BBC.com asks users: 'Should homosexuals face execution?'

[Martinus]

I'm with Shelf.  There is value in learning the depth of anti-gay sentiment and by extension how much popular suppot this law is.  I can recall several times when Iraqis were polled about the acceptability of suicide attacks.

Just because you ask a survey question doesn't mean you're hoping for a yes answer.

But is this really the case? I mean, as some of the people criticizing the poll pointed out, most of the votes came from the UK and came from trolls and haters, rather than being presented as a real debate (and again, do you really expect the internet responses to a question like this to reflect some sort of global consensus, rather than a bunch of extremists and trolls using this as a forum to preach their appalling ideas?)

Not all questions and ideas are equally valid - especially when expressed on an anonymous, unmoderated forum such as the internet.

[Caliga]

Good point.  I mean, that's why when the Yankees put up an Internet poll on what song should they play during the 7th inning stretch once they got "Never Gonna Give You Up" by Rick Astley.

To their credit, they *did* actually play the song, although the fans booed the living shit out of it.

[Martinus]

I like the song. 

[Martinus]

And, on the flip side, if you consider this a forum for the actual debate, rather than a playground for trolls, don't you think that posing a question like this on a reputable international website legitimizes the issue and paints the monsters who think gays should be killed as a side capable of presenting reasons and justifications for their despicable views?

What the Ugandan government is proposing is essentially Holocaust of gays. If BBC existed in 1940, do you think it should be asking questions like "Do you think Jews should be sent to death camps?"

All this issue shows is the fact that gays remain the only minority that "it is ok to hate". Had the question been asked about anyone else - Muslims, Jews, Blacks, American soldiers or any other group you could think of - there would be a shitstorm, protests in the streets and possibly heads would roll at the highest levels of BBC. But it's different for homos. Disgusting.

[grumbler]

Should there be a poll "Did Holocaust really happen?" or "Did Americans deserve 911?"? After all, these are all questions that are being asked in the real world?

Sure, if those questions become newsworthy again.  There were such polls back when those were issues.  There have been polls about "Should the US have invaded Iraq" and "Should euthanasia be allowed" as well.

I guess it is a broader question of the role of the media - should it be simply a mirror of reality, however nasty it is or should it avoid situations in which it legitimizes extreme, unacceptable views even if some people on the face of planet embrace them?

These are not the only choices, though, so your question (though you try to make it loaded) is moot.

[Martinus]

And finally, all of this convinces me that grallon is actually right - that the liberal "hear everyone's opinion" is truly moronic and will not protect us against hatred and persecution - it will be our destruction.

[Martinus]

Should there be a poll "Did Holocaust really happen?" or "Did Americans deserve 911?"? After all, these are all questions that are being asked in the real world?

Sure, if those questions become newsworthy again.  There were such polls back when those were issues.  There have been polls about "Should the US have invaded Iraq" and "Should euthanasia be allowed" as well.

Surely you are not comparing these questions to the ones I used as examples (or the one about gays being executed). 

[Admiral Yi]

But is this really the case? I mean, as some of the people criticizing the poll pointed out, most of the votes came from the UK and came from trolls and haters, rather than being presented as a real debate (and again, do you really expect the internet responses to a question like this to reflect some sort of global consensus, rather than a bunch of extremists and trolls using this as a forum to preach their appalling ideas?)

Not all questions and ideas are equally valid - especially when expressed on an anonymous, unmoderated forum such as the internet.

Was it a fake internet poll?  I didn't know that.  Changes everything.

[grumbler]

And, on the flip side, if you consider this a forum for the actual debate, rather than a playground for trolls, don't you think that posing a question like this on a reputable international website legitimizes the issue and paints the monsters who think gays should be killed as a side capable of presenting reasons and justifications for their despicable views?

No, it doesn't.  What is does is draw them out of the woodwork so that people who folllow BBC but not the hate sites get to see what is festering out of their sight.

