SWITZERLAND 2013 - Takasa - You and me

[Impressive]

1 The Salvation army represent a specific religion

2 They are against homosexuality

Do I need to say more

As long as they do not insult to homosexuals or another religions, everyone is free to what to think or what to believe. And to the rest, there is only one exists; respect. Eventually this is not religious contest or homosexuality support event. When homosexual people say "We want respect!", they paralelly must respect to other side. I haven't seen them when insulting homosexuals or Christian, Jewishes, Muslims or atheists.

The point is, respect. Eventually this is a song contest.

 

[Paulo3044]

As long as they do not insult to homosexuals or another religions, everyone is free to what to think or what to believe. And to the rest, there is only one exists; respect. Eventually this is not religious contest or homosexuality support event. When homosexual people say "We want respect!", they paralelly must respect to other side. I haven't seen them when insulting homosexuals or Christian, Jewishes, Muslims or atheists.

The point is, respect. Eventually this is a song contest.

I agree with you.

 

[Terence]

I mean, you support those who might be hiding their personal thoughts on gays and despise those who openly state their views?
It means, what you dislike about them is not their opinion but their guts to speak out.
The best solution is to only mind the song and not their personal beliefs.

No, that's not the point... the point is, this is a SONG contest and I don't care if someone is homophobe or not as at the end of the day, the song matters (well... for most countries) but there was no need for this controversy to be brought up - unless it was done deliberately for media attention.

 

[Mickey]

1 The Salvation army represent a specific religion

2 They are against homosexuality

Do I need to say more

That's a load of rubbish. The name and uniforms weren't banned because of the Salvation Army's position on homosexuality. The political rules don't work like that. Nowhere does it say "You can't participate at ESC if EBU disagree with your personal opinions".

Heilsarmee were banned for the same reason that Facebook was banned last year. They were deemed to be a promotional act. It was encouraging people to join the Salvation Army and you can't promote your group. Whether that group is The Salvation Army, The Boy Scouts or The Women's Institute and what that group thinks of gays is irrelevant.

 

[escYOUnited]

 

[CypriotGirl]

Ok, they might be Christians and homophobes, neither of which I am. But, so what? Should it retain you from voting for them?
Can you proove that Farid Mammadov from Azerbaijan also is not a homophobe? Or Gianluca from Malta? Zlata from Ukraine? Maybe they also hate homosexuals but just don't talk about it.
Even Carola, the queen of gays, was proved to find same-sex relationships unnatural(tho she later denied having said that).
I mean, you support those who might be hiding their personal thoughts on gays and despise those who openly state their views?
It means, what you dislike about them is not their opinion but their guts to speak out.
The best solution is to only mind the song and not their personal beliefs.

I totally agree with this. In the song, they don't say anything against homosexuals or anybody, if they belong to an organization that has some beliefs, it's up to them. Nobody must tell you what to do. If you want to love or hate somebody or something, as long as you don't harm your neighbors, nobody must tell you not to...

 

[MyHeartIsYours]

I wasnt expecting to like this but it's fab, good luck Switzerland

 

[cassio]

As long as they do not insult to homosexuals or another religions, everyone is free to what to think or what to believe. And to the rest, there is only one exists; respect. Eventually this is not religious contest or homosexuality support event. When homosexual people say "We want respect!", they paralelly must respect to other side. I haven't seen them when insulting homosexuals or Christian, Jewishes, Muslims or atheists.

The point is, respect. Eventually this is a song contest.

I agree with you, So do you think that is was wrong that ESC broad told them to change close and their name, because it was like a political/religious brand???

 

[A-lister]

I have nothing against them belonging to the Salvation Army brand, as long as they don't stand for hate or spread it then where's the problem? And since when was the Salvation Army notorious for being hateful? On contrary it's probably one the nicest religious organizations one can find.

In fact I even find it quite refreshing in today's Europe with a bunch of friendly devoted Christians entering as a group on the ESC stage.

 

[cassio]

Originally Posted by cassio
1 The Salvation army represent a specific religion

2 They are against homosexuality

Do I need to say more



That's a load of rubbish. The name and uniforms weren't banned because of the Salvation Army's position on homosexuality. The political rules don't work like that. Nowhere does it say "You can't participate at ESC if EBU disagree with your personal opinions".

