Joe Lycett - Qatar/Beckham debate

[Bear]

Of course you can, if a religion gains enough traction to be considered a real religion, and part of it's doctrine is that murdering a person for any reason is fine, that does not cancel out the human right of not being murdered.

It's more about which rules directly impact people in ways that are hugely differing to most other religions. Kosher/Halal are good example of this, as they generally don't infringe the rights of other people, however animal rights activists will still have a go.

Of course you can come up with ludicrous examples to try and prove a point. I would rather point to the cases in the UK and US where the Christian bakers won their case against the gay couple who wanted a certain decoration on their cake which went against the principles of the baker as it was tested in court

 

[Dirk Diggler]

if a religion gains enough traction to be considered a real religion

Oxymoron alert.

 

[fez]

Of course you can come up with ludicrous examples to try and prove a point. I would rather point to the cases in the UK and US where the Christian bakers won their case against the gay couple who wanted a certain decoration on their cake which went against the principles of the baker as it was tested in court

Thats similar but fundamentally different. I have 0 issues with what the bakers did personally. They were not refusing to bake cakes for gay couples, they were refusing to bake "gay cakes" and yes I do realise that reads like a brass eye soundbite

There is a vast difference between allowing people religious freedoms to not be forced to do things they are against and allowing those people to stop other people doing things they don't like. In the bakery example its fine for them to refuse to make a gay cake but its not OK to stop other people from baking gay cakes.

 

[Bear]

Thats similar but fundamentally different. I have 0 issues with what the bakers did personally. They were not refusing to bake cakes for gay couples, they were refusing to bake "gay cakes" and yes I do realise that reads like a brass eye soundbite

There is a vast difference between allowing people religious freedoms to not be forced to do things they are against and allowing those people to stop other people doing things they don't like. In the bakery example its fine for them to refuse to make a gay cake but its not OK to stop other people from baking gay cakes.

I see what you are saying but when their religion is against the act of homosexuality and is enshrined in law, that changes the situation some what. The bakery example doesnt work because the UK or US doesnt have a law that prevents you from baking gay cakes.

If they genuinely believe their religion is the word of God, they arent likely to change their minds whether its nonsense or not

 

[mrk]

The Room Next Door - Giovanni Infantino

https://fb.watch/gZYKh53WaF/

Very good

 

[dowie]

Babes, I'm an open minded person, but if there's one hole I won't do it's a Dowiehole.

Yup, because the hypocrisy is obvious and Beckham is clearly a scapegoat.... everything else is just cope, he's not personally oppressing gays and many others (people and orgs) are participating in and/or profiting from the exact same event while also being pro LGBT.

 

[Tony Edwards]

Germany cover mouths and wear rainbows on kit in World Cup protest

Germany’s players placed hands over their mouths and wore rainbow stripes on their warm-up tops and boots in a powerful statement of defiance against Fifa

www.theguardian.com

Germany’s players placed hands over their mouths and wore rainbow stripes on their warm-up tops and boots in a powerful statement of defiance against Fifa before their Group E match against Japan.

Their message was reinforced by the German interior minister, Nancy Faeser, who also wore a OneLove armband, which promotes tolerance, diversity and LGBTQ+ rights, as she sat next to Fifa’s president, Gianni Infantino.

In a powerful statement published shortly after the game started, the German Football Association warned Fifa: “Denying us the armband is the same as denying us a voice. We stand by our position.”

German interior minister, Nancy Faeser, with the OneLove armband beside Fifa’s president, Gianni Infantino. Photograph: Friedemann Vogel/EPA
It added: “We wanted to use our captain’s armband to take a stand for values that we hold in the Germany national team: diversity and mutual respect. Together with other nations, we wanted our voice to be heard.

“It wasn’t about making a political statement – human rights are non-negotiable. That should be taken for granted, but it still isn’t the case. That’s why this message is so important to us.”

Six of Germany’s starting XI, including Ilkay Gündogan and Manuel Neuer, had rainbow colours on their boots.

 

[dowie]

So powerful... yet they totally bottled it with the armbands they were supposedly going to wear. A bit of virtue signaling is OK but if FIFA says it will maybe cost them something, anything at all, then that's going too far... such commitment to the cause, no wonder they're celebrated while Beckham is singled out.

Meanwhile, Iranian players backed their cause in spite of the actual risk to themselves:

Iran players at World Cup speak out in support of protests at home

'We are here but it does not mean we should not be their voice.'

metro.co.uk

As protests against the ruling regime in Iran continue, some of the country’s star footballers have spoken in support of their people while they prepare to play in the World Cup in Qatar.

The death of Mahsa Amini in custody of Iranian morality policy sparked weeks of protests, which have seen hundreds of deaths and thousands of imprisonments.

There were question marks over whether Iran would be able to compete in the World Cup as a result, but they get their campaign underway against England on Monday afternoon.

It will be an emotional time for the Iranian players, some of whom have bravely spoken in support of the protesters at home, knowing that it comes with a risk.

