| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5079 Posts
On August 03 2013 15:58 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: Credentials of my government giving you permission to speak on Singapore's behalf, please. where did anyone say they were speaking for the singaporean government or the city-state of singapore or even presuming to speak for anyone but themselves | ||
|
Hattori_Hanzo
Singapore1229 Posts
On August 03 2013 15:37 DeepElemBlues wrote: We're all human beings there's credentials. People who are not only wrong but willfully wrong in a way destructive to others shouldn't get a free pass just because most of them think it's okay. Credentials of my government giving you permission to speak on Singapore's behalf, please. Or credentials of the USA having sovereignty over these nations. And your credentials with the elected USA government. My current knowledge is Singapore has a free trade agreement with the USA. That is all. Otherwise you are not entitled to speak on my behalf or that of my nation. I reserve that right for myself. Should either you or Mr. ComaDose continue to speak for me without my permission, I will not hesitate to take the appropriate measures to cease this illegal action. | ||
|
Hattori_Hanzo
Singapore1229 Posts
On August 03 2013 16:00 DeepElemBlues wrote: where did anyone say they were speaking for the singaporean government or the city-state of singapore or even presuming to speak for anyone but themselves You did when you claimed to speak for all human beings. Now, credentials. Edit: I personally have made no nomination to either you or Mr. ComaDose to speak on my behalf regarding the nation of Russia's laws or handling of an international event known as the Olympics and I recommend you stop immediately. | ||
|
DBS
515 Posts
On August 03 2013 16:08 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: Credentials of my government giving you permission to speak on Singapore's behalf, please. Or credentials of the USA having sovereignty over these nations. And your credentials with the elected USA government. My current knowledge is Singapore has a free trade agreement with the USA. That is all. Otherwise you are not entitled to speak on my behalf or that of my nation. I reserve that right for myself. Should either you or Mr. ComaDose continue to speak for me without my permission, I will not hesitate to take the appropriate measures to cease this illegal action. Listen, you are dodging the actual argument here. Just because someone wants to do something that doesn't mean everyone else should let them, otherwise you are saying that nobody should have stopped the holocaust. | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
On August 03 2013 14:48 arsonist wrote: Would you think slavery was okay if the majority of people were in favour of it? it was at one point :/ it is what it is, let them take care of it. letting all political bias aside, maybe russia just doesnt want olympic being used to push gay pride since majority is against it. its their home, let the people of that country do what it wants. doesnt matter how higher of a standard the others (non russia, like most here) thinks. in time, change will come i'm optimistic, it wont be pretty getting there but it'll get there. history repeats itself right? there were many sacrifices and there will be more. i just think they should take care of themselves (with some help from human rights organizations) and i believe olympic can be used politically by individuals with strong passion towards LBGT, and majority of russia wants none of that since this movement has been getting attention for awhile now if i'm correct(hence the ban). perhaps the government is handling it wrong but its also wrong for everyone else to point fingers at russia's own business when you guys yourself (like usa) went through the same shit. like telling a kid how being a grown up is, the kid wont know until they go through it themselves. | ||
|
MarklarMarklarr
Fiji226 Posts
So is it worth it to kill personal freedom because of how some people choose to have sex and love? | ||
|
Hattori_Hanzo
Singapore1229 Posts
On August 03 2013 16:13 DBS wrote: Listen, you are dodging the actual argument here. Just because someone wants to do something that doesn't mean everyone else should let them, otherwise you are saying that nobody should have stopped the holocaust. I agree this has gone beyond the OP and the discussion. You are not addressing the point I brought up either. That to my knowledge, neither Mr. ComaDose nor DeepElemBlues have the right to speak on behalf of all humanity unless they produce the appropriate documentation, I believe laws were broken. Edit: Because they have gone beyond my back to claim to speak on my behalf by their claim that being human they can speak for all humans, when I, as a human being, clearly have not given such permission. Should they post sufficient evidence that my government has assigned said right to them, then I believe, yes, they do have that right to speak for me by virtue of a decision of my elected government. | ||
|
Mallard86
186 Posts
| ||
|
opisska
Poland8852 Posts
