serve them well to see Europe suffer in trying to stand against their criminal activities. On another level, if someone wanted to destabilize Europe and open up venues for future conflict they would want to sponsor efforts that break down all sorts of alliances and agreements inside the continent, because with the EU and these sorts of councils and so forth it's not really clear how members would engage even in mere economic warfare against one another. When an enemy of Europe plays the long game they want us to raise generations of children who grow up in a culture of mutual conflict, and not generations of children who grow up in a culture of harmony and union.
If a baker doesn't want to make you a cake find another baker. The simple fact is that everyone has human rights. That baker could for example have a religious reason why not to do it.
"War is how Americans learn geography." Brexit is how Britons learn what the EU, ECJ etc is - sadly i know a million times more now than i did then, mostly thanks to you!
This is fascinating to me as someone from the USA. What is of particular intetest is that there are poltical parties from differing countries that align. I have been watching Europe more closely since retiring because now I have time to delve into things more. It is truly remarkable. I can't imagine that North America could do this though it is possible at times for USA to make some correlation between itself and Canada but less so with Mexico.
The Council of Europe. An ineffective international organization and hence beloved by the UK government. And the Russians. And Turkey... Can anyone see a pattern?
The structure was nicely explained, but it doesn't explain much other than that. There are more relevant cases that illustrate what its function is, like other comments here have noted
As I understand it the sovereign court can ignore any ruling if they so choose. There's another case that's ongoing that's interesting at the moment - Mark Meechan aka Count Dankula has referred his case from the UK Supreme Court to the European Court on the grounds that it's a thought crime. I tend to agree with him that he was punished for someone else's interpretation of this "thoughts" which is a violation of the Human Rights established in Europe by Churchill et al, but tbh even if the European court sides with Mark the UK Supreme Ct, as any other court is, can simply go "Meh, whatever."
Not quite correct, sovereign courts act as a part of the authorities of CoE member states, so if the court decides "meh, whatever", then there may be (and well be) sanctions for not implementing ECtHR decision from the Council of Europe itself. But, again, no one can actually make courts implement new rulings in the UK, since it has very different legal system to most of European countries.
The more I know about Europe and EU, the less I understand. This all seems unnecessarily complicated and a full restructuring is inevitable to make it more efficient and relevant to Europeans
Most of Europe is a joke. They're not in any real danger so their politicians can say whatever they want and constantly pat themselves on the back. They really are a narcissistic and insufferable bunch. Especially Western Europe.
Yes I think It takes time for society's to become liberal, humanitarian and ethical. One of the biggest problems in human progression is tradition. A lot of traditions are archaïc but at the same time make a culture what it is. Is it bad to have conservative traditions? Not really it all depends on the morality of the subject and the personal view. what is right or what is wrong is different for everybody but I think we can all agree that generally harming somebody else physically or mentally is a morally bad. Putting yourself above someone else is mentally a bad thing to do and I know indian society does that a lot with its castes system and cronyism/nepotism. I think that is one of the biggest hurdles for India to overcome to give everyone in the country at least a chance on a good life.
I'm sure this is mentioned somewhere in the comments, but you forgot of Protocol 1 to ECHR guaranteeing, inter alia, right to property (an important one)
It has a court you can go to if your country has failed to protect your human rights. If you win in that court, you will get damages and the country who lost will have to promise to change their laws. While they can technically refuse to, refusing to abide with the cours decision will have dire diplomatic consequences. EU members have, as a part of being mebers of the EU, promised to follow the Council of Europe's charter of Human Rights, so the EU could punish them as well, if they do not abide. The EU likes what they do, and their human rights, so they flat out promise to follow the Court of the Council of Europe as well as all it's precedenses. Russia pretty much says nah and ignores a lot of it. It can, because membership of the Council of Europe is bilateral, rather than supranational. EU can force countries to do things, the Council of Europe can only implore them.
@@justanotheremptychannel2472 Thanks! It's sadly very common to have no idea what part is what, and even politicians on a local level in Sweden confuse them during EU elections. The ECHR has to do human rights in any country that has ratified it. The EU is a trade union with a common market, that requires it's members to follow human rights :).
To anyone with any knowledge of Churchill's sponsorship of a United States of Europe in his famous 1946 Zurich speech and the Treaty of London, this is not confusing at all.
@@ryanhuntrajput474 To my mind, it is the substance of what might be achieved rather than what it might be called or might call itself which is important. This piece might be a bit of an eye-opener to many though probably not to many readers on TH-cam The movement towards European Union is a fact of history and unavoidable in the future as isa about to be emphasised to us.
I dont think someone should be punished for refusing to bake a cake with a political message on it, provides that same cake can easily be sourced at another bakery.
I agree that someone shouldn't be punished for refusing to bake a cake with a political message. However, I don't think that supporting gay marriage should be considered a political message. It's just love man.
@@Nikolaj11 He's trying to deflect. It's like the owner of the petrol station saying he's "refusing to fill up the car" because a "bumper sticker says Trump 2020". Nothing to do with the owner of course, lol It's a deflection tactic, so that bigots feel better about their own bigotry.
@@ralphbernhard1757 I know, that's why I repeated the basis of the reasoning, I find it easiest to deflect deflections by refusing to argue their dumb claim, but thanks for the clarification regardless. :)
How do the two organizations collaborate? or not? I am thinking in particular about the Council of Europe's Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture, to put it more precise: I am trying to figure out how much (or little) influence such initiative have on policymaking in the member states? My guess is that decisions made in the European Union have stronger influence on member states than decisions made by the Council of Europe. However, I might have gotten it all wrong?
Wouldn't the freedom to expression and prohibition of discrimination be contradictive? Considering freedom of expression would therefore allow people to discriminate others but then there is the prohibition of discrimination which causes the freedom of expression to be null.
I think the distinction you are missing is discrimination involves deeds or actions (or lack of actions?), rather then expression which is more about words.
I have a Master's degree in European Studies and I am still haunted by the struggle to tell the names of the European Council and the Council of Europe apart during my studies (the french and german names are even more closely confusing). I would like to have the Council of Europe renamed to Eurasian Council to have a better differnentiation and recognition and also to better represent that some of its members occupy with their major territory Asia rather than Europe.
