THBT self professed progressive athletes should boycott the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics
Now Olympics have annually been a gathering among all athletes around the globe, where they are present to compete for the trophy and place their country on top. The Olympics truce, contains absolutely "no discrimination of any persons- regardless of age, gender, race, color, religion, nationality... etc"
However, we on the government bench believe that the principles of the Olympics such as (1) no discrimination and (2) sportsmanship and team play, are being voided with the new "anti gay law". How are we rest assured that there is no bias against the LGBT communities? How can we be sure that there is team play, when Russia is promoting persecution of LGBTs?
It is in this context that we believe that self professed progressive athletes, that are in most cases, fall under the LGBT community or support it, should boycott the said Olympics to send a strong discourse on the disapproval of the law, and how it is absolutely unacceptable to judge a person based on gender.
If these athletes do not attend the Olympics, especially with their high status in society, people will begin to wonder the reason behind their boycotting. It is with this curiosity that people will become aware of the persecution the LGBT community faces with. For example, if a high profile athlete decides not to attend the Sochi Olympics, and interviewers ask why, he will be able to send a strong discourse via media that it is unacceptable to the LGBT community to be persecuted for unjustifiable reasons such as gender preference. And once people see the stand that these influential athletes have against the law, it will somehow encourage them to support the LGBT movement as well; therefore, strengthening the stand of the nation against discrimination.
We'd also like to highlight how this wide discrimination of LGBT athletes would result to a biased and unjust results in the Olympics. Olympics, as earlier mentioned, is a mean for athletes to showcase their talent in their profession. But how are they given an equal opportunity to do so when there is an "anti gay law" hindering their progress? How will these athletes receive the awards they deserve if the judges are so biased against the LGBT movement? How can we assure that the results are not based on opinions, but rather, skill?
It is for the following reasons that we are proud to propose.
The Anti-Yay Law
The Fool: But this is absolutely false. As there is only a bill banning the "propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations to minors"? There is no law against being homosexual, this is propaganda from LGBT and its affiliate ideologies. (Feminism, socialism and extreme left) they are just using it the media for leverage. For good or for worse, there is only a law against the explicit propaganda TOWARDS --CHILDREN. The LGBT reaction is an extreme and dishonest one.
Russia is not against gays per say, they just don't want children being bombarded with LGBT Propaganda when they are young and naive.
It’s not against being biologically gay or ending up gay. But the way it’s being solicited. We have to remember WHO IS giving us the actual information. Information ESPECIALLY in the US, is filtered, for a US based IDEOLOGY. If you think you are getting all the facts think again. News is the most corrupt of all. Each news company has its own special affiliations who is either a part of them or who is paying them. Money makes the new possible, and it doesn’t get worse then Internets articles. If you actually believe pro first claim, Like pro you are probably a victim of propaganda.
The LGBT Posse
LGBT, is an ideological community, and like any other religious, or political regimes they are in the plight for power.
I say that high profile Progressive athletes should not abuse their social status to manipulate the minds of the masses is an immoral method.
It doesn’t matter how much hate it will produce against Russia’s values and her people, via association. Athletism is an unjustifiable measure of Morals, let along justify contempt for a people. And being caught up in Propaganda machines will hurt their credibility in the long run.
The B-r-e-a-k- down
Pro profusely, proposed question after question were each question depended upon fact and answers of previous questions, which questions which is have not been provided. Thus constantly begging the question. But one cannot wise by begging for knowledge.
The Pro's:"How will these athletes receive the awards they deserve if the judges are so biased against the LGBT movement?"
The Fool: This begs the question that it is true, that the judges, will not only be from Russia, and have those particular values, but also the time, money and effort, to go and seek out the sexual orientation of each and every athlete.
This is shameless “Loaded question” Fallacy. Very sneaky.
For, Allowing LGBT propaganda which targets children, and the most easily manipulated, is unlikely to have any effect on the multi-valued and cultured judge’s decisions. Most of the competitions are dependent on measurements and referees anyways.
And Did I forget to mention, that the law is in relation to mind manipulation of minors... And has nothing to do with the Olympics. At all!!!!
I think we can all agree that Olympics, is about athletic competition, not religion, politics or ideology, or any social mental enslavement.
“The Government bench” asks a lot of questions but avoids actually giving any positive arguments.
And questions, are always an admittance of ignorance, as a sincere and honest question is a request of knowledge, not a supplement for knowledge.
For like all propaganda, the purpose is to take advantage of emotionally charged, bias and naïve, who are not expected to critically analyze what is actually being said.
