Gays May Be Prosecuted at 2014 Olympics

[Joda_Muto]

Hmmm… For some reason, when I clicked “new thread” it posted my question as a reply to this thread, which I never visited. Sorry for any confusion.

 

[VanSensei]

Basically I am asking, is there anywhere that I can read about the “Russian Anti-Gay Law” from an unbiased source?

I don’t even know what the law actually is or says, just everyone’s opinions about what they think or feel it is.

I just want to know what it is and what it does, no opinions, just facts.

Unfortunately, the media elite in the U.S. is very pro-homosexuality, therefore I can’ really trust any of their pieces on it, as it will be twisted to fit their agenda, (assuming the actual law is different than what the media is portraying it as.)

Thank you,

The law just says that homosexual propaganda is illegal in Russia. That’s all.

The homophobic attitude and beating of gays is part of the general attitude of the Russian people towards homosexuality, which is hostile. The government has nothing to do with it.

 

[gilliam]

Basically I am asking, is there anywhere that I can read about the “Russian Anti-Gay Law” from an unbiased source?

I don’t even know what the law actually is or says, just everyone’s opinions about what they think or feel it is.

I just want to know what it is and what it does, no opinions, just facts.

Unfortunately, the media elite in the U.S. is very pro-homosexuality, therefore I can’ really trust any of their pieces on it, as it will be twisted to fit their agenda, (assuming the actual law is different than what the media is portraying it as.)

Thank you,

The Russian law, signed in July 2013 by President Vladimir Putin, outlaws pro-gay “propaganda” that could be accessible to minors.

In June 2013 the national parliament (the State Duma) unanimously adopted, and President Vladimir Putin signed, a nationwide law banning distribution of “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations” among minors. The law does not explicitly mention the word “homosexuality”, but instead uses the euphemism “non-traditional sexual relations”. Under the statute it is effectively illegal to hold any gay pride events, speak in defense of gay rights, or say that gay relationships are equal to heterosexual relationships.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Russia#Bans_on_.22homosexual_propaganda_to_minors.22

You may also like to read:How Russia enforces its ban on gay 'propaganda’

 

[Joda_Muto]

The law just says that homosexual propaganda is illegal in Russia. That’s all.

The homophobic attitude and beating of gays is part of the general attitude of the Russian people towards homosexuality, which is hostile. The government has nothing to do with it.

Hmmm, I am curious if the law attempts to define “propaganda.” And under what situations the law would be enforced. I am assuming any type of public demonstration as children would be present.

 

[Joda_Muto]

The Russian law, signed in July 2013 by President Vladimir Putin, outlaws pro-gay “propaganda” that could be accessible to minors.

In June 2013 the national parliament (the State Duma) unanimously adopted, and President Vladimir Putin signed, a nationwide law banning distribution of “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations” among minors. The law does not explicitly mention the word “homosexuality”, but instead uses the euphemism “non-traditional sexual relations”. Under the statute it is effectively illegal to hold any gay pride events, speak in defense of gay rights, or say that gay relationships are equal to heterosexual relationships.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Russia#Bans_on_.22homosexual_propaganda_to_minors.22

You may also like to read:How Russia enforces its ban on gay 'propaganda’

Thanks for the info, I will be digging a little deeper.

 

[trnsvrsprocess]

Hello!

Does the Russian Patriarch’s support for the anti-gay law affect Christianity’s image in some sense for non-Christians to label us ‘homophobic’ much worse that they’re actually doing and relativist (and uninformed) Christians to be more hostile to the Church in general? If it does, how can we counter it?

And one more thing: what’s the relationship between the gay persecution and the anti-gay law? Are these persecutions happening prior to the law or even before it?

I don’t agree with the violence against gay people but I understand that the Russian government consider the traditional way as part of their culture. (And it is ours, too, I live in a dominantly Catholic country. Though gay men and women are widely accepted, still, they are not allowed to marry a person of the same gender as theirs.) However, I don’t have any stand regarding the criminalization. Is the criminalization only for the protection of the youth, or is it a criminalization for being a gay man or woman?

God bless!

 

[Geist]

No one is prosecuting people for being gay. They would be prosecuted for propagandizing their disgusting lifestyle; as they should be in Russia which has no 1st Amendment.

 

[Darryl1958]

The Russian law, signed in July 2013 by President Vladimir Putin, outlaws pro-gay “propaganda” that could be accessible to minors.

In June 2013 the national parliament (the State Duma) unanimously adopted, and President Vladimir Putin signed, a nationwide law banning distribution of “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relations” among minors. The law does not explicitly mention the word “homosexuality”, but instead uses the euphemism “non-traditional sexual relations”. Under the statute it is effectively illegal to hold any gay pride events, speak in defense of gay rights, or say that gay relationships are equal to heterosexual relationships.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Russia#Bans_on_.22homosexual_propaganda_to_minors.22

You may also like to read:How Russia enforces its ban on gay 'propaganda’

This really brings in perspective the difficulties of legislating something like a generalized ban on propaganda. There was the case of the fourteen year old writing to the woman setting up a conversation which in effect was about taking the gun out of her mouth and finding a better way to deal with her homosexuality than killing herself. Any response of compassion or encouragement or frank discussion of what is happening becomes a chargeable offense.

Granted, Russia does not have the same culture of freedom of expression that has been championed by the American revolution, and the intentions of this bill may be both worthwhile and pristine, but as soon as government starts running interference with people’s communications, the transgression is against the word itself.

There has been a failure in the West all the same that Russia, and a lot of the third world in fact, is reacting against. It was never a failure of the law, for the law of freedom of expression has preceded the problem being dealt with.
The problem lies in the failure of the West to uphold the community standards that large segments of the society uphold in their personal lives. Frankly, most liberals are as socially conservative in their private lives as social conservatives are. In order for them to preach against what they practiced, it took a concerted effort from the leftist activists to demonize traditional morality and community standards as a right wing conspiracy to shove morality down people’s throats.

