Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

UN vote to accept execution of gays Watch

Announcements
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by metjush)
    Why shouldn't things like these be voted on?
    Because it's not really right for people to vote on who has the right to live based on their sexuality, which is something you can't change
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lewis :D)
    Because it's not really right for people to vote on who has the right to live based on their sexuality, which is something you can't change
    Justify that objectively.

    It's just an opinion, a view... something which you might even say should be voted on!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Folderol)
    I suggest you read the first 50 pages of the Ask a Muslim thread or any of my threads on Iran.

    And I'm glad you acknowledge that I wasn't talking about Muslims but about Islamists. The fact you said "It's Muslim" not Islamist leads me to believe you didn't know the difference. I was talking about Islamists - just emphasise that.
    No. I am quite sure I know what it means considering that I have been called it on several occasions on this board. Despite, I say, despite the fact I have no official political affiliation.

    And I will. Let's see if our definitions do match up.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mujeriego)
    No. I am quite sure I know what it means considering that I have been called it on several occasions on this board. Despite, I say, despite the fact I have no official political affiliation.
    That's great. So when someone refers to "Islamists" don't you think its pretty stupid to say "it's Muslims" when they Islamist refers specifically to a certain ideology?

    And I will. Let's see if our definitions do match up.
    There aren't two definitions. There is one definition of an Islamist. From Quilliam; "It is the belief that Islam is a political ideology, as well as a faith. It is a modernist claim that political sovereignty belongs to God, that the Shari'ah should be used as state law." I advise you to read their page in full because you shout "Gotcha!"

    I seriously don't understand why you even replied to me. Are you denying that there are Islamists on TSR? Seriously? (aside from Abu Umar)?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DJkG.1)
    Justify that objectively.

    It's just an opinion, a view... something which you might even say should be voted on!
    It is an opinion, but do you really think it's morally right to decide whether or not people should have the right to live because of who they are? Whether it's because of skin colour, they way they look or their sexuality. It's something about you you cannot change and I don't think it's fair or correct that people sitting in a room have the power to decide whether or not people should die because of who they are
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by taigan)
    No it isn't wrong. Sorry to disagree with practically everyone on this thread, but the fact that this was voted to pass means that the majority of nations in the UN are in favour of it, thus, their opinion is the majority. They are the norm, if you will. I'm not saying that I agree with this, because I definitely do not. However, the fact that you think you can impose your beliefs on people of other cultures is not in spirit of the UK's self-proclaimed multicultural nature. This is no different then countries who ban alcohol, drugs etc.
    Lad.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Folderol)
    That's great. So when someone refers to "Islamists" don't you think its pretty stupid to say "it's Muslims" when they Islamist refers specifically to a certain ideology?
    Don't be silly. I said that it being TSR, it is not unreasonable to question someone's definition of Islamists and Muslims. I don't see why that is so hard to grasp.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mujeriego)
    Don't be silly. I said that it being TSR, it is not unreasonable to question someone's definition of Islamists and Muslims. I don't see why that is so hard to grasp.
    In which case, why don't you ask instead of unequivocally say "And it's Muslim. Not Islamist"? Lets accept that is reasonable, to quote you, "question" - why don't you question instead of say "it's Muslims"?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lewis :D)
    Because it's not really right for people to vote on who has the right to live based on their sexuality, which is something you can't change
    does the vote really deny their right to live? as far as I know, the vote was not about whether or not homosexuals are human beings with the same rights as others...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cinqueta)
    Yes, because alcoholic prohibition has exactly the same consequences as chopping someone's head off doesn't it? Nobody dies as a direct consequnce of banning alcohol or heroin, but people would die if an execution bill was passed. You're insane.
    Please refrain from personal attacks, you just lose all your credibility as a poster by doing so

    To clarify what I meant, of course the magnitude of the consequences are different, but that doesn't mean the principles are not the same. In Islam, alcohol is prohibited: that is the mindset; the same with homosexuality. It's like how Christianity teaches that murder is wrong, or how we shouldn't steal etc. You can't expect others to have the same exact mentality as you, and you can't blame them for altering it just for your sake, now that would be insane, wouldn't it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    oh noooooos, not the gays!!!

