[Closed] Putin; gay people at Winter Olympics should "leave the children in peace".

not quite as bad a story as I was fearing, he wasn't implying that the children were at risk of being assaulted.

[quote=TurnerGuy ]not quite as bad a story as I was fearing, he wasn't implying that the children were at risk of being assaulted.
Are you accusing a newspaper of over-sensationalising an issue in its headline?

Whatever next?

A bit lost in translation I think.

He's still a **** though.

Channel 4 reporting it in a similar way;

[url= http://www.channel4.com/news/putin-anti-gay-stay-away-children-sochi-russia ]http://www.channel4.com/news/putin-anti-gay-stay-away-children-sochi-russia[/url]

does seem to be very specifically telling gay people not to go near children?

Because they passed a law saying you can't give children "propaganda" about being gay (and other things) so I guess that is why the focus on saying about children.

[i]you can't give children "propaganda" about being gay[/i]

Problem is that has been interpreted locally as being any reference to homosexuality in any material available to children. So essentially, they've banned any reference to homosexuality in any mainstream media.

Two men holding hands being seen by a child might be seen as 'propoganda'.

It's not just about stopping adults talking to children directly about being gay.

If gays aren't allowed to stand up for their rights to live their life in the way they choose, will it be OK if all the hetero participants (competitors, judges, officials and spectators) do instead?

Can their bigoted minds deal with that?

Because gay people will coerce 'straight' children into playing for their team...??! 😕

These prejudiced bastards never cease to amaze me, if being gay [i]were[/i] a choice, taking into account all the abuse and discrimination gay people are subjected to, even in this day and age, why would people actually [i]choose[/i] to be gay?? It's not exactly the easy option.

Hopefully the day will come when it is religious idiots who are discriminated against and not gay people.

[quote=loddrik ]Because gay people will coerce 'straight' children into playing for their team...??!
These prejudiced bastards never cease to amaze me, if being gay were a choice, taking into account all the abuse and discrimination gay people are subjected to, even in this day and age, why would people actually choose to be gay?? It's not exactly the easy option.
[s]Hopefully the day will come when it is religious idiots who are discriminated against and not gay people.[/s]This thread isn't stirring up enough controversy so here's another trolling comment

What, you don't think Putin is a churchgoer....

Seems to be that the most homophobic people are also 'god fearing'.

Do you always accuse someone of trolling when you don't agree with them ?

I can't see why there should be any controversy really?

Does anyone think the Russian law and it's interpretation by enforcement authorities is just and fair?

This was more a 'wtf' type post than a 'Woppit stirring things up' one.

Putin's obviously doing the right thing, cos we don't want the kids to catch [i]teh gay[/i], do we.

I didn't realise that in Ireland (ref. the linked article) referring to gay people as "gays" as though they were a different species was still the done thing - does anyone know (genuine question) if they still refer to black people as "blacks".

If so, I wonder how they would refer to a black, gay person? A "black gay" perhaps? Or a "gay black".

There's a serious point in there about labelling people and defining them by their difference btw. (I find this shyte interesting even if no one else does). Personally I don't think any gays will be going. There will be some people going, and some of those people will be gay.

There's no problem with exposing children to the propaganda spread by the church though is there?

Difference is that there is clear evidence that people are gay, but there is no evidence of a god.

So which 'propaganda' should be banned?

I vote for religion.

You're not going to coerce someone into being gay, and even if they are unduly influenced into a 'gay' lifestyle, then they will eventually figure it out and 'switch sides', in the same way that someone will 'come out' now.

But that is not so likely once you have been brainwashed by years of being bombarded with religion.

Or is Putin likening homosexuals to pedophiles and 'grooming', in the same way those very dodgy 60's public service films did, like this one :

People are born gay, to imply otherwise just smacks of ignorance or an agenda, people are not born religious.

This is well weird;

Methinks Putin doth protest too much.....I mean, those macho publicity shots............Russian member of the Village People or what?

Bareback on horseback.

Very macho!!

This is putting me in mind of the scene in The Office where they are on a team-building day. Gareth Keenan is really getting to Tim during the 'fox/chicken/bag of grain crossing a river' exercise.

When Gareth eventually (because he is too thick to figure it out) blurts out "he could get his wife to do it - all farmers have wives" and Tim counters (thinking he has flumoxed Gareth) with "this farmer doesn't have a wife because he's gay". Then Gareth slays the argument with the unintentionally hilarious reply "well, he shouldn't be allowed near animals, then".

Actually there is a lot of Gareth Keenan in Putin - military pretensions and a lot of macho posturing making him actually look like a bit of a pillock.

I also suspect that with him tbh
Over compensates too much

The no propaganda means no talking, no marches ,nothing in the media and nothing in public. It is essentially a ban of speaking about homosexuality whilst making a BS appeal to "protecting children" - some of whom will be gay.
Someone needs to explain to him its not an infectious disease we get due to exposure to gays as children

Bit bored of repeating this, but here goes. I'm a Catholic. I'm also the (very proud) dad of a gay son. It's obviously wrong to discriminate against gay people, so why is it ok to discriminate against 'religious idiots'? Do you mean all religious people, or did you have someone specific in mind? I'll be honest, I've generally got bigger things to worry about than the opinion of a complete stranger on an internet forum, but sometimes, the repeated anti religion stuff on here gets right on my tits. 😕

President requests visiting athletes to obey the law. Mmmm. Not such an attention seeking headline I guess.

I should probably add that I don't agree with their laws, but it is their country and different peoples have different views on morality.

[i]President requests visiting athletes to obey the law.[/i]

so as long as a country has a law then it shouldn't be questioned?

barnsleymitch - genuine question: do you find it difficult to hear your churches teaching and views on homosexuality and reconcile it with how you feel about your son?

