No offense Rukis, but isn't it presumptive for Americans/non-Russians to insinuate themselves into the Russian political process? I realize it's just a petition, but it feels like disrespecting the nation's sovereignty to interfere, even in this regard. When it's a big enough issue for Russians, they'll make sure it happens.

I agree. It drives me nuts when non-Americans try to interfere with our process over here. It's fine to have opinions about stuff in other countries, but if you're not from here, don't tell us how to vote.

Pretty much. To make another comparison, how would Americans feel if the British were petitioning the PM to encourage the US president to ban something? Most of us probably wouldn't like it.

Depends on the issue. If it's a legitimate issue, then it doesn't matter who initiates it.

Nationalities don't change the fact that we're all people, and in an interconnected world, the policies set by one nation can easily have spillover into others.

America has a bad history of disrespecting sovereignty. I don't see why it's bad to try to change that.

You see your neighbors outright abusing their children, you have a moral obligation to not simply look the other direction. It doesn't matter how you handle a situation, but the only absolutely wrong answer is to do nothing at all. Petitions are a show of support. If the people in Russia feel isolated and think that no one else cares about their situation, they'll most likely be a lot less vocal.

Saying 'It's not our problem' doesn't do anything but hurt you in the future when it does become your problem.

My neighbors live under the same laws as me. I can call the police if they're abusing their kids. The Russian people are not under the same laws as I am, and I'm not going to tell them they should change just because they have different laws.

The last time we didn't mind our own business to any significant degree and didn't respect the rights of another country, we had Vietnam. People have a right to self-determinate.

Not to pull out the old well abused hammer here.. but since you brought Vietnam into it... your statement of "The Russian people are not under the same laws as I am, and I'm not going to tell them they should change just because they have different laws." Was the same view and near word for word argument we used for not entering world war II. I do not consider passing a law the same as that.. on that you can be sure, but the mindset and reasoning is only a step away from where it could go. And we all saw where the ideals of moral imperatives ended up as a political way for people to justify the treatment of gays in Germany at the time.

I feel we have a right to make a comment politically, which is a far cry from invasion and hardly shows as a blip as interference with self determination.

My issue is the route this is being done through, not the actions being taken.

It also happens I missed a few key points because I skim.

We the people, for the people... If we as people feel our government should voice our views, then our views should and will be voiced. If the other government feels they should listen they will, that is the nature of national sovereignty. We live in a nation that gives us the freedom to make these comments as people without disrupting the international relationships that exist outside of the peoples comments. I entirely approve of the way it is being done, having an intimate knowledge of how countries interact with each other on various levels.

And yes, i feel you did miss a few key points. *grins* Still, busy thread though! congrats on that ;)

It's a petition. Petitions fail all the time.

There's a ton of abuse in these "laws" too. One of the most recent gruesome deaths of a gay man involved him coming out, then his peers beat him and shoved beat bottles up his anus. This man died. A lot of others have died. It's also technically a human rights violation to be passing laws against certain types of people.

Russia is also supporting a lot of religious newly instituted laws, so seperation of church and state is progressively going to be non existent.

But it's just.. People are getting hurt, the "not my problem" or the "it's their country not mine" thing is complete bullshit. People are being beaten in the streets and killed for their sexuality.

Yup. You'll forgive me if I'm more concerned with the ones on my continent than the ones in Eurasia.

Well no... I think we should be concerned with basic human rights and civil liberties no matter where that person or persons happen to be from. You're sounding a little ethnocentric there.

As a member of the LGBT community myself, I resent the fact that this is even being argued over. I must always come back to this piece. Thomas Jefferson was a true genius in his time:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

All men are created equal: Though at the time this meant White males owning property, It now means All[i] men, no matter nationality, race, religion, or [i]sexuality, are equal, they deserve equal rights under the laws of the government.

that they are endowed by their Creator ... Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Hapiness: This is timeless and it's meaning does not change over time. We all have the right to live happy, free lives. That means that everyone should have the right to pursue what makes them happy (within reason). That they should be able to do so within the law of the government and to live happily so long as they obey the just laws set by their government.

This document may be at the center of American History, but its central Ideals are what matter here. It's basically telling us what no Bible-thumping man wants to hear: LGBT have the same rights as straights. If our government--or any government--wishes to ignore these rights it is not just our right but our duty to act upon their tyranny and either abolish laws that take away rights or abolish the government instituting said laws. This petition is but a blip on the political interference radar. It's nothing to worry about. It's not like we are helping start a revolution in Russia, we're just supporting our fellow humans during their time of struggle against their government

Except they don't seem to WANT our help.

Look, like I keep saying: if a government is going to change, it has to be the people under it. Despite the fact the Declaration of Independence is meant to speak for all men everywhere, the Russians are under NO protections from it and the documents related to it. You can speak about the rights of people all you like, but as long as the people let this totalitarian regime continue to oppress them, OUR input won't mean spit.

Idealism isn't what changes countries, it's the will of the people. It takes people WANTING change. And it's NOT your duty to interfere with the rights of another country to self-determinate; hell, it's not even a right. This is the reason that Starfleet has a Prime Directive in Star Trek: it's not one group's place to interfere with the cultural and societal development of another. If we have a problem with their behaviors, we cut trade and step away, but we don't act like we know what's better for their country, whether or not it would be. You have every right to express yourself; Russia also has every right to ignore you as well.

Seriously, if Russia wants to do this, they have every right to. We also have every right to stop trade and interaction with them. If they want to keep playing with the big boys, they'll get their shit in line. Or they won't and will start another war. Either way, we have no right to interfere with their political process. Not until they and we are under the same rules and government, anyway.

See, this is what I don't get: I'm not saying that I don't have sympathy for the gay Russians being oppressed, I'm not saying Russia doing this is RIGHT. I'm just saying it's within their rights as a government to do, and if the people don't like it, they need to get a new government. No amount of bitching from bleeding-heart Americans is going to affect the Russian government, and it's really not worth the time spent to try and influence them. If you want to, go ahead. It's just not going to move them.

Wait until they decide they've had enough. THEN put all your support behind them.

You are absolutely right that Idealism does nothing by itself. However, Idealism can inspire the people to move. And if any amount of support shown to the Russian people being oppressed can help them decide to rise up, to feel as though their voices do matter, then I say let America show their support. It's only through actions that I will be proven right or wrong, so I shall make this my last statement:

If you want to help the Russian Gays, then don't sign their petition. Pay attention to what Yamato is saying. Someone should start a petition to the American government and other governments who control major trade and ask them to cut ties with Russia until such time as the bill in question is dropped.

*shrugs* That's not a bad idea, honestly. It has more capability to do something, that's for sure.

Thanks for thinking of it Yamato. *winks* All I'm saying is we need to do something. We cant stay silent. Just because our brothers and sisters (metaphorical) over in Russia are under a different rule, doesn't mean we can't help them out in some way.

Well it's always good when someone tries to help people in trouble, but when it comes to Russia you need to know, that lots of things there work differently or don't work at all.
I live in Russia, I know it from inside, and I'm telling you that no petitions or peaceful/agressive/whatever meetings and demonstrations never change anything here, no matter how many people participate. It's like every other month russian government pushes through some bullshit law, and there's always thousands of disgruntled citizens in the streets carrying banners and signing petitions against them. What does our goverment do about that? Simple! Put a couple dozen demonstrants in jail for hooliganism, so the others calm down and go home...

They want to issue the law - they make it so. And I'm afraid that this whole petition thing is futile, sorry.

Maybe. However, if we can get the American Government and its allies to stop trade with Russia until such time as this law is nullified, we might get Russia to stop this bullshit. I have a friend who was exiled from Russia for some stupid reason so I'm well aware that Russia's government is not for their people. I'm American, but I'm not stupid. I understand that different countries have different policies, but that doesn't stop me and people like me from wanting to change those policies. And just because I don't have any say in Russian policy doesn't mean I can't show my support of the people being oppressed by ridiculously religious and hateful policies. Or at least from what I've heard. I want to do more research to be sure, but spreading the word is the first step. Making people aware of the way their government is oppressing them is the first step, the next is making them aware that as fruitless as it seems, you still have a say and you can still do something about it. It's about conversing with the right people and making sure that your voice is heard time and time again until a government is forced to change its policies or lose control of its people. These are the ways of informed protestation. These are the ways that an oppressed people can still force change in a government. It's a long and difficult process but change can happen.

Last time? I think you forgot Afganistan, Irak, Libia, ...

I was trying to be generous, I didn't forget.

that's the problem with this world though. you have to stop thinking in terms of countries and start thinking in terms of this planet. with a world that is as connected as ours, we need to do something with the technologies we have instead of just looking at cat videos on youtube.

I mean whats the problem with people helping some else from another country. like is there REALLY anything wrong with it other then "YOUR A FOREIGNER?
and if they had a petition to ban the banning of gay marriage I would be fine with that petition.


most of us wouldn't like a petition for making a dominate religion, even if it did come from the US or Russia. it all depends on what the petition is about

It's not about being a foreigner, it's about respecting the right of a country to self-govern without outside influence.

No country self-governs without outside influence. That's simply not possible. Just look how policies change in nations that have sanctions imposed on them.

If the UN wants to take a whack at this, that's fine. But I don't see why people are bothering the President with this.

no, I understand a petitions not going to do much. petitions really only work in a democratic government. and even then its iffy

as for the getting involved part. I think we should at least to a certain extent with out taking over the government.

One thing to keep in mind is that its a petition to the US government, worded towards the Russian government. Its WE, the people, telling our politicians what WE want them to represent our views in international affairs. Whereas laws are a matter of state and they do have sovereign rights, human rights issues are not and have been debated in politics since the mid 1600's. The concept of border based state rights and sovereignty originates and stems directly from the Peace of Westphalia, or Westphalian policies of 1684. Whereas this does directly apply that states have self determination and non-intervention, it specifically states that there shall be legal equality between states. This allows for international commentaires in politics such as this.

