[philman_36]

However, saying that we should bow to the UN because it sort of works for one state in the USA.....none of that makes sense.....the UN doesn't care about our Federal or State Constitutions nor our Federal or State sovereignty.
Whoa there, butt-munch! I've not stated that we should bow to the UN in any manner.
You better reel that one back in.

I'm still saying "Screw the UN", just like I've been doing for many a year...and just like I did back in that 2001 comment.

I don't understand how someone could endorse a libertarian ideal of state sovereignty but be OK having it's implementation forced by international fiat by a progressive international bureaucracy that has no respect for said sovereignty.

That's okay, I do understand how somebody can make an incorrect assumption and statement based on their ignorance of a person's actual position.

[brent13a]

Well holy geez, whoa, I didn't know I had impugned your delicate sensibilities enough to start some childish namecalling, of which I never initiated.

You originally posted up above:

And how many years has prostitution been legal in Nevada with few negative consequences?
Sovereign States. You know, 50 of them joined together in a Union yet capable of making their own laws as a Sovereign State!

That was posted by itself in what appears as a direct response to other posters questioning the UN's decision to issue such a decree to the world.
I guess I was just way out of line for assuming that you're blanket statement (that was put out there with no other context) was just you somehow aligning your libertarian viewpoints on prostitution and state sovereignty with the UN.
Obviously, now that I look back, there was much deeper meaning and contextual relevance to your original statement above. I mean, reading your original statement by itself directly after reading the OP's article obviously makes complete sense.