3 ms·

I don't know if you have kids but I do. I don't want my kids to be exposed to any form of expression supporting any sexual lifestyle. In fact, I don't event wa

by osipov 12y ago

I don't know if you have kids but I do. I don't want my kids to be exposed to any form of expression supporting any sexual lifestyle. In fact, I don't event want my kids to see a blurred photo of Kim Kardashian's naked butt on TV. There is zero prejudice in this value statement. And most parents agree with my position. When my kids are adults they can decide about sexual relationships for themselves. Until then I decide for them and I want a legal system that supports my decisions.

unprepare 12y ago
Does the law block speaking to kids about ALL sexual orientations, or just 'non traditional'? you're point is completely irrelevant to the discussion. this is about discrimination against homosexuality. But I'll address it anyways: >I don't want my kids to be exposed to any form of expression supporting any sexual lifestyle. Good for you, luckily as a parent you have the ability to make those decisions for your kids. This does not extend to you forcing your views on others. >And most parents agree with my position. and the rights of the majority are the only rights that matter, correct? >Until then I decide for them and I want a legal system that supports my decisions. This is not how it works. Say you were an anti-vaccine advocate, you would want the legal system to outlaw vaccines, but many other parents would disagree. see how this conflicts with the rights of others?
- osipov 12y ago
  Choose your words carefully, the law blocks _propaganda_ not speaking; of _"sexual relations"_ not sexual orientations. Translated from Russian to English, "sexual relations" refers to non traditional parental units, i.e. those that do not consist of a male + female. You may see here a discrimination against homosexuality but I see a legal framework for protection of a traditional family. LGBT individuals still have rights in this framework. With respect to your anti-vaccine example. There is always a conflict between something that a minority may consider a right and the rule of the majority. There are minorities that want pedophilia to be made legal. Do you have a novel solution for the minority rights conflict? Traditionally rights for minorities have been won through struggle, societal change, and war among many other ways. Are you proposing a novel solution for LGBT rights in Russia?
  - unprepare 12y ago
    >or say that gay relationships are equal to heterosexual relationships in presence of minors. Is it me, or is that the word 'say'? >You may see here a discrimination against homosexuality but I see a legal framework for protection of a traditional family. This is a direct contradiction. You cannot use law to legally protect one class of people without necessarily discriminating against those not in that class. > There are minorities that want pedophilia to be made legal. Weak example. Pedophilia has a direct victim (a child is unable to give consent) >Do you have a novel solution for the minority rights conflict? No, but it wouldnt be to ignore it as you would. This is so far from what the discussion is about I wonder why you are trying to sidetrack this >Traditionally rights for minorities have been won through struggle, societal change, and war among many other ways. Are you proposing a novel solution for LGBT rights in Russia? ? this is pretty much nonsense? yeah, rights are won through societal change as you say - Many societies are changing to accept homosexuality, not sure what you're trying to get at here? Why would i be proposing a novel solution to gay rights? Thanks for the discussion
  - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
    In free countries, minorities have right without struggle. We all are owed due process, free assembly and so on. This so-called conflict is made-up, where the majority imagines they are harmed by the private arrangements of the minority.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
klipt 12y ago
I assume you would have no problem showing your children a Disney movie where the prince marries a princess (kids' movies obviously have no explicit sex scenes). Would you have a problem with a Disney movie where a princess marries another princess? I.e. is your problem really just with exposing children to sex, or do you actually have a problem with gay characters?

by osipov 12y ago

unprepare 12y ago

Does the law block speaking to kids about ALL sexual orientations, or just 'non traditional'? you're point is completely irrelevant to the discussion. this is about discrimination against homosexuality. But I'll address it anyways: >I don't want my kids to be exposed to any form of expression supporting any sexual lifestyle. Good for you, luckily as a parent you have the ability to make those decisions for your kids. This does not extend to you forcing your views on others. >And most parents agree with my position. and the rights of the majority are the only rights that matter, correct? >Until then I decide for them and I want a legal system that supports my decisions. This is not how it works. Say you were an anti-vaccine advocate, you would want the legal system to outlaw vaccines, but many other parents would disagree. see how this conflicts with the rights of others?

osipov 12y ago
Choose your words carefully, the law blocks _propaganda_ not speaking; of _"sexual relations"_ not sexual orientations. Translated from Russian to English, "sexual relations" refers to non traditional parental units, i.e. those that do not consist of a male + female. You may see here a discrimination against homosexuality but I see a legal framework for protection of a traditional family. LGBT individuals still have rights in this framework. With respect to your anti-vaccine example. There is always a conflict between something that a minority may consider a right and the rule of the majority. There are minorities that want pedophilia to be made legal. Do you have a novel solution for the minority rights conflict? Traditionally rights for minorities have been won through struggle, societal change, and war among many other ways. Are you proposing a novel solution for LGBT rights in Russia?
- unprepare 12y ago
  >or say that gay relationships are equal to heterosexual relationships in presence of minors. Is it me, or is that the word 'say'? >You may see here a discrimination against homosexuality but I see a legal framework for protection of a traditional family. This is a direct contradiction. You cannot use law to legally protect one class of people without necessarily discriminating against those not in that class. > There are minorities that want pedophilia to be made legal. Weak example. Pedophilia has a direct victim (a child is unable to give consent) >Do you have a novel solution for the minority rights conflict? No, but it wouldnt be to ignore it as you would. This is so far from what the discussion is about I wonder why you are trying to sidetrack this >Traditionally rights for minorities have been won through struggle, societal change, and war among many other ways. Are you proposing a novel solution for LGBT rights in Russia? ? this is pretty much nonsense? yeah, rights are won through societal change as you say - Many societies are changing to accept homosexuality, not sure what you're trying to get at here? Why would i be proposing a novel solution to gay rights? Thanks for the discussion
- JoeAltmaier 12y ago
  In free countries, minorities have right without struggle. We all are owed due process, free assembly and so on. This so-called conflict is made-up, where the majority imagines they are harmed by the private arrangements of the minority.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

klipt 12y ago

I assume you would have no problem showing your children a Disney movie where the prince marries a princess (kids' movies obviously have no explicit sex scenes). Would you have a problem with a Disney movie where a princess marries another princess? I.e. is your problem really just with exposing children to sex, or do you actually have a problem with gay characters?