Would you support Rainbow on Hockey Unis for Sochi?

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by strombad

2. You're using an outlandish example to make it sounds inappropriate.
If a 10 year old boy is on the street and you say "the Conservative government is a sham" then that is fully within reason of the law. You can express your opinion to anybody regardless of age. "It's ok to be gay" is not wrong, perverse, or even an opinion, it is FACT. If someone casually told a child "It's ok to be white" the Russian government would not come down on them, why? What difference is there?

They will. If you are white and you come to 10 years old black boy and tell him that "it's ok to be white", which would obviously sound as some sort of taunting, you may very well be charged. If you come to white boy and tell him that it's ok to be white, you obviously will not be charged (unless you go further and try to convince him that whites are superior). If you come to 10 years old gay boy and tell him that it's ok to be gay, you will not be charged. If you come to 10 years old hetero boy and tell him that it's ok to be gay, most likely you will be charged, however it depends on judge decision and with 0 actual practice on this law, it's hard to say where exactly the line is (and I never denied that it is vague and could be more precise).

Originally Posted by strombad

3. Oh sorry, do you Russians have a magical justice system that is able to run people through the system within a month? Because I THOUGHT most things took more than a month. The man was charged for a simple sign he held in the city centre, and he will likely be convicted of the offence. This sign goes against the lies you've been telling about "what is allowed" and made it extremely clear that you're interested in lying and stretching the truth in whatever way you please to make your point. Shame.

It is two monthes actually, and this case is the only one that is currently being processed (at least according to this very same article). There were also two cased of charges dropped. This article says that this guy is likely NOT going to be convicted, however it's all a matter of opinion at this point. You are saying that "it is extremely clear that I'm interested in lying" based merely on your opinion that he's going to be convicted.

Originally Posted by strombad

4. What have you done? Anything? You don't care about Russian teens either. Want to know why people aren't listening or taking you seriously? Because of your unwavering support of bigotry and hate under an embarrassing guise of humanity. Just stop. We get it. You're creating a red herring to distract people and attempt to make everyone look worse. Trust me, you've made yourself look worse than anyone else could have.

I've done nothing to actually help gay teens, however since finding ways to help gay teens was a topic, I contributed to it.

You are taking this debate WAY too seriously. Probably because you are new here. It is just an off-season CP debate for me. I initially joined in merely to explain the law, however than I felt like I enjoy the discussion. Once season starts, I will go back to discussing Flames hockey, which I've been doing here for decade.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Pointman

They will. If you are white and you come to 10 years old black boy and tell him that "it's ok to be white", which would obviously sound as some sort of taunting, you may very well be charged.

You are taking this debate WAY too seriously. Probably because you are fairly new here. It is just an off-season CP debate for me.

Please show me the law that says that.

Sorry man, didn't know human rights were so casual to you. You're either a bigot or a troll in this case, seeing as you claim to have no real stake in the matter, so you go ahead and pick which it is. I'll just wait. Though, having seen your methodology thus far, I can only assume that you'll come back with something along the lines of your human rights being violated because I'm not giving you the right to choose more than two different kinds of waste. Bummer dude.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by strombad

Please show me the law that says that.

Russian constitution, linked few posts above.

Originally Posted by strombad

Sorry man, didn't know human rights were so casual to you.

If you are really this hard up for human rights, why don't you protest way bigger human rights violations? And yes, if I'm talking about human rights on Flames forum, not in front of Saudi Arabia embassy, or at least on some human rights forum, you can tell that I'm pretty casual. You can tell I'm not homophob zealot either, otherwise I would be battling at some LGBT forums. I'm just a hockey fan discussing off-topic things in the off-season.

Originally Posted by strombad

You're either a bigot or a troll in this case, seeing as you claim to have no real stake in the matter, so you go ahead and pick which it is. I'll just wait.

I'm just discussing on my favorite forum. This discussion is no different to me than some hockey discussions. I admit, this matter is more important than hockey, however given that this thread will have 0 impact on the matter anyway, it's essentially the same. That said, I'm not trolling at all. I posted a lot of factual information and I gave a decent effort in explaining the law, why Russians support it and why we don't think that it violates human rights. I firmly believe, that whether you agree with my views or not (I know, that you don't), those, who were interested in the matter got something useful from my posts. Nonetheless, it's just for fun and I by no means pretend that I'm doing something useful for humanity here.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Pointman

Russian constitution, article 19 (I found you an english version)

That doesn't say cannot be straight parades, and doesn't prohibit someone from saying straight people are better than gay people.

The other law specifically targets gay people, gay parades, or speech that gives the impression that a non-traditional sexual relationship is socially equivalent to a traditional one.

