This thread is so emotionally charged as to be totally defunct. I'm strongly on the side of supporting LGBT equality, opposing the law in Russia and would be proud to have Canada or individual Canadian athletes making some kind of visible protest at the Olympics, but even I'm hesitant to post in this thread for fear of accusations that I'm a backward bigot because I'm willing to accept that my moral position is not absolute and that people whose moral views regarding gays are negative should still be entitled to express them and argue for them as long as they are not inciting violence.
Where has anyone attempted to stifle expression? Go ahead and express whatever you want, but be prepared to face opposing positions, and if your (not you in particular) position is one that is okay with treating others as less than equal based on sexual orientation be prepared for those opposing positions to be very unwelcoming.
__________________
When you do a signature and don't attribute it to anyone, it's yours. - Vulcan
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to valo403 For This Useful Post:
Where has anyone attempted to stifle expression? Go ahead and express whatever you want, but be prepared to face opposing positions, and if your (not you in particular) position is one that is okay with treating others as less than equal based on sexual orientation be prepared for those opposing positions to be very unwelcoming.
I will never understand why I continue to hear the argument that freedom of speech is tantamount to freedom from criticism - well, I guess I understand it; the people making that argument are generally quite stupid (Edit note: I REFER TO NO ONE HERE NOR ANYONE IN PARTICULAR).
But really, it needs to be written in big bold letters somewhere where everyone can read: just as freedom of speech protects your right to express your opinion, it protects my right to point out what a total **cking a**hole you are for doing so.
Last edited by 19Yzerman19; 08-30-2013 at 11:10 AM.
And I think there's a difference between a person from the gay community saying bad things about all priests and ALL people from the gay community saying that. Every group of people has some dumb people in it that say and do dumb things.
Just like I don't judge all Christians by what Westbro says and does, and I don't judge all Christian denominations by the Catholic Church's systemic problem of protecting sex offenders, I also wouldn't judge the gay community by the words or actions of a few.
Just because a Flames fan acted like an ass at a Vancouver game doesn't make all Flames fans asses.
There's a prejudice if I've ever seen one. That's essentially the problem with the gay community. They demand "respect" yet they continue to act as if having prejudices against Christians is acceptable. You can't say "I don't judge Christians" and in the next sentence dwell on a few cases and make false representations as if that's all that the Church is about. You're basically judging the Catholic church by dwelling on those issues.
What are you trying to achieve by dwelling on that issue? There's countless Catholic charities that provide basic necessities to starving people and fighting for human rights - yet this is how Catholics are defined?
It doesn't add up when the same people start demanding that everyone have a favourable opinion of them and agree with them.
There's a prejudice if I've ever seen one. That's essentially the problem with the gay community. They demand "respect" yet they continue to act as if having prejudices against Christians is acceptable. You can't say "I don't judge Christians" and in the next sentence dwell on a few cases and make false representations as if that's all that the Church is about. You're basically judging the Catholic church by dwelling on those issues.
What are you trying to achieve by dwelling on that issue? There's countless Catholic charities that provide basic necessities to starving people and fighting for human rights - yet this is how Catholics are defined?
It doesn't add up when the same people start demanding that everyone have a favourable opinion of them and agree with them.
Who's dwelling on anything? The Catholic Church had a well documented issue with sex offenders, and the covering up of abuse. It's not being dwelled on, it's being mentioned as something that happened. It doesn't mean all Catholics support it, or really that many at all do. It doesn't define Catholics and hasn't even been remotely used to define Catholics anywhere in this thread.
It is hilarious that you demonstrate such outrage at all Catholics being judged on the basis of "a few cases" (apparently "a few" means a lot for you) while at the same time paint the entire gay community (whatever that means) as holding prejudice against Christians, and you don't even present a shred of basis for that position.
