Athletes in Sochi to Be Barred From Advocating Gay Causes

[CriticalThought]

MOSCOW — Russia’s minister of sports, Vitaly L. Mutko, said on Thursday that foreign athletes traveling to Russia for the 2014 Olympics in Sochi would be expected to obey a new Russian law banning “homosexual propaganda” or face criminal prosecution.

In comments made to the state news agency R-Sport, Mutko said that gay athletes were welcome to attend the Games, but insisted that under the new law no athlete or visitor could advocate a “nontraditional” sexual orientation.

The statement seemed sure to stoke criticism of the law, which has already become a point of contention for the Games, with some calls for a boycott. Legislation and statements by the Russian Orthodox Church and political officials about the law have been denounced as homophobic.

“No one is forbidding a sportsman with a nontraditional sexual orientation to come to Sochi,” Mutko said. “But if he goes out on the street and starts to propagandize it, then of course he will be held accountable. Even if he’s a sportsman, when he comes to a country, he should respect its laws.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/02/s...ssian-law-stirs-olympic-controversy.html?_r=0

A little reminder of how wonderful that 1st Amendment is when it comes to the US. It is a pity they don't have something similar in Russia.

If I had the opportunity I would be advocating for gay rights until they locked me up in Russia. The way the law is written, a same sex couple holding hands in public is considered "homosexual propaganda" and could face criminal prosecution. That is how a lot of the religious right in our country would like to have it.

 

[Stewart]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/02/s...ssian-law-stirs-olympic-controversy.html?_r=0

A little reminder of how wonderful that 1st Amendment is when it comes to the US. It is a pity they don't have something similar in Russia.

If I had the opportunity I would be advocating for gay rights until they locked me up in Russia. The way the law is written, a same sex couple holding hands in public is considered "homosexual propaganda" and could face criminal prosecution. That is how a lot of the religious right in our country would like to have it.

There is already a thread on this... Somewhere ...

 

[WCH]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/02/s...ssian-law-stirs-olympic-controversy.html?_r=0

A little reminder of how wonderful that 1st Amendment is when it comes to the US. It is a pity they don't have something similar in Russia.

If I had the opportunity I would be advocating for gay rights until they locked me up in Russia. The way the law is written, a same sex couple holding hands in public is considered "homosexual propaganda" and could face criminal prosecution. That is how a lot of the religious right in our country would like to have it.

Mutko said. “But if he goes out on the street and starts to propagandize it, then of course he will be held accountable"

IOWs ..don't shove it in our faces and there will be no problems.

I can go along with that.

 

[CriticalThought]

There is already a thread on this... Somewhere ...

I believe this is new. Before, the Olympic Committee was assuring people that foreign athletes had nothing to fear from this law. Now they are saying that foreign athletes can face criminal prosecution.

 

[CriticalThought]

Mutko said. “But if he goes out on the street and starts to propagandize it, then of course he will be held accountable"

IOWs ..don't shove it in our faces and there will be no problems.

I can go along with that.

Hm...so if I am a foriegn tourist there to see the Olympics and I get arrested for holding my boyfriend's hand while walking down the street, that is okay with you because I was apparently shoving it in their faces?

You are kind of proving my point about the religious right in the US.

 

[digsbe]

It's a stupid restrictive law that Russia passed. It's not right and I think civilized nations that respect freedom of speech and belief should boycott the Olympics.

 

[WCH]

Hm...so if I am a foriegn tourist there to see the Olympics and I get arrested for holding my boyfriend's hand while walking down the street, that is okay with you because I was apparently shoving it in their faces?

You are kind of proving my point about the religious right in the US.

"Athletes in Sochi to Be Barred From Advocating Gay Causes"

It doesn't say anything about holding hands, kissing or the like.

Do you not understand what propagandizing is?

 

[Kal'Stang]

"Athletes in Sochi to Be Barred From Advocating Gay Causes"

It doesn't say anything about holding hands, kissing or the like.

Do you not understand what propagandizing is?

Anything that shows something can be considered "propagandizing" IOW "shoving it in other peoples faces". Your own post #3 shows that you consider holding hands as such.

 

[iacardsfan]

Mutko said. “But if he goes out on the street and starts to propagandize it, then of course he will be held accountable"

IOWs ..don't shove it in our faces and there will be no problems.

I can go along with that.

You can display affection with your wife/girlfriend in public, why can't they?

 

[CLAX1911]

"Athletes in Sochi to Be Barred From Advocating Gay Causes"

It doesn't say anything about holding hands, kissing or the like.

Do you not understand what propagandizing is?

