Talk:United States/Archive 15

Picture of the US
Use this link.

Religion Figures
Are the religion stats correct? The CIA World Factbook lists them as"Protestant 52%, Roman Catholic 24%, Mormon 2%, Jewish 1%, Muslim 1%, other 10%, none 10%"

More than just a Power
I dislike the emphasis made in the opening papragraphs on the U.S., as being practically nothing but a Power: almost as if the World should fear it, or that it exists to bully the World. Hey, the U.S. is my home. Most of the the people I love live here. This is where I learned about the world, grew up to be a man. This is where I learned that I am the master of my life. I think for myself. Yet I also learned to be responsible, productive, respectful. Having the ability to speak and do what I want with my time, doesn't mean I should always say what is on my mind or do whatever I please. Yet what I like the most about the U.S. is I am fairly free to figure it out all on my own, to work something out that allows me to coexist, at peace, with my fellow citizens. This is where I learned the value of a fair and ordered society. I feel safe and secure in my home. I don't worry about my future. My life is a life of the mind. I only wish I had more time to learn all there is to know!

I want the people of the world to feel as free and safe as I do. To never know hunger, civil war, unemployment, or persecution. Yet it is not all happiness. I don't always like the people I have to deal with, or my job, or where I live, but it is not so bad when I consider other things going on in the world. If people were more educated and less impulsive, I'd be happier. If I were more willing to take risks and explore and find a job or hobby that really sustains my mind, I'd be happier. If I could live a healthier life, I'd be happier. If the population stabilized and housing demand decreased and developers didn't keep bulldozing every last inch of open space, I'd be happier. We in the U.S. have a lot to do, to make this nation better.

Yet all I can do is try to be the best person I can be. I can either "write it all off" and remove myself from society or blame it for making me unhappy, or I can reject such defeatism and be a force for good. This society hungers for leadership. I am no leader, however. I just think it is important to be in the moment, to treat each little thing as something worthy of care, of effort, no matter how mundane. If I know I'm doing a good job (even if somebody says otherwise) that is enough for me! Just feed me and clothe me and give me some good books and I'll be fine. On the flip side, if I think I'm doing a poor job (even if somebody says otherwise) then I'm unhappy no matter how much I'm paid or rewarded.

If you must judge a nation, judge it by its people. And not just a few people, or the loudest, or the most brutal, but all people: including the quiet, the caring, the just. I refuse to be grouped among the imperialists, the warmongers, the racists, the classists, and the prejudicial haters in this nation. I am not a pacifist, however: I freely admit I do hate what some people do and say to each other in this nation, or anywhere in the world, and demand justice. But I hate these people, not the nation, or class, or race. I am tolerant, and sometimes I am forgiving: I'd rather be your friend then your enemy. Yet we must have justice. Not only here, but everywhere.

When are we going to stop with our state-centered view of the World and make it a people-centered view? It should not matter if you live in the U.S., or Mexico, or China, or Iran, or wherever, we are all citizens of the planet and should live together in peace, freedom, dignity, and mutual respect. I love the U.S., but I'm not attached to it, just to those good things within it. Just as the U.S. has no monopoly on goodness, it also has no monopoly on badness. Good and evil run in all circles.


 * Are you running for congress or something? This is an encyclopedia, not a campaigning platform.  If you have a point to make, could you be a little more concise?


 * Answer to the above question: Why the harsh tone? Calm down. No, I'm not campaigning for anything. Just speaking from the heart, trying to give readers an example of an American who doesn't want the U.S. to control the world, to beat everybody up. Take it or leave it. You know, if you don't like it, you can always delete this whole comment. I don't care, now, since the site changed and my concerns were dealt with!