It has been said that "humanity and democracy [were] two principles essentially irrelevant to the original Westphalian order" and that "the principle of sovereignty it relied on also produced the basis for rivalry, not community of states; exclusion, not integration." (NATO Secretary-General Javier Solana). If this is the case then one can think after the past 400 years through various treaties, laws, agreements, policies and other works of political nature we are at a position in our world wide political process to be able to make commentary on what we feel is right, in our eyes, to our neighbors who we respect, in order to keep them from making what we feel is both a mistake and a tragedy in the eyes of modern rights to humanity.

Just my 2c..

That’s the thing. Since when do countries’ rights supersede basic human rights? I keep hitting a wall whenever I try to understand the concept of an artificial construct being deemed more important than living sentient beings.

It's not a job for an individual country. We have an organization for this: the UN.

The UN can’t even get my invisible speck of a country to behave — they’ve been talking to our leaders’ hands for 4 years now. What makes you think a permanent member of the security council with full vetoing power will listen?

I'm in MUN, and we do more in our projects at colleges on the weekends than the actual UN does in a year. Most politicians are completely retarded and don't even know themselves what goes on in the world. It's usually the people of countries voicing their opinions that eventually gets that UN to move its ass a bit faster.

The UN is the biggest joke in the history of the world, besides its ill-fated predecessor: The League of Nations.

You talk about national sovereignty like we're arming rebels to affect a coup. We're citizens voicing an opinion. Which the Russian government can ignore if they wish. THAT is foreign sovereignty, the concept of being able to ignore what others outside your country say and do what you want anyway. So sign the petition if you support basic human rights. And if Medvedev doesn't like what we have to say, he'll do whatever the fuck he wants anyway. But at least we can say we took a stand. I would rather do so now than shirk doing so and wonder why they're imprisoning their gay citizens later down the road.

I'm more concerned with US gay citizens being mistreated than really concerned for Russian gay citizens being oppressed in a country who's hat is oppression.

You realize the argument you're using right now is the same one we're fighting against in the US for gay rights? "Well it's been like that as far back as I can remember, so why change it?" American citizens don't have more worth than Russian citizens as human beings just because we're under a different flag. If your support gay rights, which are at their core human rights, then I would find it surprising if you didn't support human rights for all people, not just some.

I'll settle for a fight I can win before immitating Sisyphus.

You say that as if everything worth fighting for across the span of civilization seemed like it could be won at the time.

...I thought that was what you were arguing.

No. Some good things that have been accomplished seemed impossible, some seemed like they had a chance at the time. But all were worth doing.

Yes, but they can't be done all at the same time. Which is why I think it's important to focus on the more realistic ones first. I get what you're saying, but it's possible to spread focus too far, IMO.

I would then argue that gay rights (again, human rights) should be on the top of that list since we're still so lacking in it worldwide and at "home" here in America. While I completely agree that there needs to be more focus on the goings-on here inside US borders, it doesn't mean we should turn a blind eye to any wrongdoing outside them. I'm more capable of realism than my words imply, but realism never advanced a civilization - ideals did.

It also wasn't done by anyone but the members of said civilization. As I keep trying to say: as much as people want to help the Russian gays, it has to be the Russians that actually make the change. All we can really do is give them support and stuff.

I'm glad you finally understand what this has all been about. :) Judging from your other comments, you misunderstood. I approve of your amended stance!

My stance hasn't been "amended". I've just kind of expanded on how I feel on this topic.

LMFAO

Dude, I cant remember too well, But I had read, and later heard on the news that a group of Brits sent a petition to some midwestern country that polls suggested was going to vote for I think it was Kerry, but it may have been Clinton. This petition was urging them to vote for the democrat candidate, and then the state voted more red than a school buss fire.

Did you miss out on being a legal adult during the Bush years, by chance? The years we had internet connections and social interconnectedness of a sort?

Do you have any idea the amount of times I mentioned I had the sniffles and a Canadian rubbed in my face Canadians had free healthcare, and that America didn't due to incompetence/corruption/this-that-and-the-other?

Some solidarity with a disenfranchised minority isn't sticking our nose where it doesn't belong. Not by a long shot.

Yeah, I don't tend to interact with people who are going to talk shit about me, and I wasn't a big fan of America myself during those years. Despite being an American.

And would you all be this worked up if it were, say, Muslims being oppressed instead of gays? Because I feel like it's majorly motivated by it not only being a disenfranchised minority, but because they see people like themselves suffering. I don't think there's as much "good will" here as much as "that could be me".

I'm a straight heteronormative male agnostic/atheist. It could never be me. And yes, I would. But Russia isn't currently ramping up and handstamping abuse for muslims or criminalizing being muslim in the same way they're systematically targeting homosexuals for abuse, disenfranchisment and imprisonment.

What has me worked up is the attitude that just because you don't happen to reside in a country, you have no right to have an opinion or show verbal or emotional solidarity with a group being oppressed there. Sovereignty only means a neighbor doesn't have the right to go into another's yard and beat them to the point of death because they witnessed them strike their own child. It does not mean you can't lean on the fence, gaze over the top, glare at the abuser, and go, "I see what you're doing, you gigantic asshole. And I don't approve of it."

And then maybe the abuser will notice the people around their other fenced borders or even looking on from down the road with a scowling face. People whom the abuser trades with, groups with, collaborates with. And they'll know amongst their friends, they're considered a shithead. They'll know amongst their community, they may not get the best deals from a neighbor's shop, out of contention on this issue.

America ships aid to other nations that've suffered quakes, floods, typhoons, and yes, even ethnic or cultural violence or genocide. And we're not above saying "I see what you DID THERE" when somebody needs to know they're getting the stink eye.

Best comment in the thread, i agree 100%. This is basically what i was going to say, plus that it an issue of human rights more than national sovereignty. Well said.

Best comment.

♥

well said!

I am an American. and quite honestly, I know my country has a LOT to answer for within our own borders, and to our own people. I also agree that our will as americans is far too often forced down the throats of citizens of other nations. It smacks of imperialism, something we here are SUPPOSED to be against. Personally, what you guys in other countries do within your own borders, means less than nothing to me...

Until it does.

It is not about American imposing our will upon Russians. It is about Human rights. Now I agree that In America, we have much work to do in regard to Human rights, but Last week on June 11th, the lower House of the Federal Assembly, unanimously passed a bill that makes the “promotion” of homosexuality to anyone under 18 illegal. it is now forbidden to tell anyone under 18, that gay people exist. When your President signs that bill into law, Acknowledging the truth to the people that need it most will be a punishable offense.

Now, America has not always been gay friendly. we have had and still do have fucked up views about sexuality. We are arguing right now on the very right to marry and have lives like our heterosecual counterparts. But even though we never had such a law, worded in such a way, but laws we DID have made the dark ages of being gay here... a nightmare. I believe that the AIDS pandemic in this country went hand in hand to our views about homosexualiy in the 80's , and the new infection rates are STILL related.

Today, despite all the progress we have made in gender equality and gay rights, a gay teen is up to THREE times more likely to commit suicide than a heterosexual counterpart. With the laws basically blinding youth to the existence of others like them, and forcing conformity to an ideal, that may not be true for the individual, I shudder to think of what Russian Youth deals with.

When your government passed this bill Anti-gay violence broke out instantly in Moscow.

"During the melee, an unidentified Duma official from the Communist Party approached and shook hands with a policeman saying ‘So are you guys ramping up the pressure on these faggots? Beat them up well! Cut their balls off!,’” said Versha Sharma at Vocativ .

This is not about religion, morals, or a country's sovereignty... all of which are sacred. It is about human rights, which should be protected. It is about justice which should be upheld regardless of where injustice hides. It is about the children, and young adults who dying because they are made to feel that they are less than human .

It is for these reasons that I respectfully disagree with your assessment. The world is no longer so divided that what you do within your country's borders does not affect or influence millions of others around the globe.

And the sad thing is that, I truly don't like being political, especially internationally

It is just one man's opinion.

thank you.

Thank you

Beautifully worded, I couldn't have said it better if I tried

Thank you both.

This is not a Russian issue. This is a matter of human rights, and therefore a human issue. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights protects from discrimination based on sexuality, as well as the censorship of expression. Obviously this document is not binding, but it's not a bad goal for any member nation interested in the progression and protection of the rights of their people, and the people of the world.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

.....................................................................
.....................................................................

So gay rights in Russia is a more pressing issue that other human rights violations such as legal drone strikes on US citizens without Judge consent?

Im sorry but I just cant get past this obsession with gay rights in general. If youre a US citizen, go for your states gay rights man. if not, then just focus on more important things please.

And if there isnt something more important than this to you... I just dont even... know what to say.

and mother fuck the EU.

Also this is Russia/(Ex-)Soviet Union we're talking about, another no offence but they would just wipe their asses with this petition... ^^'

Well, that just shows why it'd be pointless. But if this were even a full ally, it wouldn't feel right. It's not like this is a crime against humanity (and it's not, no matter how it's worded), so we really don't have a say in if they should/shouldn't make this change.

I just feel very strongly on this because I don't like other countries trying to tell us how we should run our country, and to me, respect goes both ways.

beating someone in the streets to a bloody pulp because their choice in lovers is of the same sex... IS a crime against humanity my friend.

You know at one time, killing blacks was fair game, enslaving other humans was okay... killing jews was okay... these were all crimes against humanity..

But I am curious to wonder, what exactly makes a crime against humanity in your book?

The only thing homos really can suffer in Russia is calling them faggots. I don't remember any violent incident because of sexual orientation for last 20 years. In USSR homosexuality was penal but very few were really arrested.

On june 11th after this legislation was passed, anti Gay violence erupted. A few years ago, there is a documentary about Gay pride celebrations around the world where the film makes were threatened by the police with more than simple imprisonment - their lives were threatened- the film won some sort of film award.

I am sorry you don't know these things about your own nation,

Give the link. Would be funny to read about "horrors".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beyond.....itics_of_Pride

This will be the last time I respond to one of your messages. I find you odious. small minded, ignorant, and uneducated.