You didn't read carefully
Excerpt from the OP

A little reminder of how wonderful that 1st Amendment is when it comes to the US. It is a pity they don't have something similar in Russia.*If I had the opportunity I would be advocating for gay rights until they locked me up in Russia. The way the law is written, a same sex couple holding hands in public is considered "homosexual propaganda" and could face criminal prosecution. That is how a lot of the religious right in our country would like to have it.

He stated in the OP that holding hands was considered propaganda in the country.

 

[CriticalThought]

"Athletes in Sochi to Be Barred From Advocating Gay Causes"

It doesn't say anything about holding hands, kissing or the like.

Do you not understand what propagandizing is?

Have you read anything about this law beyond what it says in this particular article?

It is moot now. Russia reversed course. They said they would not enforce the law for the duration of the Olympics in order to be "politically correct".

The law is written so that even same sex public displays of affection or having a rainbow flag patch or button would be considered "propagandizing". You can spend up to 14 days in jail as a result, which was oddly missing from this article.

 

[WCH]

Have you read anything about this law beyond what it says in this particular article?

It is moot now. Russia reversed course. They said they would not enforce the law for the duration of the Olympics in order to be "politically correct".

The law is written so that even same sex public displays of affection or having a rainbow flag patch or button would be considered "propagandizing". You can spend up to 14 days in jail as a result, which was oddly missing from this article.

As I said, the article said nothing about public affection and that's all I had to go on.

Now that Russia has capitulated, I din't see the need to discuss it further.

 

[cpwill]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/02/s...ssian-law-stirs-olympic-controversy.html?_r=0

A little reminder of how wonderful that 1st Amendment is when it comes to the US. It is a pity they don't have something similar in Russia.

If I had the opportunity I would be advocating for gay rights until they locked me up in Russia. The way the law is written, a same sex couple holding hands in public is considered "homosexual propaganda" and could face criminal prosecution. That is how a lot of the religious right in our country would like to have it.

With you up until there. Can you cite any kind of polling data demonstrating this claim? Or are you smearing an entire movement with its' extremes, similar to those who would argue that the most of the pro-SSM movement is basically just like the guy dancing around in a gay pride parade wearing nothing but a ball-gag and thrusting his privates into peoples' faces?

 

[Lakryte]

Mutko said. “But if he goes out on the street and starts to propagandize it, then of course he will be held accountable"

IOWs ..don't shove it in our faces and there will be no problems.

I can go along with that.

Then don't ever hold hands with your girlfriend in public and we'll call it equal. Or do you want to shove your sexuality in my face?

 

[Lakryte]

The US Olympic team should enter the stadium wearing rainbow flags on their uniforms. That would be amazing to watch.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

Hm...so if I am a foriegn tourist there to see the Olympics and I get arrested for holding my boyfriend's hand while walking down the street, that is okay with you because I was apparently shoving it in their faces?

You are kind of proving my point about the religious right in the US.

1) they probably shouldn't be holding the Olympics there.

2) While I have sympathy for people living in such places, that doesn't really extend to tourists. If you can't deal with a country's culture, people, or laws, simply don't go

 

[Infinite Chaos]

--

If I had the opportunity I would be advocating for gay rights until they locked me up in Russia.

I really think you should read about how some Russian citizens set homosexual men up online for meetings where they are then humiliated, filmed on camera and the results posted online for the world to see. It's barbaric and condoned by the authorities who have no interest in protecting homosexual men from such treatment.

There was a video on Washington Post (Post TV) a few days ago - it's not searchable but the same video appears here on huffington post plus other articles about the crackdown on homosexuals and the LGBT community.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/26/russian-nazi-torture-gay-teens_n_3658636.html

Believe me, you don't want to be gay and protesting or even living in Russia at the moment.

There is already a thread on this... Somewhere ...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...inter-olympics-russian-lawmaker-suggests.html

 

[Bob Blaylock]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/02/s...ssian-law-stirs-olympic-controversy.html?_r=0

A little reminder of how wonderful that 1st Amendment is when it comes to the US. It is a pity they don't have something similar in Russia.

If I had the opportunity I would be advocating for gay rights until they locked me up in Russia. The way the law is written, a same sex couple holding hands in public is considered "homosexual propaganda" and could face criminal prosecution. That is how a lot of the religious right in our country would like to have it.

How would we feel if we were hosting the Olympics, and members of a team from some nation that is notorious for such things wanted to use the bully pulpit to advocate that we ought to allow child prostitution here in the U.S., and to denounce us for how backward we are for forbidding it?

It is shameful that we have allowed our society to become so degraded that we allow a perversion such as homosexuality to be so accepted and treated as “normal”; but I fully support the right of other nations not to allow us to push this immorality and sickness on them.

In any event, it is very specifically the point of the Olympics not to be used as a platform for pushing controversial political views. Even if I agreed with the sick perverts who want to push homosexuality and other immorality on societies that still stand against these evils, I would disagree with any use of the Olympics for this purpose.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

You can display affection with your wife/girlfriend in public, why can't they?