High-profile athletes, should be high-athletes, and not use athletism to force values onto other sovereigns, and cultures.
They are sovereigns aren’t they? That is, they're supposed to be self-governed. But we all know, that's not really the way it works. There are many bully countries and Ideological regimes that use their power, and influence to force countries of differing opinions into submission. Sometimes directly, sometimes indirectly. And in this particular case, LGBT is as guilty as all of them. A dishonest act is equally dishonest for anybody, minority or majority, that is what non-discrimination is about. There is to be no special pleading.
It is much more likely LGBT, are worried that they will not be able to take advantage of the Olympics, to elicit propaganda for their personal, politically powered, ideological proposals.
I myself promote promiscuity.
And occasionally pornography.
And so does my monkey. Sometimes anyways.
CATC forfeited this round.
The_Fool_on_the_hill forfeited this round.
CATC forfeited this round.
The Fool: I apologize, for my spelling, and grammar, from last round. I was quite tired. I don't know how that passed a grammar check. Damn MS Word. But nonetheless, my argument still stands.
There is no Russian Anti-Gay law, as it is being sold by LGBT.
It is rather a law against, nontraditional sexual propaganda towards children. Perhaps, this is not the greatest move. But, it doesn't justify spreading false information.
Is to be expected that Russia is and will be behind in Western ideological trends. Perhaps they will become more lenient over time. But to aggressively force or bully them to change their values, in another wrong itself.
Athleticism and Moralilty
Athleticism is not a justified measure of morality and should not be used spitefully as a weapon against Russia, and her people, and/or to sabotage their hosting of the Olympic games, or the Russian people.
Pro's arguments in reference to sportsmanship, or judges, or the Olympic truce, were, to be quite frank, extreme and ridiculous.
Infact, calling them arguments is an overstatment. As, Pro did nothing but ask many loaded questions in sequence.
This itself is a hallmark of propaganda, which I will explain for the fun of it.
A loaded question, is a question which contains hidden premise, in which any direct answer will assume the truth of the unjustified premise.
e.g. A shifty Lawyer may ask a husband, "So how long has your wife been a prostitute?"
Where there has been no demonstration that the husband's wife is or was ever a prostitute. And if his wife, has never been a prostitute, or he doesn't know, there is no direct answer he can give to this question.
1. Answering it directly, assumes the truth of the hidden premise.
2. Not answering it, or saying I don't know, will give the impression of guilt.
The false Confidence effect:
The false confidence effect, is an effect caused by making bold claims and asking loaded question with high confidence. This technique tends to give its audience the sense, that the truth of the claim and the answer of the questions are so obvious they need not be demonstrated.
The Sequential Questioning:
The deceptive effects of the first two techniques, are then magnified by asking, loaded questions confidently and accusingly in a sequence from were each question presupposes the answer of another, and that loaded statement in another, while neither have been justified.
The Fool: Despite the fact, that all the questions have groundless assumptions. The more stacked, packed and spoken with confidence, the more they give an impression that there must be some truth behind them. The longer and tedious it is takes to defuse each and every false assertion.
Contrast this type of interrogation with Pro's questions? (That is, the "Not justifications") And you will see that they even worse than these examples. Fallacies like this seem so obvious after they've been pointed out, but they are really hard to spot, to someone who is biased in favor of the claims or who is not well practiced in critical thinking.
(Hint: There is some bias against everybody in every country)
2. Pro: How can we be sure that there is team play, when Russia is promoting persecution of LGBTs?
3. Pro: But how are they given an equal opportunity to do so when there is an "anti gay law" hindering their progress?
4. Pro: How will these athletes receive the awards they deserve if the judges are so biased against the LGBT movement?
5. Pro: How can we assure that the results are not based on opinions, but rather, skill?
The Fool: This barrage of questions, is meant to bombard and blind their opponents,(and sometime themselves), with a shock and awe offensive, which will (if fooled) cause honest people to focus on defending themselves, blinding them to the fact, that their opponent has no support, from which to base their accusations.
Its important to note that I am not justifying Russia, or its laws. But demonstrating, that pros claims are false, and conclusions unjustified. And therefore a false basis to assert that any Athletes should use their status to harm the hosting and/or showout for winter Olympics. It's not merely Russia's Olympics, and nor does the law represent all Russia's people. Moreover, the judges are from around the world; places which are more or less liberal than others. So that's not a good excuse, especially when the judging is not particular to sexuality whatsoever.
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|