129
submitted 1 year ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

The world’s top chess federation has ruled that transgender women cannot compete in its official events for females until an assessment of gender change is made by its officials.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] skymtf@pricefield.org 6 points 1 year ago

I'm just saying if your compromise involves throwing a minority under the bus, your just a speedbump on the road to fascism.

[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Eh. Just because some compromise is bad does not mean all compromises are bad. Every situation is unique, and it's not like compromise is murder or something.

Democracy outranks human rights. The human rights were put there in the first place by the democracy, and can be amended by it as well. It completely outranks them, unless you believe they are "god-given" or something.

This is why compromise within your own political system, in certain cases, retains value. If your faction is not strong enough, as trans folks in international chess probably aren't, then it's a tacit acknowledgement of your right to exist.

Assuming the previous position was an outright ban, anyway. I don't actually know if it was or not.

[-] livus@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Democracy outranks human rights. The human rights were put there in the first place by the democracy, and can be amended by it as well. It completely outranks them, unless you believe they are “god-given” or something.

Just have to chime in here.

Human rights are fundamental and intrinsic. They can't be "outranked."

Legislating for them and enforcing them is due to institutions such as governments (and in an international context the ICC if, say, the government has become genocidal).

[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Right. Which is why they're doing the uyghurs so much good right now. Those intrinsic rights sure are protecting them.

Point being, they're only intrinsic because we say so.

[-] livus@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think I see what's going wrong in this conversation.

By definition, "rights" can be legal, social, or ethical.

To you, they are only a legal thing and if they don't exist in law or custom, then to you they don't exist.

But to me, (and others here) they also have an ethical dimension and exist as an ethical value independent of the legal or social useage.

Saying ethics depend on laws and customs would be moral relativism (which is a tricky thing to hold for most people, because of the implications around stuff like child rape and murder being ok if everyone was doing it).

[-] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Those Uyghurs had and have rights whether the Chinese government knows it or not. Bad things happening doesn't make those things suddenly not-bad.

Point being, they're only intrinsic because we say so.

The sky is only blue because we decided on the word "blue" for that frequency of light, and there's plenty of other things that are the way they are just because we say so.

And if this isn't just a "I just don't think 'rights' are the correct word" semantic argument for you here, please refer back to the first two sentences.

[-] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Democracy outranks human rights.

I don't recall any part of the bill of rights saying "this doesn't apply in cases where it's unpopular"

[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The whole thing was put there via voting. It's the first ten amendments to the constitution.

It's the law of the land. Democracy does not mean you can ignore laws you disagree with.

[-] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

The whole thing was put there via voting

I mean, a) no, a whole ass war's worth of violence was a necessary element, b) we don't let a simple majority vote change those fundamental human rights, we make amending our constitution very difficult and put important stuff in there that probably shouldn't be changed for a reason

[-] Candelestine@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Well, yea, the war put the voting system in place. After some initial hiccups getting started, the bill of rights was one of the first things voted on.

Just because the amendment process is difficult does not make it undemocratic. Note, I'm trying to be objective here, not say that one is more valuable or important than another. Simply that one is functionally more powerful.

this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
129 points (100.0% liked)

News

23367 readers
2787 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS