4 ms·

"Both sides of the argument." That Russia has a reasonable political platform regarding its LGBT citizens? I am not sure that it is possible to 'blow out of pr

"Both sides of the argument." That Russia has a reasonable political platform regarding its LGBT citizens? I am not sure that it is possible to 'blow out of proportion' what is most certainly a human rights issue. This was your own assertion, not that of the paper's. The topic was the Google Doodle showing support for LGBT people and your first impulse is to imply that the situation in Russia is in fact a non-issue. That is why you were downvoted, man.

boyter 13y ago
I didn't say it was a non-issue. I said it was overblown. The current media coverage of the issue is overblown. I belive I am being down-voted because this is a sensitive issue. Anyone suggesting that perhaps its not as bad as it seems is instantly shouted down. Please, please, please read the linked white paper. It is well researched, well written and provides citations and sources to its conclusions. It is also written by a lawyer who identifies themselves as part of the LGBT community. If nothing else, scroll down and read the translation of the Russian Federation law in there (the only good version I could find) and really think on what it means to the individual.
- devilshaircut 13y ago
  I have no comment about the paper itself. You were bemoaning being downvoted, and I explained why. I was commenting on the context which you provided inside of your original comment. If you actually don't care or don't wonder why such a comment would be downvoted, then disregard my post(s).
  - boyter 13y ago
    I was complaining about being down-voted over what was obviously an emotional response to a sensitive topic since it was so swift. I think that is a reasonable thing to complain about. I expected to be down-voted. I was also hoping that there would be enough people around with an objective point of view to read the paper and provide solid cited counter arguments. I hold no stake in this. I am neither Russian or part of the LGBT community. I am interested in human rights, and I want equal opportunities for all regardless of race, sexual orientation, gender or otherwise. Torch and pitchfork attacks are not the way to achieve this.
spaceborn 13y ago
> That Russia has a reasonable political platform regarding its LGBT citizens? Are you saying that this position can simply be disregarded out of hand? That strikes me as disrespectful and self-important. If nothing else it is non-conducive to any actual discussion on the matter - unless all you want is an echo chamber to reaffirm your preexisting positions on the matter. > The topic was the Google Doodle showing support for LGBT people Specifically in relation to the LGBT issues surrounding the Olympics, i.e., Russia's "anti-gay" laws. The Russian laws are very much a part of this topic. You're being disingenuous.
- devilshaircut 13y ago
  Absolutely I am. I don't need to share the evidence with you because, as a thinking and contributing member to these forums, I am sure you have accessed it yourself. Is there any reason I wouldn't discard an argument in favor of institutionalized racism? Or, more mildly, that institutionalized racism is a topic that is capable of being overblown? The commenter called it "The LGBT Russia thing" and if that does not aptly sum up how trivial s/he perceives the topic to be, I don't know what does. "That human rights violation thing". Sorry, it doesn't fly with me. I am not saying Russian laws are not a part of the topic. What I am saying is that characterizing the topic as being "overblown" by citing that paper is absolutely ludicrous. EDIT: Wanted to add in this: How do you have 'rational discourse' when one side of the discussion is demonstrably pursuing nothing less than a human rights violation? It is like saying the Catholic church's sex scandal was 'overblown', or slavery, or any other human rights topic you can imagine. Where is the rational discourse there? How can "human rights violations" ever be an "overblown" topic?

boyter 13y ago

I didn't say it was a non-issue. I said it was overblown. The current media coverage of the issue is overblown. I belive I am being down-voted because this is a sensitive issue. Anyone suggesting that perhaps its not as bad as it seems is instantly shouted down. Please, please, please read the linked white paper. It is well researched, well written and provides citations and sources to its conclusions. It is also written by a lawyer who identifies themselves as part of the LGBT community. If nothing else, scroll down and read the translation of the Russian Federation law in there (the only good version I could find) and really think on what it means to the individual.

devilshaircut 13y ago
I have no comment about the paper itself. You were bemoaning being downvoted, and I explained why. I was commenting on the context which you provided inside of your original comment. If you actually don't care or don't wonder why such a comment would be downvoted, then disregard my post(s).
- boyter 13y ago
  I was complaining about being down-voted over what was obviously an emotional response to a sensitive topic since it was so swift. I think that is a reasonable thing to complain about. I expected to be down-voted. I was also hoping that there would be enough people around with an objective point of view to read the paper and provide solid cited counter arguments. I hold no stake in this. I am neither Russian or part of the LGBT community. I am interested in human rights, and I want equal opportunities for all regardless of race, sexual orientation, gender or otherwise. Torch and pitchfork attacks are not the way to achieve this.

spaceborn 13y ago

> That Russia has a reasonable political platform regarding its LGBT citizens? Are you saying that this position can simply be disregarded out of hand? That strikes me as disrespectful and self-important. If nothing else it is non-conducive to any actual discussion on the matter - unless all you want is an echo chamber to reaffirm your preexisting positions on the matter. > The topic was the Google Doodle showing support for LGBT people Specifically in relation to the LGBT issues surrounding the Olympics, i.e., Russia's "anti-gay" laws. The Russian laws are very much a part of this topic. You're being disingenuous.

devilshaircut 13y ago
Absolutely I am. I don't need to share the evidence with you because, as a thinking and contributing member to these forums, I am sure you have accessed it yourself. Is there any reason I wouldn't discard an argument in favor of institutionalized racism? Or, more mildly, that institutionalized racism is a topic that is capable of being overblown? The commenter called it "The LGBT Russia thing" and if that does not aptly sum up how trivial s/he perceives the topic to be, I don't know what does. "That human rights violation thing". Sorry, it doesn't fly with me. I am not saying Russian laws are not a part of the topic. What I am saying is that characterizing the topic as being "overblown" by citing that paper is absolutely ludicrous. EDIT: Wanted to add in this: How do you have 'rational discourse' when one side of the discussion is demonstrably pursuing nothing less than a human rights violation? It is like saying the Catholic church's sex scandal was 'overblown', or slavery, or any other human rights topic you can imagine. Where is the rational discourse there? How can "human rights violations" ever be an "overblown" topic?