Say that to this 23 year old victim of lethal anti-gay abuse!!

http://rt.com/news/man-killed-homop.....ia-russia-198/

Or are you gonna think of another bigoted excuse to make this a "non-gay-issue" or pin blame on the innocent victim that had his head crushed with a 20kg rock before he was anally assaulted with beer bottles?

The one problem. The was no confirmation that he was killed because of sexual orientation. And his friends insist that he was heterosexual.

Show me one English news artucle that disputes the claim about the victim's sexuality, not only because I cannot understand Russian, but because I don't trust the homophobic bigotted Russians for treatment to the GLBT community.

There's some international petitions as well, without any country-stamp on them. The global opinion may affect the outcome of that bill, you know. .-.

International is still outside influences trying to dictate how a country should run itself, and this bothers me. Look, it's not fair to gays, but it's also not any sort of mistreatment of humanity either. Shouldn't we let this be a decision of the Russians?

The thing is that they aren't let to decide much, if you look into it...
Also, countries sticking their noses into other countries' businesses is what global politics are all about. And I don't mean it like giving direct orders and assuming the other country will obey, but express opinion, and maybe inform the other country that, for example, if they allow violation of human rights they will stop doing business with them, or restrict it.
That is just an example, I'm very tongue-tied on this matter, I know very little political jargon in english. :/

If they aren't let to decide much, I don't think pressuring the country on homosexual rights is going to change much, then.

That might be, and as cynical as I am myself, I still think that trying is worth more than not doing anything at all just because chances of changing anything seem slim. :/
Global media attention alone is a pretty big opinion leader on itself, and while any and all of the several petitions and probable (?) protests in Russia against that bill may fail to stop it, it will still make it weaker and _hopefully_ give more power to those politicians who are against that bill over there.

Why, though? Why is it wrong for me, as someone with no citizenship in Russia, to attempt to influence policy in Russia? You haven`t given a valid reason to consider the feelings of the majority of Russians, when there are some Russians that may actually appreciate my support. The only reason why I would be considering what you have to say is if I subscribed to the religion of national sovereignty. Oh, but jailing a person for promoting homosexuality is certainly not a mistreatment of humanity, no sir.

And why is national sovereignty a problem? If people don't want to be influence by the outside world, why is it YOUR place to put your foot in and try to say otherwise?

Why is it your place to tell me I shouldn`t? Why is it a Russian citizens place to do so? You have not answered that. Ideas shouldn`t be rejected because they come from a person of another country.

Because you aren't a Russian! How can you say what's right for a country when your entire experience is from the point of view of an (I'm presuming) American?

Basic ethics? How in Hell could this be right?

I agree to some extent but I whemently oppose the idea that there is such a thing as a "point of view" when it comes to people trying to make loving another human being a crime. A countries right to sovereignty is NOT a cart blanche that lets them do whatever the hell they like to their citizens. Russians and Americans are humans, before they are citizens of whatever country they happened to be born in, and as humans ourselves, we must help them enforce their rights, else what value do human rights have at all?

I completely agree that there are many issues where other countries have no buisness meddling with others, but also as someone else previously stated, there is no such thing as a fully self governing country, they are all aftected and react as the greater world changes and reacts around them.

I've conceded I kind of rushed into this, but I appreciate you understand where my misunderstood point of view was coming from.

By your own admission, you know about as much about me, if not less, than I do about Russia. Yet you are excorcising judgment against me, and telling me what is right for me to do. You are saying that, objectively, it is wrong for me to make judgments about wht is right for another country. SAnd it is not about what is good for Russia, it is what is good for the world, and good for individuals. It is good for individuals to be able to be comfortable with their sexuality. And if I am attempting to influence change in Russia wthout ging to war with them, what is wrong with that? Are you seriously saying that borders, culture, and geographical location make a diffefrence?

Are you really saying that people that live in different places under different cultures WON'T have different beliefs on how they should govern/be governed? And do we really have a right to tell them they don't have a right to?

Would you believe I had the right to tell you you couldn't come on here and post what you said? Presumably not.
Would you believe the government had the right to tell you likewise? Presumably not?
What if the government had the consent of the majority to rule against you? No? And if not, is it because you are a citizen of the government that's telling you you can't? Or do you say Yes, because you are in the minority?

As for people who have a different culture... I believe a difference in culture can make a difference in how people RESPOND to repealing fines against people for promoting homosexuality, but it doesn't make a difference in the health of the individual who wants to be free. What I am saying is, it's universally true that, if homosexuals are not afraid to come out of the closet, and are not punished for encouraging people to come out, they will live healthier lives. If a homosexual in Russia wants to seek counseling for the pressure against them, they should be able to. Fines against people for "spreading homosexual propoganda" prevents this. If you think the culture of Russia would somehow change this, why?

See, I'm not sure if this is a result of you "rushing things", but what I objected to is you telling me that any attempt to involve myself, or support any agitation against the government in the name of respecting national sovereignty is unfair to the people of the country. Would you tell me I was being unfair to a LGBT person in Russia who would agree with me on this if I, for instance.. send them money? What if I decided to financially support the Pussy Rioters, or Femen (not that I really want to)? They're being repressed, and I don't think you have to be a psychology major or even be an expert on Russian culture to know that a repressed homosexual is going to be miserable. I want to give my support, because I can't even handle the homophobia in MY OWN country. And I live in fucking New York, of all places! I have a family who is tolerant of my sexuality, I have a wonderful boyfriend (that is 3,000 miles away, but hey), and I still hear occasional horrible things at work like "Homosexuals play with fecal matter". I've dealt with a fair bit of homophobia in my life, and I'm a mild case by far. I would still want to hear some encouraging words from a Swedish person to agitate in my own country.

In Orthodox Tsar Russia Pussy Riot would get very small punishment. In USSR something like this would end up to 15 days of arrest. The hate to them is nothing else but result of constant attacks to morality. If Russian LGBT community don't want to get in prison they better shut up and sit quiet because the society wouldn't accept them. And antigay laws would be the simplest way to get cheep popularity for politics.

What's wrong?

You only can do worse. It's where you totally wrong.

You might want to ease up on the Stolichnaya, because you're not making any sense.

At least I live here and see what happens.

Gotta give you a star for placing a fair case.

Do you really think outside opinions are an attack on sovereignty? It's just a petition, it's not like someone is coming in and writing up laws.

Petitions against an 'anti-homosexual bill' in Uganda, whilst causing the Ugandan government to moan about its sovereignty, probably were part of the reason they didn't elect to go ahead with it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uganda.....sexuality_Bill

Might want to more carefully consider your choice of words there.

The statements of "it's not fair to gays" combined with "it's also not any sort of mistreatment of humanity", suggests that you don't believe gay people to be human.

I'm hoping you misspoke, which is a simple enough mistake for anyone to make.

Which do YOU think it is?

I like to give a benefit of a doubt, but like to remind a person that the words they choose can be important and convey meaning they don't necessarily intend to communicate.

Basically, that I don't think you said what you meant to say and that part of the difficulty you might be receiving here is due to mis-communication issues and that you might want to consider the words you type to make sure you cannot be misinterpreted. Or well, best as you can.

I agree with you to some extent, but I feel as though it could also be said that their politics offend others choices first. While 2 wrongs don't make a right, I feel it's a little harmless to voice many opinions right? I dunno. I could be wrong

I'm not arguing this law isn't fair and prejudiced. But ultimately, it has to be a country's people that chose to change, not the rest of the world. And the US and Russia have never liked each other.

Well, considering some of the past interference from us to other countries, I won't be signing it. But I still don't like it. I'm sure it can be said that I should just sign it, but there are more problems here than gay rights I suppose.

Um, US and Russia are par of the big five countries and world leaders along with the UK and China, and take part in forming many agreements with one another.

And America isn't stepping in and making laws. It's a petition. It's basically a scrap that says "Hey, um, what you're doing isn't really okay, so maybe we should take this into consideration to talk it over more?"

Seriously, you're making a huge deal out of this. I'm pretty sure your views would be different if instead of "anti-homosexual", it was "anti-negro". There would be a huge flip and scream of "DAS RACIST. HUMAN RIGHTS" from basically everywhere. Really, just because your country wants something, that doesn't mean it's okay or correct. At all. Russia is in violation of quite a few human rights. And the whole thing where other countries can't or shouldn't influence other countries? I really don't think you understand global politics and the UN at all then because that is pRETTY MUCH EXACTLY WHAT IN IS. Countries coming together and voicing opinions on matters, and affecting eachother's ways of life for (usually) the better.

As a Bulgarian, I am usually very prideful of my country and our sister country Russia, but after this, I am extremely dissapointed, especially with the religios laws being enacted, I just.. This is horrendous.

Do...you not get that America and Russia aren't really on much better terms than during the Cold War?

http://usforeignpolicy.about.com/od.....p/usrussia.htm

Uh, yeah, both countries are being a little bitch when it comes to the Cold War, but they still cooperate from time to time. It doesn't mean they'd smack the shit out of one another in the middle of conference. You don't need to be best friends with someone to be able to collaborate and listen to eachother. And in fact, they are on better terms if they can cooperate.

LOL People who hate each other can cooperate. It just means it serves them both to do so. Russia still has a hate-on for the US, and probably always will.

I don't want to insert myself into this support or not support discussion thing so I'll stay away from commenting on that, but I don't think Russian people hate the US as much as you think, especially with Obama in power you as a nation have never been so much to the left. Don't forget that the people in Russia were kept in the dark about what the US really was. The only info they got was from there govt. propaganda. Today with the internet I would say it's an entire different ballgame. They are still socialist and the youth do propagate that way of thinking as there teachers and schools keep on educating them on the pros of socialistic society without giving them the cons. As for there government... On that I would agree that they hate you guys especially Poutine which I think has a visceral hate for the US.

Russian Orthodox Church is nothing more but laughingstock for last 300 years. Russian society extremally atheistic.