That's a great idea, especially considering the main purpose is to promote democratic standards and mediate EU-Russian relations, I think including Central Asian and other states in a reformed "Eurasian Council" would be beneficial. The EU enforced the Council of Europe's practices domestically already anyways. It could also act as a platform for EU-EAEU dialogue, which to date has yet to materialize.
@@god6384 How much % of Russians live in Siberia? Ankara Geographically, not; Historically it was connected by the Greeks so pretty much since European culture is descended of Roman culture that was civilized by Greek culture
Disappointing video. No mention of the members or how the membership of controversial states has caused tensions and diluted the credibility of the council of europe.
The purpose of the Council of Europe is certainly worth endorsing. That said, it should probably be reformed like all others pan-european institutions and more distinct names should be a part of this process.
@@jubmelahtes well it seems a bit unfair since the coucil had it first, but i dont think that anyone could deny that the EU is thevmost important institution
@@jubmelahtes Actually reading the comment you're answering to doesn't hurt, you know. The main point, for me, is reforming the European institutions into something efficient, something they are not at present. Changing names, flags, etc. could certainly be part of the process, thus avoiding confusion among the citizens. I wouldn't make a derby between them about which one has the right to retain the flag, though. That is a contest I'm hardly interested in.
@@Cheesblenders4all "dont think that anyone could deny that the EU is thevmost important institution" - yeah the EU is only missing two of the three nuclear superpowers and UNSC permanent members that the CoE has, definately more important. Think you're gonna need a better definition of "important" before trying to pull the EU's misinformation game.
@@streaky81 the CoE pretty much only deals with human rights questions, while the EU deals with more or less everything that has the economy, which is pretty much everything. Also cooperation between countries in the EU is a lot more substantial than cooperation between countries in the CoE. "more countries=more important" is a pretty shallow way of looking at it. if that was the only thing that mattered you could argue that FIFA is more important that both both the EU and the CoE since it has more members
@@Pierce1337 It is interesting question. Do non-discrimination rights go over rights of religion? If the makers of the cake had been muslims, would they still be required by law to make cakes for gay marriages? How well do you think that would go? If christians (or any religion, where sexual orientation has some meaning) says they do not want to make such a cake, will they be forced by law? Same thing can happen with many areas of society, though. When does discrimination rights overrule religion rights? If a person wants a car painter to paint his car with big rainbow colours, should be painter be able to decline? etc. For example, religon does NOT give bus driver the rights to choose who to let in. Religion DOES give rights to decide if gay marriage is accepted in that religion, though. Religion also seems to give rights to maim young children and do other stuff that is not accepted in general. Religion can stop two people marrying to each other, regardless of sex. In the cake case, I think the supreme court ruling was good. The cake makers decided not to make the cake, because of what the cake represents. They would have declined, regardless if the person ordering it would had been woman, man, straight, gay, black, white or an alien from outer space. If they had declined because of the person who ordered it, THAT would be discrimination. As far as I personally understand, any makers/seller/company owner can decide, what they will do and what they will not do. Nobody can (or at least should not be able to) force a company to produce anything that the company does not want to make. If someone asks a sticker company to make big swastika stickers, I assume the company can say no, regardless of the sexual orientation of the person asking?
@@Dthamilaye There has to be a clear separation between businesses and individuals. It is called human rights, not company's rights. I do not agree with the supreme court's ruling. A company's right to refuse an order should not be based on religion or other ideologies.
@@Dthamilaye you can not marry but you can't be against people marrying, freedom of marriage and association is one of their key values, freedom of thought doesn't extent to discrimination and prejudice
@@justanotheremptychannel2472 But the baker in question wasn't necessarily against people marrying, only his being required to participate in the ceremony by baking a cake.
@@mgenovski But does a gay couple have a right to a cake from a baker whose religious beliefs prevent him from baking it? They could easily have gotten a cake from another baker. This doesn't seem to be a civil rights issue, as much as an attempt to use the force of law to punish religious opinions, and virtue signal.
i would argue that there are litterally thousands of patisery shops that provide the service in question, and that everyone has a right to an oppinion, being forced to write the oppinion you do not stand behind, even if it constitutes a human right is also a violation of human rights, the shop in question is not capable of taking that right away from them, nor did it try to, and as noted before as there is a multitude of such shops that deliver the same service this case should be dismissed, this is a case of justified discrimination, you can not force someone to make a statement which goes against their religious and personal beliefs, it would be different if this cake shop had a monopoly on the service in question, but even then it is tricky because we have all heard the argument concerning twitter, facebook,... that they are private companies that can discriminate politically and so on,.... in the end it is also a frivolous case, there is no real legitemate reason that this should go to trial given that it is about a literal cake,
"If you're able to somehow work around the discrimination, why fight back?" Because if we do that, the bigots will never stop. He isn't suing to get the stupid cake, he's suing to get legal recognition and precedent that what they did was discriminatory.
Heads Full Of Eyeballs can’t work out if you’re being sarcastic or not, so apologies if we don’t agree on this one! But surely it is better to ensure that people don’t get to promote their bigoted and backwards views, so it is good to challenge, no?
This is a pet peeve, and will make me look an ass, but it's secREtary, not secUTary, which is how you keep pronouncing it. Other than that awesome vid!
Clearly the bakers' human right to liberty of conscience has been attacked by that political activist. He should be published for harming society through his activities.
Well, wasn't freedom of marriage and association one of the key elements? As far as I know freedom of conscience doesn't extent to discrimination and prejudice
@Fresh Turkey refusing to make a cake for interracial marriage is racism, you can say what you want but you can't act against human rights (refuse to do service based prejudice)
@Fresh Turkey if he doesn't wishes to make cakes he shouldn't have a bakery, also read it again, and slowly so your brain can process the phrases instead of just words individually
@Fresh Turkey so a Nazi can refuse to make a Bar Mitzva decorations? A racist can refuse to make a commemoration cake for blacks? You are free to have opinions but not to discriminate people
Gay cake: As much as I support gay rights (as a fellow one myself), surely those business owners have the right to refuse this service on two grounds: One, that clause of conscience, and Two, that they cant be forced to work. They cant be forced to do this task if they choose not to, on top the UK courts point. 'Support gay marriage' is a political statement, unusual for a cake, a reference to sexual orientation, unusual for a cake, even an indirect reference to sex, unusual for a cake. Sure, we've all seen cakes of genetia, but I wouldnt wanna make a penis cake either... Also... have Bert and Ernie ever come out of the closet? Surely thats rather disrespectful, if true, and insulting or rude, if theyre not gay as inferred.
i think the EU and europe as a political union in general is good, don't get me wrong... but the EU flag is the shittiest, blandest, most boring generic design that ever flew to the wind.
If it looks, walks and quacks like a duck. Its a duck. The fact the Council of Europe has not bothered to separate itself from the EU sharing the similar flag etc shows where its loyalties lie. I.e. the EU rather than Europe as a whole. This undermines their courts as how could a non EU country hope for a fair trial in the ECHR? Another reason for countries to leave as it appears not fit for purpose.
Hopefully not a stupid question. Say I make an "offensive" statement which some people internet as "hate speech" (think Count Dankula), and I try to make the case that I have the right of free speech under one of the "human rights commussions". Say, 1 or 2 of the 3 bodies (the national government, the EU, the "European human rights council" agree with me; but 1 or 2 disagree. Ie: no matter what, at least one person has "their rights" violated; either my free speech rights are violated, or I am violating someone's "right to not be ofdended". Who has the final say in the matter if there is a disagreement. Sounds like a constitutional crisis in the making.
Hard to strike a balance for natural looking make up with decent products and that can stand filming and lights, the more lighting I use on my channel the more harder it is😍
i fully support the right to gay marriage and treating LBGT people fairly and equally as human beings. however the idea that a person can be compelled to produce a work against their own conscience or else it is 'discrimination' is utterly absurd. This seems more to me like a persecution by a gay rights activist against who do not agree with his views
Exactly. It is a case of "Agree with me or else", which is evil. They could have just gotten their money back and gone to another baker. Although for me, I oppose the current institution of legal marriage itself, gay or straight. So many of the intricacies of the debate do not apply to my actual position.
If it was an cake for interracial marriage they would be charged for racism, when you are against freedom you have to accept you are wrong to the world around you.
European Council vs Council of the European Union... This is pretty much like Monthy Python's Life of Brian, and "The People's Front of Judea" vs "The Judean People's Front".
Just abolish anti 'discrimination' from human rights and carry on. I come from a Muslim family and live currently in Berlin. That doesn't matter what matters is I despise Marxist or in another word I'm sane!
I think for simplicity sake (and to reduce the number of bureaucrats and duplication of duties) Council of Europe should be merged with European Union Council. And Court of Human Right with European Court of Justice. Seems like there are no reason to maintain separate institutions with some specialist functions and a lot of overlaps.
@@TheBarbarella76 I am sure that those 47 member states have to be aligned with with what EU says. Similarly, like ECJ will be highest court deciding in cases against UK. Overall EU rules and decisions goes far further than 27 EU members, just look at GDPR - even US is a subject to it. So integrating these institutions would practically makes no difference for members and likewise for intuition it does not matter who the member are.
@L P Where does this certainty come from? Why should countries like Russia align themselves with the EU? The GDPR is not a good example neither as the US will not align itself with it. While I agree that due to the size of the market EU rules might very well impact how things are one in the rest of the world, but this is not certain. the GDPR will for instance only affect US companies that have a business in the EU. While it is possible that they apply the same rules also in other countries or that other countries follow the example of the EU, this is not guaranteed.
@@TheBarbarella76 Both ECJ and ECOHR are supernational institutions and there are precedents of them making rules on cases involving countries which are neither part of European Council, nor EU itself. Countries does not need to align with EU, but they are still subjects of ECJ rulings and EU rules. Like in case of GDPR it explicitly applies to any country worldwide, regardless if they like it or not. This is equally not unique to EU, for example US have a lot of supernational laws e.g. FATCA. Nobody agreed to that but US just announced to whole world that any US citizen has to pay taxes on income abroad and all countries have to report it back to IRS. Same applies to EU laws and rules. Point is - if ECJ and ECOHR would merge, this would not fundamentally change function of either court.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 87 วันนี้!! คู่เอก "ก้องชัย vs โชคปรีชา"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YN6e7HVnekw/mqdefault.jpg)
![⭐️( ลอยกระทง 2024 ) Ver. แดนซ์ Remix BY [ ดีเจกิต รีมิกซ์ ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rMWOLhgXUHc/mqdefault.jpg)
Ever been in a situation like "there are some people we don't want in that group chat but it's awkward to kick them out, so let's make another group chat without them and talk there instead"?
Europe's most confusing grouping? Are you forgetting Eurovision?
Eurovision.. Isn't apart of anything to do with the EU even though let's be honest Eurovision is very much political. Hard to argue it isn't something within the EU at this point.
That kinda reminds me of Monty Pythons Life of Brian.
"People's Front of Judea" or "Judean People's Front"
Splitters!
@Blaz Blaz I'm sure that sounded witty in your head.
Yeah, sounds British to me. Instead of trying to understand things you rather make fun of it and complain afterwards that you didn't understand.
Given the fact that until recently EU law concerned almost entirely economic issues (single market etc.) and not many "political" issues for everyday Europeans, the ECHR was, and in many ways still is, the only supranational European institution that makes changes to more tense and political issues. For example, my country, Greece, made a civil union possible for same-sex couples only after an ECHR decision. Also, Greece has tried to significantly hasten its domestic court procedures, which used, and in many cases still do, take years and years, exactly because the ECHR fined Greece on grounds of violating the right to a fair trial
Oh no, gay rights and equality! 😱
@@weetikissa I never said it was a bad thing
Yep, because things like LGBT rights, and freedom of religion, are actually UNAVOIDABLE with a Rule of Law that weights rights against rights, not opinions or beleifs. What waaaay too many people don't seem to get is that our democracies aren't the tyranny of a majority. When you protests against LGBT rights, you are actually protesting against the Rule of Law and asking to install the Rule of God (in Europe, Christian Sharia), destroying freedom of religion along the way. Sad part being that, at least in my country, you learn that in high school yet we still have lots of morons that don't even understand the very basis of our democracies.
Not to mention the fact those people don't even seem to have understood their religion... Like the "cast a stone if you have never sinned" Jesus Bible story. Even Jesus didn't throw one. It is only up to God to judge ANYONE as to their sins, certainly not you, a sinner - as all humans are. Christianity 101.
While I can understand those political movements in East European countries where democracies are still relatively young, frail and all generations aren't educated to things like the Rule of Law I really do not in Western countries with good education until high school for everyone and generally proper religious education too. We should be the example, and generally thanksfully are nowadays, not help stir that effing pot.
@@MrTomtomtest There is some more nuance there I think. From Christians lobbying for marriage privatization (marriage would be something a bar or church could do, each with their own rules and limitations, but the state wouldn't care either way) to Christians lobbying that they should be allowed not to make a product which supports believes that are antithetical to their believes. Both those are often enough presented as 'protests against LGBT rights', but both are within the framework of the law and argue for either changes to the law or specific interpretations of the law.
And at the end of the day we should never forget that 'rights' are also 'just' believes. 'Human rights' are 'just' the continuation of the 'modern' christian 'natural rights' concept, but where an attempt was made to find a common ground between a couple more people. Christians believe that the human rights flow from how God created the world, humanists believe that human rights are something that is intrinsically human and in the same way a whole group has different grounds they base themselves on, but we were able to find some common grounds.
And to circle back to LGBT, most Christians will take the position that 'gay relations are morally wrong' whilst they will also take the position 'it should be legally safe to be gay'. The idea that both those things should be possible is I believe the basis of a healthy western democracy, but - despite considering myself a bit of a SJW - I feel like we have reached a point where that is becoming less and less true. I feel like we're moving further and further away from the idea that human rights and the law give us a framework how to interact with each other whilst minimally interfering with each other. Anyway, enough ranting, got to get back to work.
WRONG!
The Council of Europe is an INTERNATIONAL not a supranational entity. That is why it is highly ineffective and can easily be blocked by a single member... That is why Russia, Turkey, Belarus or the UK LOVE the CoE so much.
IIRC, the 47 Member States are basically every country that's at least partially geographically in Europe (including Russia and Turkey), excluding only Belarus (human rights concerns), Kosovo (partial recognition) and Vatican City (absolute monarchy).
Vatican City may take some explaining - the de facto King of Vatican City is a perk that comes with the job of being Bishop of Rome and CEO of Catholicism, Inc. - all three roles, combined, together with the administration thereof, are referred to as the Holy See. It is the Holy See (rather than Vatican City State) that is a member of various international organisations whose membership is usually reserved for States.
For a long time I was confused between the council of europe and the european council. This video helped me to reduce this confusion. Thanks!
A diagram helps. But i do wonder why Europe has such a hard time naming their organizations.
Don’t forget also about the Council of the European Union mate 😅😅😅😂😂😂
Nobody can convince us that this ”confusion” isn’t deliberate and aiming at the integration of every country possible to the eu… eastern countries as well, oh and the big one too, yes, Russia 😅😂
The EU: Hey can I copy your homework?
The Council of Europe: Sure, but chan-
The EU: Done! Thanks man!
The Council of Europe: 🤦♂️
9:08
"confusing names" - it's a council of European countries.
"controversial" - does all the hard work that people credit the EU with.
TLDR News US only won the race to 100k subs because the circus over there is more entertaining rather than interesting like this content ;)
Not really.
Elect a clown, expect a circus
If it's a circus then I'd like my money back because I am having a terrible time over here
@eres well, it's a good circus for people outside of the USA tho xd
@@paulwalsh6395 someone pointed out once that 'policing Portadown [very poor godforsaken Northern Ireland district] has cost one billion pounds so far, enough to give each resident a hundred thousand pounds each instead' (numbers made up, but it was enough in those days for each of them to buy a good house)(or leave for good, as most would have because it's got no jobs, is grim, violent etc) so i guess it could be worse
I’m not going to lie prior to this video I thought the ECHR was the work of the EU. Good job on raising the profile of something no doubt many people, myself included, were ignorant of!
@Alistair Bolden There, there. Keep taking the paranoia medication.
@Alistair Bolden I said nothing of the sort. There's a big difference between being the most influential member of an organisation and being a power grabber. The fact that the Germans happen to be the most influential members of the EU is down to a number of reasons 1) since the end of WW2, they've worked bloody hard 2) they've got continuity of government following decent policies and 3) they've concentrated on building their economy rather than pursuing outdated imperial notions. If other members are caught in debt traps, it's because of their own issues rather than because of Germany. Go and look at your own shortcomings before you blame Germany for your issues.
@Alistair Bolden It's funny that so many people only see ill in the prosperity of another. It's akin to some kind of zero sum algorithm where a win on the part of another automatically means a loss for them. As I said, keep on taking the medication for your paranoia.
@Alistair Bolden "There is a very good chance that the EU will fall within the next 10 years, and the parties in Germany currently are only one center right and one far right."
People have been saying the same about the EU since it was founded as the ECSC. Strangely enough, it hasn't failed after 68 years. Let's see if it does fall before you start talking about a resulting government by the far right.
@Alistair Bolden Shall we start with basic grammar and punctuation?
"Germanies puppet states " - it's actually "Germany's puppet states" and it's not "Grease", it's "Greece". Regarding Mme Le Pen, it's quite possible that she will, indeed, gain power. And then she'll be exposed as the buffoon that she truly is, just as Trump, Johnson and various other populists have been exposed before her. In any case, following the spectacle of Brexit, she and the Front National as well as various other right-wing parties in Europe have belatedly discovered the benefits of the EU and have rowed back on their Euroscepticism. It seems that the Brexit cloud has a silver lining after all.
4:42 so the other guy's freedoms of expression and freedom of conscience were both trampled on for the gay activist who could have simply got his cake from another bakery. Nice.
8:51: 'ranging from the wide-scale abolition of the death penalty, to non-discrimination, and the fight against racism and gender equality'
This is why commas are important, kids.
6:56 Did you mean “Back to the Council of Europe itself”? You said “European Council”, but then immediately showed the Council of Europe logo and started talking about the key groups of that Council of Europe.
Considering there's 3 separate bodies called the Council of Europe, European Council, and Council of the European Union, you can't really blame him for getting them confused
These existence of these sorts of political structures are an important and ongoing litmus test for the state of the European solidarity in the sense of general harmony. Sure, they're not perfect and could use all manner of reform, plus their effectivity can always be questioned, but one should always keep foremost in mind that there were interest groups who profited from the World Wars. Similar interest groups could very well have a motivation to push for new conflict to emerge, but these sorts of pesky institutions tend to stand in the way of overtly aggressive behavior. Now with the worldwide recession a lot of interest groups with various agendas are looking for additional ways to generate profit, some of them with shadier methods, and it would serve them well to see Europe suffer in trying to stand against their criminal activities.
On another level, if someone wanted to destabilize Europe and open up venues for future conflict they would want to sponsor efforts that break down all sorts of alliances and agreements inside the continent, because with the EU and these sorts of councils and so forth it's not really clear how members would engage even in mere economic warfare against one another. When an enemy of Europe plays the long game they want us to raise generations of children who grow up in a culture of mutual conflict, and not generations of children who grow up in a culture of harmony and union.
With the membership of such nations as Russia or Poland with Hungary it seems, that CoE is a pretty hypocritic organisation.
Can you make a summary video about the 6 Institutions of the EU separation of powers? The executive, legislature, judiciary, central bank, etc.
Thank you for this video! :) I'm fascinated by the complexity of our union.
It will be interesting to see how the "gay cake" debate ends up in Europe compared to the United States.
Can you make a video about the trials in greece for the golden dawn party
If a baker doesn't want to make you a cake find another baker.
The simple fact is that everyone has human rights. That baker could for example have a religious reason why not to do it.
The reason they have the same flag is because that is the Flag of Europe, but the EU could’ve been a bit more creative I suppose.
Could have mentioned the 'Treaty of London' too ;-)
Where is the fight between Ukraine and Russia on the Council of Europe
(Also Strasbourg people are very proud of this Council lol)
imagine kicking up a big fuss over a damn cake
"War is how Americans learn geography." Brexit is how Britons learn what the EU, ECJ etc is - sadly i know a million times more now than i did then, mostly thanks to you!
This is fascinating to me as someone from the USA. What is of particular intetest is that there are poltical parties from differing countries that align. I have been watching Europe more closely since retiring because now I have time to delve into things more. It is truly remarkable. I can't imagine that North America could do this though it is possible at times for USA to make some correlation between itself and Canada but less so with Mexico.
The Council of Europe. An ineffective international organization and hence beloved by the UK government. And the Russians. And Turkey... Can anyone see a pattern?
The structure was nicely explained, but it doesn't explain much other than that. There are more relevant cases that illustrate what its function is, like other comments here have noted
They should have made an effort to differentiate the two,but I think they are a necessary body
As I understand it the sovereign court can ignore any ruling if they so choose. There's another case that's ongoing that's interesting at the moment - Mark Meechan aka Count Dankula has referred his case from the UK Supreme Court to the European Court on the grounds that it's a thought crime. I tend to agree with him that he was punished for someone else's interpretation of this "thoughts" which is a violation of the Human Rights established in Europe by Churchill et al, but tbh even if the European court sides with Mark the UK Supreme Ct, as any other court is, can simply go "Meh, whatever."
Not quite correct, sovereign courts act as a part of the authorities of CoE member states, so if the court decides "meh, whatever", then there may be (and well be) sanctions for not implementing ECtHR decision from the Council of Europe itself. But, again, no one can actually make courts implement new rulings in the UK, since it has very different legal system to most of European countries.
@@danielvavilov2157 Interesting so what are the sanctions they could impose and have they ever done so?
ward
interesting how a council can grant me my inalianable human rights
Ain't like we can trust the government on this one
The fight against racism and gender equality? I didn't know they were fighting AGAINST gender equality. That explains a lot.
The more I know about Europe and EU, the less I understand. This all seems unnecessarily complicated and a full restructuring is inevitable to make it more efficient and relevant to Europeans
I just love Europe and it's love for human rights and dignity....it might take decades for Indian judiciary to be as open and liberal
Most of Europe is a joke. They're not in any real danger so their politicians can say whatever they want and constantly pat themselves on the back. They really are a narcissistic and insufferable bunch. Especially Western Europe.
Yes I think It takes time for society's to become liberal, humanitarian and ethical. One of the biggest problems in human progression is tradition. A lot of traditions are archaïc but at the same time make a culture what it is. Is it bad to have conservative traditions? Not really it all depends on the morality of the subject and the personal view. what is right or what is wrong is different for everybody but I think we can all agree that generally harming somebody else physically or mentally is a morally bad. Putting yourself above someone else is mentally a bad thing to do and I know indian society does that a lot with its castes system and cronyism/nepotism. I think that is one of the biggest hurdles for India to overcome to give everyone in the country at least a chance on a good life.
Europe really could do with an overhaul of it's various institutions.
I'm sure this is mentioned somewhere in the comments, but you forgot of Protocol 1 to ECHR guaranteeing, inter alia, right to property (an important one)
3:33 im interested in the right to respect in family and private life, where can i find out more about it
Ward
It's almost like the people who set it up did not know what group they are doing it for
Bert and Ernie are not cartoon characters. They are puppets. How can I ever trust this channel again?
After that video I still don’t know what the council does...
It has a court you can go to if your country has failed to protect your human rights. If you win in that court, you will get damages and the country who lost will have to promise to change their laws. While they can technically refuse to, refusing to abide with the cours decision will have dire diplomatic consequences. EU members have, as a part of being mebers of the EU, promised to follow the Council of Europe's charter of Human Rights, so the EU could punish them as well, if they do not abide.
The EU likes what they do, and their human rights, so they flat out promise to follow the Court of the Council of Europe as well as all it's precedenses. Russia pretty much says nah and ignores a lot of it. It can, because membership of the Council of Europe is bilateral, rather than supranational. EU can force countries to do things, the Council of Europe can only implore them.
@@martinfalkjohansson5204 you actually explained better than the video...which is kinda sad though
@@justanotheremptychannel2472 Thanks! It's sadly very common to have no idea what part is what, and even politicians on a local level in Sweden confuse them during EU elections. The ECHR has to do human rights in any country that has ratified it. The EU is a trade union with a common market, that requires it's members to follow human rights :).
How exactly do they enforce their rulings
Who else is here to brush up on what the COE is now that Russia was kicked out from it?
"The fight against racism AND gender equality". Wow, I didn't know the Council of Europe was based. /s
The video didn't mention the International Criminal Court!!!!!! (The hague) Which was established after the First World War.
That's because it isn't associated with the EU or the Council of Europe.
8:52 "The fight against discrimination and gender equality" lol
To anyone with any knowledge of Churchill's sponsorship of a United States of Europe in his famous 1946 Zurich speech and the Treaty of London, this is not confusing at all.
I like the name EUROPEAN UNION BETTER than U.S.E .Which sounds bland and American.
@@ryanhuntrajput474 To my mind, it is the substance of what might be achieved rather than what it might be called or might call itself which is important. This piece might be a bit of an eye-opener to many though probably not to many readers on TH-cam The movement towards European Union is a fact of history and unavoidable in the future as isa about to be emphasised to us.
I dont think someone should be punished for refusing to bake a cake with a political message on it, provides that same cake can easily be sourced at another bakery.
I think you shouldn't design cakes if you can't stop yourself from discriminating against others.
I agree that someone shouldn't be punished for refusing to bake a cake with a political message. However, I don't think that supporting gay marriage should be considered a political message. It's just love man.
@@ws4857 They refused to make a gay marriage cake for a gay man, that's discrimination.
@@Nikolaj11 He's trying to deflect.
It's like the owner of the petrol station saying he's "refusing to fill up the car" because a "bumper sticker says Trump 2020".
Nothing to do with the owner of course, lol
It's a deflection tactic, so that bigots feel better about their own bigotry.
@@ralphbernhard1757 I know, that's why I repeated the basis of the reasoning, I find it easiest to deflect deflections by refusing to argue their dumb claim, but thanks for the clarification regardless. :)
How do the two organizations collaborate? or not? I am thinking in particular about the Council of Europe's Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture, to put it more precise: I am trying to figure out how much (or little) influence such initiative have on policymaking in the member states? My guess is that decisions made in the European Union have stronger influence on member states than decisions made by the Council of Europe. However, I might have gotten it all wrong?
Wouldn't the freedom to expression and prohibition of discrimination be contradictive? Considering freedom of expression would therefore allow people to discriminate others but then there is the prohibition of discrimination which causes the freedom of expression to be null.
I think the distinction you are missing is discrimination involves deeds or actions (or lack of actions?), rather then expression which is more about words.
@@matthewrye3156 seems better than my version of "it's null if you are disregarding human rights", thanks for enriching my thoughts
Some say the gay cake case will soon arrive to the UN...
Ain't like gay rights are their top concerns
I have a Master's degree in European Studies and I am still haunted by the struggle to tell the names of the European Council and the Council of Europe apart during my studies (the french and german names are even more closely confusing). I would like to have the Council of Europe renamed to Eurasian Council to have a better differnentiation and recognition and also to better represent that some of its members occupy with their major territory Asia rather than Europe.
That's a great idea, especially considering the main purpose is to promote democratic standards and mediate EU-Russian relations, I think including Central Asian and other states in a reformed "Eurasian Council" would be beneficial. The EU enforced the Council of Europe's practices domestically already anyways. It could also act as a platform for EU-EAEU dialogue, which to date has yet to materialize.
Or how about the court of Europe? That would be less confusing and more spot on
Istanbul and Moscow are clearly in Europe...
@@justanotheremptychannel2472 not Ankara and Siberia :)
@@god6384 How much % of Russians live in Siberia?
Ankara Geographically, not; Historically it was connected by the Greeks so pretty much since European culture is descended of Roman culture that was civilized by Greek culture
Burt and Ernie are not cartoon characters they are puppets.
This feels like a pseudo-aprilfools video, at least in the beginning.
Wow, I can't believe the Council of Europe prides itself on its fight against gender equality (8:50)
?
Soo, gender equality isn't a good thing? Is that what you are saying?
@@letheas6175 you clearly aren't a native english-speaker lmao
@@justanotheremptychannel2472 Wow, your comment adds so much to this discussion! You're so smart. ''lmao''
@@letheas6175 LMFAO there isn't a discussion, that's the whole point of your beginner-level English being funny
Disappointing video. No mention of the members or how the membership of controversial states has caused tensions and diluted the credibility of the council of europe.
Not really Russia and Turkey mostly abide by The councils rules.
Most of the bad things they do dont fall under the councils rules.
@@command_unit7792 Then the council rules aren't sufficient. Which reduces credibility of council. My point still stands.
The purpose of the Council of Europe is certainly worth endorsing.
That said, it should probably be reformed like all others pan-european institutions and more distinct names should be a part of this process.
So the council of Europe should change their flag and name because the EU copied them?
@@jubmelahtes well it seems a bit unfair since the coucil had it first, but i dont think that anyone could deny that the EU is thevmost important institution
@@jubmelahtes
Actually reading the comment you're answering to doesn't hurt, you know.
The main point, for me, is reforming the European institutions into something efficient, something they are not at present.
Changing names, flags, etc. could certainly be part of the process, thus avoiding confusion among the citizens.
I wouldn't make a derby between them about which one has the right to retain the flag, though. That is a contest I'm hardly interested in.
@@Cheesblenders4all "dont think that anyone could deny that the EU is thevmost important institution" - yeah the EU is only missing two of the three nuclear superpowers and UNSC permanent members that the CoE has, definately more important.
Think you're gonna need a better definition of "important" before trying to pull the EU's misinformation game.
@@streaky81 the CoE pretty much only deals with human rights questions, while the EU deals with more or less everything that has the economy, which is pretty much everything. Also cooperation between countries in the EU is a lot more substantial than cooperation between countries in the CoE.
"more countries=more important" is a pretty shallow way of looking at it. if that was the only thing that mattered you could argue that FIFA is more important that both both the EU and the CoE since it has more members
Great Video
It is the council of Europe that has kept the peace. Not the EU.
That was the perspective of total nuclear war
Ehhhhh. I rather doubt it.
The cake guy needs to let it go...
@@Pierce1337 It is interesting question. Do non-discrimination rights go over rights of religion? If the makers of the cake had been muslims, would they still be required by law to make cakes for gay marriages? How well do you think that would go? If christians (or any religion, where sexual orientation has some meaning) says they do not want to make such a cake, will they be forced by law? Same thing can happen with many areas of society, though. When does discrimination rights overrule religion rights?
If a person wants a car painter to paint his car with big rainbow colours, should be painter be able to decline? etc.
For example, religon does NOT give bus driver the rights to choose who to let in. Religion DOES give rights to decide if gay marriage is accepted in that religion, though. Religion also seems to give rights to maim young children and do other stuff that is not accepted in general. Religion can stop two people marrying to each other, regardless of sex.
In the cake case, I think the supreme court ruling was good. The cake makers decided not to make the cake, because of what the cake represents. They would have declined, regardless if the person ordering it would had been woman, man, straight, gay, black, white or an alien from outer space. If they had declined because of the person who ordered it, THAT would be discrimination.
As far as I personally understand, any makers/seller/company owner can decide, what they will do and what they will not do. Nobody can (or at least should not be able to) force a company to produce anything that the company does not want to make. If someone asks a sticker company to make big swastika stickers, I assume the company can say no, regardless of the sexual orientation of the person asking?
@@Dthamilaye There has to be a clear separation between businesses and individuals. It is called human rights, not company's rights. I do not agree with the supreme court's ruling. A company's right to refuse an order should not be based on religion or other ideologies.
@@Dthamilaye you can not marry but you can't be against people marrying, freedom of marriage and association is one of their key values, freedom of thought doesn't extent to discrimination and prejudice
@@justanotheremptychannel2472 But the baker in question wasn't necessarily against people marrying, only his being required to participate in the ceremony by baking a cake.
@@mgenovski But does a gay couple have a right to a cake from a baker whose religious beliefs prevent him from baking it? They could easily have gotten a cake from another baker. This doesn't seem to be a civil rights issue, as much as an attempt to use the force of law to punish religious opinions, and virtue signal.
Churchill would back the U.K. on the council of Europe but a sponsor of a federal institution (Eu) than in it
this was an amazing video
i would argue that there are litterally thousands of patisery shops that provide the service in question, and that everyone has a right to an oppinion, being forced to write the oppinion you do not stand behind, even if it constitutes a human right is also a violation of human rights, the shop in question is not capable of taking that right away from them, nor did it try to, and as noted before as there is a multitude of such shops that deliver the same service this case should be dismissed, this is a case of justified discrimination, you can not force someone to make a statement which goes against their religious and personal beliefs,
it would be different if this cake shop had a monopoly on the service in question, but even then it is tricky because we have all heard the argument concerning twitter, facebook,... that they are private companies that can discriminate politically and so on,....
in the end it is also a frivolous case, there is no real legitemate reason that this should go to trial given that it is about a literal cake,
After this video, I have no idea wat the COE does
Why not just go to another bakery?
Xamufam 🤣
"If you're able to somehow work around the discrimination, why fight back?"
Because if we do that, the bigots will never stop. He isn't suing to get the stupid cake, he's suing to get legal recognition and precedent that what they did was discriminatory.
Heads Full Of Eyeballs can’t work out if you’re being sarcastic or not, so apologies if we don’t agree on this one! But surely it is better to ensure that people don’t get to promote their bigoted and backwards views, so it is good to challenge, no?
@@mattgreek1066 No worries! Yeah, we agree, hence the quotation marks around that first sentence :p
@@HeadsFullOfEyeballs 👍🏽😁
What are the numbers that keep appearing in the top right corner?
Took me a while to figure it out... those are the citations. If you expand the description, you can view the "footnotes".
Why have a messy EU when you can have two?
To answer your questions:
Yes and Yes
I watched the video on my Xbox and legitmately thought I had unlocked an achievement somehow.
Sounds like EU lite
Right, but more like EU Extra Extra Lite
SpangeBab thx
Russia is member so not
3:56 - 5:13 GJ UK
This is a pet peeve, and will make me look an ass, but it's secREtary, not secUTary, which is how you keep pronouncing it.
Other than that awesome vid!
Clearly the bakers' human right to liberty of conscience has been attacked by that political activist. He should be published for harming society through his activities.
Well, wasn't freedom of marriage and association one of the key elements? As far as I know freedom of conscience doesn't extent to discrimination and prejudice
@Fresh Turkey You are free to not marry a gay, you are not free to be against a gay marrying
@Fresh Turkey refusing to make a cake for interracial marriage is racism, you can say what you want but you can't act against human rights (refuse to do service based prejudice)
@Fresh Turkey if he doesn't wishes to make cakes he shouldn't have a bakery, also read it again, and slowly so your brain can process the phrases instead of just words individually
@Fresh Turkey so a Nazi can refuse to make a Bar Mitzva decorations?
A racist can refuse to make a commemoration cake for blacks? You are free to have opinions but not to discriminate people
Gay cake: As much as I support gay rights (as a fellow one myself), surely those business owners have the right to refuse this service on two grounds: One, that clause of conscience, and Two, that they cant be forced to work. They cant be forced to do this task if they choose not to, on top the UK courts point.
'Support gay marriage' is a political statement, unusual for a cake, a reference to sexual orientation, unusual for a cake, even an indirect reference to sex, unusual for a cake. Sure, we've all seen cakes of genetia, but I wouldnt wanna make a penis cake either...
Also... have Bert and Ernie ever come out of the closet? Surely thats rather disrespectful, if true, and insulting or rude, if theyre not gay as inferred.
Basically, it's Europe's OAS.
All this makes me think is how happy I am to have a conservative magority on the Supreme Court
I wish I got that achievement when I subbed
But the E U would like it to be
i think the EU and europe as a political union in general is good, don't get me wrong...
but the EU flag is the shittiest, blandest, most boring generic design that ever flew to the wind.
Really? Have you seen the flags of Poland and Indonesia? And the old Libyan one was just one shade of green...
@@Wasserfeld. They are good and have a deep symbolism, unlike EU flag. Bicolors and tricolors are definetly the best
If it looks, walks and quacks like a duck. Its a duck. The fact the Council of Europe has not bothered to separate itself from the EU sharing the similar flag etc shows where its loyalties lie. I.e. the EU rather than Europe as a whole. This undermines their courts as how could a non EU country hope for a fair trial in the ECHR? Another reason for countries to leave as it appears not fit for purpose.
That cake guy has a good point, but he doesnt seem like a very fun dude.
Hopefully not a stupid question. Say I make an "offensive" statement which some people internet as "hate speech" (think Count Dankula), and I try to make the case that I have the right of free speech under one of the "human rights commussions".
Say, 1 or 2 of the 3 bodies (the national government, the EU, the "European human rights council" agree with me; but 1 or 2 disagree. Ie: no matter what, at least one person has "their rights" violated; either my free speech rights are violated, or I am violating someone's "right to not be ofdended".
Who has the final say in the matter if there is a disagreement. Sounds like a constitutional crisis in the making.
human rights court of the Council of Europe is the highest authority by default
Americans hate this trick.
Churchill never intended the UK to be part of any of these things when he suggested them.
So ? Churchill doesnt decide Anything im british and i hate brexit, most of them are old stupid nationalistic people
Hard to strike a balance for natural looking make up with decent products and that can stand filming and lights, the more lighting I use on my channel the more harder it is😍
I wish the UN had the same court with the force of law.
This is the flag of Kosovo🇽🇰,not the one you have used.
Wait, isn't not allowing gey merrage against the European convention of human rights?
It's kind of funny how the EU barrowed the Council of Europe's flag.
EU ordered from wish
if forced labour is prohibited, should forced military conscription be too?
i fully support the right to gay marriage and treating LBGT people fairly and equally as human beings. however the idea that a person can be compelled to produce a work against their own conscience or else it is 'discrimination' is utterly absurd.
This seems more to me like a persecution by a gay rights activist against who do not agree with his views
Exactly. It is a case of "Agree with me or else", which is evil. They could have just gotten their money back and gone to another baker. Although for me, I oppose the current institution of legal marriage itself, gay or straight. So many of the intricacies of the debate do not apply to my actual position.
If it was an cake for interracial marriage they would be charged for racism, when you are against freedom you have to accept you are wrong to the world around you.
@@justanotheremptychannel2472 What about freedom not to bake cakes if you don't want to?
@@si91 if you don't want to find another job
@@justanotheremptychannel2472 But this is a case of a business owner
Should someone tell all those Brexit nuts that the UK is still a member? Lol!
European Council vs Council of the European Union... This is pretty much like Monthy Python's Life of Brian, and "The People's Front of Judea" vs "The Judean People's Front".
the council of europe should change their name and flag and anthem
The EU should change its symbols...The Council of Europe adopted them first...
Care to explain why the Council of Europe is the one that should change it's original name flag and anthem instead of the EU which copied it?
🙏✍️🌻🌼🌻🌻🌻🌻🥬👌🥦
Just abolish anti 'discrimination' from human rights and carry on. I come from a Muslim family and live currently in Berlin. That doesn't matter what matters is I despise Marxist or in another word I'm sane!
Lol, you are just dumb because can't tell the difference between conservative and economic-right
This vidéo is great thanks for this informations and i think this conseil isn't verry userful for thé europian country
Exept Belarus
And you want to be part of that ?
I think for simplicity sake (and to reduce the number of bureaucrats and duplication of duties) Council of Europe should be merged with European Union Council. And Court of Human Right with European Court of Justice. Seems like there are no reason to maintain separate institutions with some specialist functions and a lot of overlaps.
Well, the Coucil of Europe has 47 Member States and the EU only 27...
@@TheBarbarella76 I am sure that those 47 member states have to be aligned with with what EU says. Similarly, like ECJ will be highest court deciding in cases against UK. Overall EU rules and decisions goes far further than 27 EU members, just look at GDPR - even US is a subject to it. So integrating these institutions would practically makes no difference for members and likewise for intuition it does not matter who the member are.
@L P Where does this certainty come from? Why should countries like Russia align themselves with the EU? The GDPR is not a good example neither as the US will not align itself with it. While I agree that due to the size of the market EU rules might very well impact how things are one in the rest of the world, but this is not certain. the GDPR will for instance only affect US companies that have a business in the EU. While it is possible that they apply the same rules also in other countries or that other countries follow the example of the EU, this is not guaranteed.
@@TheBarbarella76 Both ECJ and ECOHR are supernational institutions and there are precedents of them making rules on cases involving countries which are neither part of European Council, nor EU itself. Countries does not need to align with EU, but they are still subjects of ECJ rulings and EU rules. Like in case of GDPR it explicitly applies to any country worldwide, regardless if they like it or not. This is equally not unique to EU, for example US have a lot of supernational laws e.g. FATCA. Nobody agreed to that but US just announced to whole world that any US citizen has to pay taxes on income abroad and all countries have to report it back to IRS. Same applies to EU laws and rules. Point is - if ECJ and ECOHR would merge, this would not fundamentally change function of either court.
Why ¡ don’t wanna know anything about human rights: cause there’s no man rights,..