President requests visiting athletes to obey the discriminatory law

It all depends on what the law is does it not
For example if someone asks if they are gay they cannot answer I assume under this law
Perhaps wearing a rainbow badge will be promotion but the person can claim solidarity not promotion etc
I will be surprised if no one does something provocative tbh and it will be a bit of a mare for them to enforce

they can have whatever laws they wish but the IOC should make sure the Olympics does not go to countries with such laws

No harm at all in asking them to change the law. I think they should. Equally though I don't like the tone of moral superiority that assumes our moral code is best. As I said, it's their country.

[url= http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/russia-just-so-gay-2013081678730 ]RUSSIA could not be gayer if it tried, it has been claimed.[/url]

Bit bored of repeating this, but here goes. I'm a Catholic. I'm also the (very proud) dad of a gay son. It's obviously wrong to discriminate against gay people, so why is it ok to discriminate against 'religious idiots'? Do you mean all religious people, or did you have someone specific in mind? I'll be honest, I've generally got bigger things to worry about than the opinion of a complete stranger on an internet forum, but sometimes, the repeated anti religion stuff on here gets right on my tits.

Didn't say all religious people are idiots, but there are a large proportion who hold pretty antiquated views and it seems most of the hostility and prejudice against homosexual people is borne out of some sort of 'faith'.

I wouldn't feel too hard done by, we are still constrained by religion and religious ideals far more that we should be in this day and age, and I've no doubt that in 5000 years people will have generally woken up and seen how ridiculous organised religion is and it'll have largely disappeared.

Just a shame I won't be here to see it.

Wwaswas - yeah, course I do. To be honest, I still believe in God, but feel progressively removed from organised religion. It's just the often lazy generalisation that all religious people are stupid, bigoted, etc, that I find tiresome. Oh, I also think Putin's a massive cockmonkey.

Equally though I don't like the tone of moral superiority that assumes our moral code is best.

[quote=loddrik ]people are not born religious.

This chap disagrees with you

[img] [/img]

Loddrick - all the discrimination my son's received has come from meatheads and pissed up 'lads' out with their mates. Not much religion going on there, but still, you believe what you want to believe.

In general yes but when they are discriminating against people and violating human rights it is ok to say hey thats out of order dude.

I pretty much agree, however if the Russian people genuinely see it as immoral then they are duty bound by their own moral code to pass laws as they see fit.

As I said, I don't agree with them, but I agree with their sticking by their moral principles. If that doesn't sound too contradictory.

I haven't been here regularly for ages. When I was last, barnsleymitch was putting up with this stuff and being pleasant and polite about it. His patience does him great credit. 🙂

[i]To be honest, I still believe in God, but feel progressively removed from organised religion.[/i]

I think this is what's happening to a lot of people. they have a belief in the spiritual but don't feel that there's a place for them within religious doctrines developed 600 years ago.

There's huge growth in home churches and so on (although these are often seen as more conservative than the mainstream religious organisation).

My Mum's a minister and I think she's struggled with prejudice against her for being a woman in a 'mans job' - she left one church as a result.

It's a shame that Christianity which claims to be about love ends up being about what feels to the recipients of prejudice like hate.

I think a lot of what goes on on here is because of how 'absolute' a lot of religious people are - it feels like throwing a wall up to debate. "This is how the world is, full stop" when it doesn't reflect others experience or views.

[edit] of course there's prejudice from non religious organisations (including the State in a lot of countries). Religion is just an easy target.

If you find yourself being "duty bound by your own moral code" to prevent other human people loving as they wish, you're a stupendous douchebag. That goes for foreigners as well as for Britons, even if the the foreigners wear strange headgear.

Bollocks to moral relativism.

Edited for cheerful smiley: 🙂

if the Russian people genuinely see it as immoral then they are duty bound by their own moral code to pass laws as they see fit.

What if they decide to kill them to protect society?

that said yes it is just about which you feel is more important being fair to folk or letting folk have their own laws.

This chap disagrees with you

Erm, that's not quite right is it.....

What if they decide to kill them to protect society?

But, couldn't we start with Nigeria? They're far more extreme and we might actually be able to win that one.

@mitch

Much as I really, really find it hard to say anything that might come across as supportive of the rubbish you were responding to, on that point about the meatheads etc. I think you could make a compelling argument that the popular (once commonly accepted, now changing but still entrenched in large parts of our society and particularly at the perhaps less well educated and or thoughtful and contemplative edges of it) negative views of homosexuality do stem to a significant degree from the morality of the church / churches.

Granted it is less so now, but it is only in the last few decades that the generally accepted lead on morality stopped coming from the church (admittedly in this particular country a few hundred years since it was your branch, but still, the same religion) and so I don't think the fact that some of those standpoints are still prevalent among people who aren't themselves religious entirely gets the church off the hook for the propagation of those views in the first place.

If athletes and officials were that bothered about the restrictions being placed on them whilst attending these games they could always choose not to go.

Loddrick - all the discrimination my son's received has come from meatheads and pissed up 'lads' out with their mates. Not much religion going on there, but still, you believe what you want to believe.

Yes, but they've had a drink and lost their inhibitions and talking shite. But the sentiment is the same. Most religious people are not likely to go up to a gay person and lamp them in this country, but that doesn't mean their level of prejudice and animosity towards a gay persons sexuality is any less. Some would argue it's the latent prejudice that is of more concern.

I wonder would your views have evolved in the wake of having a gay child,,,

But, couldn't we start with Nigeria? They're far more extreme and we might actually be able to win that one.

Isn't it Uganda where they've not long made the committing of "homosexual acts" a capital offence?

Isn't it Uganda where they've not long made the committing of "homosexual acts" a capital offence?

And we give them millions in aid so we don't even have to invade. Do they have any oil?