Then why are they passing laws in blatant support of the church's wishes?

Practically nobody support and the laws itself is pretty minor. 70+ years of Soviet atheism is good immunization. The church is nothing more but the element of antisovetism. The shit which the government tries to use insteed of ideology. And the Church tries to get more money. I agree that Orthodoxy was a shaft for Russian civilization (well Balkans includeed Russia just dominating country after tha fall of Byzantine Empire). Remember the centries of fight with Catholic Poland but know it's all far from the religion.

Then again... when did america actually not interfere with anything of other countries? It's not a first one to see, we can pray this interference will not have guns involve though.

Some of us Americans think our past interferences were a bad decision. ¬.¬

Fuck that noise. Europeans never hesitate to lecture us on why the rest of the world hates us because of our policies, so I could give a fuck less about their national sovereignty. There is no such thing as a right of a country to initiate force, there are only rights of individuals.

So we should be on the same level as these Europeans? I realize not all of America holds itself to a higher standard, but what's wrong with trying to? Sinking to the level of others has never really resolved things, whether on an individual level or an international one.

I'm sorry but this is just my opinion. If someone wants to sign it, let them sign it. It doesn't matter what country they're from. And I don't think it's right to insult people or a country by saying they have lower standards than people who aren't signing it.

I'm with you 100%

You assume that I think telling other countries what to do without initiating force is "sinking to a level". If Piers Morgan thinks he is making our country safer by advocating gun control, I support his right to do so, even if he is from the UK. I strongly disagree with him, but his country of origin should not make any difference. if he

I'm not arguing on the basis of "where they are from". Is Piers Morgan a US citizen?

Should it matter if they're a citizen or not? If anyone has an opinion about ANYTHING, they will voice it out. Again, human nature.

So, does that mean you have a right to tell me how to, say, raise my kids as long as I'm not abusing them?

Okay now you're just comparing completely different issues that have nothing to do with each other, that really doesn't help the argument.

If it's my opinion yes, it doesn't mean you have to FOLLOW what I'm saying, but I'm allowed to VOICE IT.

...yes, yes you do. It doesn't mean you don't look like a dick for trying to force it on me either.

Regardless, I've already mentioned I came into this with some misunderstandings on the discussion, so...yeah.

Ok, I will step into this now. I have read through a majority of your posts. You believe that international intervention in wrong and should never happen.

So on those same grounds, America should not respond to a nuclear threat from say, Iran or North Korea because they are just voicing their opinions about us using a different medium of communication instead of their voices. I guess we don't need those idiots in the military, national guard, department of defense, or national security. Hell, lets just all leave our door unlocked at night. The reason one country voices their opinion to another counter (sometimes more violently than others) is to make a statement. "We are STILl HERE! WE CARE about what you are doing!" It does not matter if the country listens, what is more important is this: Other countries take notice. Countries that may have threats we don't know about may look at it and say "Oh SHIT, maybe we shouldn't do that", others might look at it and recognize that that country is interested in being a world power. I am an American, I am proud of the country I live in, not the idiots who run it. I don't give two shits whether or not North Korea de-weaponizes or not. I just pray that when the time comes, America as a nation and as a people will be ready to stand up for not only our rights, but the rights of others. I know a lot of veterans from many different theaters of combat. One of them (recently deployed) told me once that the difference between an AMERICAN soldier and an insurgent was that the AMERICAN soldier was the one who protected the foreign citizen with their OWN BODY! Americans DIE for some faceless person they probably never met before! THAT IS TRUE PATRIOTISM! That is why we as a nation act the way we do! America is a world super power. That means we must take the strong stance. To do otherwise is to show weakness. When a country apologizes for mistakes of the past shows signs of weakness. Go read hamlet. It is the perfect example of this. Sometimes the best you can do is take the fighting stance and stare the other person down till he backs off. I do not pray for war. I do not wish to see people put in harms way. But countries have the right to voice their opinions the same way you have yours. You have put over and over that you did not read all the way through. Maybe that should be the first thing you do before commenting about someones post.

Thank you, have a nice day.

Congratulations, you've clearly failed reading comprehension in grade school. But man, you made a great argument against what you THOUGHT my argument was. If only that was actually what I was saying.

I don't think that's a really good example to use, since both abusing kids and stripping people of their rights are both inhumane acts.

No, but that's exactly my point. Though it's been pointed out to me that this is about more than just adoption stuff. >.>

What difference does it make?

Thank you! My point exactly. Human right to be opinionated, whether it changes anything or not.

Besides there has been many cases where other countries have given support to one another during cases like civil wars. Start a war no, but offer support to let them know that not everyone takes kinndly to what they are doing I agree with this whole-heartedly

dude, that was kinda douche'ish, let people do what they wish to do and what they WANT to do =/ youve said way too much with just THIS comment, and im an AMERICAN speaking, feeling sick of my own kind thanks to these kind of behaviors for example << nobody is superior at ALL in this fucked-up-excuse-of-a-world, cause sincerely, everything is going down as we speak, and its only a matter of time until even america falls down through the road it picks...

...I don't even know which comment you're referring to at this point.

Either way, I was not trying to insinuate America is superior to anyone; if you got that, you misunderstand what I'm trying to say. Sorry. *shrugs*

Exactly what I saying. It's our problems and our laws, and we don't need international approvement or disapprovement on it. Isn't it a sovereign right of our People to decide what's considered good and bad in this country?..

That's pretty much what sovereignty means. I'm for respecting that, personally.

Isn’t that how it’s always worked? Imperial Russia decided that serfdom was right, pre-1860 America decided that slavery was good, the Papal States decided that depriving non-Christian parents of their kids was good, modern day Saudi Arabia decides that women being chattel without rights is good. Human history is a long series of "whoops, sorry we were collectively assholes to you guys". It would be about time we stopped doing that.

International regulation doesn't always work good too, for instance. Take pre-WWII 20 years.

There wasn’t much regulation in those years either. The League of Nations was a nice idea, but it was flawed in that once again it cared too much about Nations and too little about People. In the name of the sacrosanct non-ingerence, it didn’t do anything against the excesses of Communism in the USSR, against institutionalized racism in the Western nations, against Japanese expansionism in Asia, or against the European colonial empires in Africa. It tried to keep the nations at peace, and damned be the human price.

Let me give you an example: when I was a kid, asian-born people (including most of my mother’s family) here were often targeted by pogroms. The people wanted it, enjoyed it, and the government supported it. Sooooo let them decide what’s good for them, and look the other way, right?

My dear Alphaleone, even though Russia is not the nation it once was, It is still considered one of the two superpowers. What you do within your borders, affects the rest of the world. It affects less developed countries, with far more barbaric means of quashing dissent.

Oh that's funny) "Superpower".. You're not Russian, right? 'Cause from here it's quite clear that this country's potential is merely a Regional power... Of some sort.
But still, if it somehow is a super=power state, shouldn't it be treated with respect rather then anticipation AND constant trying to apply Western morality and social norms here? I don't see Russia dictate morality to US or even Europe... (Well, it did in the past, - but that was not just Russia, but the Soviet Union, and THAT was a Superpower: respected and feared throughout the World)

I am an American. and Russia is STILL The only nation that rivals mine in nuclear armament. hence the term superpower is still an appropriate way to describe Russia.

Well, wile measuring country's power and potential on the world's geopolitic map... I do believe it shouldn't be measured in a number of nuclear weapons only)
Russian Federation now lacks economic, (especially) industrial, scientific/technological, socio-culture and even (conventional) military strength of the Soviets to affect anything beyond it's sphere of influence, which lies not further over former Sov-Republics (Not even all of them). That's the nasty truth...

The truth is nasty, and the nasty truth is, despite the things you have just said, in the eyes of the world. Russia has that place in the world's eye and on the world's stage, I am sorry that upsets many, but it is as you say - the nasty truth.

What you say is kinda inspiring (seeing that citizens of the sole "true" Superpower AND a victor of the Cold War still treating us like equals), but also it's... Pretty shameful on our side. We lost what we achieved 'till the 80's, we regressed for the last 25 years... And still, people of other nations look at our country as of something it WAS, but not what it IS. Looking at the grim shadow of the past, never minding a dwarf behind it. Quite depressing if you think about it...

..But still, if you do believe our people deserve respect of, say, Great/Regional power ans should be threated like it, the question remains - why you're trying to force Western liberal ideology, morality and social norms into this country? It's not like we're trying to force our ideas and norms anywhere else anymore.

The thing is, I think that everyone can be better. I am not trying to advocate forcing wester anything on anyone.

I direct you back to the scientific ans statistical data. It is not just a western ideology. It is a fact that homosexual youth is at a greater risk of death, be it from suicide or disease, than their heterosexual counterparts. Publicly outlawing homosexuality - which since minors are everywhere this legislation does, only sentences vulnerable youth to a fate that no child should face.

and again- government sanctioned beatings of homosexuals is barbarism. It is a human rights issue, and in the face of that kind of injustice, national boundaries are meaningless.

and the sad thing is that during two world wars your country believed that. what is so different now?

What different? Well, lots of factors, but I'll give the most important.

A) Enormous territory loss with all of it's resources, people, and, what's more important, industrial base. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia lost like 35% of it's former territories, not less then 40-45% of it's industry and vital infrastructure, and - more than a half (!) of the overall population. Imagine US losing Texas, California, Arizona, New Mexico and Nevada - and that's not even a case, 'cause at least 3/4 of population stays in hat's left. Russia never (and I mean, EVER) lost as many territories and people, if not mention the Kievan Rus ('cause modern Russia is pretty much based on Moscovia rather then Kievans). And even then, you know, it took 350+ years for the Rus' just to reintegrate itself after the Mongol invasion... If we count loses of today, the situation is pretty much equal in terms.

