Would you support Rainbow on Hockey Unis for Sochi?

[MRCboicgy]

Originally Posted by etdpratt

I also ask the question to others on the issue of same sex marriage. If you support it, do you also support the practice of polygamy or family members getting married to one another. Do you support all these instances?

How are those the same? (hint: "Redefinition" isn't a valid answer)

[etdpratt]

Originally Posted by MRCboicgy

How are those the same? (hint: "Redefinition" isn't a valid answer)

If we are talking about redefining the traditional definition of marriage and focusing on human rights, why should these rights be limited to gay marriage and not other forms of marriage? I have met a lot of people who may support one and not the other forms (i.e. polygamy, marriage between family, etc..).

I am just looking for your opinion.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Originally Posted by etdpratt

I also ask the question to others on the issue of same sex marriage. If you support it, do you also support the practice of polygamy or family members getting married to one another. Do you support all these instances?

I'll make my position super duper simple

they are separate concepts...there are no connection between them

I am able to consider each one independently and I'm curious why you think they are linked?

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by etdpratt

While I understand and appreciate your opinion, I believe that a religious individual has every right to put their religious beliefs first if they are asked to vote on it. If I believe that same sex marriage is against the will of God, I have every right to vote against such a law that permits it.

I am not going to try to keep someone from having a relationship with another individual but if I am asked to vote and say whether I think it is ok or not ok, then I will side with my beliefs. The same goes for other sensitive issues such as pornography, or drugs. If I have a vote to make pornography illegal or make drugs legal, I will be on the side of my beliefs.

I also ask the question to others on the issue of same sex marriage. If you support it, do you also support the practice of polygamy or family members getting married to one another. Do you support all these instances?

I know this post may be viewed negatively, but I do want to open up a dialogue and maybe this isn't the right thread for this discussion.

Marriage is a legal and social construct. I don't really consider preventing gay people from marrying to be very equitable, but I also see that it's reasonably debatable as a legal topic. That's totally different from actively punishing anyone who happens to be gay for simply being what they are. There is also a huge difference between not allowing gay people to get married and not allowing people to talk about gay people getting married as an even possibly good thing.

There are very important, fundamental differences between a person's right to participation in a legally/socially recognized tradition, a person's right to free speech and a person's right to be what they are. Violation of free speech and violation of a person's right to exist as what they are is what's causing the big hullaballoo over in Russia.

[theoforever]

I'm against the patch.
Not every athlete would support it and we don't need national organizations cramming politically correct agenda down our throats.

This thread is a no win situation for those that don't support the patch or gay rights.

There are issues with Russia greater than rainbows.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by theoforever

I'm against the patch.
Not every athlete would support it and we don't need national organizations cramming politically correct agenda down our throats.

This thread is a no win situation for those that don't support the patch or gay rights.

There are issues with Russia greater than rainbows.

No doubt there are Canadian LGBT athletes these Olympics who will be going into an environment where people like them are being beaten and imprisoned. The COC should support those athletes and has an obligation to do so. Not necessarily with a patch, but they must support them as Canadian athletes.

[theoforever]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

No doubt there are Canadian LGBT athletes these Olympics who will be going into an environment where people like them are being beaten and imprisoned. The COC should support those athletes and has an obligation to do so. Not necessarily with a patch, but they must support them as Canadian athletes.

People have been beaten and imprisoned in Russia for centuries. It is happening today and not all of them are gay.

The COC should protect Canadian LGBT's.
That doesn't mean COC has the right to force rainbows on those that don't want to wear them.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by FanIn80

[snip]

Tyranny of the majority is still tyranny.

==================

Originally Posted by PlayfulGenius

Wow, there are some cavemen in this thread... that's a shame.

I don't know if cavemen were homophobic... it seems to me that homophobia is largely a religious construct.

=================

Personally I'm on the fence about this, but for other reasons. If we were to do this, how would we stop Syria from showing up at the next Olympics with "wipe out Israel" or something on their uniforms? Seems to me like the only organization who's in a position where they could differentiate between acceptable messages and unacceptable messages is the IOC. If they're not going to do it, then Canada pushing our agenda unilaterally might be opening a big can of worms.

[theoforever]

Originally Posted by SebC

I don't know if cavemen were homophobic... it seems to me that homophobia is largely a religious construct.

Which seems to prove the point expressed by women in the past that left to their own devices men will do anything that moves.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by theoforever

People have been beaten and imprisoned in Russia for centuries. It is happening today and not all of them are gay.

The COC should protect Canadian LGBT's.
That doesn't mean COC has the right to force rainbows on those that don't want to wear them.

Agreed on all points, though the first seems irrelevant.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

this thread is SOOOO non-hockey related now...it should be moved by the mods

[Fozzie_DeBear]

At the heart of it I HATE bullies...and this is a bully law.

I look at this as a finger in the face of Putin and that's part of its appeal.

#putsdownbeer

[FlamesFanStrandedInEDM]

Originally Posted by Fozzie_DeBear

Why make a bigger issue? Because standing up for the rights of those that are oppressed is the right thing to do

I don't recall any sort of patch to bring awareness to all those oppressed in Tibet during the Beijing Olympics...Why would some peoples human rights be worth more than others?

Keep it consistent.

[PlayfulGenius]

Haha, great argument...why help someone if there exists someone else not being helped...nice... You must be some kinda somaritan (after about 20 autocorrects, I have no idea if that's even remotely close to the proper spelling)

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by FlamesFanStrandedInEDM

I don't recall any sort of patch to bring awareness to all those oppressed in Tibet during the Beijing Olympics...Why would some peoples human rights be worth more than others?

Keep it consistent.

Well, obviously because Canada didn't have any Tibetans competing as part of the team.

[calgarywinning]

I agree with Bryan Burke on the issue. That there should be no boycott, athletes that have trained should attend and compete. IOC and future events should hold this against Russia for a long time into the future.

It's a deplorable law that is a throw back in time.

Team Canada should kick their respective a$s on ice and have all their gay relatives come out on ice and do normal things like smile, hug, dance and celebrate.

#bringingthehockeybacktothethread

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by FlamesFanStrandedInEDM

I don't recall any sort of patch to bring awareness to all those oppressed in Tibet during the Beijing Olympics...Why would some peoples human rights be worth more than others?

Keep it consistent.

I f'n hate this argument that keeps coming back in this thread.

Okay, we f-ed up not pushing the human rights angle more in China. Does this mean we are forever bound to continue to f-up?

"Yesterday I witnessed a father punch his son in the face and I shamefully did nothing about the situation. Now when the same thing happens again in the future, I am now duty bound to also do nothing because I have to be consistent".

-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-

As for "the Russian people are against homosexuality and who are we to legislate morality?". Personally, I don't think human rights *HAVE* any borders. When the Indonesia oppressed the East Timorese, I was right there in front of the Indonesian embassy protesting with the East Timor Alert network, even though most Indonesians were for the occupation. I have been a long time member of Amnesty International and was heavily involved in their Darfur campaign against the oppression of the non-Arabs even though the actions were supported by the majority Arabs. I believe that not only do I have the right to stand up to foreign countries and tell them that they are abusing human rights, but it is my DUTY to do so.

It was only via international pressure that we saw such things as the end of apartheid in South Africa and the free elections in Burma/Myanmar. People need to stand up against oppression and hatred EVERYWHERE, not just in their own back yard.

At 3:30 this afternoon, after the Pride Parade, I'll be joining the parade participants in marching on the Russian embassy. The Russians need to know that the majority of the developed world stand united against them.

But if anything this thread shows just how far *CANADA* needs to come on this issue. This thread has been very disheartening.

[doctajones428]

This logic of "Why stop this bad thing when we could stop this bad thing" is ridiculous. It does not matter what the cause is, you guys would say the same thing.

"People are starving, we shouldn't worry about helping the enslaved right now"

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by doctajones428

This logic of "Why stop this bad thing when we could stop this bad thing" is ridiculous. It does not matter what the cause is, you guys would say the same thing.

"People are starving, we shouldn't worry about helping the enslaved right now"

Agreed. One does not preclude the other. As mentioned above, I am going to the Russian Embassy today. That isn't stopping me from continuing my support of Plan Canada (two foster children), working with "Make Poverty History" and contributing to "Doctors/Engineers Without Borders". Personally, I think that's just a red herring so that lazy people can justify doing nothing. I doubt that they are really involved in any grass roots movement against poverty.

[theoforever]

Different strokes for different folks.
What is the right cause for one person, isn’t for another. It makes sense.
Some people chose to fight for the rights of the oppressed some don’t. Nothing wrong with that.

I would put to you that most people in the developed world don’t give a rats ass about the Russian law, hey, they don’t even know about it. World wide this Russian law would have more support than not.