So you haven't shown that a straight pride parade or some saying straight people are superior are illegal.

Originally Posted by Pointman

I guess, I didn't word it well enough, I didn't mean that it should target gays rather than lesbians or something, I just used "gays" as a general definition on LGBT. I basically meant any relationships that are not between one man and one woman, provided neither of them have changed sex during their life.

Yes I know what the word gay means and understood what you meant by it. You still haven't answered the question, what about a couple that isn't a man an a woman is so different than an infertile couple that you think the law is necessary to target only gays.

Originally Posted by Pointman

I figured, that the debate on why the law is needed will take things a little bit away from more important issues, such as protecting gay teens (for which I outlined a plan) and violation of human rights (which it doesn't). And given that the discussion is a bit too big as it is, adding yet another branch to it would be too much.

The question of why the law is needed, what issue the law addresses, is at the heart of all those other issues, and was raised far earlier in the thread than any of the other issues that arise as a consequence of the law.

Arguing about the consequences of a law is just a big red herring if it hasn't been established what societal issue the law was created to address, if the issue is something that needs to be addressed, and if the law does in fact address the issue.

So I'll continue to ask the question, what exactly is this law supposed to address? What is it that parents are "tired of" in your words? A specific example would be very helpful.

[19Yzerman19]

Originally Posted by Pointman

Take a look at actual UN declaration of human rights and try to find anything about gay parades here. Basic human rights were declared at 1948. Gay parades started decades later. They have nothing to do with human rights.

How can someone be this completely and utterly... Ugh, it's not worth it.

The "you are violating human rights, you backwards scum" attitude will get you nowhere.

We'll see. Because they are violating human rights and they are scum.

You can gather facts of gay teens being bullied into suicide and bring it to public, but also to judges, because the law against bullying is there already. If you really want to DO SOMETHING, this is what you should do.

No, I think it will actually be more useful to continue to point out that Russia is basically a backwards, screwed up nation of bigots that should be ashamed of itself. Eventually, it worked with apartheid, so we'll give it another go here.

[SebC]

Can Russia use the anti-bullying law to prosecute the legislators who passed the anti-gay law?

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by 19Yzerman19

No, I think it will actually be more useful to continue to point out that Russia is basically a backwards, screwed up nation of bigots that should be ashamed of itself. Eventually, it worked with apartheid, so we'll give it another go here.

So, your agenda is to basically keep pointing out that Russian is a country of backwards scum until this law will be revoked? This law is two monthes old, was Russia a progressive country of well-smelling people before this law? If not, what exactly will you achieve by revoking the law? Will you stop doing it after Olympics? If you will, it is pointless. If not, there is no logical reasoning for why you are going after Russia instead of muslim anti-gay countries (not to mention a lot of other world issues).

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Pointman

So, your agenda is to basically keep pointing out that Russian is a country of backwards scum until this law will be revoked? This law is two monthes old, was Russia a progressive country of well-smelling people before this law? If not, what exactly will you achieve by revoking the law? Will you stop doing it after Olympics? If you will, it is pointless. If not, there is no logical reasoning for why you are going after Russia instead of muslim anti-gay countries (not to mention a lot of other world issues).

The "why go after ____ and not ____" argument is so tired man, give it a rest.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by strombad

The "why go after ____ and not ____" argument is so tired man, give it a rest.

Dodge, deflect.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by photon

That doesn't say cannot be straight parades, and doesn't prohibit someone from saying straight people are better than gay people.

2. The propaganda or agitation instigating social, racial, national or religious hatred and strife shall not be allowed. The propaganda of social, racial, national, religious or linguistic supremacy shall be banned.

http://www.constitution.ru/en/10003000-03.htm

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by strombad

The "why go after ____ and not ____" argument is so tired man, give it a rest.

It is not argument, it is a question. You are so much for human rights and I wonder, why you go after $150 fine law and not death penalty law. Seems like a valid question to me. Any time you believe some issue is so important that it should be raised into Olympics, people will ask why it is this issue and not other issues that should be raised. You can only wear so many patches on your uniform.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Pointman

It is not argument, it is a question. You are so much for human rights and I wonder, why you go after $150 fine law and not death penalty law. Seems like a valid question to me.

We can do both.

This is a thread about this specific issue, many other issues similar to this or totally different are discussed on the off-topic side of the forum or out and about in our daily lives.

Now that that is answered we can stay on topic.

[strombad]

Originally Posted by Pointman

It is not argument, it is a question. You are so much for human rights and I wonder, why you go after $150 fine law and not death penalty law. Seems like a valid question to me.

Because this topic is rooted in the discussion of Russia's anti-gay law.

Perhaps you'd like to talk about cake?
Or your favourite car?