B) In the past times, the Government was, first of all, actually interested (if not obsessed) in defending this country's Superpower status and our dominance in the Eastern hemisphere. The Government of nowadays seemingly only interested in respective stability and their own (and their family) wealth. Nobody "up there" does consider another race for dominance as something that needs to be achieved. Actually it looks like they fell themselves better without enormous responsibilities of the Global power. Well, they like to talk about "good old times" and "future prospects", but on the other hand nobody would take those responsibilities personally, like the leaders of the past did.

C) Most important, there's no Ideology, no national Idea behind the whole thing. What we have today is a ridiculous and bizzare mix of western liberal democracy, Imperial Russia's state capitalism, "popularized" orthodox Christianity and some Soviet nostalgia. But most of it gets down to quite egoistic ideology of individual prosper over any odds, which means wealth now is more important for the people then their country, their morales, their religion and even (in most cases) their friends and so on. Soviet Union was created upon lives of millions, who died just to keep up with the other World (and to made it on the top of it), paying the ultimate price to correct mistakes of degraded Imperials. It seems that today no one will accept that price to make the country strong again...


...And about the Rights question. You right that the State should protect those people from beatings and other aggressive acts, but I do believe that those people on their behalf could at least don't express their, well, decease (or genetic alteration if "decease" sounds offensive) to the public, right? Somehow I don't see parades of people with Kearns-Sayre or Pearson syndromes.. Also I don't see those people opressed - maybe because the others consider them, you know, victims. Probably if gay society accepted such an image it would be much easier to tolerate it, but what we got (at least in this country) is demands to accept them like they are and that they are normal just like everyone else without any alterations. Gay people seems to not be neither ashamed nor they regret being such (Also what leads to some not well educated people to assume that it's a choice rather then genetic alteration), thus ruining the "victim" image, enraging the masses.
I do believe that the right policy on such would be a "don't ask - don't tell" policy: The State protects private life of gay/lesbian/etc people and severely punishes orientation-related crimes, but on the other hand the State doesn't allow such people to express their nature in public. You know, many people are disgusted by it, and just many, but TOO many. Doesn't it like the democracy works - the individual freedom ends where it breaks other individuals freedoms?..

So let me get this straight.

Because Russia lost a metric fuckton of lands and people in Eastern Europe that was taken and held with a great deal of oppressive force, and your Economy basically sucks, Homosexuals are deviants and genetic freaks, who should hide their diseased behavior- because being gay in the dark is the only acceptable way?

Let me ask you... Do you out law Straight / Heterosexual couples from being in the open? No you put that up as normal and the Ideal- when truthfully, being homosexual is no different. The religious argument is straight bullshit. so what are you left with? Certainly not SCIENCE... well because, you know, that's a thing... and all around you the scientific evidence is there. Why must the LGBT community be viewed as victims? We are not, We exist and have the right to be recognized just like any one else.

Why should gays Regret being who they are? do heterosexulas regret who they are? Do Straight people flaunt their sexuality? why yes they do! if you are going to believe in DADT - then NO one should at ANYTIME EXPRESS any Sexual Attraction to ANYONE. then it would be equal.

Take it From experience that A Don't ask Don't Tell attitude fails, because there is no privacy. Someone WILL find out and when they do, the Outed person will be ruined in this utopia you are fantasizing about.

Oh yeah, and what about those young people that feel that there is no alternative to being different than suicide? Oh but you don't care about the suffering of others as long as they are Heterosexual.

Right?

So in short you see homosexuality as a disease and we should cease to exist, whether its by "praying the gay away" or by remaining in the closet and living their entire life as a lie to appease hateful bigots. It's Russian homophobes like you that make me proud to live in America. We may be far from perfect, but at least we are much more welcoming towards the GLBT community than your backwards authoritarian government. Have your country keep up the anti-gay sentiments and you'll be one step closer to becoming a Christian version of Iran.

Russia is basically prohibiting gay individuals the right to demonstrate. By that they're in violation of the European Convention On Human Rights to which they are a signatory. Eventually this law will likely end up before the European Court of Human Rights and will be challanged. In the meantime I don't see what is wrong with calling them out for what they do though.

Then let the Europeans handle it, if they're part of that compact. It's still not something America has any right or reason to stick its nose into.

And why we should allow demonstrations? Did you ever thing that demonstration itself is serious thing and take resources like police escort and possibly blocked roads? Show your nakes asses to your lovers in your bedrooms not to everybody on street.

Because it is a fundamental right for people to demonstrate and express themself and their political beliefs? Part of a democracy and democratic discourse is compromise. A nation that refuses to compromise and withholds basic rights from minorities for no ohter reason than "we're uncomfortable seeing that" or "it's too expensive" can't call itself a democracy.

OK. I've from my side a right to have a free road. The real problem in many old cities. And the right the police would do usefull things and don't spent time because somebody wanted to express that (s)he is homo.
And I've rights to have enough food and clear sky above me not roaring with bombers' engines.

Russian funny story:
British lord asks his servant:
- What's the noise outside?
- Homosexual demonstration sir.
- What they want?
- Same-sex love sir.
- Anobody is forbiding them?
- No sir.
- Then why they cry?
- Faggots sir.

And don't tell Russians about democracy they usually use other word which is 1 sound different in pronunciation but far more accurate in meaning. In English would be something like "shitcracy".

We think that all this crisis in Greece was sent to them as punishment because they invented the democracy.

I should have known that continuing this exchange was pointless.

As attempts to force us be genderless even not humans I don't know how to name this creature.

This isn't directed at me, but...

Why should I care?

It's not like it's suddenly none of my business if people are being jailed in Russia. The reason it's my business in the USA isn't because I'm an American citizen, it's because I'm a sapient being with basic ethical standards, and those standards include LGBT+ rights. I will quite happily interfere in other nations by signing petitions, promoting boycotts, and generally doing the things I would usually do. I won't support, say, fraudulently going in and interfering with elections, or doing half the stuff that the USA did in the Cold War because it tends to all go to hell and I'm pretty sure there is actually a slippery slope there.

And frankly, I don't mind if other countries hit the USA with the cluebat a few times, whether it's regarding environmental protections, economics, foreign policy, LGBT+ rights, or anything else.

Worse, this bill will basically make it so you can't even argue that it should be a big enough issue for Russians, because they'll get arrested. Political protest against homophobic laws will get you fined. By making this law, Russia makes it a lot harder to repeal any homophobic laws in the future.

Even disregarding what I've said before, this is RUSSIA. This is the same country that put up with the Czars and Stalin. Russia is never going to respect human rights, and it's a waste of time to think they will or that America, a country they STILL dislike, could ever influence the thinking of those in power. My arguments about sovereignty are a general argument, the case of Russia in particular is just a waste of time because they won't change. It's been the same for practically a thousand years, the only real change is who's in power.

And Germany put up with Hitler and various other leaders who were giant assholes. Currently they're pretty good about respecting human rights. For that matter, Uganda didn't like much of the Western world, but its efforts were weakened by international outcry.

As Iv'e been saying, then let's do it INTERNATIONALLY. Russia is NOT the biggest fan of America, after all.

That's not what your original response said, but okay.

Oh, I'm sorry, I'm not the best at expressing myself. Do you want to take a crack at me for not having my bachelor's before being 30 next?

Oh I guess USA respects human rights? How about the shooting of Todashev? FBI openly kills the witness. I guess he knew too much. Impossible thing in Russia.
And don't forget 100500 bombed countries. The world hates USA.

...I'm at least trying to be a better citizen than my countrymen. Don't give me shit for the things my country's done that I disagree with, because I don't like them any more than the rest of the world. Or maybe I'm just a troll because there's no such thing as a kind and considerate American.

Then don't judge other countries where you never lived. May be Russia is not the best place to live but it's free from many Western problems and I don't remember when it has problems with human rights. In Soviet times even policemen usually never weared any weapon even truncheons because they would had to make serious explanations in case they used it. Just don't mix human rights and state rights to protect itself. The last often means the choice between few people dead and thousands people dead.

Okay, tell you what. When Russia has its first free election that isn't impeded upon by a background power, give me a call.

Free election or illusion of free election? Feel the difference. What will change if Obama would lose next election? And what's more personally me is monarchist-stalinist and don't think that president election every 4-7 years can really work at state's level where programs take years for realization and requires the level of competence and awareness which is not available for regular citizen.

I tell you as the man who spent really many time for Soviet history the best years of USSR are 1939-1941 and 1950s despite any propaganda bullsit you read in American history book.

So please don't tell about "universal values" for other people they may be not so universal.

Obama's not up for re-election, American presidents can only serve two terms. But I'm glad to see you're so well-educated on these topics.

Obama's party. No matter who'll win. This'll not change American's politics system. In modern Russia things are not so simple and serious shocks if something would happen with Putin inevitable. Medvedev's 4 years were not best but he became a president only because of restriction for 3rd term.

Nah, our government doesn't respect human rights. But seriously, I sincerely doubt that Todashev 'knew too much', and unless you can provide evidence it's just another conspiracy theory. Also... there aren't 100500 countries, so I don't know what you're trying to say there.

Sure, the USA has done some nasty things. Such as torture, assassinations, rigging elections, etc; I'm not denying that. But I prefer to have evidence before making conclusions like that.

Then even worse FBI killed a man just because they wanted it. No one would believe that four trained men couldn't deal with one guy without seven shots.

This remains the assasination of Ben-Laden. Any special forces would try to capture so important person alive even if they would've more losses. But BOOOM and the corpse somewhere in the ocean.

In the case of Ben-Laden I would suspect that keeping him alive would have been even more of a problem in the US. I think that for them, to get rid of him like they did was probably the best scenario possible. Keep him alive and you have a martyr on your hand that is just a lightning rod attracting more terrorism on US soil, kill and leave his body in place then you just created a shrine that can be used to manipulate the opinion against the US for countless years to come. IMO they did the best thing they could do under the circumstance. Kill him and get rid of the body so that nobody would ever find him again.

Just imagine what information you can get from enemy leader especially if you put electrodes on his balls and etc.
Or all this international terrorism is nothing more than fiction and Ben-Laden is just a character in this show. But we all know that it's only a conspirancy. ;)

Well... I don't think they needed the info as they probably knew everything that they need to know about him. IMO he was really working for the Saudi govt., which in turn where helping the Bush Jr. Republican (I should say Cheney & Rumsfeld here) in there agenda. Proof of that is the bush organization had an opportunity to eliminate him and most of the top brass of his organization in Afghanistan,and they specifically did not. Eliminating them right there would have remove the reason to stay deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq. I'm afraid that the true goal of all those war and planing were just the control of oil and at the same time an indirect help to Israel. But when you let the genie out of the bottle, and you give money and power to bad people, then all kind of collateral incident like 911 and the like can happen.
Now in light of recent history, I'm still unsure of the outcome. Is it better or worst then what we had?? Good question...

Saudi Arabia is one of the most odious islamic fascist states and comrade Rukis could spend time for petition about gay rights there. If we can name it rights when gays are simply beheaded. Sure Ben Laden would have many interesting things to say for American citizens about 9.11 Afghanistan Iraq and etc. which government would prefer to keep undiscussed.

Some years ago it all looked pretty simple. Iraq was bombed out because of oil. Now American and Western politics looks more like schizophrenia. Years in Afghanistan without any result. Al-Caida, democracy? They want your democracy as much as Soviet socialism. Billions spent for Iraq and it's not like there was any real profit.

You can also look at it an other way. We all know that Iraq it was for the oil and the benefit of Israel. But Afghanistan, while the American are there it's acting like a lighting rod taking terrorism away from the main land. And I must add that it's working because there were very few theorist attack in the us after 911. Most of them were and are occurring in Afghanistan. Plus it got Bush that was very unpopular at the time, reelected.

The only way a democracy can work is if people are educated. Trying to instigate democracy in an uneducated country is just doom to fail. That is why it will not work in Afghanistan. They will just fall right back to a religious state rule under religious thug.

BTW you are in a social democracy. Democracy is just a term that say that the people are voting for the politician and have a little input in the decision of the state base on that. So yea since 1993 you live in a democracy my friend. :-P

The us has a Representative democracy. If you want to know the difference just look it up

I don't think that tossing bombs left and right can make you more safe. You just make more enemies. You can start a war by your wish but can't finish it. All these things like so called "international terrorism" looks like mystification. Some abstract people who hate the other world. F. e. what is common between Chechen bandit and Irish terrorist? Each terrorist or terroristic organisationhas it's own goal.

>So yea since 1993 you live in a democracy my friend.

Oh sure thing! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_R.....utional_crisis

And 1996 election. No one deny that it was falsified.

>The only way a democracy can work is if people are educated. Trying to instigate democracy in an uneducated country is just doom to fail. That is why it will not work in Afghanistan. They will just fall right back to a religious state rule under religious thug.

Sure thing. But I'm afraid that USA government really believe in all this shit.

My solution to that problem would have been much more radical but he what can I say... That is the way they decided to handle that conflict and so far it seem to have work and grounded that conflict into that region of the world. I'm not saying that it will never overflow to other parts of the world but the more resource the enemy put in that place the less it has for other places. The only problem is that it will start all over again when the Americans leave.


Well I'm not saying that democracy are fool proof, I'm just saying that it's the system you are living in right now. Democracy is just a kind of system. And yea all the rest of the world knows that those election were a fraud.

Hummm IMO they know damn well what will happen but they don't want to put another dime into that place knowing it will never have any value. You have to know that this is one of the few exception were the American took control without any hope of return on the investment. They usually never do things for nothings.

Smart guy's think. Respecting you.

I generally agree, but it appears that all this petition really asks is that the U.S. place these officials who are behind this law (in Russia) on a list of people who are to be refused entry into the United States should they attempt to visit.

And, the U.S. is fully within it's rights to exude any foreign nationals it so desires to exclude.

I have to conceded I only skimmed before a pet-peeve got hit. So I may have been a bit excessive in my vitrol.

National sovereignty is well and good, but it doesn't seem to apply here. What you are suggesting is that American citizens should avoid signing a petition that would encourage the American government to state its opposition to Russia's current repression of its LGBT citizens, and/or would encourage the American government to threaten Russia with sanctions or diplomatic repercussions if it continues to deprive LGBT Russians of freedom. This particular petition seems to be aimed at ensuring that the Russian government knows that the American people do not agree with the direction they have taken, and with ensuring the Russians being persecuted under these laws know that the world hasn't forgotten them. It isn't really demanding that the Russian government do anything, it's demanding that the American government not do nothing.

Which is not to say that I agree with your position on national sovereignty anyway. Fundamental to the idea of human rights is that they are inalienable, and that the "tyranny of the majority" should not overrule them. And it is this form of majority prejudice that makes Russia's gay community so vulnerable to violence and political repression. In Russia, over 70% of the population believe that homosexuality should not be tolerated, a percentage that is rising. Does this mean that we should just let Russia's government do anything it wants to those people? Without international pressure, the LGBT people of Russia are, essentially, completely helpless. Not only are they politically powerless, but the Russian government is working to make advocating for change a criminal act. Our governments can, and should, make it clear that we disapprove of such persecution.

There's nothing wrong with signing a petition for something you care about. Also, I heard about this petition THROUGH a Russian citizen, asking for help. It does no harm to voice your concern.

I guess not. But it goes to show you should be careful what you voice your opinion on too, given the reaction my thoughts got.

I agree that America shouldn't force itself into things when it is not a case of human rights. A countries sovereignty shouldn't be an open invitation to abuse it's citizens and oppress entire groups of people. American has a bad history of interfering when we're unneeded and unwanted, but we also have a bad history of ignoring the cases where we are needed and asked for.

I'm not against when it's human rights, and as I said before, I didn't fully read the journal, so I'll take that on me. But I appreciate that some people are seeing part of what I was trying to get at.

Signed it. Because I actually care about what happens in the world and not just what happens in my own country.
Bloody hell >__>

Probably more, given your attitude.

I live in a country that has two parties that actively ban full gay equality based on a fairytale. They are two christian parties that want to keep "christian values within our society".
It's ridiculous and I am fed up with it. I want to have it fixed, not just here but also in the rest of the world.

And you've clearly given up on fixing it here, so you'll focus on fixing it in a "more free" society like Russia?

But what do I know? My opinion sucks, so I clearly have no right to it. I ought to just bow down to yours, because it's clearly better.

Given up? Are you kidding? We just got equality in terms of tax cuts. Much to the dismay of our political fairytale believers! We aren't giving up, we are pushing for full equality now.
As for your opinion... I just think your approach is all wrong. Why exactly shouldn't we care about what happens in other countries? Why shouldn't I care about people being treated horribly in other countries?

Because humans only have so much attention they can focus. So I don't see how we can fight for our rights when some of us are fighting for the rights of those in Russia.

You don't get it. Whether it's int he US, Germany or Russia, we ARE fighting for our rights. Or are russians not humans?

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree, because neither of us seems to be getting the other's points.

Not trying to be an ass about this, but I gotta disagree. I don't care if it's happening in Russia or on the moon, stripping LGBT individuals of their basic human rights is WRONG, and should be VEHEMENTLY opposed anywhere such attitudes try to crop up.

We're not in the god-damn middle ages anymore, we're evolving human beings who should have a bit of fucking sense between their ears after centuries of bigotry. If we can bit a complex super-computer into a chip the size of a raisin, then we can handle something as simple as human equality. It's not a matter of "respecting cultural differences", it's a matter of respecting the BASIC human right to equality--REGARDLESS of what country you're in.

Just my two cents, take 'em or leave 'em.

You don't have a right to MAKE a country change it's ways. Voice your opinion? Sure. But if you expect that you can FORCE gay rights onto another country, they'll just buck until they can knock those restraints off.

It's not right, it's not fair, I get that and agree. But we can't MAKE another country do what we want, and for America, it comes dangerously close to past American practices of interfering as well. Not to mention, human rights and scientific development are not by-definition hand-in-hand. We had planes and trains and the starts of computers before the Civil Rights Movement in America. I think this is a case of assuming correlation proves causality, since both social rights and technology has improved by leaps and bounds since the 1960s. But they aren't connected by-default. Japan STILL has heavy racism against non-Japanese, for example.

Look, my point before probably wasn't clear. No matter how much we try, it has to be the Russian people who stand up and take their rights. We can try and help them, but until they're ready to stand up to their government, things will not change. It sucks, but it's just kind of how it is.

For starters, the petition was started BY a Russian citizens, so point = moot. That's the FIRST thing.

Secondly, you're making this sound like a hostile political takeover, when it ISN'T. I'm not an American ,I'm a person with an OPINION. And one which I will voice loudly, proudly, and use it to beat people over the head with it with indignant ferocity if that's what it takes to herald in change.

This world is FUCKED, and it's going to STAY fucked, so long as everyone thinks they have to just stay within their own individual bubbles, and how DARE anyone else try and touch MY bubble. We can dice words all day about the due processes of different countries all day if we like, and that still doesn't change the fact that at the end of the day, the entire WORLD needs to move towards change, and not just fixate on their own biased agendas. It's not about what country has a right to do what, it's about HUMAN BEINGS (regardless of where they're from) having the right to be treated equally and fairly. And if it takes voices from other countries to unite and make that happen, then so fucking be it.

Calm down, this isn't worth getting angry over. :)

And you've got every right to express your opinion. But that doesn't mean the world is as simple as you're looking at it. I get where you're coming from, and I have sympathy for the gays suffering in Russia. But sometimes there's just nothing that can be done for the moment. I know you want to feel like you're accomplishing something, that's why you're shouting for Russia to stop doing it, but...sadly, it's not really gonna do anything for now. It can add up in the long run, but for now, you may have to accept that your actions won't mean much by themselves. These governments don't want the changes you're wanting right now, and it comes down to the people under that government to change it. Because just like with people changing themselves, changes to government and law has to come from within, or you can't be sure it'll stick.

Dang man, sorry you're under such heavy fire here. I actually have to say that I agree with you on this. Even though we have a right to our opinions and stuff, I still dont see why so many of us have to be so dang pushy....looks bad.

I think people sometimes forget that just because they have an opinion, it doesn't invalidate the opinions of others.

Or they just dont care and want to feel special. :<

There's that too, but I try to give the benefit of doubt that they're not being that shallow. >.>

**if we can put, I don't spell well when I'm angry >_<

Its a human rights thing. Whether governments like it or not we are slowly merging into one people on one planet. And we all have a say about what happens on spaceship earth.

Uh...I'm gonna respectfully disagree with the idea we're "slowly merging". There's still LOTS of countries that will want to stay independent, no matter how closely allied with one another.

I agree with you on that one. Russia always seem to make something happen whether it is big enough or not.

It's not necessarily wrong to be an American and care about issues outside the US, but it's terribly tacky to used the White House petition system to do it. Basically asking "OBAMA FIX ALL THINGS PLZ".

I'm not against people caring about outside issues at all. My only concern was how it was handled. Which this kind of comes off similar to how you described.

Let's make a whitehouse.gov petition to get Pluto to be a planet again!

...it's not a planet. It hasn't cleared its orbit, so it's not a planet. *puts on his astronomer glasses*

And what exactly do you suggest doing? Marching up to the Kremlin with our forces and demanding they change their laws because WE say so? The problem with unilateral action is that it takes into consideration no one's opinions but the ones taking that action.

Spreading awareness? It's RUSSIA, nobody's unaware of what their opinions on human rights are. Seriously, there really isn't anything that can be done externally.

You're not getting this. There IS nothing we can do regarding Russia without making the situation worse. This is a problem the Russian people have to fix, not us.

Tell you what. Suggest something that we can do that will actually HAVE a result, and that will actually be authorized to be done. Since you're so sure we are capable of having actual success, tell me what we should do.

Funny how this happens in a country with so few Christians when people so often assume that anti gay sentiment always stems from religion...

Shhh! You'll take the wind out of the sails of the antitheists! :P

It's a personal pet peeve of mine. A lot of antitheists have no concept of respect for people's beliefs.

As do a lot of theists.

Which leads us to the conclusion that the problem is not dependent on whether people believe in God or not. It's not actually a religious issue; religion's just yet another excuse people use to divide themselves into camps that despise each other.

...can I give you a big hug please? XD

Gladly. :)

Since I've got your attention, I'll say this: I strongly believe it is not only appropriate, but essential, to speak out against injustice and evil, and that every human has both the right and responsibility to do so.

(In fact I once wrote a blog post about pretty much this exact topic: http://footpad.livejournal.com/586533.html .)

So I think it is both legitimate and right to protest against the new Russian law. I don't even respect the moral right of the Russians to make that law, since I think it represents a tyranny of the majority over an innocent minority. Because we live in representative democracies, I also think it's legitimate to ask my representative (David Cameron) to tell the Russians' representative that that law is full of shit.

I also think it's the Russians' right to tell me that they think I'm wrong.

Eventually, hopefully, if we're all sensible people, we might just just come to sensible and humane conclusion. But that won't happen unless we talk about it. It sure as hell won't happen if we all pussyfoot around hiding our moral differences between some veil of politeness.

Yeah, you're right. Like I said, this started because I was expressing macrocosmic opinion on a microcosmic issue: national sovereignty standing in for personal rights.

Well, then we start asking about the actual job of politicians in a representative democracy. :)

Anyway. Hug! *wag*

Being atheist as opposed to anti-theists I do so agree with you. I would never impose my view onto other, as I would hate to have some religious imposing his view on me. Although I still like to debate with them (or you I guess ) the futility of religion, but I would never force you, or have the law forcing you, to change your ways. Unfortunately in this world of ours there is still a great majority of people doing atrocity and imposing there will onto others in the name of god.

I repeat my point: it's not really about religion. As evidence, I offer to you the number of people doing atrocity and imposing their will not in the name of God. Religion is just one of the many excuses people use to justify atrocities -- or, even worse, to justify the wilful lack of independent thought that all too often leads to atrocities.

Conversely, people also do incredible, beautiful things in the name of religion. And also without it.

If anyone actually cites religion as a cause of either atrocity or greatness, then they're blinding themselves to the greater part of the picture. It's all people. Just people.

PS: I should mention that I'm about as solidly atheist as atheists get. :)

O yea I do so agree with you

Respect the believer, not the belief.

Pretty much.

Exactly why I said it.

Because fuck that whole *call someone close-minded, then turn around- and be super close-minded* bullshit.

At least there's this. XD

41% are orthodox, they are christian too.

so theyre... not the majority of the population and theyre running the politics of the country?
Sorry but other factors are at play here. Theres a homophobic sentiment running through the population that is unrelated to religious beliefs. Just like there is here. Just like in China... whose percentage of Christians is 7.5%. All of my non christian friends are also homophobes at least to a certain extent. In fact I would say that a large portion of those that support gay marriage even moderately may likely have some negative feelings about non-straight people, and simply do not express them, much as was the case with abolition of slavery and civil rights.

Sorry for the wall of text, but its something Ive been thinking about a lot lately.

Protip: I like when men put things inside of my body, and -I- have negative feelings about certain facets of the "gay" culture. I also happen to dislike many things about arabic and african societies, but I don't "hate" arabs or africans or gay people as a group. Disagreement /= Hatred, until you start trying to deny basic rights.

Yeah pretty much that. Thats why I always disliked the term homophobia. It kinda feels someone is saying that because gay porn grosses me out, and I really fucking dont want to have to sit there and overhear a student telling another student about the m/m sex he had the other week, automatically has mean I hate gay ppl. I mean fuck, if I did I wouldnt be here on FA in the first place, unless I was a SERIOUS retard. It just means that I personally dont want anything to do with it- not that I hate people who do.

Are over 40% of all of Russia's population just a "few" christians? That was my point.

well no, but like... compared to us? Percentage wise? yea.

That was my point. ;1

Why does everything have to be compared to the US. It's such an extreme example anyway.

I just say so cause I live in the US. Its even more extreme in South America.

if 40% of Russians are Christian and over 60% of Russians support the bill, Then religion isnt the biggest factor here, cause thats a surprising statistic even without considering the fact that it assumes ALL 40% of the Christian population supports the bill, which Clearly is highly unlikely.

Sure, its a factor. It always somewhat is. but it is being over-estimated.

aye.

I agree. I just know however, that a lot of people who support gay rights unfortunately *do* think religion is all of the cause. And its frankly not. It serves as a justification for, not so much creator of, homophobia in my research. IE, those people would dislike gays with or without religion, but with religion, they also have a means to justify that dislike of gays.

Actually, the majority of Russians are Orthodox Christian. And they are trying to make it their national religion

Actually, its about 40% but Ive seen estimates that put the number of atheists at about 60%, which would suggest a lower # of christians since it hardly leaves room for other beliefs. They cant possibly be able to make it their national religion. Not in the former Soviet Union. Regardless, this anti gay sentiment is clearly coming from other factors. Evident by the contrast between the % of Christians in Russia and the % of Russians who support the bill.

Oh yeah, the Christians can't POSSIBLY make it their national religion. It's never been tried before, nor have attempts to introduce theocracy have been attempted:

http://rt.com/politics/sentences-fe.....insulting-557/

But anyways, if you're asking me - no, I don't believe that homophobia in Russia is necessarily motivated by religion only. I am aware of Communisms' history of oppressing them. I don't believe many atheists are under the impression that religion is necessary to be homophobic.

dude, still. Do you REALLY forsee a country with the largest population of one of atheists in the world making Christianity their state religion? I really, really dont. Although that article was almost amusing. Its like the Russians lack any concept of freedom.

Also thats a relief to hear. Sadly Ive encountered a lot who do and it just frustrates me. And its not helping their efforts either, cause they want to hit target A and are for some reason convinced theyre hitting A when really theyre focusing on B.

Russia doesn't have anywhere CLOSE to 60% of atheists, nor do they have the largest population in their country, dude. There are more Orthodox Christians than people who identify is non-religious, let alone atheist. Also, Orthodox Christianity doesn't account for all of the branches of Christianity. If you add in the other Christians, it adds up to 47% if you account for other forms of Eastern Orthodox and Non-Orthodox present in Russia. Shit, there are probably more MUSLIMS than atheists in Russia. You can't get an accurate estimate on who's atheist or not, because some people who identify as non-religious can always be pagans or some other woo woo bullshit - but the number of people who identify as non-religious definitely do not exceed 25%. And yes, I definitely do see it being a possibility that Orthodox Christianity may end up being the state religion. They're certainly trying as we speak, and the number of Orthodox Christians are growing rapidly.

I know for a fact that the % of unaffiliated FAR exceeds the amount of religious individuals. I am unsure of what sources you have, But I can say right now that they are not the same as mine. I highly doubt that Russia has more believers (in the major religions) than the unaffiliated than Germany, which is roughly 50/50. I would be interested in learning what your sources are so I could (rather slowly) compare them to mine. if youre interested in providing them, I will gladly take a look. but as far as these comments go, I have no desire to continue discussing this. I know where we both stand, and I dont want to spam this journal with debate. All the best to you, and hopefully this shit does not pass in Russia.

Although admittedly with their record of human rights, I suspect it will.
Oh well, one more talking point for the west, I guess ... -_-

I think you are right about a lot more people being religious in Russia then actually showed by the data. Not only that but I think as the years will go by it will increases, and the reason for that is pretty simple. I am one of those people that don't believe in religion or god period. That also mean that I don't believe in the afterlife. I'm very comfortable into the idea that when I die everything stop right there into nothingness.
As I get older I've not change my view on that, quite the opposite, but looking around I can see that a lot of people that used to speak of themselves as being atheist are having great difficulty living with that idea that there is nothing after death. By definition, believing that there is something after death mean that you are somewhat religious, otherwise it does not make sense. Thus my predicted shift in Russia.

