Political Billboards on Mainland

[Luna Bliss]

Really, this provides a perfect example for what governance would need to deal with, and it can't be written easily into the rules.

Is this person hateful and trying to harm others, or are they just dumb as a rock?  (they'd need to ascertain via any sign)  Likely they'd be more lenient in the latter case.

Edited September 15 by Luna Bliss

[Luna Bliss]

HATE and discrimination is not a valid opinion!  And with that I am out of here..

[Love Zhaoying]

27 minutes ago, Coffee Pancake said:

32 minutes ago, Cynite00 said:

Yes, I will go as far as to tolerate people displaying Nazi flags, or the Union Jack, and the LGBTQ+ flag .........

Think we're done here.

It's a good opportunity for learning, though. 

 

[Love Zhaoying]

4 hours ago, Fluffy Sharkfin said:

This wouldn't even be an issue if we had a governing body in SL with opposing parties and elections, etc.

There'd be no room for RL politics because we'd all be too busy yelling at each other for a bunch of different (but equally frivolous and nonsensical) reasons fabricated to distract us from how the people in charge are screwing us all equally. 😏

Are you running for President of Second Life? Will you be able to use political signs?

[Cynite00]

26 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Nobody has ever tried to deny marriage for a straight person though, so why would you feel the need to affirm your preference?  You've never been hurt for your preferences while gay people have been denied their rights.  This shows, really, that you don't understand the underlying issues here.

(Sorry) The argument made assumes:

That the only reason to express support for a type of relationship is if it has been previously denied or persecuted. This ignores other potential motivations for expression, such as cultural or personal values. `

That response also implies that affirming one type of relationship necessarily comes at the expense of another, which is not inherently true.

Edited September 15 by Cynite00
Corrected as it is not meant to be taken personally.

[Luna Bliss]

1 minute ago, Cynite00 said:

20 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Nobody has ever tried to deny marriage for a straight person though, so why would you feel the need to affirm your preference?  You've never been hurt for your preferences while gay people have been denied their rights.  This shows, really, that you don't understand the underlying issues here.

You assume:

That the only reason to express support for a type of relationship is if it has been previously denied or persecuted. This ignores other potential motivations for expression, such as cultural or personal values. `

I'm not assuming that at all.

Where I am coming from is a belief that we should not steal from others. We should not deny others the same rights we have, preventing them from living their life as they see fit.  It's fine if you hold the opinion they are wrong -- what's not fine is when you enact laws that deprive another of their agency.

[Love Zhaoying]

3 hours ago, WeFlossDaily said:

18 hours ago, Sammy Huntsman said:

You are responsible for walking away or even doing something about it to avoid the issue. 

In your silence you agree

I am reminded of the "SILENCE=DEATH" campaign that was used during the AIDS crisis. That was certainly political. While those signs may be allowed in SL, I assume most younger people would not understand what they were about (in the previous use during the 80's).

[Garnet Psaltery]

46 minutes ago, Cynite00 said:

Yes, I will go as far as to tolerate people displaying [...] the Union Jack

I put up the Union Flag in celebration of my nation, and in gratitude for people who were heroic in its defence.  There is absolutely no political statement there. 

[WeFlossDaily]

2 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

"SILENCE=DEATH"

would be a terrifying billboard. It's simple and I could see it grabbing ppls attention back in the '80s. I'm not sure of the politics involved with it. It must have happened before I was born.

'In your silence you agree' is a dyslexic variant of 'Silence gives consent.' I believe it can be attributed to Plato.

[Arielle Popstar]

2 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

Nobody has ever tried to deny marriage for a straight person though, so why would you feel the need to affirm your preference?  You've never been hurt for your preferences while gay people have been denied their rights.  This shows, really, that you don't understand the underlying issues here.

That would be incorrect as through the ages there have been a great many reasons for why even straight people were not allowed to marry ie: caste/class, race, religiosity, age, familial, genetic, political affiliations, non arranged marriages, bigamist, etc.

So much so in fact that many ceremonies include the question to the audience whether anyone present has a reason for why the two marrying should not be allowed to wed.