__________________
When you do a signature and don't attribute it to anyone, it's yours. - Vulcan
Who's dwelling on anything? The Catholic Church had a well documented issue with sex offenders, and the covering up of abuse. It's not being dwelled on, it's being mentioned as something that happened. It doesn't mean all Catholics support it, or really that many at all do. It doesn't define Catholics and hasn't even been remotely used to define Catholics anywhere in this thread.
It is hilarious that you demonstrate such outrage at all Catholics being judged on the basis of "a few cases" (apparently "a few" means a lot for you) while at the same time paint the entire gay community (whatever that means) as holding prejudice against Christians, and you don't even present a shred of basis for that position.
It's a textbook case of strawman arguing fallacy. Both "sides" have been doing it here too.
And I think there's a difference between a person from the gay community saying bad things about all priests and ALL people from the gay community saying that. Every group of people has some dumb people in it that say and do dumb things.
Just like I don't judge all Christians by what Westbro says and does, and I don't judge all Christian denominations by the Catholic Church's systemic problem of protecting sex offenders, I also wouldn't judge the gay community by the words or actions of a few.
Just because a Flames fan acted like an ass at a Vancouver game doesn't make all Flames fans asses.
I'm still digging the irony of korzym12 trying to compare the anti-gay laws in Russia to the Anti-Christian insults in North America. There is a pretty big difference between insulting a priest versus making it illegal to say "it is okay being gay" in a public place where there may or may not be children present. Pretty much comparing apples and whales.
But the irony: isn't this whole situation with the Russian anti-gay law happening under the guise of protecting their christian values? So while there may be people in the gay community saying mean things about priests, there are christians in the Russian community trying to make it illegal to be gay.
It makes it really hard for me to feel bad for the christians in this story.
There's a prejudice if I've ever seen one. That's essentially the problem with the gay community. They demand "respect" yet they continue to act as if having prejudices against Christians is acceptable. You can't say "I don't judge Christians" and in the next sentence dwell on a few cases and make false representations as if that's all that the Church is about. You're basically judging the Catholic church by dwelling on those issues.
That part is such BS. The Catholic Church has been well proven to have systematically hidden and protected pedophiles within it's ranks for decades. If any other organization in the world had been caught doing the things they have been doing without showing any hints of planning to change, they'd have been lynched by angry mobs by now.
The current pope just made reporting on pedophile priests a crime within the Catholic church. That's where the Catholic church stands on pedophiles.
Which whole issue really doesn't have anything to with gay rights.
I see you choose to ignore the rest of my post and focus on one thing...
Quote:
Originally Posted by korzym12
There's a prejudice if I've ever seen one.
It's not a prejudice, from a leadership level the Catholic Church has demonstrated that they will take actions to shelter offending priests (i.e. by moving them around) rather than deal with the issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by korzym12
That's essentially the problem with the gay community. They demand "respect" yet they continue to act as if having prejudices against Christians is acceptable.
So you claim, but you haven't substantiated your claim. Saying the Catholic Chruch sheltered rather than dealt with their sex offenders isn't a prejudice, it's a comment on a pattern of behaviour. And it doesn't have anything to do with the gay community, other Christian churches have criticized the Catholic Church (heck even Catholics have I'm sure) for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by korzym12
You can't say "I don't judge Christians" and in the next sentence dwell on a few cases and make false representations as if that's all that the Church is about. You're basically judging the Catholic church by dwelling on those issues.
You are misrepresenting what I said. I didn't say that was what the Catholic Church was all about. When I criticize the Catholic Church's leadership, the organization, that doesn't equate to judging all Christians. I clearly said I don't judge any other Christian denominations (or their leadership) by the actions of the leadership of the Catholics.
I'm not dwelling on anything, I think the context was clear that I was using that to illustrate a point that you chose to ignore and rather yourself dwell on this perceived persecution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by korzym12
What are you trying to achieve by dwelling on that issue? There's countless Catholic charities that provide basic necessities to starving people and fighting for human rights - yet this is how Catholics are defined?