I don't think it's so much that they're uncomfortable with the fact that there's nothing after death. I think it's more like - in Russia, religion never truly went away. Sure, Stalin was an atheist dictator, and he killed people for not believing (although he did work with the Russian Orthodox Church during World War Two), but people never really stopped being religious. I think the trends towards religion in Soviet Russia are a trend -away- from Communism. It seems to me that there's more of a desire to move away from religion

I live in a place were religion was the power that was controlling everything to the point that in the 50s if you were not religious you were excluded from society. It went so bad that in the 60s the youth decided to move away from religion in trove. So much so that this place became a curiosity for people studying religion and trend true out the world. It turn out that this is the only place in history were the people when from religious to atheism almost over night without any fight or bloodshed. That had never happen before. So in my youth we were among the most atheist of society. These days, those young people that were the one moving away from religion are slowly getting back as they age nearing there end of life. People that used to be totally atheist are now going back to religion. If you ask them if they believe in the after life they all say yes. Thus the paradox and now they are trying to remove that paradox by joining religion. That is why I suspect something similar is happening in Russia. It would be interesting to see if all those people that are supposed to be out of religion what they think about the after life. I would bet you that most of them do believe it. And if you do believe, then it's almost automatic that eventually you will go back to religion. It's just a mater of time.

BTW nice icon. What is that pink blob on your head?

My tiggy's ear

O, should have gone look at your gallery before asking. LOL

So few Christians? Over 40% of the population adhere to the Russian-Orthodox church which is highly influencial in post sowiet Russia. And a lot of the Anti gay sentiment does stem from this church. The rest comes from mostly irreligious neo-fascict groups.

so theyre... not the majority of the population and theyre running the politics of the country?
There has to be other factors are at play here. Theres a homophobic sentiment running through the population that is unrelated to religious beliefs. Just like there is here. Just like in China... whose percentage of Christians is 7.5%. All of my non christian friends are also homophobes at least to a certain extent. In fact I would say that a large portion of those that support gay marriage even moderately may likely have some negative feelings about non-straight people, and simply do not express them, much as was the case with abolition of slavery and civil rights.

Sorry for the wall of text, but its something Ive been thinking about a lot lately.

Sure, there are other things at play, such as lower education levels, other focus points in education, lack of exposure to gay people in daily life and the media. Interestingly, Russia and Germany have about the same distribution of religiosity, with about half the population being religious and about 40% not being religious, yet 75% of Germans support same-sex marriage and adoption while 75% of Russians think homosexuality should not be accepted by society.
Homophobia musn't be deeply rooted in Russian society, I think it is just a convinient scape goat for a lot of people, a vent for them to take out their frustration about other things. The Orthodox church just fuels these sentiments with its rethoric. That's just how I see this.

And I think youre 100% right.

Religious groups take a lot of criticism because in the United States, Canada, Latin America, and in most of Europe, the vast majority of organized, political opposition to LGBT rights is financed by and organized by religious organizations, or by organizations that frequently rely upon religious themes, scriptures and references to make their arguments. This political homophobia differs from individual homophobia, and is usually the more visible of the two.

The result is that while many non-religious people are homophobic, you don't see very many secular groups or organizations arguing against homosexuality. And conversely, while many of those who support LGBT rights (and many LGBT people) are religious, most of the organizations promoting LGBT rights are secular and not affiliated with any specific religious tradition.

The context in Russia, where gays are being used as a scapegoat by the regime, and in much of Asia, where cultural values discouraging open homosexuality are the norm, is somewhat different, but there IS a reason that people associate anti-gay sentiment with religion, even if it is not a reason that is valid in the context of every country.

I understand what youre getting at. And Im not saying that religious groups dont perpetuate homophobia.

But in the eyes of most pro gay supporters religion isnt just the biggest cause of homophobia, its THE cause of homophobia.
I recognize that neither are really true. As you stated, it may appear to be the case on the surface, so I suppose its understandable that some people get that impression, especially if they already have a distaste for religion in the first place. But honestly, the biggest factor religion plays in perpetuating homophobia is not so much the creation of it, but rather the justification of it.

It often does stem from religion whether its in the majority or not. Religion is a bad thing that has been holding us back for way too long. It is long past time to leave these dark age fantasies behind.

If only people could see the good it has done and not just the bad, people wouldn't hold such ignorant views. Views like that are every bit as bigoted as homophobia or racism.

I'm not going to hide my distaste for religion because a few people like you label it as bigotry. I see it as something bad that is continuing to be a problem for humanity at large. People should not be raised to believe in lies and superstition. I won't hate someone for believing in it, but I still don't like organized religion in general. It just holds people back and stands in the way of progress both socially and scientifically.

Simply because I have discussed this topic with furries more times than I have woke up in the morning, and have no desire to drag this into a long ass dramafest,

my retort is simply this.

I have to actually agree with  yamatoiouko. A US-based petition doesn't seem the right way to go about stopping said bill. At this point I feel as though it's more the population of Russia's decision at this point, regardless of how horrible of a bill it is.

Sadly the majority of the people in russia (67%) is actually in favor of the bill. :/
Being gay in Russia you're pretty much fucked.

For sure! But ur fucked by government... Without lubricant or same shit...

=( that's horrible. Why exactly is the anti-gay movement there so strong? Is it simply that they have always been that way (like the majority of countries), or someone causing this movement recently?
I do not know much about russian politics or their social issues.

Putin has some dirty business that needs to get done, and, like most people who do that, he's decided to deflect criticism by accusing MUSLIMS, or JEWS, or HOMOSEXUALS of some gross impropriety. When people have no other frame of reference, they judge someone based on the "Facts" they know, and for the most part people tend to know negative "facts" about the Other. Happens here all the time.

No matter were injustice may be it is our duty as human beings to fight it...no matter you age/ethnicity/Country of origin

Just because you find it an injustice doesn't mean another country does. We don't have the right to interfere with another country's rule. That's exactly how you get into long, drawn-out conflicts with no resolution like Vietnam and Iraq.

And what would you say of other social injustices? Women's rights? oh you mean that property fathers would trade to the women's future husband?

But its okay thats the tradition and what we believe in!

No...There are things that are morally gray that are up too individuals to make decisions on them. the Social Injustice of making life MUCH harder on somebody on something as arbitrary as their sexuality IS a social injustice and is WRONG!

Here is a quote from the United Nations charter

The United Nations shall promote: a) higher standards of living, full employment, and conditions of economic and social progress and development; b) solutions of international economic, social, health, and related problems; c) international cultural and educational cooperation; d) universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.

I bolded the important part. just because it's something somebody believes in or a large group of people believe in doesn't make it ANY less wrong.

Then let the UN do it! I'm saying that the US as an individual nation shouldn't be doing this.

except its not the NATION doing it. It's PEOPLE from the nation!

AND i might add its a good thing! We as a freaking species need to stop being so fucking walled up against one another due to being born somewhere different from somebody or worship a different god or look different!

We are all human beings and we are all natives to this wonderful little blue speck in space called earth.

I don't care if your born in Russia or Iran or France or Canada, If there are others within your country or whatever that want too put you down and treat you as second class citizens just because you are *Different* from the majority then i am going to do all within my power to stop those people from doing that!

My power might be as small as signing a petition but if thats all i'm capable in my current position in life then i'm going to freaking do it!

Except that there’s the problem, right? Countries are so afraid of the UN interfering in their business that they basically castrated it and tied its hands twice.

But...but that's why it exists! So it can act as a unified group, instead of just nations together! *sigh*

Yes, ideally, it was supposed to be that. The UN, in theory, was the best idea ever. But let’s be honest here: before it even existed, its most powerful members were already working hard to emasculate it. Example: giving the USSR (then Russia) and the USA vetoing power, ensuring that nothing significant will ever get done because it’ll always run contrary to one or the other’s interests.

So nothing will ever get done outside any country. Fabulous. All the more reason just to stay out of each other's business, then.

Or maybe it’s time to stop worshiping countries. Maybe we needed an United Humanity, not an United Nations, because nations eventually start acting as entities having more power and far more rights than human beings, despite being artificial, virtual constructs.

How do unite a world that doesn't want uniting?

I say we give out free gummy bears.. everyone likes gummy bears. And internets.. Free gummy bears and internets for uniting in humanity ;)

It's a nice thought, but...sadly, it's something that feels unrealistic.

Somehow I feel you missed the jovial nature of the comment. I thought you could use a smile after the beatdown you've been getting on here. :) Plus.. gummy bears ;)

I appreciate the attempt, it's just...I wish people could learn to respect other people's opinions a bit more. That's why I'm being so vehement on national sovereignty: it's not much different than personal respect on another level.

Except in this case the "National sovereignty" decided to condemn and dehumanize some 5-10% of the Russian population, depending on which surveys and polls you happen to support on the general percentage of the population that happens to be non-normative. That's not really respecting personal opinions at all.

Oppressive laws that stop free speech and free association aren't respectful laws, they're tyranny, whether they're stopping the free association of homosexuals or dog-lovers or nazis or people who like dressing up a s superheroes or bronies or anything, anything at all that you find weird, silly, gross, or immoral. Laws exist to protect people's rights, not to trample on them, and I'm getting tired of the argument that any artificial construct, if it's big enough, automatically becomes "immune" to the "don't tell people what to do" clause in your moral codex. As long as those people aren't -hurting- anyone, stomping all over their ability to speak, to be heard, to be human is a violation of the Higher Law of basic human rights, of decency and kindness and respect and equality that you so desperately are trying to claim for your own.

People who pursue unrealistic dreams will always get closer to achieving them than people who don’t try.

Education mostly, discussion, exchanges and all. For example, Germany, France and the UK didn’t go from Worst Enemies Ever to Best Friends Ever within a few decades by giving each other the cold shoulder — rather, the British, the French and the Germans collectively decided that fighting each other for the sake of country and culture has only brought them misery and destruction.