What happens if Xi Jinping decides that he wants something that you do not want? He will not let you vote if one day his foreign policy goals involve nice Americans.
Are you somehow not aware of this? They were a founding member of the UN, and have been on the Security Council since it's beginning. They have abstained or voted yes on every UN action that involves the SC (international peace and security).
Meng violated additional US laws... which she is only subject to because she was operating in the US. Just as a US citizen is subject to Chinese laws when operating in China. Surely you're not suggesting that foreigners should be allowed to go into another country and violate their laws without consequence.
The PRC became a permanent member of the Security Council (with a veto) only since 1971. Taiwan was the permanent member from 1945-1971.
Of course, you could reply to this comment with some gross injustice, and I could counter. But I'm generally curious. And if you do believe that that U.S. and China are the same, I guess my next question, because arguments seem to lead this way - how do you feel about what-aboutism?
But what irks me is the "what-aboutism." If Texas executes handicap people, that's awful. But it makes China harvesting organs OK? The U.S. has a horrible track record in Latin America and (frankly) around the world, so China gets some "slack" in how many human rights activists or lawyers it jails each year?
I understand I'm responding to a larger idea and not your comment specifically but... your exact line of argument is used to justify basically everything China (and Russia, and a lot of people incidentally) does that is condemned by the international community
"So-and-so does it? Wake up you fucking sheep" is basically the locked-and-loaded phrase you can use to sound important and win any argument anytime, anywhere, and I think the tendency to fall back on that idea on HN hurts the community.
Hopefully, as America's hegemony declines relative to other actors, the resulting multipolar world is fairer for more people.
Monopolies aren't a good thing in the commercial sphere, and they aren't a good thing in the political sphere, both lend themselves to abusive practices by those who can go unchallenged.
I sort of go back and forth on the point though. I also think monopolies enable and contribute to abuse - but I worry that the multipolar order would just breed new battle grounds for the various contenders to establish supremacy. On the one hand, you can get the space race (woo, the moon!), on the other hand, you can get the arms race (boo and/or complicated yay, nuclear weapons!).
China being bad doesn't excuse the U.S, the U.S. being bad doesn't excuse China. But somehow, somewhere, in the rhetoric of HN (and let's face it, the internet) there's this idea that only the morally unimpeachable can criticize something. But in reality that just gives the worst actors carte blanche to do whatever the fuck they want - as long as it doesn't break some record or set a new standard for terribleness.
We're in a moral race to the bottom, and it doesn't help to say "because so-and-so did it." That just digs us deeper
> Sec. 192.001. REGISTRATION REQUIRED. The birth of each child born in this state shall be registered.
Children receive birth certificates regardless of whether their parents are married, or are citizens, or any other consideration. There is no requirement for a marriage certificate, or for anything else.
It's also not true that you can't be registered as a married couple without a marriage certificate. You can, and it's easy.
Edit: You're probably talking about China, not Texas.