Heilsarmee were banned for the same reason that Facebook was banned last year. They were deemed to be a promotional act. It was encouraging people to join the Salvation Army and you can't promote your group. Whether that group is The Salvation Army, The Boy Scouts or The Women's Institute and what that group thinks of gays is irrelevant.
---------------------------------------------------------

I think you have lost track of context..... what I wrote was an answer to someone who couldn't see a political issue in the Salvation army...... I think that the name and uniform was banned because religion/politic issues are not allowed in the ESC.......

If they would have represented The salvation army I believe questions, which has already has been said, has nothing to do with the ESC would have been asked !!!

So my answer still is the name Salvation army as a name is a political issue because:

1 The Salvation army represent a specific religion

2 They are against homosexuality

Do I need to say more


---------------------------------------------

Yes I agree ........ these two examples are example of political issues only!!!
regarding Salvation army
not necessarily the specific reason why they had to change their name.

 

[MyHeartIsYours]

I absolutely disagree with the Salvation Army's views on homosexuality, however I will always remember them for the fact that after my Nanna had left an abusive home in Ireland and was homeless and hungry in London in the 1950s, they gave her a place to stay and fed her until she could find work. If this band is Salvation Army then it is not something they should be ashamed of and in any case, since when has an organisation's stance on issues meant that all their members think the same way?

 

[cassio]

dobb post

 

[A-lister]

So my answer still is the name Salvation army as a name is a political issue because:

[/COLOR]1 The Salvation army represent a specific religion

2 They are against homosexuality

Do I need to say more

Huh? In what way is it a political issue to be against homosexuality? (just generally speaking... I'm not saying I agree with being against homosexuals, afterall then I would be against myself aswell ).. And are you even sure they are (and with they in particular I mean the members of this group?... afterall it's the members of this group that will enter ESC and not the whole Salvation Army), or is it just some assumption based on the whole Salvation Army connection?

And what about all the other participants then? Should we do some opinion check-ups on them or something? Afterall we know nothing of where the members of this group stand on different issues, but we know just as little about most of the other participants, yet people use some guilty-by-association theories to label the Swiss participants as something they might not be at all... so what about the rest of the participants in ESC then? Or should we simply ban Christians to enter the contest or what because some assume they dislike homosexuals? (which might not be true at all).

As far as I'm concerned none of the group's members have spread any hatred towards homosexuals, and they did change their band-name etc. in accordance to EBU's rules. So I'm confused here, where is the issue here or do people just use their prejudices to judge them? I could get the outrage if they'd actually stated something fishy or if the Salvation Army in general is some notorious gay bashers, but I can't see any of this really. As far as Salvation Army goes they might not be pro-gay, but I hardly find them gay hostile though... but some people seem to think that for instance being against gay marriage is the same as being hostile towards homosexuals... which is a very far-stretched view imo.

 

[CypriotGirl]

As I understood, Salvation Army might not allow homosexuals to be its members, and they might be non-supportive to homosexual's lifestyle and values, BUT I don't think they are doing something against homosexual individuals, or having any personal problem with them. It's up to them to support or being against some things, as long as they don't do any harm. Homosexuality and homosexual individuals are two different things. It's like saying an organization that does not allow smokers to be members of it hates all smokers and is against all smokers just because it might not support smoking. That's how I understood it anyway.

 

[cassio]

Hi A-lister

This is from Wikipedia (im sorry but I do not have the time verify it, but I believe its true):

In 2012, the Salvation Army placed its Positional Statement on Homosexuality "Under review" after receiving adverse publicity about the statement.[SUP][22][/SUP] Prior to 2012, its position was as below.Practicing homosexuals are "ineligible for full membership" in The Salvation Army.[SUP][23][/SUP] The organization will not appoint 'practising' homosexuals to posts as ministers, preferring heterosexuals "whose values are consistent with the church's philosophy."[SUP][24][/SUP]​

I think this is a discrimination against homosexuals in the Salvation Army... and therefore i think that it is a political issue and not just a personal issue. (Its a human right (In my opinion to be treated equally no matter of sex, sexual preferences, race and religious believe)

However being against homosexuals is not a political issue as long as you treat hetrosexuals and homosexuals equal ....

So I should have written that they are discriminating homosexuals instead of just that they are against homosexuals.

however I want to stress I do not believe that even being discriminating homosexuals is the reason why they had to change their name .... maybe just because of the name being a organization or if it was because of political issues they certain have them!!.​

 

[ParadiseES]

As I understood, Salvation Army might not allow homosexuals to be its members, and they might be non-supportive to homosexual's lifestyle and values, BUT I don't think they are doing something against homosexual individuals, or having any personal problem with them. It's up to them to support or being against some things, as long as they don't do any harm. Homosexuality and homosexual individuals are two different things. It's like saying an organization that does not allow smokers to be members of it hates all smokers and is against all smokers just because it might not support smoking. That's how I understood it anyway.

