So does his RL political views matter to a Games Politics?

If you want a no BS candidate, Fon's your man.

+3 votes from me.

So 12 million bad, 120,000 good? but besides that.

But yes his personal views may make him come undone once elected but to refuse him the ability is to discriminate against him, just as he would discriminate against others.

The players yes, VERY yes. If the players don't like it hell yeah we don't vote for the neo-**** scum.

But CCP no.

You mean besides, EU law, US law, AU law?

You are literally hiding behind scale.

Yes the lets call it old german party as it censors it, went out of their way to exterminate, Jews, Gays, Intellectuals, Communists, and the list goes on, using their military might. The current war is killing a race of people en-mass by going well we want those guys so we will just kill everyone in the area with smart bombs and drones.

The reason may be different an smaller scale but the effect is just the same.

You could have saved me the hassle of re typing, it is in GD atm

But check out the Handbook on European non-discrimination law section 3.5.2 page 81
"The right to freedom of association has also been taken to include protection
for the formation of political parties, which the ECtHR has accorded a high level
of protection against interference.

Similarly, as noted in Chapter 4.11., any interference with the right to free speech in the context of political debate is
scrutinised very closely."

So yes the neo-bloody-**** party is protected under EU law.

Well how about you show me these lovely laws that allow organizations, excluding other political and religious organizations to discriminate? Or you might want to read further down in that document I told you to look up as it says exactly the opossite.

But I am happy to see your references.

Well how about you show me these lovely laws that allow organizations, excluding other political and religious organizations to discriminate? Or you might want to read further down in that document I told you to look up as it says exactly the opossite.

But I am happy to see your references.

But on the other I will not back down on a persons right to live without discrimination be it from sex, race, sexual persuasion, religion, disability or political affiliation or lets be frank any other form of discrimination.

do I think neo-nasis suck, yep personally I do but they still have the right to freedom of speech and political association that they would happily deny others.

Any view that results in the deaths of any innocent civilians is unwelcome in any civilized society, let alone the person themself.

Yes you absolutely do and I encourage you to use that freedom.
It is just CCP who cannot exclude them from running in the election on the basis of political association but yes everyone really should make fun of them.

No actually I am waiting for your quote that expressly says an organization can discriminate.

The reality is that personal freedoms have taken such a battering in the last 20 years that now people consider freedom of speech and freedom of association to be crimes these days as this thread perfectly well shows.

Do I believe in his values frankly not at all, but I do believe in his right to have those views and everyone elses right to mock him for them, but not discriminate.

Actually their are laws in the US and Australia that tell you very clearly how you cannot have sex just as the EU has

"The term discrimination first entered EU discourse in the form of its prohibition on the basis of nationality in Article 18 TFEU. Article 19 TFEU, introduced as Article 13 EC by the Treaty of Amsterdam, extended the grounds on which discrimination is prohibited to sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age and sexual orientation. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as enacted by the Treaty of Lisbon on 1 December 2009, includes in Article 21(1) a general prohibition of GÇÿany discrimination based on any ground, such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, religion or belief, political or any other opinion, membership of a national minority, property, birth, disability, age or sexual orientationGÇÖ."

as I said care to find me one that says organisations have the right to discriminate?

And yes Nulla poena sine lege does occur in some parts of the world.

Parts of Australia to be specific.

Shame I am not quoting from there but you are obviously under the belief that anyone who is not a government can discriminate. So I will no longer try to break your illusion.

Ok lets take Sexual positions beyond missionary are illegal in Washington, D.C.

So yes you have a choice, no sex or missionary, it does not specify you can it just makes everything else illegal.

No the opposite being not, no penalty without a law, where a specific dead is not written so it cannot be punished (Victorian Law) and where they assume a best fit (Western Australian Law)

research illegal video surveillance should tell you what you need

In Victoria if the crime is not on the books they cannot charge you with a crime, while in Western Australia they can.

Well in that case yeah, stupid US laws are not of of my hobbies.

The fact that Australia has some stupid laws is.

For example you can have a **** on the side of the road behind your passenger rear tire while parked on the side of the road so long as you do not look up.

Go search Australian High court as so far you have managed to provide 0 other than badgering.

Well here is an easy dumb law for you.

Western Australia still has the death penalty for mass murder and mass ****. It cannot be used as it would be found to be cruel and unusual punishment by the high court.

Yes these laws do exist. The American one honestly no idea, the Australian ones yes they do.

Same as drink driving in a babies pram, law exists in Australia.

Ok how about Directive 2006/54/EC that the countries laws come from?

So your now saying that anyone who defends some one like him should not be associated with.

So you are saying never talk to barristers, solicitors, judges, politicians, hell anyone how votes for a persons rights.

Funny I am standing up for a scums personal rights and it is your limited views I feel sorry for.

keep reading that is only the top

How about we go for a simple base mark

Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights

Article 10 GÇô Freedom of expression

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.