    seriously, TSR is more preoccupied with the well being of homosexuals than homosexuals themselves :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by metjush)
    does the vote really deny their right to live? as far as I know, the vote was not about whether or not homosexuals are human beings with the same rights as others...
    Yeah, the vote basically says that it's justifiable for gay people in countries where it's illegal to be killed, that's denying their right to live
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by taigan)
    Please refrain from personal attacks, you just lose all your credibility as a poster by doing so

    To clarify what I meant, of course the magnitude of the consequences are different, but that doesn't mean the principles are not the same. In Islam, alcohol is prohibited: that is the mindset; the same with homosexuality. It's like how Christianity teaches that murder is wrong, or how we shouldn't steal etc. You can't expect others to have the same exact mentality as you, and you can't blame them for altering it just for your sake, now that would be insane, wouldn't it?
    You are correct in saying that alcohol is banned in Islam, however, consuming alcohol as a Muslim does not carry a death sentence, you just get ignored by Allah for forty days. Executing somebody for being homosexual is wrong because (without going into a whole other debate), you cannot choose whether you are a homosexual or not.

    In your examples, people choose to steal or to drink alcohol, it is their decision and they should be punished under the rules of the society that they choose to live in. Being executed for being something like homosexual that does no harm to anything else or anybody else is crazy and so is anyone who holds that view.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JamesH6097)
    Actuallyit is ridiculous and disgusting....does being gay mean you arnt a human...I think not jerk. How would you like it if there was a vte to allow people to be executed for being black etc..it's exactly the same. Just like Hitler killing Jews....he was stopped, so why can't these trashy uncivilised countries also be stopped from killing homosexuals...it makes me sick!
    I'm sorry, I literally had to stop myself from LOL-ing at your post

    First of all, calm down, what is wrong with you!? Composure please. Secondly, if you'd actually tried to understand my post, you might know that I said I DEFINITELY DID NOT AGREE with the decision itself. Seriously, can't you read?

    Thirdly, to clarify, I was just trying to say that you need to understand you can't impose your beliefs of what is ethical on others. It just isn't going to happen. Also, you generalize and say that these countries are 'trashy' and 'uncivilized', but is that just because they're beliefs are different than yours? Are you going to bring down anyone whose opinion conflicts with yours? That makes you more of a Nazi than me
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SpiritedAway)
    Regardless. Artcle 2 of the Human Rights Acts, the right to life. The UN has basically gone back on this.
    Yeah that is very true, but look at Article 2 Clause 7 of the United Nations Charter: 'Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.'
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    This is disgraceful!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cinqueta)
    You are correct in saying that alcohol is banned in Islam, however, consuming alcohol as a Muslim does not carry a death sentence, you just get ignored by Allah for forty days. Executing somebody for being homosexual is wrong because (without going into a whole other debate), you cannot choose whether you are a homosexual or not.

    In your examples, people choose to steal or to drink alcohol, it is their decision and they should be punished under the rules of the society that they choose to live in. Being executed for being something like homosexual that does no harm to anything else or anybody else is crazy and so is anyone who holds that view.
    I just want to clarify once again that I totally agree homosexuals should not be discriminated against in any way. My whole point was that, although irrational, that is the mindset of these countries (just like your mindset is that adultery or thievery is wrong). I'm not comparing the acts themselves, but rather I'm comparing their significance to you. You aren't going to wake up one day and decide that stealing is alright, are you?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Why have I been negged? :indiff:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    It is terrible. What's more one of the weirdest things was also that South Africa voted in favour of taking it off the list, South Africa being one of the most legislatively progressive countries when it comes to gay rights. Absolutely unbelievable.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by toasteh)
    Why have I been negged? :indiff:
    Probably the same reason I've been negged: for having an opinion :s
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.