Well, I bet you do, just like we talk about things like honour killings and acid assaults against women. But you know what? We don't do it in a thread rooted in the discussing of Russia's anti-gay law. Because that would be (drum roll please) OFF TOPIC and NOT PERTAINING TO THE CURRENT DISCUSSION.

Use your head man.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by strombad

Because this topic is rooted in the discussion of Russia's anti-gay law.

Perhaps you'd like to talk about cake?
Or your favourite car?

Well, I bet you do, just like we talk about things like honour killings and acid assaults against women. But you know what? We don't do it in a thread rooted in the discussing of Russia's anti-gay law. Because that would be (drum roll please) OFF TOPIC and NOT PERTAINING TO THE CURRENT DISCUSSION.

Use your head man.

I realize that this is the topic of this discussion. But you can have thousands of discussions and you can basically have only one patch on your Olympic uniform. The topic is, precisely, "Would you support Rainbow on Hockey Unis for Sochi", so the question of why this and not some other issue should be raised to this point, is legit.

Could you please stop saying things like "Use your head"? It's fun off-season debate, steam out. You are not saving the world from appartheid here.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by Pointman

I realize that this is the topic of this discussion. But you can have thousands of discussions and you can basically have only one patch on your Olympic uniform. The topic is, precisely, "Would you support Rainbow on Hockey Unis for Sochi", so the question of why this and not some other issue should be raised to the point, is legit..

Yeah and the thread has weaved away from that topic (as they tend to do) to this issue as a whole.

Again, that your question has been answered, we can keep the debate going.

[Pointman]

Originally Posted by SebC

Can Russia use the anti-bullying law to prosecute the legislators who passed the anti-gay law?

No, as they didn't "pushed them into suicide by constant insults and belittling".

On opposite, you may probably get some charges if I will commit suicide after reading some more of "Russians are scum" comments

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Pointman

It is not argument, it is a question. You are so much for human rights and I wonder, why you go after $150 fine law and not death penalty law. Seems like a valid question to me.

Doesn't a rainbow patch do both?

But even if it didn't, some reasons to target the Russian law are:
- with the Olympics in Russia, advocates have a mechanism with which they can apply pressure
- pressure is more likely to be effective in a country that is not a theocracy, and that didn't have this law a few months ago

Undoubtedly, the death penalty for homosexually is a far greater violation of human rights than the russian law is, but russian law is perceived as much easier to influence, and thus an appropriate path forward in what is ultimately a global campaign. It's a matter of picking the winnable battles as a way to keep making progress.

[doctajones428]

Originally Posted by Pointman

"Would you support Rainbow on Hockey Unis for Sochi", so the question of why this and not some other issue should be raised to this point, is legit.

Maybe because the other issues have nothing to do with all three of the following:

Russia
Hockey
Olympics

[photon]

Originally Posted by Pointman

2. The propaganda or agitation instigating social, racial, national or religious hatred and strife shall not be allowed. The propaganda of social, racial, national, religious or linguistic supremacy shall be banned.

http://www.constitution.ru/en/10003000-03.htm

That's not in Article 19, which is what you had pointed out.

And that doesn't prevent a "straight pride" parade, since in general a pride parade isn't about hatred or strife, but about the opposite, acceptance and friendship, and doesn't promote supremacy, but the opposite, equality. If it was a pride parade the promoted supremacy then yeah.

Also doesn't seem to prohibit someone from saying straight people are better than gay people, just limits propaganda.

The other questions remain unanswered...

In the absence of further information and based on what's been put forward so far, the only reasonable deduction is that the entire basis for the Russian law is to avoid "icky" situations like this.

[19Yzerman19]

Originally Posted by Pointman

So, your agenda is to basically keep pointing out that Russian is a country of backwards scum until this law will be revoked?

Basically, yup. Much as I would've done in re: South Africa. I currently have an opinion of Russia that is borne largely from one particular ugly feature the country has that in my estimation dwarfs and overshadows what I assume are its many virtues.

Not unlike the notion that you could be any number of other things (dentist, father and husband, jazz bassist, tennis player), but once you're a murderer, none of those other things matter; you're a murderer and that's it.

Will you stop doing it after Olympics?

No, I will still think your country is a morally backwards nation chock full of homophobic subhumans.

If not, there is no logical reasoning for why you are going after Russia instead of muslim anti-gay countries (not to mention a lot of other world issues).

Yeah, it's probably super comforting to know that Russia can be equated to middle eastern theocratic nations in terms of human rights. That's just stellar. Even if the argument is "well our human rights standards aren't quite as bad as places that jail rape victims for being forced to have sex outside wedlock", you're really not making a particularly strong case here.