On August 03 2013 07:28 radscorpion9 wrote: We aren't talking about some complex moral issue that could have people arguing from both sides. It is simply immoral to oppress people based on their sexual orientation, which was chosen for them (through no fault of their own) at birth. The reasons are because it inflicts serious psychological trauma which leads to suicide in many cases, so I see it as a form of mental torture. The only so-called "argument" from the other side is based on ignorance and religious dogma. I assume you and everyone else here (well almost everyone) are intelligent enough that further explanations are not required. So I missed about 3 pages while sleeping, can I still go on with this line of argument? I think that you see it as not being a complex moral issue, because you are a priori refusing to even look from the other side. Let me play a devil's advocate: this disucssion actually started from a talk about "hapiness" and how denying it to some people is universally wrong. Do you also think that hapiness can be measured objectively and universaly? I think that it is even easier to see in regard to hapiness than morality that it is not the case - people in different part of the world desire different things. Whereas healthcare and nutrition are somewhat universal to hapiness, people from less "developed" world could be quite puzzled about many goals that westerners pursue in their life, such as career growth and whatnot and I can imagine whole nations who would always unanimously consider any western high manager extremely unhappy, because he works 12 hours a day - while a large part of our culture sees such a "success" as almost the paramount of hapiness. Now, coming to our particular case, can we agree, that if we were to consider "human hapiness" as a valuable metrics, it has to be the overall hapiness of the nation and not just the hapiness of a selected group of people? Thus the question is, could the Russian reasonably assume that while the prohibition of vocality about homosexuality decrease the hapiness of homosexuals, it increases the hapiness of everyone else enough that it brings net positive gain? Can we bring solid arguments that this is not the case? Or, can we somehow discredit the whole idea that the hapiness of a group is more important than that of an individual? Well, I can, in my head, it feels very simple, it's so natural that it brings anger whenever I think about the law. But I honestly don't know how much of that is just conditioning by the society that brought me up and I don't now how to justify imposing this view on other nation from a purely moral point of view, even though I would like to. The result of this thinking excersise is, that I would still like to live in a world, where such laws do not exists and I think it is pretty clear that making a high-visibility sports even that pretends to stand for values in Russia does not help that cause, and thus I oppose it, but the justifitcation really boils down to the original "I want it like that". | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On August 03 2013 16:16 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: I agree this has gone beyond the OP and the discussion. You are not addressing the point I brought up either. That to my knowledge, neither Mr. ComaDose nor DeepElemBlues have the right to speak on behalf of all humanity unless they produce the appropriate documentation, I believe laws were broken. Edit: Because they have gone beyond my back to claim to speak on my behalf by their claim that being human they can speak for all humans, when I, as a human being, clearly have not given such permission. Should they post sufficient evidence that my government has assigned said right to them, then I believe, yes, they do have that right to speak for me by virtue of a decision of my elected government. When you're ready to stop being facetious, could you please let me know by typing something in bold and underline? I'm going to stop reading your posts in the meanwhile, but if you could do that that would be great. Unless you genuinely think asking for "credentials" over and over again is a good way to discuss something? In which case I don't know how to help you. So I'm just going to assume you're being totally facetious. | ||
|
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On August 02 2013 07:40 shabby wrote: It is sad that Russia has laws like these, but tbh it has nothing to do with the Olympics. We had Olympics in Beijing i 2008 and they're arguably more backwards with womens rights, censorship etc. This is a sports event and nothing else, it is not in the Olympic committees (or the participating countries) place to push their political views on the host country. If you want to visit Russia and/or participate in their events, then you should adhere to their laws. That being said, it is a principal thing for me, and I'd much like for everyone to be able to say and preach whatever they want. I agree. If the olympics are held in a certain country, people and athletes have to adhere to the laws of that country, whether those are anti-gay laws, anti-free speech or whatever. Noone really seemed to mind the lack of free speech during the Beijing Olympics, so I don't really see the issue here. In case you guys forgot, homosexuality is taboo and/or illegal in most of the world, just like abortion and euthanasia. | ||
|
HunterX11
United States1048 Posts
On August 03 2013 16:10 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: You did when you claimed to speak for all human beings. Now, credentials. Edit: I personally have made no nomination to either you or Mr. ComaDose to speak on my behalf regarding the nation of Russia's laws or handling of an international event known as the Olympics and I recommend you stop immediately. By this line of reasoning, where are the Russian government's credentials? Did they, individually or severally, create human beings from inanimate clay? Or are they mere mortal humans themselves? What gives them the right to oppress people for their sexuality? It is extremely arbitrary to claim that moral relativism applies at exactly the national level without providing some argument for why. | ||
|
Thorakh
Netherlands1788 Posts
Now, coming to our particular case, can we agree, that if we were to consider "human hapiness" as a valuable metrics, it has to be the overall hapiness of the nation and not just the hapiness of a selected group of people? Thus the question is, could the Russian reasonably assume that while the prohibition of vocality about homosexuality decrease the hapiness of homosexuals, it increases the hapiness of everyone else enough that it brings net positive gain? Can we bring solid arguments that this is not the case? Or, can we somehow discredit the whole idea that the hapiness of a group is more important than that of an individual? Because the 'unhappiness' of the general Russian populace about homosexuals is based on nothing more than wind and air. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26762 Posts
On August 03 2013 15:45 Gnaix wrote: Some of the best Olympic moments were made by those that chose to compete despite the country hosting having extreme prejudice against them. The best example is that of Jessie Owens' golds despite the Nazi's belief in racial superiority. Suppose he chose to boycott the event instead or tried to actively protest against Nazism and got arrested in Berlin, then I doubt we consider him to be one of the greatest Olympians. His act of winning has much more impact in my opinion. Reasonable, albeit different. If you're gay, you aren't immediately visible as gay. Your win doesn't have that visceral visual impact, as an Owens win, especially with this law. On a level of personal satisfaction yes, or subsequent influence on your home nation if you reveal your sexuality on the talk show, you probably can change perceptions in the manner of which you speak. | ||
|
hfglgg
Germany5372 Posts
On August 03 2013 17:31 Mallard86 wrote: So Russia doesnt want minors exposed to sexual advocacy groups. Bid deal. Im sure that if some BDSM group set up shop outside a preschool in the US the public and media would be up in arms. someone who doesnt understand what homosexuality is. glad you are happy to make a fool out of yourself. | ||
|
Hattori_Hanzo
Singapore1229 Posts
On August 03 2013 19:05 marvellosity wrote: When you're ready to stop being facetious, could you please let me know by typing something in bold and underline? I'm going to stop reading your posts in the meanwhile, but if you could do that that would be great. Unless you genuinely think asking for "credentials" over and over again is a good way to discuss something? In which case I don't know how to help you. So I'm just going to assume you're being totally facetious. Let me make this very simple to understand, I take my online identity and moral and political views seriously. These individuals claimed they speak for humanity. Ergo, their political/moral/etc views and positions regarding Russian laws are my positions as well. By speaking "for humanity", these two individuals have claimed that they speak for the entire human race, of which I am a party of. They claim to speak for me. This is false and untrue. I am not party to any agreement to either individual(s)/legal entities operating under the TL identities of ComaDose or DeepElemBlues to represent my views in any matter at any point in time. I intend to take the appropriate steps to ensure my identity is not fraudulently used. User was warned for this post | ||
|
marvellosity
United Kingdom36161 Posts
Is this your first time debating on an online forum? | ||
|
shinosai
United States1577 Posts
Now, coming to our particular case, can we agree, that if we were to consider "human hapiness" as a valuable metrics, it has to be the overall hapiness of the nation and not just the hapiness of a selected group of people? Thus the question is, could the Russian reasonably assume that while the prohibition of vocality about homosexuality decrease the hapiness of homosexuals, it increases the hapiness of everyone else enough that it brings net positive gain? Can we bring solid arguments that this is not the case? Or, can we somehow discredit the whole idea that the hapiness of a group is more important than that of an individual? No serious utilitarian actually takes this view, because they know what the ridiculous consequences are. By arguing that you must maximize happiness no matter what the cost, you justify slavery, genocide, murder, etc for the majority. Pretty much all philosophers who take utilitarianism seriously have some sort of provision that protects minority rights, usually by arguing that there is a sort of hierarchy of pleasure. Thus, the suffering of a human being cannot be outweighed by a few moments of pleasure. | ||
|
Saryph
United States1955 Posts
On August 03 2013 21:05 marvellosity wrote: Can't tell if srs Is this your first time debating on an online forum? I'm still trying to search through the posts for where they 'claimed to speak for all of humanity.' The closest thing I could find was someone mentioning a human heart. | ||
|
Hattori_Hanzo
Singapore1229 Posts
On August 03 2013 21:05 marvellosity wrote: Can't tell if srs Is this your first time debating on an online forum? With all due respect, had the involved parties limited voicing their personal opinions, their immediate circle and that of verifiable sources (e.g. their newspapers, professors, etc), this incident would not be the state it is now. Given my future dealings with Russian elite, I cannot have such carte blanche claim to representing my political view unchallenged. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
herO vs TriGGeR
NightMare vs Solar
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
BSL
IPSL
eOnzErG vs TBD
G5 vs Nesh
Patches Events
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
Afreeca Starleague
Jaedong vs Light
Monday Night Weeklies
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