What the Ugandan government is proposing is essentially Holocaust of gays. If BBC existed in 1940, do you think it should be asking questions like "Do you think Jews should be sent to death camps?"

Ah, one would expect that Godwin's Law would be violated by the person claiming they were not going to get shrill! 

What the Ugandan government proposes is nothing of the sort.  What they propose is despicable, but far from the Holocaust.

All this issue shows is the fact that gays remain the only minority that "it is ok to hate". Had the question been asked about anyone else - Muslims, Jews, Blacks, American soldiers or any other group you could think of - there would be a shitstorm, protests in the streets and possibly heads would roll at the highest levels of BBC. But it's different for homos. Disgusting.

This issue actually shows that gays are the only minority so shrill they defeat their own purposes.  One seems top hear more from the "moderate Muslims" more often than from the "moderate gays" (though, to be sure, this is probably because moderate gays are less passionate about being gay that moderate Muslims are about be Muslim).

In any case, the BBC has delivered. 

[Martinus]

One has to remember this is the same BBC which last year blocked the humanitarian appeal about Gaza because it didn't want to "take sides" in the Israel-Palestine poll. So they are perfectly happy to censor messages they send.

[grumbler]

Surely you are not comparing these questions to the ones I used as examples (or the one about gays being executed). 

I don't know if Shirley is doing so or not, but I am pointing out that debates/polls such as you note have been conducted.  If not by the BBC, then by someone.  I think a BBC-ME poll about whether, for instance, suicide bombing was morally justified would be acceptable if that became newsworthy.

[grumbler]

One has to remember this is the same BBC which last year blocked the humanitarian appeal about Gaza because it didn't want to "take sides" in the Israel-Palestine poll. So they are perfectly happy to censor messages they send.

Yes, we knew that the BBC does not send messages impulsively.  In fact, we count on it.

[Martinus]

And, on the flip side, if you consider this a forum for the actual debate, rather than a playground for trolls, don't you think that posing a question like this on a reputable international website legitimizes the issue and paints the monsters who think gays should be killed as a side capable of presenting reasons and justifications for their despicable views?

No, it doesn't.  What is does is draw them out of the woodwork so that people who folllow BBC but not the hate sites get to see what is festering out of their sight.

What the Ugandan government is proposing is essentially Holocaust of gays. If BBC existed in 1940, do you think it should be asking questions like "Do you think Jews should be sent to death camps?"

Ah, one would expect that Godwin's Law would be violated by the person claiming they were not going to get shrill! 

What the Ugandan government proposes is nothing of the sort.  What they propose is despicable, but far from the Holocaust.

It's not "Godwin's Law" if one side is proposing killing all members of a specific minority - it becomes an apt analogy.

All this issue shows is the fact that gays remain the only minority that "it is ok to hate". Had the question been asked about anyone else - Muslims, Jews, Blacks, American soldiers or any other group you could think of - there would be a shitstorm, protests in the streets and possibly heads would roll at the highest levels of BBC. But it's different for homos. Disgusting.

This issue actually shows that gays are the only minority so shrill they defeat their own purposes.  One seems top hear more from the "moderate Muslims" more often than from the "moderate gays" (though, to be sure, this is probably because moderate gays are less passionate about being gay that moderate Muslims are about be Muslim).

In any case, the BBC has delivered. 
[/quote]

You call "Godwin's Law" on me and yet use a retarded analogy like this? Gays may be shrill, but comparing them to extremist muslims is simply dishonest to the extreme. Last time I checked, extremist muslims were saying "We want to destroy the West" whereas the "extremist" gays were saying "We are really  upset people want to slaughter us."

Anyway, I am not going to post anymore. This is circular, and it takes me 5 minutes to post a single post on Languish recently, for some reason.

[garbon]

I hear from moderate gays all the time.

[LaCroix]

i don't suppose individuals in uganda committing extreme cases of rape in general are executed, just homosexual-rape--right? i don't see a legitimate reason to penalize homosexuality just because the chances of spreading HIV are higher