 * Note : The following paragraph was added before the previous paragraph was inserted:
 * I have to agree to a point, and have added something to the opening paragraphs about the country's philosophical founding which truly did represent a sharp break from what had gone on before. I'm sure it will be gone by tomorrow, but we really do need to have *something* that deliniates just how radical the governmental ideas were by 18th century standards, even if several countries have bypassed the U.S. in political development within the past two or three generations. Haverberg 18:12, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

The United States: a great nation
I am a very proud 15 year old Australian and my nation is great ally of the USA. As people have previously said people are concentrating too much on the negatives of the US and ingnoring the positives: which greatly outweigh the negatives. Everyone should leave the USA alone. They have made some mistakes with going to war in Iraq but some good can still be done. the USA has contributed greatly to the history of this world and the west as we know it would not be the same without the USA. the US has contributed greatly to civilisation and they should be praised for being a nation of great morals. America you have 1 ally at least. and trust me there are many more pro-Americans over here in Australia. God Bless America
 * Your Australian and your 15, obviously the American mass media has succeeded in brainwashing you. *Attempts to teach you some things about your own nation, before you go complimenting others* You might be surprised just how special Australia is, and how great it could be if only we weren't so exploited by foreign mass media and cultural influence. Yours truly, *Your compatriot*

Human Rights
Not a flag waver or anything, we've got our problems; but this section only lists the negatives and ignores the positive influence the U.S. has had on the world in regards to this issue (despite the curre...no, I shouldn't get political). If this section includes information on slavery and voting restrictions it should also mention the bill of rights and other amendments. Support for repressive regimes should also be counterbalanced by the Marshall Plan, election monitoring, and democracy building (...sigh...so hard to write this and watch the news). I also don't see anything regarding U.S. historical (if maybe not current) leadership in environmental protections but that's another section. I did skim a lot, though, so I could be missing something - apologies in advance if I am being a fool. Haverberg 02:43, 31 March 2006 (UTC)


 * No, I don't think you are being a fool. The section was way too focused on the negatives and did not point out any of the positives.  I have expanded the section to provide a more balanced perspective.


 * PLEASE NOTE: I don't think I have removed a single negative statement from the original text. In fact, I have even added some more negative statements.  However, I have balanced them out with some positive stuff that the United States has done over the years.  More importantly, I have highlighted the fact that our values are for democracy and human rights.  I have also conceded the fact that we have not always lived up to our own ideals.


 * I didn't put in very much about our commitment to promote democracy and human rights around the world (the election monitoring and democracy building that you mentioned). It is an insult to Jimmy Carter to suggest that the U.S. doesn't care about human rights.  Someone should write something about the things he did as President and afterwards.  Maybe you can do this.

Richard 07:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

The rights of children
Maybe it should be mentioned in the human rights section that the US is the only country (except from Somalia) that has not ratified the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child. Not trying to bash the country or so but it is a rather glaring controversy.

--Torsken 20:05, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It should be mentioned briefly, but with a comment on why the US did not ratify it. Thank you for pointing that out.--Ryz05 23:28, 28 April 2006 (UTC)


 * This is a minor treaty that doesn't merit mention in the main article. There are lots of treaties that various countries have not ratified.  Rights of children in the U.S. are based on the Constitution, federal and states law, and the common law. --JW1805 (Talk) 02:37, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Something is wrong.. not this is not spam
i was doing a project for school and im wondering why there are some spanish... i think its spanish next the the language box

quote None at federal level; English de facto

I dont want to delete this in case there is a good reason for it, just something i found thanks for your time. DarkShadowx180 DarkShadow 01:10, 28 February 2006 (UTC) sorry i forgot to do the date the first time...


 * Are you referring to "de facto?" That's a latin phrase, meaning that's the way it is, but there's no law saying so. --Golbez 01:48, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * i.e English is the unofficial official language. keith 02:53, 28 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Why dont we write that in english for those who dont know latin? DarkShadow 01:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Because latin does in two words what takes English a dozen. It's linked. CLICK IT. --Golbez 01:42, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
 * De facto is so often used in English that, for all intents and purposes, it is English. See also: nearly every other word in English. android  79  01:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


 * It's not English to all intents and purposes. It simply is English, period.  Its etymology is latin, and it was originally part of the latin language.  However, once a word comes into common usag