I seriously admire fans for having such high regard for human rights abuses and are against this takeover
However, I highly doubt the ethical element of the debate will be disregarded if United are taken over by Sheikh Jassim/Qatar. If anything, United being such a big clog in people's lives it will come to the fore more frequently. The club is also based in Manchester and as such British laws will apply so no issues with LGBTQ or the women's team not being given support (City and PSG have no such problems).
Coming onto Sir Jim (Ineos) and Sheikh Jassim (Qatar) can simply both cheat FFP rules. We only generally associate states as capable of doing such possibly due to Manchester City which has created an in-built bias. There has been talk of other clubs being responsible for breaching FFP rules not owned by a state.
Quite simply if United are run well as has been said numerous times the club can compete with anyone on the planet even with cheats. I'm not even saying any owner should be denied making money from the club. Simply, allowing it time to develop its infrastructure, the debt burden and get best-in-class footballing people to run its footballing division. Personally, if these benchmarks are fulfilled I don't mind any owner taking over the club. When I go to games the owner will be the last thing on my mind. Even the Glazers were not relevant when as a club we were maintaining a high degree of success and the club was well run.
Now the debate is which owner can best achieve what we require. The answer to that will not be known until some time in the future. We have absolutely no control over the takeover process and it's hardly worth falling out over.
que sera, sera
"whatever happens, happens" (more literally "whatever will be, will be") Ostensibly employed to express a personal philosophy of fatalism and acceptance of the future.