Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Personal Background or Policy??

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Personal Background or Policy??

    After loosing the election, conservative party is looking for new leader. There are few contenders and one of the strong contenders is gay and few people are against it due to his sexuality.

    Would you support a leader in Pakistan on his policy or on his personal background? Let say if Imran Khan is a very good person eligible to run the country but happens to be gay so would you still vote for him?

    #2
    Khan Sahib, Imran Khan is not gay, he may be bi-sexual. I think Musharraf is a transgender. In any event, I think someone’s sexual orientation should not be a criterion for choosing a leader.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by khan_sahib:
      After loosing the election, conservative party is looking for new leader. There are few contenders and one of the strong contenders is gay and few people are against it due to his sexuality.

      Would you support a leader in Pakistan on his policy or on his personal background? Let say if Imran Khan is a very good person eligible to run the country but happens to be gay so would you still vote for him?

      Hell who cares if he is gay I will vote for a kafir if he/she is good for Pakistan.

      Comment


        #4
        Arent we supposed to elect a leader based on personal preferences? So if the personal preference of the majority of the population is against electing a homosexual, then why should we critique that? It was the opinion of the majority of the population that a homosexual should not be in power. So why is that wrong compared to a majority of the population saying otherwise?

        If the majority has indeed managed to keep a homosexual away from power because they dont like his homosexuality, thats democracy. The majority decides....so whats wrong with this decision, if they do take it?

        But now if we are going to dictate to the people as to what criteria they can use while electing a leader, and what criteria they cant, then we are effectively shutting down their ability to choose.

        Comment


          #5
          Hey, don't take it so seriously. The question is, given a choice, would you prefer if ppl elect a person based on his personal life or his policy issues.

          NYA thinks personality or sexuality is secondary to other major policy issues or leadership traits. Another may come in and ask as to how can a person who is screwed up in his personal life can possibly be a good leader. Yet another can come in and totally confuse the issue by saying I want both.

          This is democracy. You just need to express your opinion. No one is "going to dictate to the people as to what criteria they can use while electing a leader". Its just a discussion on your personal likes and dislikes

          Comment


            #6
            So lets say we elected gay leader/persident. How do you guys feel when he will kiss his boyfriend in public??? I saw this gay kissing each other at station and to be honest I felt sick.

            ------------------
            "Away from Eyes......Close to Heart"

            [This message has been edited by Insaaniat (edited June 28, 2001).]

            Comment


              #7
              It is the collective psyche that dictates who is good enough to be elected and that collective psyche has nothing to do with the idea of democracy. The majority of Americans thought (until the civil war) that slavery was OK. Now, were they right then? What happens is that some screwed up religious nonsense has made people blind of the fact that Homosexuals are not to be trusted and/or are incapable of performing certain tasks, which is a ludicrous proposition in my opinion. The fact that people are mature enough to look beyond someone’s sexual orientation is a result of democracy and openness, not an antecedent of it. Sometimes the collective psyche is so screwed that even the victims of that harm are beyond felling the affects of it. To give you an example, during the 1965 war between India and Pakistan, a war song became so popular:

              “Jang Khaid Nahi Hondi ZananiaN di” (War is not a game at what women are good at).

              Imagine this, a female singer (Noor Jahan) not realizing that this sexist bull**** is so infuriating but she felt rather proud to sing that song. Was she that stupid to realize it? Perhaps. The affects of collective psyche at its best.

              Comment

              Working...
              X