I never said anything about how all Catholics are defined, I said the church itself (as in the leadership) has a problem with not doing the right thing in a specific set of circumstances. To define that as prejudice is stretching the word beyond all reason. Every organization, religion, government, group of people, etc is going to do things that aren't right (regardless of intention), to say that criticizing an organization for not doing the right thing when it should have is prejudice.. well it's just hyperbole to try and justify a position, not reasonable at all.
I'm not dwelling on any issue, again it was something to help make a point rather than be a point itself, which you seem not to have understood.
So let me state the point again; the just because an individual or group of individuals within a larger group behave badly does not necessarily mean the entire group should be judged based on that.
Now if there was an organization of gay people that had a policy document that described what the group was about, and part of that policy document was to "at all times insinuate all priests are pedophiles", or can otherwise substantiate your claim, you would have a point. But otherwise you are engaging a straw man.
Quote:
Originally Posted by korzym12
It doesn't add up when the same people start demanding that everyone have a favourable opinion of them and agree with them.
It only doesn't add up because I think you are starting with unbalanced scales to start with. Start by substantiating your claim to prove the scales are unbalanced.
You can also respond actual point of my previous post. Do you agree that the poor actions of a few in a group should not be used to judge an entire group by just because they happen to be in that certain group?
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to photon For This Useful Post:
There's a prejudice if I've ever seen one. That's essentially the problem with the gay community. They demand "respect" yet they continue to act as if having prejudices against Christians is acceptable.
That's hilarious. So Christians get to hang out with their prejudices and say that being gay is a "sin" and "should not be accepted in society" and you are worried that the gay people have becomed prejudiced against the Christians that hate them?
I understand that gay people are supposed to be happy and all but aren't Christians supposed to be tolerant and accepting?
And to be clear, the gay community is not demanding "respect", no one has every said anything about respect. They are demanding equal human rights, which everyone should have anyway, and these equal rights are being denied them by other groups.
Quote:
Originally Posted by korzym12
You can't say "I don't judge Christians" and in the next sentence dwell on a few cases and make false representations as if that's all that the Church is about. You're basically judging the Catholic church by dwelling on those issues.
What are you trying to achieve by dwelling on that issue? There's countless Catholic charities that provide basic necessities to starving people and fighting for human rights - yet this is how Catholics are defined?
It doesn't add up when the same people start demanding that everyone have a favourable opinion of them and agree with them.
I really hate to "dwell" on the topic but for me the thing that is really absurd is the cover ups. Some old man rapes a little boy, the church should be burning the guy at the stake. Isn't that their whole M.O.? They say that being gay is sinful and they say that abusing children is wrong but when a priest is both gay and a pedophile they try to cover it up and protect him to save face.
I really hate to "dwell" on the topic but for me the thing that is really absurd is the cover ups. Some old man rapes a little boy, the church should be burning the guy at the stake. Isn't that their whole M.O.?
Well, no; their whole MO is repentance and forgiveness.
Regardless, I have no idea what the Catholic church has to do with oppression of gay people in Russia, nor potential political statements to be made in reference to said oppression by Canadian olympic athletes.
... I'm hesitant to post in this thread for fear of accusations that I'm a backward bigot because I'm willing to accept that my moral position is not absolute and that people whose moral views regarding gays are negative should still be entitled to express them and argue for them as long as they are not inciting violence.
The only people who would be hesitant to post in this thread are people who think there is something wrong with being gay.
And anyone who thinks that, is identical to someone who thinks there is something wrong with being black, or Jewish, or a woman, and denies those people equality.
That's called bigotry.
And if it's an ugly word that frightens people... well maybe they should stop acting like bigots.
__________________
"Isles give up 3 picks for 5.5 mil of cap space.
Oilers give up a pick and a player to take on 5.5 mil."
-Bax
Nothing terribly new or surprising here, but I add the following excerpt from an interview with Slava Malamud, a Russian-born journalist, on Russian political attitudes and their hockey players:
Quote:
PB: It’s been said that the Russian public is 80% behind Putin on the anti-LGBT legislation. Do you think that percentage is right? And what about the Russian hockey fan base, where would you peg them on the homophobia scale.
SM: No, I don’t think this percentage is right. In my personal estimation, it’s somewhere on the other side of 90%. Kick it up another few percentage points for the hockey fans.
But I should be more precise here. Russians are generally quite cynical about their laws. There is a saying in Russia about this. “In Russia, the strictness of laws is compensated by the lack of necessity to follow them.” I would say that many Russians do take this particular law for what it is – a naked attempt by the government to usurp the populist agenda and to marginalize the opposition by painting them as “f****t-lovers.”
However, if you ask an average Russian whether they think that gay people represent a danger to their children and whether it’s possible to “convince” a minor to become gay by subjecting them to gay culture, the answer will be a resounding yes at least 9 times out of 10.
I should also note that the support for this law has only risen in the past few weeks, as the West has paid more and more attention.
PB: Historically, Russian leaders for the last several centuries have defined their nation and values as a contrast to the European West. What’s the relationship between growing acceptance of homosexuality in Europe & America and what looks like declining acceptance in Russia?
SM: Not all of the leaders. Peter the Great was a big Westernizer, right down to compulsive beard-shaving among the Russian nobility. Czar Paul I reformed the military in the Prussian style. In the XIX century the small Russian educated class, the “intelligentsia”, spoke French and expressed disdain for the unwashed masses.
And of course, Perestroika brought in a prolonged love affair with the West and with America in particular. The love affair was quite one-sided and ended in heartbreak, thus the current hostility. I think, nowadays, Russians associate the poor living conditions and the drop of self-esteem they experienced in the 1990s, after the fall of the Soviet Union, with their erstwhile love of the Western values. And nowadays many of them don’t miss an opportunity to discredit said values or to point out the easily available examples of Western hypocrisy.
So, we have the current situation, when the very idea of democracy is no longer attractive to many (“The kind of democracy America brought to Iraq, you mean?”) and words such as “tolerance” and “political correctness” have become favorite Russian verbal piñatas. Many Russians, it seems, don’t want to live in the society where minorities are treated the same as the majority. They are afraid that such a society will end up hurting the majority’s rights.
“We don’t want to be like America, where you are not treated as a human unless you are a gay, black, one-legged woman on crack” That’s a very widespread conviction in the Russian society. Life without second-class citizens to look down upon isn’t worth living for many.
PB: Has Russia been historically this homophobic or have we seen a spike with Putin’s agenda? What role does the Church play?
SM: Russia has always been very socially conservative. This concerns not only gays, but also women and ethnic minorities. People in America don’t realize that the Soviet Union (at least after the 1920s) was a social conservative’s paradise. It was a monolithic society, with one, religion-like ideology uniting everyone, in which women were expected to know their place, abortion was prohibited, loud fashions scorned, modern music resisted, pornography criminalized and gays imprisoned.
Homosexuality was decriminalized in 1993, but the people’s attitudes haven’t changed much. The recent mass reintroduction of the Russian society to the extremely conservative Orthodox Church didn’t help, of course. But it merely gave the already existing hatred an ideological basis.
As for Putin, his ratings are lagging, his opposition is becoming more organized, so he is looking for “hot button issues” around which he could garner popular support. Homophobia and religion are such issues… Incidentally, Russia has also just passed a law which effectively makes it illegal to be an outspoken atheist. Strangely enough, nobody in America has so much as raised an eyebrow at that one. Probably, because being an outspoken atheist won’t get you too many fans here, either.
PB: How monolithic is Russia when it comes to homophobia? How do the urban areas like Moscow and St. Petersburg differ from the rural areas? Do we see similar attitudes in the region – Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia?
SM: Quite monolithic indeed. But here is a caveat. An average Russian will tell you that he or she doesn’t care what people do in their bedrooms and doesn’t support imprisoning people just for being homosexual. What they are against are public manifestations of homosexuality. Those public manifestations are usually envisioned in the form of pride parades during which people go about naked and/or engage in public acts of same-sex lovemaking. But as nothing of the sort has ever happened in Russia, their fear winds up being directed at people demonstrating for equal rights with rainbow flags. Or merely at two men holding hands. Or kissing. This, for most Russians, is abhorrent, disgusting and a step down a slippery slope to public gay sex in parks, schools, bus stops and at the foot of the Motherland Calls statue. All of it, of course, resulting in their children’s deciding to follow the path to gaydom en masse.
Now, of course, there is quite a substantial amount of genuine gay haters. People who’d like to hunt down homosexuals and exile, imprison, kill, or make them undergo mandatory castration. But for the most part it’s not the haters, but the homophobes (in the exact meaning of the word – people who are afraid) who, being ignorant and unwilling to learn, are the driving force behind these laws.
Obviously, cities tend to be much more cosmopolitan than the rural area. You won’t find too many gay clubs in rural Arkansas either, will you? As for Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia et al, there is no appreciable difference in their attitude. We all grew up within the confines of the same culture.
PB: NHLrs are increasingly commenting on Russian LGBT law and Sochi. How is the issue playing over there, if at all?
SM: Not well. After the Russian pole vaulter Elena Isinbayeva spoke in defense of the anti-gay laws and was criticized in the West, Russian media and the Russian public had a collective fit. “The West is Hounding Isinbayeva”, “Our Heterosexual Heritage is Under Attack” was the tone of most headlines. People view Western criticism as an attack on Russian culture and on the idea of free speech.
You’ll hear people say things like, “See, this is how “democratic” the West is! They wage war on us for our opinion.” Of course, nobody seems to realize that you’re having an opinion doesn’t immunize you against people having their own opinions about your opinion. But the debate in the West does feed nicely into the already formed national idea of “Us vs. Them.”
Imagine now if Russian NHLers get criticized in the Western media for their views on the law… Things will get ugly.
PB: Ovechkin, Kovalchuk and Datsyuk have all gotten headlines here by responding to LGBT questions and reactions have varied: Ovi was given a pass for basically saying nothing, while Pavel and Ilya took some heat for being more declarative. What are some of the pressures Russian NHL players live under, on and off the ice?
SM: You are assuming that Russian hockey players don’t share the prevailing opinion of the rest of the Russian society. This is not a good assumption to make.
But, talking strictly hypothetically, if a Russian hockey player did speak out against such a “hot-button” law, he could expect repercussions. Hockey is closely followed by Putin and the KHL has strong ties with his inner circles. And as the Olympics are always a big political event, people are bound to be extremely cautious to prevent any kind of embarrassment for the government.
The smartest thing a Russian player can do right now is what Ovechkin has done. Say it’s not your business to comment on political issues and speak about hockey. There isn’t much to gain from saying anything else.
PB: Is making Russia and Putin anti-LGBT pariahs productive and could they become more entrenched?
SM: Whatever it is that topples Putin, if anything, you can rest assured it won’t be LGBT issues. For all the fuss in the media right now, most Russians don’t really give them much thought and would prefer to go on just so. As a rule, I don’t think any free thought is useless and I personally don’t have any problems with the Westerners calling out Russia on the bad things it does. As long as they don’t forget bad things other countries do, up to and including their own countries.
PB: If we really wanted to see a more tolerant Russia, what’s the best way forward and what can the average person do?
SM: Countries pave their own path to tolerance. America’s own path was a long and bloody one. I hope Russia’s remaining journey isn’t too long. But it’s an evolutionary process.
PB: You have strong opinions about Russian politics and your twitter feed is a great read. How do this play back home and among your readership?
SM: Not too well, I suppose. At least not on this issue. But I can’t well disown my opinions if they don’t happen to correspond with those of the majority. It is what it is. Many people also don’t like me because I am an atheist or ethnically Jewish, or from a small town. Or live in America. Or like the NHL. Or root for the Sabres when not working… As they say in Russia, “I am not a 10-rouble note to be liked by everyone.”
