Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pointman
I still haven't described it because it is irrelevant. The point is that if parents believe that something is harmful to their children, it is their right to protect their child from it, even if parent's opinion is wrong. If you think that russian parents are ignorant, or even if they really are, doesn't mean that they can`t protect their children from something they feel is unappropriate.
|
So parents have the right to protect their children from harm that may be imaginary by trampling on the rights of LGBT people?
As you said, "Your Liberty To Swing Your Fist Ends Just Where My Nose Begins. [...] This is the very basic of democracy. And this is what this law is all about."
Yet you argue that punching LGBT people in the nose is okay because you're afraid of them. In that case, it is clearly important to determine whether such fear is founded or unfounded.
Some infringing on rights is okay so long as the infringement is to achieve a pressing and substantial objective, and the infringement is minimal, protional, and rationally connected to the objective. This is the Oakes Test. The Russian law fails this test when harm is unproven, because if you can't show that children are harmed then there's no rational connection to the objective of protecting children.