Forums of the Megaverse®

Posted: **Sat Oct 01, 2016 2:06 pm**

The US Civil Rights Act brings us the definition of Hate Crimes as any action "by force or by threat of force, injure, intimidate, or interfere with anyone who is engaged in six specified protected activities, by reason of their race, color, religion, or national origin." That has become the foundation for such crimes.

In a Heroes Unlimited world, should the phrase "sentient species" be added, based on the government's knowledge of extra-terrestrials?

Posted: **Sat Oct 01, 2016 6:37 pm**

wyrmraker wrote:The US Civil Rights Act brings us the definition of Hate Crimes as any action "by force or by threat of force, injure, intimidate, or interfere with anyone who is engaged in six specified protected activities, by reason of their race, color, religion, or national origin." That has become the foundation for such crimes.

In a Heroes Unlimited world, should the phrase "sentient species" be added, based on the government's knowledge of extra-terrestrials?

That depends on how you want your world to work.
In my C.A.P.E.S. world there is a current civil rights campaign to get full equal rights protection for "Anthros" (genetically created life, basically mutant animals) with a lesser but related campaign to recognize AIs as people. I purposefully didn't provide the protections to make for a gritty world with lots of shades of grey.

In another game, where I want a more utopian flavor? I might make the law nicer and recognize everyone equally.

Neither is right, neither is wrong.

Posted: **Sat Oct 01, 2016 9:29 pm**

I understand your point with GELFs, but I was referring to a kind of catch-all referring to non-terrestrial life forms. Given the fluff in Century City, I would think that the US government might add that provision to prefent irritating off-world dignitaries.

Posted: **Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:47 am**

wyrmraker wrote:The US Civil Rights Act brings us the definition of Hate Crimes as any action "by force or by threat of force, injure, intimidate, or interfere with anyone who is engaged in six specified protected activities, by reason of their race, color, religion, or national origin." That has become the foundation for such crimes.

In a Heroes Unlimited world, should the phrase "sentient species" be added, based on the government's knowledge of extra-terrestrials?

Is there a need to put the phrase in though?

Any one of the four could be seen as applying to sentient extra terrestrials unless the text specifies it only applies to humans, in which case it would need to be amended to expand it to extra-terrestrials. Though I would imagine there might be cases of unintended consequences either in raw or amended form (ex. could other intelligent animals (mutant or not) be "protected" by this law?).

Posted: **Sun Oct 02, 2016 1:41 pm**

As for a need, yes, there would be. 'Race' is a sub-set of a species, whereas I'm seeing them add 'Species' to the Hate Crimes list once they are properly aware of extra-terrestrials. Legally, it makes sense to properly nail that one down.

Posted: **Sun Oct 02, 2016 2:25 pm**

ShadowLogan wrote:
wyrmraker wrote:The US Civil Rights Act brings us the definition of Hate Crimes as any action "by force or by threat of force, injure, intimidate, or interfere with anyone who is engaged in six specified protected activities, by reason of their race, color, religion, or national origin." That has become the foundation for such crimes.

In a Heroes Unlimited world, should the phrase "sentient species" be added, based on the government's knowledge of extra-terrestrials?

Is there a need to put the phrase in though?

Any one of the four could be seen as applying to sentient extra terrestrials unless the text specifies it only applies to humans, in which case it would need to be amended to expand it to extra-terrestrials. Though I would imagine there might be cases of unintended consequences either in raw or amended form (ex. could other intelligent animals (mutant or not) be "protected" by this law?).

Unfortunately yes you would need to include the extra text because there are most certainly people who would insist in and outside the legal system that without it all those non-humans would be considered to have lives worth no more than an animal and killing them quite acceptable and legal.

Posted: **Sun Oct 02, 2016 4:32 pm**

There are three routes to this actually.
The first is you can do it through legislations by amending the hate crime law

The second is you can have your courts do it by reviewing cases and ruling that the term "anyone" and especially "race" (now in its proper use!) to mean that the law applies to all sentient life and that species is a protected class.

The third is backdoor it in as a term of The Accord that was signed. Besides banning off world technology and what ever... it could have a clause about recognizing all life and applying the same legal code to all lifeforms as the local ones. Basically outlawing two tier justice. So it doesn't say you have to have a hate crime law. But if you do have one it applies to everyone equally.

Posted: **Mon Oct 03, 2016 3:02 pm**

It would definitely be something I would address in-game. One side would argue against it since it is easier to control and combat aliens if you don't give them equal rights. The other would argue that they should have equal rights as sentient species. There would always be those arguing that aliens cannot be considered sentient, and so on and so forth.

Posted: **Wed Oct 05, 2016 9:54 pm**

wyrmraker wrote:As for a need, yes, there would be. 'Race' is a sub-set of a species, whereas I'm seeing them add 'Species' to the Hate Crimes list once they are properly aware of extra-terrestrials. Legally, it makes sense to properly nail that one down.

So then there is hate crimes against cows because we target their particular species for hamburgers. Even though it would be cruel to not cook them seeing as how they are the only animal I know of other than humans who go toward smoke instead of away from it, so they must want to be cooked as I doubt they're trying to go put out the fire.

Posted: **Thu Oct 06, 2016 2:17 am**

Hey if it was easy there would not be a need for judges or lawyers you could just eyeball it and know who was guilty and what the proper penalty was.

Posted: **Thu Oct 06, 2016 4:04 am**

Stone Gargoyle wrote:It would definitely be something I would address in-game. One side would argue against it since it is easier to control and combat aliens if you don't give them equal rights. The other would argue that they should have equal rights as sentient species. There would always be those arguing that aliens cannot be considered sentient, and so on and so forth.

As far as arguing sentience. If an alien is able to communicate concepts and argue that they have the capacity to feel, perceive, or experience subjectively, which is a definition of sentience, in an age where that definition is accepted then one can not argue one is going on in another's head. They can deny it but they can not make a resonable argument against it.

Posted: **Thu Oct 06, 2016 5:10 am**

Zer0 Kay wrote:
Stone Gargoyle wrote:It would definitely be something I would address in-game. One side would argue against it since it is easier to control and combat aliens if you don't give them equal rights. The other would argue that they should have equal rights as sentient species. There would always be those arguing that aliens cannot be considered sentient, and so on and so forth.

As far as arguing sentience. If an alien is able to communicate concepts and argue that they have the capacity to feel, perceive, or experience subjectively, which is a definition of sentience, in an age where that definition is accepted then one can not argue one is going on in another's head. They can deny it but they can not make a resonable argument against it.

Isn't that what lawyers are for? Making reasonable arguments against anything?

Of course, the entire point of this was a funny image in my head. An Immortal Demon Lord pressing Hate Crime charges against a demon hunter.

Posted: **Tue Oct 25, 2016 10:52 pm**

wyrmraker wrote:The US Civil Rights Act brings us the definition of Hate Crimes as any action "by force or by threat of force, injure, intimidate, or interfere with anyone who is engaged in six specified protected activities, by reason of their race, color, religion, or national origin." That has become the foundation for such crimes.

In a Heroes Unlimited world, should the phrase "sentient species" be added, based on the government's knowledge of extra-terrestrials?

Likely not. In the 'HU" world Aliens are wildly unpopular. Only slightly better than mutants. (If not worse, depending on area.) You don't see it mentioned much in the core book but in Century Station, the main 'setting' book for HU it pops up there. (And explains why).

Long story short, HU Earth is treated like the stupid little red headed step brother of the Galaxy and humans like dumb children that can't be trusted (There's... plenty to prove that argument, but still) and when an alien DID come to earth and give us advances, the "Alien cops" showed up and yanked them all away, and basically twapped Humanity on the nose with a rolled up news paper for it and now We (Humans/Earth) Are grounded, with a babysitter watching us.

So all in all, Aliens in HU are not just accepted and given rights. They're specifically NOT. Like Mutants are not 'people' and don't have 'rights' in HU World (Seen in Century Station and Mutant Underground)

Posted: **Fri Oct 28, 2016 7:00 pm**

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
wyrmraker wrote:The US Civil Rights Act brings us the definition of Hate Crimes as any action "by force or by threat of force, injure, intimidate, or interfere with anyone who is engaged in six specified protected activities, by reason of their race, color, religion, or national origin." That has become the foundation for such crimes.

In a Heroes Unlimited world, should the phrase "sentient species" be added, based on the government's knowledge of extra-terrestrials?

Likely not. In the 'HU" world Aliens are wildly unpopular. Only slightly better than mutants. (If not worse, depending on area.) You don't see it mentioned much in the core book but in Century Station, the main 'setting' book for HU it pops up there. (And explains why).

Long story short, HU Earth is treated like the stupid little red headed step brother of the Galaxy and humans like dumb children that can't be trusted (There's... plenty to prove that argument, but still) and when an alien DID come to earth and give us advances, the "Alien cops" showed up and yanked them all away, and basically twapped Humanity on the nose with a rolled up news paper for it and now We (Humans/Earth) Are grounded, with a babysitter watching us.

So all in all, Aliens in HU are not just accepted and given rights. They're specifically NOT.

Citation? As in book and page where this is stated? (If it is specifically then it needs to be just that... specific)

Pepsi Jedi wrote:Like Mutants are not 'people' and don't have 'rights' in HU World (Seen in Century Station and Mutant Underground)

yes mutants are treated badly in the later versions of the HU world (as much as there is an HU world since the pre Century Station and post Century Station books tend to have irreconcilable differences on how the world is set up and runs)

Posted: **Sat Oct 29, 2016 8:54 pm**

Zer0 Kay wrote:
wyrmraker wrote:As for a need, yes, there would be. 'Race' is a sub-set of a species, whereas I'm seeing them add 'Species' to the Hate Crimes list once they are properly aware of extra-terrestrials. Legally, it makes sense to properly nail that one down.

So then there is hate crimes against cows because we target their particular species for hamburgers. Even though it would be cruel to not cook them seeing as how they are the only animal I know of other than humans who go toward smoke instead of away from it, so they must want to be cooked as I doubt they're trying to go put out the fire.

Actually, if you think about it, cows could be considered geniuses. Think about this: They are protected against being randomly murdered, given better health care than humans receive, in some places entirely prohibited from being harmed, all under penalty of law. In some places harming a cow is a religious crime, whereas in most of the US it's a felony level crime to kill a cow unless it's either in an approved slaughterhouse or the animal is too far beyond veterinary science to save.

All for a small sacrifice of their numbers per year.

Just a funny side bit to consider.

Posted: **Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:59 pm**

wyrmraker wrote:
Zer0 Kay wrote:
wyrmraker wrote:As for a need, yes, there would be. 'Race' is a sub-set of a species, whereas I'm seeing them add 'Species' to the Hate Crimes list once they are properly aware of extra-terrestrials. Legally, it makes sense to properly nail that one down.

So then there is hate crimes against cows because we target their particular species for hamburgers. Even though it would be cruel to not cook them seeing as how they are the only animal I know of other than humans who go toward smoke instead of away from it, so they must want to be cooked as I doubt they're trying to go put out the fire.

Actually, if you think about it, cows could be considered geniuses. Think about this: They are protected against being randomly murdered, given better health care than humans receive, in some places entirely prohibited from being harmed, all under penalty of law. In some places harming a cow is a religious crime, whereas in most of the US it's a felony level crime to kill a cow unless it's either in an approved slaughterhouse or the animal is too far beyond veterinary science to save.

All for a small sacrifice of their numbers per year.

Just a funny side bit to consider.

Imagine if they were a hive intelligence...
Then they wouldn't even be loosing any numbers, just a tiny portion of their body...
...world wide psychic cow...
*scribbles* I think I may just have to use this

Posted: **Mon Oct 31, 2016 1:48 pm**

eliakon wrote:Imagine if they were a hive intelligence...
Then they wouldn't even be loosing any numbers, just a tiny portion of their body...
...world wide psychic cow...
*scribbles* I think I may just have to use this

Genius!

Posted: **Mon Oct 31, 2016 9:43 pm**

eliakon wrote:[
Imagine if they were a hive intelligence...
Then they wouldn't even be loosing any numbers, just a tiny portion of their body...
...world wide psychic cow...

AAaaaaannnnndddd...this is why you shouldn't overuse antibiotics on livestock.....

Actually the stinker could be that the hive mind deliberately sacrifices those components of itself that are ailing or defective..the 'ailment' being the diminishment of the mental links that make an individual cow an integral seamless part of the whole.
Furthermore, the hive-cow intelligence uses low-powered psychic persuasion on its human wranglers to make them believe that they are the ones chosing specific cows for slaughter, when in fact it is the hive-mind that is directing them to remove specific diseased cells of its greater psychic body form the circuit before their degeneration corrupts and compromises the greater gestalt.

Posted: **Wed Nov 02, 2016 6:00 pm**

What if the psychic cows are modifying their own milk so that humans specifically are enticed to drink/use more of it in their food preparation and in turn raise even more cows for the Hivemind?

Daniel Stoker

Posted: **Sun Nov 06, 2016 8:15 pm**

eliakon wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:
wyrmraker wrote:The US Civil Rights Act brings us the definition of Hate Crimes as any action "by force or by threat of force, injure, intimidate, or interfere with anyone who is engaged in six specified protected activities, by reason of their race, color, religion, or national origin." That has become the foundation for such crimes.

In a Heroes Unlimited world, should the phrase "sentient species" be added, based on the government's knowledge of extra-terrestrials?

Likely not. In the 'HU" world Aliens are wildly unpopular. Only slightly better than mutants. (If not worse, depending on area.) You don't see it mentioned much in the core book but in Century Station, the main 'setting' book for HU it pops up there. (And explains why).

Long story short, HU Earth is treated like the stupid little red headed step brother of the Galaxy and humans like dumb children that can't be trusted (There's... plenty to prove that argument, but still) and when an alien DID come to earth and give us advances, the "Alien cops" showed up and yanked them all away, and basically twapped Humanity on the nose with a rolled up news paper for it and now We (Humans/Earth) Are grounded, with a babysitter watching us.

So all in all, Aliens in HU are not just accepted and given rights. They're specifically NOT.

Citation? As in book and page where this is stated? (If it is specifically then it needs to be just that... specific)

Pepsi Jedi wrote:Like Mutants are not 'people' and don't have 'rights' in HU World (Seen in Century Station and Mutant Underground)

yes mutants are treated badly in the later versions of the HU world (as much as there is an HU world since the pre Century Station and post Century Station books tend to have irreconcilable differences on how the world is set up and runs)

Citation on the Aliens is in Century station, you see it all through the book but specifically it starts on page 25. It talks about how most every citizen holds them in a negative light. They even talk about lynchmobs forming to string up and kill aliens. It goes into it for detail for a page or two but you see it through out the 'history' of the city and such too.

You see further citation of the anti-alien bias in Mutant Underground, where in, when answering the question (General) "Where the heck did all these mutants come from?" one of the possible 'answers/theories' was "Aliens?" Indicating they're either alien offspring or purposefully created by aliens, as there 'are' aliens known to be around, it circles back around to the anti-alien bias.

Later on in the same book there's a number of aliens that take advantage of the Mutant underground.

Those are two of three setting books we have for HU. Which back up the general concept. One is very specific around Century station, but speaks in general, The other is more general overall, but links back around to the thought on the street, being negative to aliens and how they should be rounded up and kicked off planet because they may be responsable for the mutant problem and bringing them/making them/trying to invade with them, etc.

In short. HU isn't all embracing the aliens like Superman and the Green Lantern Corps.

In general (in HU) They're not much liked.

You can see this further indicated/proven by the "Alien watch groups" in HU, presented in the Aliens Unlimited book. Even 'good guys' or peaceful aliens are hunted down, captured, examined, and imprisoned, then interrogated. It says that common perception of the aliens is such that Project Tyche even exceeds the laws, breaks them, and has little concern for collateral damage when capturing aliens. "How ever the public image of the project is one of protecting innocent humans from marauding alien defenders"

Later on it talks about how the captured aliens are imprisoned and studied and only a small number are ever given the ability to live openly on earth. Those that are are urged heavily to work for the government super teams and what not and those that don't are watched (Even illegally)

When it addresses no earth governments having been officially approached, it states "Sadly, dangerous aliens have far outweighed the number of friendly peaceful alien visitors, which fules the flames of parinoia and gives Project tyche more political clout.

So in general, in the HU setting, Aliens on HU earth are feared, and or hated for the most part. There's a notation in CS on how they can 'overcome' that perception (it's not easy, and half of it is hiding that you ARE an alien) But that indicates that the preconceived notion needs to be overcome to start with.

Posted: **Sun Nov 06, 2016 8:53 pm**

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:
wyrmraker wrote:The US Civil Rights Act brings us the definition of Hate Crimes as any action "by force or by threat of force, injure, intimidate, or interfere with anyone who is engaged in six specified protected activities, by reason of their race, color, religion, or national origin." That has become the foundation for such crimes.

In a Heroes Unlimited world, should the phrase "sentient species" be added, based on the government's knowledge of extra-terrestrials?

Likely not. In the 'HU" world Aliens are wildly unpopular. Only slightly better than mutants. (If not worse, depending on area.) You don't see it mentioned much in the core book but in Century Station, the main 'setting' book for HU it pops up there. (And explains why).

Long story short, HU Earth is treated like the stupid little red headed step brother of the Galaxy and humans like dumb children that can't be trusted (There's... plenty to prove that argument, but still) and when an alien DID come to earth and give us advances, the "Alien cops" showed up and yanked them all away, and basically twapped Humanity on the nose with a rolled up news paper for it and now We (Humans/Earth) Are grounded, with a babysitter watching us.

So all in all, Aliens in HU are not just accepted and given rights. They're specifically NOT.

Citation? As in book and page where this is stated? (If it is specifically then it needs to be just that... specific)

Pepsi Jedi wrote:Like Mutants are not 'people' and don't have 'rights' in HU World (Seen in Century Station and Mutant Underground)

yes mutants are treated badly in the later versions of the HU world (as much as there is an HU world since the pre Century Station and post Century Station books tend to have irreconcilable differences on how the world is set up and runs)

Citation on the Aliens is in Century station, you see it all through the book but specifically it starts on page 25. It talks about how most every citizen holds them in a negative light. They even talk about lynchmobs forming to string up and kill aliens. It goes into it for detail for a page or two but you see it through out the 'history' of the city and such too.

You see further citation of the anti-alien bias in Mutant Underground, where in, when answering the question (General) "Where the heck did all these mutants come from?" one of the possible 'answers/theories' was "Aliens?" Indicating they're either alien offspring or purposefully created by aliens, as there 'are' aliens known to be around, it circles back around to the anti-alien bias.

Later on in the same book there's a number of aliens that take advantage of the Mutant underground.

Those are two of three setting books we have for HU. Which back up the general concept. One is very specific around Century station, but speaks in general, The other is more general overall, but links back around to the thought on the street, being negative to aliens and how they should be rounded up and kicked off planet because they may be responsable for the mutant problem and bringing them/making them/trying to invade with them, etc.

In short. HU isn't all embracing the aliens like Superman and the Green Lantern Corps.

In general (in HU) They're not much liked.

You can see this further indicated/proven by the "Alien watch groups" in HU, presented in the Aliens Unlimited book. Even 'good guys' or peaceful aliens are hunted down, captured, examined, and imprisoned, then interrogated. It says that common perception of the aliens is such that Project Tyche even exceeds the laws, breaks them, and has little concern for collateral damage when capturing aliens. "How ever the public image of the project is one of protecting innocent humans from marauding alien defenders"

Later on it talks about how the captured aliens are imprisoned and studied and only a small number are ever given the ability to live openly on earth. Those that are are urged heavily to work for the government super teams and what not and those that don't are watched (Even illegally)

When it addresses no earth governments having been officially approached, it states "Sadly, dangerous aliens have far outweighed the number of friendly peaceful alien visitors, which fules the flames of parinoia and gives Project tyche more political clout.

So in general, in the HU setting, Aliens on HU earth are feared, and or hated for the most part. There's a notation in CS on how they can 'overcome' that perception (it's not easy, and half of it is hiding that you ARE an alien) But that indicates that the preconceived notion needs to be overcome to start with.

While these sources do say that people don't like them, and that they face problems with mob justice
There isn't anything to support your claim of them being explicitly said to NOT have rights.
To make a comparison. In the 1950s United States there was a lot of discrimination against blacks in the south. They faced persecution, discrimination and lynching...
...that didn't mean that they did not have rights. Just that the southerners were not recognizing them.
HUGE difference.

I will grant that they are not accepted that was never in question
I will grant that they are often feared, persecuted and even reviled.
I do NOT grant that they are explicitly said to have no legal rights. THAT claim, the claim that there is an explicit claim of the specific denial of rights (which is what saying that they are specifically not given rights is saying) needs exactly that, the explicit claim of the denial of rights. Those words in a book. With out those words you do not have an explicit claim. You may be able to argue that there is an implicit claim but not an explicit one.

Posted: **Mon Nov 07, 2016 12:04 am**

Did you miss the part where there's agencies that activly hunt them down, exceeding legal authority, and not careing about whom they hurt or kill in doing so to beat up, capture, imprison, interrogate on, experiment on and hold indefinately with out trial or representation, at their digression?

I'm not being a smartass here. I'm honestly asking, because that indicates they have no rights.

If they had rights, they would not be subject to....

Being hunted,
Being accosted and beaten up by governmental officals (Or civillians in mobs)
Being captured, and taken against their will (Kidnapping)
Being detained. (unlawful inprisonment)
Being held with out trial.
Being questioned with out legal representation (interrogation)
Being experimented on. (Assault and battery)
Being killed with out trial (Murder, as no nation has a formal declaration of 'war' on aliens.)
Being enslaved. (Held in prision unless they agree to do that govenrment's bidding as a member of their super team etc)

So.... I'm curious as to what 'right' you think aliens have that's not really covered by the above. Or if they have rights, how all of the above are done in gross violation of the law. That's from ther US. Not some crazy Putin russia or something. The 'good guys' do that stuff. The bad guys likely more.

Seriously if you can do all of the above, with out ending up on death row for it, or life in prison yourself. What rights do the aliens have?

Posted: **Mon Nov 07, 2016 12:46 am**

Pepsi Jedi wrote:Did you miss the part where there's agencies that activly hunt them down, exceeding legal authority, and not careing about whom they hurt or kill in doing so to beat up, capture, imprison, interrogate on, experiment on and hold indefinately with out trial or representation, at their digression?

I'm not being a smartass here. I'm honestly asking, because that indicates they have no rights.

Ummm what part of 'exceeding legal authority' proves that the law is on their side?

Pepsi Jedi wrote:If they had rights, they would not be subject to....

Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being hunted,
Being accosted and beaten up by governmental officals (Or civillians in mobs)

Like lynchings?
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being captured, and taken against their will (Kidnapping)
Being detained. (unlawful inprisonment)
Being held with out trial.
Being questioned with out legal representation (interrogation)

Good thing that no one ever arrested blacks in the south for "breathing while black" during the civil rights era
And its a good thing that the US didn't run Internment Camps for Japanese Americans in WWII

Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being experimented on. (Assault and battery)

Tuskegee experiment? Look it up
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being killed with out trial (Murder, as no nation has a formal declaration of 'war' on aliens.)

Lynching again thanks

Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being enslaved. (Held in prision unless they agree to do that govenrment's bidding as a member of their super team etc)

That isn't what the word 'enlaved' means...
...but its a good thing that there wasn't a 442 regimental combat team in WWII that was the only option for Japanese Americans to get out of the camps...

So.... I'm curious as to what 'right' you think aliens have that's not really covered by the above. Or if they have rights, how all of the above are done in gross violation of the law. That's from ther US. Not some crazy Putin russia or something. The 'good guys' do that stuff. The bad guys likely more.

Seriously if you can do all of the above, with out ending up on death row for it, or life in prison yourself. What rights do the aliens have?

And not to be a smart ass here but
Have you READ about what they were doing to blacks in the south during the civil rights era?
About what the US government has done to Native Americans, or the Japanese Americans in WWII?

I mean by this logic Blacks, Native Americans, Japanese-Americans, et multiple cetera have no civil rights because they have been mistreated...
...and since we KNOW this is false it suggests that any argument predicated on the exact same case would be equally false.
Not having your rights respected is MUCH different than having the law explicitly say you do not have those rights.
You have proven the first yes. You have done zero to prove the second.

Posted: **Mon Nov 07, 2016 2:24 am**

You should read the indicated sections.

eliakon wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Did you miss the part where there's agencies that activly hunt them down, exceeding legal authority, and not careing about whom they hurt or kill in doing so to beat up, capture, imprison, interrogate on, experiment on and hold indefinately with out trial or representation, at their digression?

I'm not being a smartass here. I'm honestly asking, because that indicates they have no rights.

Ummm what part of 'exceeding legal authority' proves that the law is on their side?

They're a sponsored and popular governmental agency. They operate openly in the execution of their charter and duties. This proves that law is on their side.

eliakon wrote:

Pepsi Jedi wrote:If they had rights, they would not be subject to....

Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being hunted,
Being accosted and beaten up by governmental officals (Or civillians in mobs)

Like lynchings?

No. The US Government does it via the before mentioned Agency. That's why it's clear that aliens, in HU don't share the rights of humans.

eliakon wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being captured, and taken against their will (Kidnapping)
Being detained. (unlawful inprisonment)
Being held with out trial.
Being questioned with out legal representation (interrogation)

Good thing that no one ever arrested blacks in the south for "breathing while black" during the civil rights era

Good thing HU Isn't set during the civil rights era or you might have partially a point, but no. Not really, as it would more prove the point than anything. Reguardless. HU isn't set in the civil rights era and all the above is done by the US governmental agents. They're not locked up for doing their jobs, thus it's legal for them to do, which indicates that the aliens don't share the rights of humans, in HU.

eliakon wrote:
And its a good thing that the US didn't run Internment Camps for Japanese Americans in WWII

HU is also not set during WWII, and that is currently seen as one of the darkest elements of our history and universially accepted as wrong. Well almost universally. Someone running for office in a couple of days might be down for it, but for the most part that was seen as wrong, and a human rights violation.

eliakon wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being experimented on. (Assault and battery)

Tuskegee experiment? Look it up

I don't need to look it up. I know all about Tuskegee, it would be currently against the law. Because people have broken the law, it's not indicative that the law didn't exist.
That was also... 84-44 years ago.

In 1974 Congress passed the National Research Act, and created a commission to make regulations governing the studies etc. The OHRP was established. Studies now require informed consent and have review boards and the like.

So.. again Not valid in the HU setting. You're speaking of things that happened in the past that are currently illegal and would get people locked up if they did them.

eliakon wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being killed with out trial (Murder, as no nation has a formal declaration of 'war' on aliens.)

Lynching again thanks

Lynching is illegal.

I'm speaking of the US government, and it's agencies doing so to the aliens 'legally'.

eliakon wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being enslaved. (Held in prision unless they agree to do that govenrment's bidding as a member of their super team etc)

That isn't what the word 'enlaved' means...

It's not? Lets see shall we?

Slave: 1: A person that is the property of and wholly subject to another; A bound servant
2: A person entirely under the domination of some influence or person.

If you capture and imprison someone and give them one option. To work for you, or to stay in prison, how does that not make them entierly under the domination of some influence or person?

If you have the control to give them that choice, are they not your bound servant? Faced with imprisonment or subjection? Thus.. Slavery?

If you make them a slave.. you have thus, ENSLAVED THEM.

Yes... that's what the word means.

eliakon wrote:
...but its a good thing that there wasn't a 442 regimental combat team in WWII that was the only option for Japanese Americans to get out of the camps...

And already covered above, but again. We're not in WWII are we? The "setting" of HU is modern times, though you could argue it's 1980s. Which still wouldn't be WWII by quite a stretch.

eliakon wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:So.... I'm curious as to what 'right' you think aliens have that's not really covered by the above. Or if they have rights, how all of the above are done in gross violation of the law. That's from ther US. Not some crazy Putin russia or something. The 'good guys' do that stuff. The bad guys likely more.

Seriously if you can do all of the above, with out ending up on death row for it, or life in prison yourself. What rights do the aliens have?

And not to be a smart ass here but
Have you READ about what they were doing to blacks in the south during the civil rights era?

Yes..... and thus has been deemed illegal since then. If you do such things you go to jail. They would be considered human rights violations. They were crimes, and are crimes still. The fact that they happened in history doesn't mean that black people don't currently have rights in our society. Rights that are withheld from Aliens in HU.

eliakon wrote:
About what the US government has done to Native Americans, or the Japanese Americans in WWII?

As stated above. We're not in WWII, and those would be crimes. I'm not saying humanity has never been aholes to one another. Clearly they have, but you're saying because things happend 50-100+ years ago, those same people don't have rights today? they do.

eliakon wrote:

I mean by this logic Blacks, Native Americans, Japanese-Americans, et multiple cetera have no civil rights because they have been mistreated...

And at varying points in history they didn't. But they do now.

You're trying to say that because people were abused and treated as not having rights in the past thaty they don't currently.

I'm pointing out that they DO have rights currently, but the Aliens do not.

At some point in HU's future, they might GIVE Aliens on earth, human rights, but as of now, they do not currently possess them. Time matters. Setting matters. The "Default" setting for HU is current (or 1980s if you go by publication)

eliakon wrote:

...and since we KNOW this is false it suggests that any argument predicated on the exact same case would be equally false.

No, because your assumption is based on humanity not experiencing the passage of time. Which, it does. Dr Strange, you're not.

eliakon wrote:
Not having your rights respected is MUCH different than having the law explicitly say you do not have those rights.
You have proven the first yes. You have done zero to prove the second.

[/quote]

I have proven the second. You're addressing CRIMES and violations and times in history when the people you're referencing, did not infact 'have' rights via the law. It sucks, but the past sucked for that sort of thing. We're a little better now. (Still working on it)

The 'fact' is that as written, Aliens currently have no rights in HU, otherwise the actions of the US government would be ..... A (Sentient being?) Rights violation, as... they're doing all the above listed crimes in violations of the 'Rights' You're assuming that the aliens are granted.

The actions above are public. They're not ultra secret. The agency is even popular for doing them. Thus they're not hidden. The people know. These things are happening and noone's calling the US and other governments out for rights violations (Of the aliens) Therefore, in setting, there are no 'rights' being violated.

Thus.. clearly in HU, aliens are not afforded "Human Rights".

If it's "legal" for the government to openly Kidnap, detain, interrogate, hold with out trial, torture, experiment upon and ultimately enslave or kill aliens..... then clearly Aliens are not afforded the same rights as you or I.

Posted: **Mon Nov 07, 2016 5:41 pm**

Spoiler:

The problem here is two fold
First you are ignoring precedent by trying to claim that past examples don't matter because they are in the past
The past is important because by showing us how identical situations were handled it tells us how this situation will be handled. By telling us the status of rights in the past we can infer the status of rights in the present.

and Second you are conflating breaking a right with the nonexistence of that right

Like I have said repeatedly ALL you have done is prove that people are openly going around ignoring rights. This is NOT the same as saying that there is an explicit legal stance that those rights do not exist at all.
To put it in legal terms you are conflating de facto justifications and de jure ones.
De facto violations are ones that occur, regardless of their legality and are allowed because of things like public support, or antipathy to prosecution
De jure violations though are actually legally enshrined in the law such as slavery laws.

There is, with out a doubt a de facto absence of civil rights for Aliens. No one is arguing that.
What you have NOT proven is that there is a de jure one. That needs actually citations. You can't just point to a de facto situation and say that because it eixists that it is legal. De facto situations can (and often are) de jure illegal... they just are not prosecuted until after the fact (the classic example here are war crimes)

Now... can you provide evidence that this is de jure?

Posted: **Mon Nov 07, 2016 6:03 pm**

eliakon wrote:
Spoiler:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:You should read the indicated sections.

eliakon wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Did you miss the part where there's agencies that activly hunt them down, exceeding legal authority, and not careing about whom they hurt or kill in doing so to beat up, capture, imprison, interrogate on, experiment on and hold indefinately with out trial or representation, at their digression?

I'm not being a smartass here. I'm honestly asking, because that indicates they have no rights.

Ummm what part of 'exceeding legal authority' proves that the law is on their side?

They're a sponsored and popular governmental agency. They operate openly in the execution of their charter and duties. This proves that law is on their side.

Err no. When you are violating your legal authority then you do NOT have the law on your side. You may have public opinion on your side but that is different. The KKK had public opinion on their side and operated openly, that did not mean they were legal

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:

Pepsi Jedi wrote:If they had rights, they would not be subject to....

Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being hunted,
Being accosted and beaten up by governmental officals (Or civillians in mobs)

Like lynchings?

No. The US Government does it via the before mentioned Agency. That's why it's clear that aliens, in HU don't share the rights of humans.

Again demonstrating that someone is being Lynched does not prove the Lynching is legal.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being captured, and taken against their will (Kidnapping)
Being detained. (unlawful inprisonment)
Being held with out trial.
Being questioned with out legal representation (interrogation)

Good thing that no one ever arrested blacks in the south for "breathing while black" during the civil rights era

Good thing HU Isn't set during the civil rights era or you might have partially a point, but no. Not really, as it would more prove the point than anything. Reguardless. HU isn't set in the civil rights era and all the above is done by the US governmental agents. They're not locked up for doing their jobs, thus it's legal for them to do, which indicates that the aliens don't share the rights of humans, in HU.

It doesn't MATTER when HU is set. The point is that we can point to multiple examples of the exact same behavior in our history where we know that the victims had rights that were being deliberately ignored by the State. That demonstrates that simply ingnoring the rights of a person does not prove that those rights do not exist.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
And its a good thing that the US didn't run Internment Camps for Japanese Americans in WWII

HU is also not set during WWII, and that is currently seen as one of the darkest elements of our history and universially accepted as wrong. Well almost universally. Someone running for office in a couple of days might be down for it, but for the most part that was seen as wrong, and a human rights violation.

Again it doesn't matter when HU is set. The point is that HU is set during a period when the government is doing something. In the future the actions may be seen as being as dark or darker than the internment camps. Or put another way. In a game set in WWII you could not argue that the Japanese Americans had no rights. You could argue that their rights were being ignored but they still had them. Same thing here.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being experimented on. (Assault and battery)

Tuskegee experiment? Look it up

I don't need to look it up. I know all about Tuskegee, it would be currently against the law. Because people have broken the law, it's not indicative that the law didn't exist.
That was also... 84-44 years ago.

In 1974 Congress passed the National Research Act, and created a commission to make regulations governing the studies etc. The OHRP was established. Studies now require informed consent and have review boards and the like.

So.. again Not valid in the HU setting. You're speaking of things that happened in the past that are currently illegal and would get people locked up if they did them.

Your deliberately missing the point. The actions that were done in the past were illegal. They violated the rights of those people at the time they were done. The victims had rights that were ignored they victims did NOT have no rights. THAT is the point that is important here. The situation right now is the EXACT SAME ONE. The current situation is just as illegal, and just as horrific and likely to eventually be seen as such... but right NOW the people are commiting the crimes because they don't feel that they have to follow the laws. During Tuskegee black people had a right to not be murdered, the doctors though felt that since they were 'only blacks' that they didn't really have that right. HUGE difference.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being killed with out trial (Murder, as no nation has a formal declaration of 'war' on aliens.)

Lynching again thanks

Lynching is illegal.

I'm speaking of the US government, and it's agencies doing so to the aliens 'legally'.

I am sure that all the people that the US government/agents thereof has extra-judicially killed, or had sentenced to death in unfair courts, or had exterminated as threats to the citizenry are very happy to know that it was illegal and never happened.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Being enslaved. (Held in prision unless they agree to do that govenrment's bidding as a member of their super team etc)

That isn't what the word 'enlaved' means...

It's not? Lets see shall we?

Slave: 1: A person that is the property of and wholly subject to another; A bound servant
2: A person entirely under the domination of some influence or person.

If you capture and imprison someone and give them one option. To work for you, or to stay in prison, how does that not make them entierly under the domination of some influence or person?

If you have the control to give them that choice, are they not your bound servant? Faced with imprisonment or subjection? Thus.. Slavery?

If you make them a slave.. you have thus, ENSLAVED THEM.

Yes... that's what the word means.

Then I am glad to know that the entire population of the US is slaves. (since they are e
By your definition
Oh, and the entire Military during WWI, WWII and Vietnam was slave labor and thus pure evil
Or perhaps in trying to reach to far your being overly broad?
Because no, holding a person prisoner and offering a work program as a parole is not slavery even if the work program is military in nature.
Especially since you have not demonstrated that the people in these work programs ARE slaves. (see below)

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
...but its a good thing that there wasn't a 442 regimental combat team in WWII that was the only option for Japanese Americans to get out of the camps...

And already covered above, but again. We're not in WWII are we? The "setting" of HU is modern times, though you could argue it's 1980s. Which still wouldn't be WWII by quite a stretch.

Again you can't just ignore the fact that we have precedents that demonstrate that actions have already been done and NOT taken away rights. That is what the word precedent means. If we already know that you can hold someone in an internment camp and only allow parole under military service, because it has been done AND we know that those people were not slaves, AND that the people so held had rights... we can pretty safely assume that if the exact same thing is done again in the future that it will not suddenly turn them into slaves with no civil rights.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:So.... I'm curious as to what 'right' you think aliens have that's not really covered by the above. Or if they have rights, how all of the above are done in gross violation of the law. That's from ther US. Not some crazy Putin russia or something. The 'good guys' do that stuff. The bad guys likely more.

Seriously if you can do all of the above, with out ending up on death row for it, or life in prison yourself. What rights do the aliens have?

And not to be a smart ass here but
Have you READ about what they were doing to blacks in the south during the civil rights era?

Yes..... and thus has been deemed illegal since then. If you do such things you go to jail. They would be considered human rights violations. They were crimes, and are crimes still. The fact that they happened in history doesn't mean that black people don't currently have rights in our society. Rights that are withheld from Aliens in HU.

And again the point is that just because people were doing it didn't make it legal did it?
Just because the KKK was openly lynching blacks didn't mean that those blacks had no rights. Even if they were not allowed to exercise those rights.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
About what the US government has done to Native Americans, or the Japanese Americans in WWII?

As stated above. We're not in WWII, and those would be crimes. I'm not saying humanity has never been aholes to one another. Clearly they have, but you're saying because things happend 50-100+ years ago, those same people don't have rights today? they do.

Your still missing the point.
The aliens are not in a unique situation. They are in a common situation that has occurred over and over in human history, heck it has several incarnations in just the United States. Thus we can go look at how it has been handled in our history to see what the legal status would be. The legal status of those previous events tell us what the legal status of this event is. Since in none of the previous events were the people actually legally stripped of their rights and relegated to non-right status by their treatment it follows that the treatment of the aliens would not do this either.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:

I mean by this logic Blacks, Native Americans, Japanese-Americans, et multiple cetera have no civil rights because they have been mistreated...

And at varying points in history they didn't. But they do now.

You're trying to say that because people were abused and treated as not having rights in the past thaty they don't currently.

The points in time I was pointing to though they DID legally have those rights. They may not have been allowed to use them but legally they did have them.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:I'm pointing out that they DO have rights currently, but the Aliens do not.

And I am pointing out that you have not done any such thing. You have only shown that Aliens are not allowed to use rights. There is a big difference.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:At some point in HU's future, they might GIVE Aliens on earth, human rights, but as of now, they do not currently possess them. Time matters. Setting matters. The "Default" setting for HU is current (or 1980s if you go by publication)

Again your making an assumption that is not supported by the book. The rights issue is not, as far as I know, not explicitly settled one way or another. We can safely say that they are not treated as having rights, but you have not proven that they do not HAVE those rights. There is a huge difference.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:

...and since we KNOW this is false it suggests that any argument predicated on the exact same case would be equally false.

No, because your assumption is based on humanity not experiencing the passage of time. Which, it does. Dr Strange, you're not.

Umm you are aware of what the word 'precedent' means right?
The precedent is that simply ignoring peoples rights does not mean they do not exist. I am not saying that people do not experience the passage of time at all, so your snarky response is a total non sequitur. What I am saying is that we can look at how identical situations were handled in the past and draw a conclusion about how an identical situation will be handled in the present.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
Not having your rights respected is MUCH different than having the law explicitly say you do not have those rights.
You have proven the first yes. You have done zero to prove the second.

I have proven the second. You're addressing CRIMES and violations and times in history when the people you're referencing, did not infact 'have' rights via the law. It sucks, but the past sucked for that sort of thing. We're a little better now. (Still working on it)

The 'fact' is that as written, Aliens currently have no rights in HU, otherwise the actions of the US government would be ..... A (Sentient being?) Rights violation, as... they're doing all the above listed crimes in violations of the 'Rights' You're assuming that the aliens are granted.

The actions above are public. They're not ultra secret. The agency is even popular for doing them. Thus they're not hidden. The people know. These things are happening and noone's calling the US and other governments out for rights violations (Of the aliens) Therefore, in setting, there are no 'rights' being violated.

Thus.. clearly in HU, aliens are not afforded "Human Rights".

If it's "legal" for the government to openly Kidnap, detain, interrogate, hold with out trial, torture, experiment upon and ultimately enslave or kill aliens..... then clearly Aliens are not afforded the same rights as you or I.

No you have not proven anything
Those crimes of the past? Yeah, its the exact same situation today in HU. A crime is a crime... even if its popular and publicly condoned.
In WWII the government officially and publicly interned the Japanese. The Citizenry of the US was behind the program. The courts upheld it.
It was totally 100% a violation of their rights and illegal... but that didn't mean that it didn't happen.
Trying to argue that just because something is an official public program that is publicly supported means that it is legal... well
Hey lets go to today.
Enhanced Interrogation torture of terrorism suspects (not even convicts, just people that MIGHT be a terrorist, or just know something about them) was an official US government program for years. It was openly run, and a rather large majority of US citizens were supporters of it for years.
That doesn't mean that it was legal, or that those victims of it were not having their rights violated in systematic ways, or that the people responsible were not criminals. Just that no one cares enough to do anything about it. Maybe someday we will care enough to go back and redress the situation. maybe someday our government will issue a formal apology, maybe someday we will hold trials and hold people accountable... but in the mean time we can not simply claim that those rights ceased to exist because they were violated.

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:21 pm**

Sigh
since the post is getting insanely long and complicated I think I will recap my points here and try and restart

Point #1
The simple fact that someone's rights are being violated in a de facto manor does not now, and has not in our nations history, ever been valid legal proof that those rights have been de jure nullified. This is why I bring up the past such as the Civil Rights era or WWII. Because while the official actions of the government during those times were de facto violations of civil rights of groups, and those actions were both public and popular they were neither de jure legal nor demonstrated an actual de jure removal or nullification of the civil rights of the groups in question. THIS is important because the claim at stake here is that the current violation of aliens civil rights is proof that they do not have civil rights. My argument is that we can point to history to prove that this claim has always been false in the past, and thus it should be considered false now.

Point #2
The claim that there is no recognition of civil rights by the government
-Project Tyche is explicitly said to paranoid, working beyond its mandate, and in violation of the law in its handling of aliens... Sort of like the real world NSA/CIA and their dealing with terrorism suspects (extraordinary rendition kidnapping, enhanced interrogation torture, warrantless surveillance, and the like)

-Project Secure though is FAR more interesting. It has an acclimation program...
...a program that seeks to see if an alien can be trusted to be allowed to live and work in the United States. That right there suggests that they are allowing at a minimum an effective "green card" status... which would imply heavily rights and legal recognition since you can't have people that do not legally exist and have no rights working and interacting with the public

-S.H.O.C.K. is the only purely anti-alien group that goes around killing aliens... and it is an illegal vigilante organization like the KKK

Century Station book says that the US Government has actually pledged to cooperate with Alpha Prime and strongly implies that they agreed to the Covenant (they were attempting to minimize the damages but still...)
Heck I would note that the USAF has Komodo on its special mission team. As an officer. A position that will require a security clearance. And security clearances are ONLY available to US citizens. Who Have Rights.
Oh and Alpha Prime is a member of a Government Team...
And then there is the minor fact that Aliens go through the civilian court system

ALL of which are pretty strong evidence of the US recognizing them as having de jure rights.

THUS what I am saying is that while no one denies that there is massive discrimination against Aliens nor that they are likely to face de facto loss of rights the claim that the discrimination is an institutionalized, legalized de jure status where in they have no rights is an extraordinary (and dubious) claim and thus needs extraordinary evidence.
Since the claim made was that the setting said specifically that aliens do not have rights that is what needs to be proven. That particular burden of proof has not been met which is why I am saying that I do not believe the claim.
If someone can provide evidence to support the claim then we have something to talk about. But as it is all that I am seeing is a continued insistence that some how de facto status proves de jure status. Which is, at best, a logical fallacy since I have proven that claim false (with citable evidence such as US Internment Camps)

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 7:37 pm**

eliakon wrote: Sigh
since the post is getting insanely long and complicated I think I will recap my points here and try and restart

Point #1
The simple fact that someone's rights are being violated in a de facto manor does not now, and has not in our nations history, ever been valid legal proof that those rights have been de jure nullified. This is why I bring up the past such as the Civil Rights era or WWII. Because while the official actions of the government during those times were de facto violations of civil rights of groups, and those actions were both public and popular they were neither de jure legal nor demonstrated an actual de jure removal or nullification of the civil rights of the groups in question. THIS is important because the claim at stake here is that the current violation of aliens civil rights is proof that they do not have civil rights. My argument is that we can point to history to prove that this claim has always been false in the past, and thus it should be considered false now.

You seem some how able to miss the point, that the times you're pointing out and the things that happened in those times, were BEFORE EQUAL RIGHTS WERE GIVEN TO ALL. Thus at those points in those times, the violations you're citing were not against the law. That if they had equal rights then and in those times and places, it would be. Times have changed.

Pointing out that people had slavery before the civil war, doesn't mean that we have slavery now, or that savery is accepted, because the laws have changed. Which is basicly what you're doing.

Going "Well back then they treated these people with our rights"

Well yeah, back then they didn't HAVE equal rights.

eliakon wrote:

Point #2
The claim that there is no recognition of civil rights by the government
-Project Tyche is explicitly said to paranoid, working beyond its mandate, and in violation of the law in its handling of aliens... Sort of like the real world NSA/CIA and their dealing with terrorism suspects (extraordinary rendition kidnapping, enhanced interrogation torture, warrantless surveillance, and the like)

Two points here. 1) I don't remember it saying they were working beyond it's mandate and in violation of the law __IN IT'S HANDELING OF ALIENS__ If memory serves it said that they didn't seem to care who got hurt WHILE they were carrying out their orders, and that the violations if any would be against innocent people, caught in the cross fire.
So I'll ask you to cite the book and page that says that please.
2) The NSA/CIA are not working beyond their mandate in the situations you describe. They're working with in the patriot act. If they do exceed, they get charged with crimes, but it's not as common place as you're making out (If nothing else they would just have allied governments do things that we can't. I.E. letting Egypt torture people while our agents were present to observe. etc)

eliakon wrote:
-Project Secure though is FAR more interesting. It has an acclimation program...
...a program that seeks to see if an alien can be trusted to be allowed to live and work in the United States. That right there suggests that they are allowing at a minimum an effective "green card" status... which would imply heavily rights and legal recognition since you can't have people that do not legally exist and have no rights working and interacting with the public

You should read the section. For that to even happen, they have to get the alien away from the other group. Even then most don't make it through that program. Those that do, are requested/required to work for the Government. Thus the points about slavery above (Which you don't want to address.)

If they refuse their status is largely locked away. Only very very few are allowed to stay on earth, 'free' if they don't agree to work for the government, and even they are kept under constant survelliance, as per the book. Waiting for them to do something to be rounded up again.

So even if 1 in 100 some how manage to make it through all that and are let to stay, they're not treated like normalized citizens. They're watched like terrorists till they can be picked up or lead to others.

eliakon wrote:
-S.H.O.C.K. is the only purely anti-alien group that goes around killing aliens... and it is an illegal vigilante organization like the KKK

Simply not true. Project Tyche does to.

eliakon wrote:

Century Station book says that the US Government has actually pledged to cooperate with Alpha Prime and strongly implies that they agreed to the Covenant (they were attempting to minimize the damages but still...)

No.. not 'but still' the implication isn't that they've agreed to the Covenant. The implication is that they didn't wish INTERSTELLAR WAR with advanced civilizations and a race made up of mega heroes.

eliakon wrote:
Heck I would note that the USAF has Komodo on its special mission team. As an officer. A position that will require a security clearance. And security clearances are ONLY available to US citizens. Who Have Rights.

No that is implicated of slavery, before mentioned in the above. If they make it through the examinations and imprisonments, they can be offered a chance of 'freedom' ___IF THEY WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT___ i.e. Slavery, or at the very best, perminate indentured servitude.

eliakon wrote:
Oh and Alpha Prime is a member of a Government Team...

She's an exception, as noted in the Century station book. Even then she's working for the government which *points up*.

eliakon wrote:
And then there is the minor fact that Aliens go through the civilian court system.

They don't. They're hunted, captured, imprisoned, experimented on, interrigated, held, and even killed with out going through the court system.

eliakon wrote:
ALL of which are pretty strong evidence of the US recognizing them as having de jure rights.

They would be, but the books don't actually say what you're claiming.

eliakon wrote:

THUS what I am saying is that while no one denies that there is massive discrimination against Aliens nor that they are likely to face de facto loss of rights the claim that the discrimination is an institutionalized, legalized de jure status where in they have no rights is an extraordinary (and dubious) claim and thus needs extraordinary evidence.

It's not. You still haven't successfully countered my list of actions that happen to them, that would clearly prove they don't share the same rights.

eliakon wrote:
Since the claim made was that the setting said specifically that aliens do not have rights that is what needs to be proven. That particular burden of proof has not been met which is why I am saying that I do not believe the claim.

It's been clearly made. You just don't like being wrong. You'll play your games how ever you want. Clearly there's no changing your mind, but it's extreamly clear that the actions of the US government (and indications others are worse) Indicate that aliens do not possess rights on earth.

eliakon wrote:
If someone can provide evidence to support the claim then we have something to talk about. But as it is all that I am seeing is a continued insistence that some how de facto status proves de jure status. Which is, at best, a logical fallacy since I have proven that claim false (with citable evidence such as US Internment Camps)

I think you just like saying "De facto' and 'De jure' as if it some how invalidates the rest. It doesn't.

You've been proven wrong. Repeatedly. You're done.

I'm not going to waste any more time with it.

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 7:46 pm**

I'll be honest. I can easily and readily disregard a lot of the foundational fluff in the Century Station and Gramercy island books. The US government giving up all that just for the chance (and not a guaranteed one at that) at joining the galactic society? Not seeing it. And Gramercy Island would have been shut down, investigated, and restaffed within 6 months once a single lawyer was told he couldn't meet his client in the prison. The Bar Association would descend like demonic locusts.

So, I'll simply rephrase my question for it's original purpose. Say I'm playing an Immortal Demon Lord who does indeed have US Citizenship (and has had that for no less than 30 years) and no criminal record. Would it (in theory) be possible for him to bring Hate Crime charges against demon hunters and their ilk?

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 8:51 pm**

wyrmraker wrote:I'll be honest. I can easily and readily disregard a lot of the foundational fluff in the Century Station and Gramercy island books. The US government giving up all that just for the chance (and not a guaranteed one at that) at joining the galactic society? Not seeing it. And Gramercy Island would have been shut down, investigated, and restaffed within 6 months once a single lawyer was told he couldn't meet his client in the prison. The Bar Association would descend like demonic locusts.

So, I'll simply rephrase my question for it's original purpose. Say I'm playing an Immortal Demon Lord who does indeed have US Citizenship (and has had that for no less than 30 years) and no criminal record. Would it (in theory) be possible for him to bring Hate Crime charges against demon hunters and their ilk?

Of course.
Your a US Citizen. That means you have all the rights and privileges that go with Citizenship.
if someone is harassing you because of your race that is illegal under US law... as long as that is the ONLY reason they are harassing you.
If you are eating souls or what have you, then you open your self up to a claim that it is not profiling (which is illegal) but that they are going after the illegal activity (which is fine)
But if your just minding your own business and some rude exorcist comes by and putting holy water circles down by your kids school...
Yah, sick the FBI on him.

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 9:26 pm**

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote: Sigh
since the post is getting insanely long and complicated I think I will recap my points here and try and restart

Point #1
The simple fact that someone's rights are being violated in a de facto manor does not now, and has not in our nations history, ever been valid legal proof that those rights have been de jure nullified. This is why I bring up the past such as the Civil Rights era or WWII. Because while the official actions of the government during those times were de facto violations of civil rights of groups, and those actions were both public and popular they were neither de jure legal nor demonstrated an actual de jure removal or nullification of the civil rights of the groups in question. THIS is important because the claim at stake here is that the current violation of aliens civil rights is proof that they do not have civil rights. My argument is that we can point to history to prove that this claim has always been false in the past, and thus it should be considered false now.

You seem some how able to miss the point, that the times you're pointing out and the things that happened in those times, were BEFORE EQUAL RIGHTS WERE GIVEN TO ALL. Thus at those points in those times, the violations you're citing were not against the law. That if they had equal rights then and in those times and places, it would be. Times have changed.

THATS THE POINT.
The were NOT.
Those actions? They were done in times when the action itself was ILLEGAL under the law.
That didn't make the actions legal though. No matter how popular
Just like the current US policy of illegally detaining and torturing people doesn't make it legal.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:Pointing out that people had slavery before the civil war, doesn't mean that we have slavery now, or that savery is accepted, because the laws have changed. Which is basicly what you're doing.

No I am not doing that. I have never said that. You are trying to put words into my mouth there
What I am saying is that in the 1950s the states of the south were engaged in illegal actions on a state level that were systematically denying blacks their civil rights. Even though they had those rights legally.
The civil rights era was AFTER the civil war, not before it.
the 14th amendment was passed in 1868
1950 is AFTER 1868
Thus the relevance

Pepsi Jedi wrote:Going "Well back then they treated these people with our rights"

Well yeah, back then they didn't HAVE equal rights.

Um you do realize that 1868 is before 1950 right?
It is even before 1941
So Yeah, they had their rights.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:

Point #2
The claim that there is no recognition of civil rights by the government
-Project Tyche is explicitly said to paranoid, working beyond its mandate, and in violation of the law in its handling of aliens... Sort of like the real world NSA/CIA and their dealing with terrorism suspects (extraordinary rendition kidnapping, enhanced interrogation torture, warrantless surveillance, and the like)

Two points here. 1) I don't remember it saying they were working beyond it's mandate and in violation of the law __IN IT'S HANDELING OF ALIENS__ If memory serves it said that they didn't seem to care who got hurt WHILE they were carrying out their orders, and that the violations if any would be against innocent people, caught in the cross fire.
So I'll ask you to cite the book and page that says that please.
2) The NSA/CIA are not working beyond their mandate in the situations you describe. They're working with in the patriot act. If they do exceed, they get charged with crimes, but it's not as common place as you're making out (If nothing else they would just have allied governments do things that we can't. I.E. letting Egypt torture people while our agents were present to observe. etc)

Um you are aware that violations of the Geneva Accord are still illegal right?
That torture is illegal no matter what?
That even the patriot act can not authorize the kidnapping of foreign nationals and then torturing them?

As for the source, You can read aliens unlimited project Tyche yourself. I provided the source (alien unlimited revise book)

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
-Project Secure though is FAR more interesting. It has an acclimation program...
...a program that seeks to see if an alien can be trusted to be allowed to live and work in the United States. That right there suggests that they are allowing at a minimum an effective "green card" status... which would imply heavily rights and legal recognition since you can't have people that do not legally exist and have no rights working and interacting with the public

You should read the section. For that to even happen, they have to get the alien away from the other group. Even then most don't make it through that program. Those that do, are requested/required to work for the Government. Thus the points about slavery above (Which you don't want to address.)

They don't have to 'get them away' from the other group. Tyche hands them over to Secure.
On their own.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:If they refuse their status is largely locked away. Only very very few are allowed to stay on earth, 'free' if they don't agree to work for the government, and even they are kept under constant survelliance, as per the book. Waiting for them to do something to be rounded up again.

Source?
Because the BOOK says "the typical Alien Acclimation Program (AAP) lasts one to four years before it determines whether the alien can be allowed to function in human society, even under strict military rules and observation. The period is governed by the friendliness and cooperation of the alien and how quick the being becomes acclimated to Earth society, civilization, and the law. those that successfully complete the AAP process are encouraged to join S.C.R.E.T, Agec, Project Secure, Project Tyche, the FBI, NSA, CIA, military or other government agency. Many will refuse the offers simply to live a reasonably free life.
Encouraged with the ability to refuse doesn't sound like they are forced to join and locked away.
Only those who refuse to cooperate, exhibit hostility or treachery, or simply cannot acclimate to human society are imprisoned at secret bases.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:So even if 1 in 100 some how manage to make it through all that and are let to stay, they're not treated like normalized citizens. They're watched like terrorists till they can be picked up or lead to others.

Since that is not what the book says...

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
-S.H.O.C.K. is the only purely anti-alien group that goes around killing aliens... and it is an illegal vigilante organization like the KKK

Simply not true. Project Tyche does to.

Not according to the book. But thanks for playing.
They are paranoid. They have a us vs them attitude. They even are fairly trigger happy...
but they are not out to kill aliens to kill aliens (especially since aliens work for Tyche)

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:

Century Station book says that the US Government has actually pledged to cooperate with Alpha Prime and strongly implies that they agreed to the Covenant (they were attempting to minimize the damages but still...)

No.. not 'but still' the implication isn't that they've agreed to the Covenant. The implication is that they didn't wish INTERSTELLAR WAR with advanced civilizations and a race made up of mega heroes.

Again that is not what the book says.
You can put your own personal head canon spin on things all you want.
But the book says the words

"The U.S. Federal Government offered full cooperation to Alpha Prime and her fellow heroes as a sing of the Earth's Willingness to adhere to "galactic law." And it was hoped, to buy the planet early admission into the galactic community, but things never quite worked out that way."

Heck it even says that the US adheres to galactic law. Which would suggest that what ever the galactic law regarding rights status for aliens (as understood by the races that are bound by The Covenant) then that is the status that the US holds as well. Since that is what the book says that the US policy is

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
Heck I would note that the USAF has Komodo on its special mission team. As an officer. A position that will require a security clearance. And security clearances are ONLY available to US citizens. Who Have Rights.

No that is implicated of slavery, before mentioned in the above. If they make it through the examinations and imprisonments, they can be offered a chance of 'freedom' ___IF THEY WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT___ i.e. Slavery, or at the very best, perminate indentured servitude.

Again that is not what the book says.
The book says that they are encouraged to join, but do not have to.
And that STILL does not change the fact that those jobs... are only open to US citizens, and that he is an OFFICER, not an enlisted, not a specialist, not a warrant, not anything else he is an OFFICER.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
Oh and Alpha Prime is a member of a Government Team...

She's an exception, as noted in the Century station book. Even then she's working for the government which *points up*.

Where is it stated that she is an exception?
I missed the line that says she is the sole alien on earth that is considered a person.
heck I missed the line that says that she is an exception in any way, shape or form
Head canon is not a rule

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
And then there is the minor fact that Aliens go through the civilian court system.

They don't. They're hunted, captured, imprisoned, experimented on, interrogated, held, and even killed with out going through the court system.

You haven't read Gramercy Island recently have you. There are aliens in there. In a civilian prison, after being sentenced by a civilian court.
If you were correct then they would have to be held in secret military bases... but they aren't... because you are NOT correct.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
ALL of which are pretty strong evidence of the US recognizing them as having de jure rights.

They would be, but the books don't actually say what you're claiming.

Great. Your source?
I mean really your source?
Because as I just pointed out above I can provide back up from the books for my stances and so far your claims seem to be rooted in "nuh uh"

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:

THUS what I am saying is that while no one denies that there is massive discrimination against Aliens nor that they are likely to face de facto loss of rights the claim that the discrimination is an institutionalized, legalized de jure status where in they have no rights is an extraordinary (and dubious) claim and thus needs extraordinary evidence.

It's not. You still haven't successfully countered my list of actions that happen to them, that would clearly prove they don't share the same rights.

That is because your list of actions are CRIMINAL ACTIONS THAT ARE BEING DONE ILLEGALLY
let me make it more blunt
The US government imprisoned Japanese Americans in 1941
This was a violation of their civil rights under the 14th amendment
The 14th amendment was passed in 1868
Does this mean that the rights of the Japanese Americans vanished? That they did not exist?
OF COURSE IT DOESNT.
SAME THING HERE.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
Since the claim made was that the setting said specifically that aliens do not have rights that is what needs to be proven. That particular burden of proof has not been met which is why I am saying that I do not believe the claim.

It's been clearly made. You just don't like being wrong. You'll play your games how ever you want. Clearly there's no changing your mind, but it's extreamly clear that the actions of the US government (and indications others are worse) Indicate that aliens do not possess rights on earth.

I think you do not want to admit that the government commits crimes
The bitter truth is that sometimes the government does things that are actually illegal.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:
eliakon wrote:
If someone can provide evidence to support the claim then we have something to talk about. But as it is all that I am seeing is a continued insistence that some how de facto status proves de jure status. Which is, at best, a logical fallacy since I have proven that claim false (with citable evidence such as US Internment Camps)

I think you just like saying "De facto' and 'De jure' as if it some how invalidates the rest. It doesn't.

You've been proven wrong. Repeatedly. You're done.

Do you understand what the words MEAN?
Just because the KKK lynches blacks doesn't mean blacks have no rights.
Just because the US government imprisons Japanese Americans doesn't mean that they don't have rights
You seem to have a hard time understanding that sometimes people break the law. Even the government can (and does) break the law.
And that if you are going to claim that the governments actions are EXPLICITLY legal, then you need to do just that. Provide EXPLICIT proof that they ARE legal. Because otherwise all you have done is prove that they are taking actions.
Right now you are arguing that blacks had no rights in 1950s-1960s south
Right now you are arguing that the Japanese Americans had no rights in the 1940s
Right now you are arguing that there are no such thing as human rights in the real world because the US government right now says that they do not have to respect them.
YOU ARE LITTERALLY SAYING THAT RIGHTS ONLY EXIST IF NO ONE EVER VIOLATES THEM. EVER.
And I reject that stance as, besides being absurd, being legally false, historically false, and counter to every definition of the word 'right' in existence.

I'm not going to waste any more time with it.[/quote]

Posted: **Tue Nov 08, 2016 11:20 pm**

Just to point something out... even Mutants apparently have civil rights, because both the Century Station book and Mutant Underground states that the various corporations are spending millions (billions) on lawyers to deny them those rights as the processes that made them are patented trade secrets, making them property rather than people.

In other words, the burden of proof is on the corporations to prove that these individuals are not people but property. Of course, that these corporations have millions (billions) to spend on lawyers to prove their cases (with dubious evidence), they can more or less violate the civil rights of the mutants and experiments they create (who usually don't have the resources to fight such legal battles).

This doesn't change the fact that this is an abuse of the law... just that the wheels are justice are slow to turn (especially with lawyers doing everything they can to slow those wheels to a crawl).

Posted: **Wed Nov 16, 2016 2:20 am**

Razorwing wrote:Just to point something out... even Mutants apparently have civil rights, because both the Century Station book and Mutant Underground states that the various corporations are spending millions (billions) on lawyers to deny them those rights as the processes that made them are patented trade secrets, making them property rather than people.

In other words, the burden of proof is on the corporations to prove that these individuals are not people but property. Of course, that these corporations have millions (billions) to spend on lawyers to prove their cases (with dubious evidence), they can more or less violate the civil rights of the mutants and experiments they create (who usually don't have the resources to fight such legal battles).

This doesn't change the fact that this is an abuse of the law... just that the wheels are justice are slow to turn (especially with lawyers doing everything they can to slow those wheels to a crawl).

I don't see it that way at all. The way it reads is that those corps and what not are spending the money to -prevent- the mutants from GAINING Civil rights. Not to take away what was given. I.E. they're fighting anything that might at one point try and change the laws, to -give- them rights.

Not trying to fight to change the laws to take away what's presently there.

If you look on pages 11 and 12 of Mutant Underground it directly addresses it. Saying that the law hasn't kept up with the scientific explosion and governments don't know what to do with it. The US had made a half hearted attempt to block it but private corps can do as they please. There's a statement of governments hesitating on making laws on morality and that's where it's mentioned that the money is flowing in. Again, -prevention- of the laws being formed, not -retraction-.

Specifically page 12

"With out any laws or rulings as to weather or not genetic lab creations have human rights, intelligent mutant animals, genetic misfits and even human volunteers are caged, chained, studied and tested around the clock(Some would say tormented and tortured) like laboratory rats. Some are even killed and dissected for further study or used in new experiments.
These genetic creations have no rights"

I mean it's straight up said. Not hinted at, at all. "These genetic creations have no rights" It goes on quite a while, but points out that while it sucks, it's perfectly legal.

Posted: **Wed Nov 16, 2016 2:27 am**

wyrmraker wrote:So, I'll simply rephrase my question for it's original purpose. Say I'm playing an Immortal Demon Lord who does indeed have US Citizenship (and has had that for no less than 30 years) and no criminal record. Would it (in theory) be possible for him to bring Hate Crime charges against demon hunters and their ilk?

In a setting, where the US government has acknowledged immortal demon lords openly, and given them US Citizenship ( Er.. wha??).... then.... they would theoretically have the full rights of any US Citizen, unless it was specially dictated that they did not.

Right now we don't have "Classes" of citizens. Other than "Ex convicts", who may have restricted rights. (Voting, gun ownership etc). If you're a Citizen you're a Citizen.

But... if they're nationalizing immortal Demon loads... they MAY have put some restrictions on them. like... if they're immortal... Retirement and such benefits are unlikely to be granted at the same time they would be for humans. lol

In a setting as such, that's the sort of thing the setting creator would have to dictate. A world where immortal demon lords are given full US Citizenship... is one that's far enough different than our own, that it would be up to the creator of that universe.

Posted: **Wed Nov 16, 2016 7:34 am**

wyrmraker wrote:The US Civil Rights Act brings us the definition of Hate Crimes as any action "by force or by threat of force, injure, intimidate, or interfere with anyone who is engaged in six specified protected activities, by reason of their race, color, religion, or national origin." That has become the foundation for such crimes.

In a Heroes Unlimited world, should the phrase "sentient species" be added, based on the government's knowledge of extra-terrestrials?

How would you handle societal/cultural equivalence? Religious diversity and freedom?

The World the group I run with has never adopted hate/bias crime statues. Such motivations may be considered as mitigating factors but are not crimes in and of themselves.

Posted: **Wed Nov 16, 2016 1:55 pm**

It is more that these lawyers are confusing the issue... arguing that because many mutants and experiments are created by a patented process that they are property rather than people (and thus don't deserve the same rights given to people).

This is a technicality that the law hasn't caught up with that these corporations are exploiting... they are intentionally using the fact that their creations are created rather than born as a legal excuse to create a slave population. The fact is that the laws haven't closed these loopholes and technicalities to prevent such abuse... not that the laws state that these people don't have rights (they do... but because of these technicalities those rights can be stripped from them).

It is the same thing with Aliens... people are arguing technicalities that prevent existing laws from being applied or enforced... allowing abuses of justice to be carried out against these people while the law makers struggle to catch up.

This is what Eliakon was saying... while the laws do exist that grant these individuals rights, those rights are being ignored or argued against because of technicalities (Subject 16 was created in a lab, not born to a human parent, thus can not be considered human; Miss. Prime here wasn't born on Earth and despite her human-like appearance isn't actually human, thus can't be accorded any "human" rights). These technicalities are what deprive these beings of the rights that should be accorded to them.

Posted: **Wed Nov 16, 2016 2:44 pm**

Razorwing wrote:It is more that these lawyers are confusing the issue... arguing that because many mutants and experiments are created by a patented process that they are property rather than people (and thus don't deserve the same rights given to people).

This is a technicality that the law hasn't caught up with that these corporations are exploiting... they are intentionally using the fact that their creations are created rather than born as a legal excuse to create a slave population. The fact is that the laws haven't closed these loopholes and technicalities to prevent such abuse... not that the laws state that these people don't have rights (they do... but because of these technicalities those rights can be stripped from them).

It is the same thing with Aliens... people are arguing technicalities that prevent existing laws from being applied or enforced... allowing abuses of justice to be carried out against these people while the law makers struggle to catch up.

This is what Eliakon was saying... while the laws do exist that grant these individuals rights, those rights are being ignored or argued against because of technicalities (Subject 16 was created in a lab, not born to a human parent, thus can not be considered human; Miss. Prime here wasn't born on Earth and despite her human-like appearance isn't actually human, thus can't be accorded any "human" rights). These technicalities are what deprive these beings of the rights that should be accorded to them.

Please point me to the laws pertaining to mutants, and or beings from other planets that currently give them rights.

Right. We don't have any. Just like Dolphins don't have human rights, nor humpback whales, or corvids, or even gorillas.

For us to have them, they would actually have to be written and passed into law.

Which is what the Mutants book addresses. That governments have not caught up to the scientific advances, much less codified laws pertaining to the new beings. Thus THEY HAVE NO RIGHTS.

You're assuming that rights (Legally) are intrinsic and exist for all. They most certainly do not until they're created. Until they're written and passed into law. They do not exist.

The book tells us this hasn't happened. It states SPECIFICALLY That Mutants have no rights. I gave you the page number. It doesn't say "Oh they have them but we're ignoring them"

It states in black and white that they don't have any, and that there's alot of money being put into preventing them from gaining them.

You can play your games how ever (No doubt you do. lol) but in canon. The default HU setting has stated clearly they don't exist.

Posted: **Thu Nov 17, 2016 2:25 pm**

Pepsi Jedi wrote:Which is what the Mutants book addresses. That governments have not caught up to the scientific advances, much less codified laws pertaining to the new beings. Thus THEY HAVE NO RIGHTS.

You're assuming that rights (Legally) are intrinsic and exist for all. They most certainly do not until they're created. Until they're written and passed into law. They do not exist.