PB: In all fairness, you’re plenty critical of American politics and culture. Your #SlavaBaffledByAmerica is a favorite hashtag of ours. What else baffles you about America?
SM: The fact that some people apparently can’t believe that I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter isn’t butter.
PB: Your son is a goalie. You’re cool with that? Was he born that way? How’s his team looking this season? You still the travel reporter for them?
SM: No, I am most definitely not cool with that, even though I myself was a football goalkeeper. Goalie’s father is by far the worst job in sports and I won’t wish it on my worst enemies. What’s even worse, now my younger son has expressed a troubling affinity for the same lifestyle, which has gotten me afraid (even phobic, one may say) that my children have succumbed to some form of nefarious goalie propaganda prevalent in Western society.
“We didn’t mean for this to happen, obviously,” lamented Vatican foreign minister Monsignor Dominique Mamberti. “It’s quite the papal pickle that His Holiness has placed upon our heads. Sex crimes are more illegal than ever, but technically it’s illegal to report them.” Mamberti said that the simultaneous passing of each law is merely a coincidence and insisted that the Church is not trying to protect itself against further embarrassment, but critics outside the Vatican are skeptical.
“They know exactly what they’re doing,” claims Fabrizio Perona of Italy’s LaRepubblica newspaper. “They just thought nobody would notice. The Church wants to impress the world by getting tough on sex crimes, but they criminalized leaks, which is the only way anybody would ever discover their crimes. It’s genius, if you stop and think about it.”
Mamberti says plans are already being made to eliminate the loophole, but change often comes slowly to antiquated Vatican law, which is based on the 1889 Italian code. “We’re not going to let a dangerous law like this stand, but people need to understand that this is the Vatican, and there is a process here.Voting, incense, prayer. We ask the minors at risk to please be patient with us.”
That last quote really makes me sick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by photon
And it doesn't have anything to do with the gay community, other Christian churches have criticized the Catholic Church (heck even Catholics have I'm sure) for it.
Remember how Sinead O'Connor crushed her career by doing this? She was ahead of her time unfortunately.
Well, no; their whole MO is repentance and forgiveness.
Regardless, I have no idea what the Catholic church has to do with oppression of gay people in Russia, nor potential political statements to be made in reference to said oppression by Canadian olympic athletes.
Oh right, the whole stake burning thing was for women back in the 1600s. My bad.
This article touches on the connection between the Russian Orthodox church and the anti-gay movement in the country. The leader of the church has said some pretty heavy things like how legalizing gay marriage is the harbinger of impending doom and has called for the Russian people to do everything in their power to prevent the state from ever allowing such sinful laws. Considering the amount of influence that Churches have over their followers, I would say that this would shed insight to ABeef's question of "why do these people think the way that they do?".
A pretty typical story about church fearmongering and guiding their followers to put on masks and go beat up people. I would say it is pretty related to the overal discussion and whether or not Canada should boycott going to the olympics when the hosting nation is making laws that support these discriminatory ideas and turn a blind eye to the violence attached to the whole situation.
Right, I would agree that the Russian orthodox is complicit and directly involved in the trend in public sentiment against gays in Russia but again I see little connection to past abuses by Catholic priests.
My point was he is forcing his BELIEFS on others. He shows zero tolerance. That is not much difference.
Expressing the fact that you are a bigot is not the same thing as forcing beliefs on to you. You have your beliefs, and you are free to speak them - that is a basic human right. Likewise, he is free to speak against your beliefs - also a basic human right. Equal treatment is also a basic human right - one that he supports and that you oppose. You tell me who is the one doing the forcing here.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Resolute 14 For This Useful Post:
Right, I would agree that the Russian orthodox is complicit and directly involved in the trend in public sentiment against gays in Russia but again I see little connection to past abuses by Catholic priests.
There isn't one. Go back to post #431 and read forward. That is how it came into the conversation. Basically just a deflection from the primary topic by trying to make Christians into victims of abuse from gays...
meh.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to Wolven For This Useful Post:
