dear Foxy,
Your thoughts struck a cord in my heart. 32 years ago I was an atheist when My wife and family left our home and broke my heart.
5 days later I met the man Christ Jesus and my walk with God began.
32 years later I am still walking with the Lord.
I have traveled many miles since that day and I can honestly say he has never let me down, though I can't say the same about myself but no matter how often I stumble and fall he has never ever condemned me but like he said in Matthew 23:37 he loves us. Moses brought the Law but Grace and Truth came through Jesus. In the old testament we lived under a law of an eye for an eye. To follow Jesus we have to grow up and become responsible for our actions but thank God no matter how many times we soil our diper he never ever rejects us, for in our weakness his strength is available. When my wife wants to punch someones light out for a perceived hurt I always tell her this, if a dog bites you, you don't get down and bite the dog. Vengeance is mine sayest the Lord.Forgive and pray for those who spitefully use you, and as this goes right against human nature we have to let God be God in all circumstances. Then the love walk becomes reality and we walk the walk and talk the talk. People perish from lack of knowledge, pride comes before the fall, and without the Grace of God there goes I.

Those people who live all their lives in the congested pollution of traffic in a concrete jungle, who have no family and who farm no land would not have a clue of how to sustain a growing population. Australia needs water; and we have it but it needs storing and redirection. Australia's population needs decentralizing and we could easily support a population twice what it is now

Hardly, Boaz.

>>Pericles tends to latch onto any shred of dangling comment<<

I concentrated on the core concept that you introduced here...

>>"Global Citizens"..... What I'd like to explore is the various dimensions of such a thing. 1/ What are it's values?etc...<<

...and deconstructed it.

You determined, because that was the argument that you wanted, that a "Global Citizen" required a common set of values, and asked us what they should be.

Your fellow posters have gently illuminated for you the tree up which you are barking.

Foxy, as always, pitched it perfectly.

>>In 1837 Paine's famous phrase: "My Country Is the World, my countrymen are Mankind,"<<

No requirement for common values, common language or the United Nations. Just compassion and thoughtfulness.

Ludwig's contribution reflects his typically elegant style:

>>Here, the main tenet of a global citizen is a person who helps others in distant lands as a moral duty independent of pragmatic self-interest.<<

No requirement for common values, common language or the United Nations. Just compassion and thoughtfulness.

There is, and never will be, a "Global Citizen" in the sense that you attempt to present here. And to pretend that the United Nations has a role to play in the creation of such an animal, is absurd.

Especially when you employ the fact that they produce "declarations" and "resolutions" and "conventions" as evidence of this.

>>this kind of begs the question 'why' should we even have such supposedly unifiying declarations and conventions when they don't have the desired outcome?<<

They act as a kind of umpire, whose verdict you can either accept or reject. They often act in a non-partisan fashion, in order to bring some pressure to bear, or to help out in a trouble spot. To encourage (but not coerce) countries to help out in places like Pakistan, or Bangladesh, when there is a natural disaster.

They did other stuff too

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005685

Global Citizenship is not a nationality. If anything, it protects the right to be different, rather than insist that everyone conforms to one pattern.

Perhaps that's why you dislike the idea so much

If there is one organisation that makes the Catholic church look good its the UN.

Dear Pericles,

I've said it before and I'll say it again -
I enjoy reading your posts and admire
your intelligence and reasoning.
The fact that you read my posts as well,
I take as a great compliment.
Thank You.

Dear Richie,

Thank You for your kind words,
and I feel humbled that my words
struck a cord in your heart.
The poem that I cited in my
earlier post, by William Garrison
I found particularly moving.

Dear runner,

Have you heard of the Saint Vincent de
Paul Society and the work that they do?
The Catholic Church certainly has its
share of problems but the total number
of people annually assisted by Vinnies
is an extraordinary 1.8 million in Australia.
They represent Catholicism at its best.

I'm quite impressed with what you guys have brought to the table so far!

I'd reinforce that the UN is accepted precisely because its' own values (which are, essentially humanist: which has a lot less consensus among the world) are nothing more than an advertisement to the world- which is why so many countries (especially those that clearly have different values) are so happy to join up and try to work with it (or else, do business through it).

As a recent vote to treat criticism of religion an offense among most national members (well, beyond those who abstained) endorsed mostly from Middle Eastern Countries and opposed primarily by Western countries, there is clearly no consensus whatsoever to work to beyond that as a voluntary mediator- which is the way it should be.

With the recent events and insights into multiple cultures over the past decade, it is clear that to even try to attempt to forcefully install ones values into another society isn't so easy anymore (and less effective to justify), so the possibility of such a thing happening has been shelved forever.