I agree. It is kind of like how slaves did not have rights in the US until after the Civil War. They were treated as property. Then after that they were given very limited rights, as were women at one time.

Posted: **Thu Nov 17, 2016 6:48 pm**

Wouldn't mutants not created in a lab, not be citizens of the country they live in and have the rights because of that.

Posted: **Thu Nov 17, 2016 9:51 pm**

Mutants 'not' created in a lab, aren't humans. Therefore human law doesn't pertain to them.

The books state that countries have not caught up and enacted laws making mutants citizens, so no.

The book also states clearly in black and white that mutants have no rights.

Posted: **Fri Nov 18, 2016 5:20 pm**

Technically all intelligent beings have the intrinsic rights.

However governmental law may not always extend the legally protected forms of those rights to them. And usually won't until a law is specifically passed or enough case law precedents pile up.
This is why many animal rights groups keep filing lawsuits over the treatment of animals while citing human rights laws. All it takes is one or two cases where the lawsuit isn't thrown out. Even if they lose, there is a precedent for extending human rights to animals and it becomes easier to file more such lawsuits. If they win the precedent becomes even stronger.

If it becomes a common enough occurrence, you can propose a bill to get it enshrined as a law instead of just a common precedent.

Posted: **Sun Nov 20, 2016 2:49 pm**

Well Glitterboy that's my point. Untill the LAW gives them those rights, they don't have them. And in Palladium/HU, they've specifically NOT. We know this, because the book tells us with out any ambiguity that it's so.

Posted: **Thu Nov 24, 2016 2:39 pm**

no, my point is that they do have Rights.. it's just that the legal system doesn't usually recognize them in practice until after a long struggle to get people to realize the intrinsic rights the universe (and the american constitution) says everyone has apply equally to them.

same sad process that the Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, etc all had to go through in our country.

just because the legal system is ignoring a group's intrinsic rights does not negate those rights.

so it is much more accurate to say they have no recognized legal protections. which is very different from having no rights.

Posted: **Thu Nov 24, 2016 3:39 pm**

Pepsi Jedi wrote:Mutants 'not' created in a lab, aren't humans. Therefore human law doesn't pertain to them.

The books state that countries have not caught up and enacted laws making mutants citizens, so no.

The book also states clearly in black and white that mutants have no rights.

So wait we have two human parents and some X factor cause thier child to be blue and fly and that not a human? That seem very wacked from a Legal perspective.

Posted: **Thu Nov 24, 2016 8:48 pm**

Saitou Hajime wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Mutants 'not' created in a lab, aren't humans. Therefore human law doesn't pertain to them.

The books state that countries have not caught up and enacted laws making mutants citizens, so no.

The book also states clearly in black and white that mutants have no rights.

So wait we have two human parents and some X factor cause thier child to be blue and fly and that not a human? That seem very wacked from a Legal perspective.

Yet that is frequently how things play out in super-hero and other science fiction and fantasy stories; you can be born to human parents yet declared not human for whatever reason a prejudiced person feels like including nothing more than being deformed (frankly given how certain birth defects can leave someone looking horribly ugly or not quite human looking we should see way more stories show up of them being victimized by people witch-hunting for non-humans or mutants rather than almost always seeming to find qualifying mutants to attack).

After Marvel turned around and declared mutants WEREN'T humans (to save on toy tariffs) in violation of everything that they stand for after the 'No More Mutants' deal with the Scarlet Witch in the comics those few mutants still left were actually treated like animals covered under the Endangered Species Act instead of as human beings.

Posted: **Fri Nov 25, 2016 4:26 pm**

glitterboy2098 wrote:no, my point is that they do have Rights.. it's just that the legal system doesn't usually recognize them in practice until after a long struggle to get people to realize the intrinsic rights the universe (and the american constitution) says everyone has apply equally to them.

same sad process that the Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, etc all had to go through in our country.

just because the legal system is ignoring a group's intrinsic rights does not negate those rights.

so it is much more accurate to say they have no recognized legal protections. which is very different from having no rights.

Ehh.. it's a matter of samantics at that level.

The lack of legally recognized rights, indicates that you don't have those rights, as they're not legally afforded to you.

Sentimentality aside, if they're not legally recognized you don't -have/possess- those rights. You can 'claim' them, in the hazy metaphorical sort of way, but with out legal backing it means nothing. I can claim I have the rights of "All mankind" or what ever, but unless I'm in a country that provides those rights legally (and enforces it) it's just air.

Posted: **Fri Nov 25, 2016 4:31 pm**

Saitou Hajime wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Mutants 'not' created in a lab, aren't humans. Therefore human law doesn't pertain to them.

The books state that countries have not caught up and enacted laws making mutants citizens, so no.

The book also states clearly in black and white that mutants have no rights.

So wait we have two human parents and some X factor cause thier child to be blue and fly and that not a human? That seem very wacked from a Legal perspective.

Not really. A mutation resulting in a superhuman would most definitely be considered something 'else'.

In the real world 'mutants' are often disfigured or disabled in some way. (Or it's so mild you don't really think of it as a mutation. Heterochroma, or having loads and loads of freckels are technically 'mutations' but most people don't realize or catagorize them as such) In the real world 'human mutation' is at best a medical disability or such.

in comics/ HU they could shoot plasma blasts and or kill everyone around them by secreting acid. It's a different playing field.

The Mutants Underground book is.... well if we're honest. CLEARLY ... an.... "Homage" Taken from certain comics with "X" in their title, with the "X" Removed. Some would say it's shamelessly ripped off. I'll not go that far on Palladium's own forums. I'll say it's an 'homage' to 'That kind of comic story" but the parallels are enormous and you can clearly see the source material if you read it. "Mutants" in comics aren't considered human. They're their own species. (Classification differs). Same seems to be said for HU.

Posted: **Fri Nov 25, 2016 4:32 pm**

Nightmask wrote:
Saitou Hajime wrote:
Pepsi Jedi wrote:Mutants 'not' created in a lab, aren't humans. Therefore human law doesn't pertain to them.

The books state that countries have not caught up and enacted laws making mutants citizens, so no.

The book also states clearly in black and white that mutants have no rights.

So wait we have two human parents and some X factor cause thier child to be blue and fly and that not a human? That seem very wacked from a Legal perspective.

Yet that is frequently how things play out in super-hero and other science fiction and fantasy stories; you can be born to human parents yet declared not human for whatever reason a prejudiced person feels like including nothing more than being deformed (frankly given how certain birth defects can leave someone looking horribly ugly or not quite human looking we should see way more stories show up of them being victimized by people witch-hunting for non-humans or mutants rather than almost always seeming to find qualifying mutants to attack).

After Marvel turned around and declared mutants WEREN'T humans (to save on toy tariffs) in violation of everything that they stand for after the 'No More Mutants' deal with the Scarlet Witch in the comics those few mutants still left were actually treated like animals covered under the Endangered Species Act instead of as human beings.

To be fair, both in Marvel and in HU you do see 'inhuman looking ____" being chased and witch hunted for being mutants. In HU in specific it mentions how inhuman Alien's are often mistaken for Mutants and mistreated, and in Century Station, how the inverse happens. Inhuman mutants are mistaken for aliens and thus mistreated there. (As Century Station are still pretty pissed at the aliens in general)

Posted: **Tue Nov 29, 2016 10:47 am**

Something to consider for all sides. Western world laws (IE US law) works really differently in the HU world, as they relate to the various super humans. From Villains Unlimited and Gramercy Island, we know that super human suspects and criminals can be denied access to legal consul, and certain trial rights. From Aliens Un's write up on SHOCK, the threat thresh hold for super humans is much higher before being able to claim self-defense (SHOCK goons can shoot at you, but so long as they can prove they were just shooting near you, they're still on solid legal ground). And we can see enough concern for super human civil rights that the group the Jury had to take things into their own hand to make sure that heroes who lose it or go rouge are dealt with where normal human laws don't apply.

Posted: **Sun Dec 04, 2016 10:24 am**

wyrmraker wrote:The US Civil Rights Act brings us the definition of Hate Crimes as any action "by force or by threat of force, injure, intimidate, or interfere with anyone who is engaged in six specified protected activities, by reason of their race, color, religion, or national origin." That has become the foundation for such crimes.

In a Heroes Unlimited world, should the phrase "sentient species" be added, based on the government's knowledge of extra-terrestrials?

Okay... deep breath. Here's what I remember from my law-school constitutional law class:

The constitutionality of a law is always subject to court review. When courts analyze whether a law is unconstitutional, they apply different standards of review (i.e. the set the bar of unconstitutionality higher or lower) depending on whether the law touches on a protected right. If it doesn't - for instance, a law regulating how high buildings can be built - the standard of review is pretty low: it needs to be rationally related to a legitimate state interest. In this example, limiting the height of buildings might be rationally related to the state interest in ensuring buildings on a fault line aren't so high that an earthquake would case unnecessary loss of life.

However, if the law touches on an obvious constitutional or human right, the court applies strict scrutiny - is the law narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling government interest? Targeting people on the basis of immutable characteristics is not a compelling government interest, so the law essentially must be infringing on that right as little as possible in order to achieve something obviously, absolutely necessary for a government to do.

In real life, it's hard to come up with any scenario in which the government has a compelling interest in quashing the rights of racial or ethnic minorities. But mutants? Demons? Aliens? It's a lot easier to show how a law that infringes on their rights could be constitutional, when it addresses a pressing need for public safety (which the government clearly has a compelling interest in ensuring) and when there might be no way a law could be so narrowly tailored as to respect the rights of demons while still ensuring the public interest.

Let's look at the demon hunter example. Is demon hunting a state-sanctioned activity? It well might be - considering that demons are hostile to all human life, that all people have a right to self-defense, and that the state may not be able to react to every demon outbreak everywhere because it does not have the resources to do so, I'd say there's a good argument for its constitutionality. However, hunting aliens may not be constitutional, because being an alien is an immutable characteristic, an "all-alien" hunting license is not narrowly tailored, and there is no compelling government interest in eliminating all alien life.

Whew. Law-school exam over.

Forums of the Megaverse®

Hate crimes definition

Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition

Re: Hate crimes definition