 

[Hagar]

NVM

 

[StriderX]

Goes to prove that western footballers are divas that should be paid far less so we can actually get some real men on the field.

 

[ianh]

It also goes to show that these "political/cultural" displays, whilst they gain a lot of social media clout, do absolutely zero in reality and are dropped at the first hint of hardship. Had any of the teams had any genuine principles towards the OneLove armbands and the groups associated with it them they'd have worn them irrespective of the punishment.

Instead they folded like a chocolate fireguard showing it was all a sham. What would have made a bigger impact in the public eye - Players caving in to FIFA or players standing strong against them and wearing the armband irrespective of punishment? I know which I think would have sent a better message of support.

 

[Hotwired]

So powerful... yet they totally bottled it with the armbands they were supposedly going to wear. A bit of virtue signaling is OK but if FIFA says it will maybe cost them something, anything at all, then that's going too far... such commitment to the cause, no wonder they're celebrated while Beckham is singled out.

Meanwhile, Iranian players backed their cause in spite of the actual risk to themselves:

As protests against the ruling regime in Iran continue, some of the country’s star footballers have spoken in support of their people while they prepare to play in the World Cup in Qatar.

The death of Mahsa Amini in custody of Iranian morality policy sparked weeks of protests, which have seen hundreds of deaths and thousands of imprisonments.

There were question marks over whether Iran would be able to compete in the World Cup as a result, but they get their campaign underway against England on Monday afternoon.

It will be an emotional time for the Iranian players, some of whom have bravely spoken in support of the protesters at home, knowing that it comes with a risk.

Iran players at World Cup speak out in support of protests at home

'We are here but it does not mean we should not be their voice.'

metro.co.uk

The players are reflecting how their people feel.

Iranian people are getting off their *** to riot and the average western viewer will be changing the channel rather than listen to sanctimonious whinging about the Qataris.

If there was genuine connection to the cause the players would be willing to risk more.

 

[platinum87]

Explain why someone shouldn't be able to freely express their love for someone else regardless of race, gender or religion without using the fact that some people don't like it as a reason. Explain why it might being bad intrinsically.

There are some things which don't have any basis in logic or sensible thinking and this is one of them.

No your reply implies that forcibly changing things is fundamentally the right thing to do.

To which i say, no, its not, that is just an opinion.

The next issue is, if you could go and forcibly change things, you would not care about gay rights, with all violence that is required that is required to forcibly change entire systems and ideologies.

 

[Dirk Diggler]

Germany’s protest will reverberate down the years and generations

Even if Hansi Flick’s side go out in the World Cup group stage after the 2-1 defeat by Japan, some things just matter more

www.theguardian.com

 

[jamoor]

Germany’s protest will reverberate down the years and generations

Even if Hansi Flick’s side go out in the World Cup group stage after the 2-1 defeat by Japan, some things just matter more

www.theguardian.com

3% of the population may be gay
10% is dying of hunger.

Amazing which issues grab the headlines

 

[Dirk Diggler]

3% of the population may be gay
10% is dying of hunger.

Amazing which issues grab the headlines

99.7% of statistics on the internet are made up on the spot in order to advance a point of view.

 

[NVP]

Old video, but still relevant.

 

[fez]

Germany’s protest will reverberate down the years and generations

Even if Hansi Flick’s side go out in the World Cup group stage after the 2-1 defeat by Japan, some things just matter more

www.theguardian.com

They can’t be serious here can they. No one will remember that in a years time. They put their hands over their mouths. It wasn’t some genius statement or withering commentary.

I just find it all a bit funny how we tell ourselves that our empty gestures are powerful and impactful. I especially like taking the knee for 10s before the game as the commentators spout crap like “sending the strongest kind of message that discrimination of any kind will not be tolerated” as we very much tolerate it in Qatar.

 

[StriderX]

They can’t be serious here can they. No one will remember that in a years time. They put their hands over their mouths. It wasn’t some genius statement or withering commentary.

I just find it all a bit funny how we tell ourselves that our empty gestures are powerful and impactful. I especially like taking the knee for 10s before the game as the commentators spout crap like “sending the strongest kind of message that discrimination of any kind will not be tolerated” as we very much tolerate it in Qatar.

Whilst I'm sure the author of that article might think otherwise I believe the point was that any curious future observer of said photo would immediately wonder why they're covering their mouths and for that I would say it's a fairly poignant way to start a conversation/journey to figure it out, but yes most people don't/won't care about it now as they already know what it means or don't care about football because it's lost all meaning.

 

[n111ck]

Whilst I'm sure the author of that article might think otherwise I believe the point was that any curious future observer of said photo would immediately wonder why they're covering their mouths and for that I would say it's a fairly poignant way to start a conversation/journey to figure it out, but yes most people don't/won't care about it now as they already know what it means or don't care about football because it's lost all meaning.

More like it will reverberate throughout the 'ages' as a million meme's...