Well, it's not the same. At least, I don't see it like you say. But anyway, as long as they don't hurt anyone and have a good behaviour with everyone in Malmö, there shouldn't be any problem with them.

+ the song is wonderful!

 

[A-lister]

Hi A-lister

This is from Wikipedia (im sorry but I do not have the time verify it, but I believe its true):

In 2012, the Salvation Army placed its Positional Statement on Homosexuality "Under review" after receiving adverse publicity about the statement.[SUP][22][/SUP] Prior to 2012, its position was as below.Practicing homosexuals are "ineligible for full membership" in The Salvation Army.[SUP][23][/SUP] The organization will not appoint 'practising' homosexuals to posts as ministers, preferring heterosexuals "whose values are consistent with the church's philosophy."[SUP][24][/SUP]​

I think this is a discrimination against homosexuals in the Salvation Army... and therefore i think that it is a political issue and not just a personal issue. (Its a human right (In my opinion to be treated equally no matter of sex, sexual preferences, race and religious believe)

However being against homosexuals is not a political issue as long as you treat hetrosexuals and homosexuals equal ....

So I should have written that they are discriminating homosexuals instead of just that they are against homosexuals.

however I want to stress I do not believe that even being discriminating homosexuals is the reason why they had to change their name .... maybe just because of the name being a organization or if it was because of political issues they certain have them!!.​

Firstly it says "prior 2012" (maybe it has changed?). Secondly that doesn't equal spreading hate or being hostile towards homosexuals?

I mean there are women groups that just allow female members, and obviously various of other political, NGO, religious and various interest groups that only allow members with their political views or whatever, but does that really equal being hostile or spreading hate towards others? I don't think so, it really depends on the case.

I mean if the message of the Salvation Army would explicitly include hateful opinions on gays etc, then I could agree with your concern, but as far as I'm concerned that's not really the case here.

Also, we still don't know where these particular people stand on these issues anyways.

 

[cassio]

As I understood, Salvation Army might not allow homosexuals to be its members, and they might be non-supportive to homosexual's lifestyle and values, BUT I don't think they are doing something against homosexual individuals, or having any personal problem with them. It's up to them to support or being against some things, as long as they don't do any harm. Homosexuality and homosexual individuals are two different things. It's like saying an organization that does not allow smokers to be members of it hates all smokers and is against all smokers just because it might not support smoking. That's how I understood it anyway.

Hi in regarding to my post I think that they are doing something wrong in regarding to human rights. I do not believe that it is a human right to be able to smoke every were . How ever I think that this tread is now becoming more of a politic issue that of the entry from Switzerland can we find somewhere else to continue the discussion ?????

 

[A-lister]

Hi in regarding to my post I think that they are doing something wrong in regarding to human rights. I do not believe that it is a human right to be able to smoke every were . How ever I think that this tread is now becoming more of a politic issue that of the entry from Switzerland can we find somewhere else to continue the discussion ?????

Is it a human right to be able to enter every political or any type of organization in the world??? I don't agree...

In Sweden we have for instance "Afro-Swedish National Association" where only people with some sort of African origin are allowed as members... I mean yeah it's racist... but then again is it a human right to be part of that group as a white person for instance? Tricky...

All I'm saying all organizations have their membership rules, if all people could be part of all organizations, then obviously there wouldn't exist any organizations in the end because nothing would differ one from the other.

I do however oppose any organization which actively spreads hate in one form or another.

 

[cassio]

Firstly it says "prior 2012" (maybe it has changed?). Secondly that doesn't equal spreading hate or being hostile towards homosexuals?

I mean there are women groups that just allow female members, and obviously various of other political, NGO, religious and various interest groups that only allow members with their political views or whatever, but does that really equal being hostile or spreading hate towards others? I don't think so, it really depends on the case.

I mean if the message of the Salvation Army would explicitly include hateful opinions on gays etc, then I could agree with your concern, but as far as I'm concerned that's not really the case here.

Also, we still don't know where these particular people stand on these issues anyways.

26.11.2012 Salvation Army's Red Kettle Holiday Campaign Takes Heat From Gay Rights Activists

I would like to sent more links and comment on your answer but lets find anoter place than this tread