On 29 September the Warsaw Marathon collapsed, with the momentum blocking 7 districts of the city for most of the day. In the evening I saw signs, announcing the ban on stopping there next Sunday – this time due to the run "Run Warszawa" – the next large mass sports event.
Although the “largeness” concerns the degree of the difficulties alternatively than participation. Despite the spells of organizers on routes of this kind of gear (I compose on the basis of my own experience) there are mostly empty and no fans, but for any isolated passionates, and the number of participants on the city scale represents a fraction of the population. 7184 participated in the Warsaw Marathon. Let us besides number the participants for 10 km – 5354 people. Together we have about 12.5 1000 people. That's 0.7 percent of the city's population. Yet a large part of the participants have nothing to do with Warsaw.
Supporters of marathons in the mediate of the city have had the same arguments for years.
First of all, it's profits for the city. What? They're never able to tell. What is the profit of 12 1000 people moving within hours of Warsaw on closed streets?
Secondly, it is simply a promotion of a healthy lifestyle. Apart from the fact that moving on asphalt is highly unhealthy, this is another completely inert statement. How many people in peculiar have changed their lifestyle to a healthier 1 under the influence of a city block due to a marathon? While, of course, we will number off those who had to give themselves a Passenger Walking Day due to the fact that they could not decision either by car or by public transport. I would alternatively presume that the consequences of the marathon for average residents would be rejected alternatively than encouraged from running.
Thirdly – that it is the same usage of public space as in the case of demonstrations or spiritual ceremonies (there is always an absurd opposition here: marathon versus the procession of God's Body). That's evidently not true. Political demonstrations or spiritual ceremonies (the latter, without comparison, little burdensome than urban marathons) are the exercise of the freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution. Mass events – not at all. This is besides reflected in government that distinguishes conventions (the Convention Law) and mass events (the safety of Mass Events Act). A mass event (run, concert, sports competition) is not 1 of what can be called the essence of democracy. It's entertainment, only and only. amusement of any cannot make life grossly hard for others.
For the sake of order, it is essential to add that in Warsaw mass sporting events – not everyone is as onerous as a marathon – are well over a 100 in 1 year.
Fourthly, that “this is the case in the West.” As we know, the argument from the universality of any phenomenon is of no value in its assessment. In addition, marathons – besides much larger ones than Warsaw – are organized in different places in different ways, and there are different conditions in these places. For example, if we take fresh York or London, just a glance at the network of metro connections in both cities to realize that public transport there will be disrupted much little than in the Polish capital.
There's been so much dispute over the years. But it is worth noting the more general rule in this context. The case of marathons organised in many cities of Poland is just an example of its application: most are regularly terrorized for number groups. It is simply a dogma and distorted rule of respect for number rights. Let's think about this for a second.
Respect for minorities is to tolerate them. Toleration means putting up with, agreeing to be – not praising or joyful apology of these, and surely not adapting to them. Tolerare means ‘to put up with’. In modern democracy, it is simply a "no discrimination", but the deficiency of discrimination in the right sense of the word means only that these groups must have the same rights as all others. No less, no more.
Take the most emotional example: marriage. The fact that Poland does not recognise specified a thing as "gay marriage" is not an example of discrimination, due to the fact that the institution of matrimony is absolutely accessible to everyone – as far as we are actually talking about marriage: a relation between a female and a man, confirmed by a suitable sacrament or a civilian act. No 1 defends getting married to Mr. Robert Biedron, but demanding that he marry a man makes the same sense as demanding that a blind man can get a driver's license. As a driver’s licence requires comparatively good eyesight, so a man and a female are needed for marriage.
So the problem begins erstwhile marginal groups begin to request that for their visions the full strategy be rebuilt and that most adapt to their needs. That's how the marathon thing works. No 1 says no 1 can run. Yeah, no 1 even prohibits cross-country fanaticism. With our wellness care system, you can even completely smash the ponds at the taxpayer's expense by moving (it's interesting that the same people who claim that in addition to their wellness problems should pay, for example, smokers, do not have the same request for sworn urban runners who are waiting for the bank serious orthopaedic problems). Only that no 1 has the right to request to set up half the city for his hobby and make life hard for hundreds of thousands of people.
You want to run around town? There you go. Take a tour of the park or the stadium. You want your gay partner to have the right to look into your medical records? delight kindly, there are procedures that let this – adequate authorisation is sufficient. Yeah, you don't even request to confirm it with a notary. There's no discrimination here.
Unfortunately, the most discriminated against is the silent majority.
Luke Warches