Within proper bounds, heterosexuality is normal and proper and healthy. Homosexuality will never be anything other than a sick, disgusting perversion. It will always be wrong to treat them as if one is in any way equivalent to the other.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I really think you should read about how some Russian citizens set homosexual men up online for meetings where they are then humiliated, filmed on camera and the results posted online for the world to see. It's barbaric and condoned by the authorities who have no interest in protecting homosexual men from such treatment.

You have to think about why this would be humiliating.

Suppose they were setting guys up for dates with women, and then trying to humiliate them in the same manner. Would that work? It wouldn't of course, because there's nothing improper or humiliating about men dating women. That is, of course, assuming that all involved are single.

Now if the men being set up this way were married,and they were being set up on dates with women other than their wives, then yes, this would be humiliating, and rightly so. Married men who cheat on their wives should be humiliated, and any who had a conscience would easily be by such a setup.

Not to say that I necessarily agree with any such setups, but the point is that deep down, no matter what politically-correct indoctrination may have taken place to the contrary, everyone innately knows that there is something wrong with homosexuality, that it is not normal or proper. If this was not true, then it would not be possible to humiliate someone by exposing him as a homosexual.

 

[Infinite Chaos]

You have to think about why this would be humiliating.

Suppose they were setting guys up for dates with women, and then trying to humiliate them in the same manner. Would that work? It wouldn't of course, because there's nothing improper or humiliating about men dating women. That is, of course, assuming that all involved are single.

Now if the men being set up this way were married,and they were being set up on dates with women other than their wives, then yes, this would be humiliating, and rightly so. Married men who cheat on their wives should be humiliated, and any who had a conscience would easily be by such a setup.

Not to say that I necessarily agree with any such setups, but the point is that deep down, no matter what politically-correct indoctrination may have taken place to the contrary, everyone innately knows that there is something wrong with homosexuality, that it is not normal or proper. If this was not true, then it would not be possible to humiliate someone by exposing him as a homosexual.

The "humiliation" is not simply exposing someone online as a homosexual - they record beatings, object rape (the last death was a month ago where bottles were used on the poor victim).

Also, I think you're derailing with your rant about "politically correct indoctrination" as in various cultures over time, homosexuality was not seen as something people knew was "innately wrong".

 

[iacardsfan]

Within proper bounds, heterosexuality is normal and proper and healthy. Homosexuality will never be anything other than a sick, disgusting perversion. It will always be wrong to treat them as if one is in any way equivalent to the other.

So because you disagree with it, it is considered perverted?

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Within proper bounds, heterosexuality is normal and proper and healthy. Homosexuality will never be anything other than a sick, disgusting perversion. It will always be wrong to treat them as if one is in any way equivalent to the other.

Poor Bob. You STILL haven't educated yourself on this issue and you STILL post complete nonsense. And you STILL don't understand the difference between sexual behavior and sexual orientation. Come on, Bob... show us what you know... tell us the difference between these two rather different concepts.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

You have to think about why this would be humiliating.

Suppose they were setting guys up for dates with women, and then trying to humiliate them in the same manner. Would that work? It wouldn't of course, because there's nothing improper or humiliating about men dating women. That is, of course, assuming that all involved are single.

Now if the men being set up this way were married,and they were being set up on dates with women other than their wives, then yes, this would be humiliating, and rightly so. Married men who cheat on their wives should be humiliated, and any who had a conscience would easily be by such a setup.

Not to say that I necessarily agree with any such setups, but the point is that deep down, no matter what politically-correct indoctrination may have taken place to the contrary, everyone innately knows that there is something wrong with homosexuality, that it is not normal or proper. If this was not true, then it would not be possible to humiliate someone by exposing him as a homosexual.

No Bob... you THINK there is something wrong with homosexuality. Yet at every turn, you are proven wrong. All you have are your own irrelevant and inaccurate biases. But tell us, Bob... factually, what is wrong with homosexuality? And remember... we are discussing facts. Your morals are irrelevant as they always are when discussing facts.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Poor Bob. You STILL haven't educated yourself on this issue and you STILL post complete nonsense. And you STILL don't understand the difference between sexual behavior and sexual orientation. Come on, Bob... show us what you know... tell us the difference between these two rather different concepts.

That I do not agree with your defense of evil perversions does not make me uneducated.

In any event, the difference between orientation and behavior is no mystery. It is the difference between noticing that some woman other than my wife is attractive, and attempting to pursue an adulterous affair with her. It is the difference between seeing an object that I would like to possess, and stealing it.

None of us are immune to temptations to do things that we know are wrong. The difference between orientation and behavior is the difference between temptation and behavior.