 

[VanSensei]

Hello!

Does the Russian Patriarch’s support for the anti-gay law affect Christianity’s image in some sense for non-Christians to label us ‘homophobic’ much worse that they’re actually doing and relativist (and uninformed) Christians to be more hostile to the Church in general? If it does, how can we counter it?

And one more thing: what’s the relationship between the gay persecution and the anti-gay law? Are these persecutions happening prior to the law or even before it?

I don’t agree with the violence against gay people but I understand that the Russian government consider the traditional way as part of their culture. (And it is ours, too, I live in a dominantly Catholic country. Though gay men and women are widely accepted, still, they are not allowed to marry a person of the same gender as theirs.) However, I don’t have any stand regarding the criminalization. Is the criminalization only for the protection of the youth, or is it a criminalization for being a gay man or woman?

God bless!

In some sense, it does because I imagine some of the influential Russian Orthodox clergy are genuinely homophobic, that is, denigrating the homosexual person for something they can’t change.

Russia as a whole is vehemently against homosexuality, and the persecution has always been there. It’s because Russia’s birth rate/gender ratio is low thanks to a bunch of factors, including their scathing population loss in the Second Wold War

 

[seekerz]

But who defines what propagandizing is? That paragon of virtues - Putin?

 

[seekerz]

Last I heard the Russian people had trouble even participating in free and fair elections…but if it’s really them deciding, then I congratulate them on the freedom to choose.

 

[curlycool89]

But who defines what propagandizing is? That paragon of virtues - Putin?

I think you could go with the general idea of propaganda. At it’s base, it’s an aggressive promotion of some position - in this case of “non-traditional sexual relations”.

Propaganda is generally something we talk about in the context of war. (Just a note, I’m using these examples because they are well known history, not to make a comparison) The Nazi’s had propaganda about superiority (and other BS) and how Jews (and other “undesirables”) were less human. On there other side, the Allies had propaganda about how the Nazi’s were evil and how we all needed to stop them at any cost.

Generally, propaganda involves taking a particular idea (ex - blood purity) and amplifying it up to 11. The ones that get the best traction play to pre-existing prejudices (there was an underlying anti-semitism throughout much of Europe leading up to WW2. Hitler himself was inspired by antisemitism in the slums of Vienna).

So you could say that the propaganda that the law is banning is the underlying assumption that is behind the entire gay rights movement - that all sexualities and sexual activities are equal. (Post-modernism, of course, accepts this claim on it’s face because post-modernism is a lazy philosophy that denies all purpose and orderliness and likes equality because it gives feelings of warm fuzzes)

The entire point of propaganda is to take something that might be difficult for people to accept (or are likely to reject) and put it in nice, pretty, non-threatening packaging. The next step is to turn the tables and start insinuating (and later explicitly saying) that people who disagree with this viewpoint are in the backwards minority and are wrong.

It’s really not that difficult to conceive propaganda actually. You start out with acknowledging the existence of such beliefs in the general population (“There are gay people around you…”), then you talk about how much they’re like you to fashion an emotional bond ("… who are just like you, …") and how virtuous they are ("… they go to work, they pay taxes, they help old ladies carry their groceries."). Maybe you talk about how misunderstood they are and how they want the exact same thing you want, “someone to love and live their life with”, with the only tiny, microscopic, insignificant addition begin that they want someone of the same sex.

Then you start to explain the why using culturally accepted norms. “Straight people like to get laid. They use contraception and the morning-after pill (and if that fails, abortions), so you can see that sex for them is all about having fun and feeling good”. Once you’ve accepted that assertion, then it’s a short hop to “gay people have sex for fun too!” You talk about how eventually people want to get married and raise a family “because they love each other so much”, and then you point to “it’s the same for gay people”. For a society that has nearly no idea about the ordered purpose of sex and the sacredness of marriage, it’s an easy sell.

Now, there are several fallacies up there (starting with the underlying assumption itself) and lots of information left out, but you don’t talk about those because it’s all about promotion. The next step after is, of course, attacking people who don’t share this view for being backwards (a la GLADD). The more important and influential people you bring to your side the easier this becomes and the harsher the attacks can become.

As you can see, it’s hard to teach the Church’s position because not only do we have to explain why homosexual activity is wrong (dis-ordered), we have to explain to society why their acceptance of sex outside of marriage is wrong and why contraceptive sex is wrong. Let’s face it, explaining to people why a man and a woman should only have non-artificial-contraceptive sex within a marriage (which, by the way, is for life and not dissolvable) is itself an uphill battle.

 

[seekerz]

My nose ain’t that long, I’m afraid . More’s the pity.

 

[seekerz]

I think you could go with the general idea of propaganda. At it’s base, it’s an aggressive promotion of some position - in this case of “non-traditional sexual relations”.

Propaganda is generally something we talk about in the context of war. (Just a note, I’m using these examples because they are well known history, not to make a comparison) The Nazi’s had propaganda about superiority (and other BS) and how Jews (and other “undesirables”) were less human. On there other side, the Allies had propaganda about how the Nazi’s were evil and how we all needed to stop them at any cost.

Generally, propaganda involves taking a particular idea (ex - blood purity) and amplifying it up to 11. The ones that get the best traction play to pre-existing prejudices (there was an underlying anti-semitism throughout much of Europe leading up to WW2. Hitler himself was inspired by antisemitism in the slums of Vienna).

So you could say that the propaganda that the law is banning is the underlying assumption that is behind the entire gay rights movement - that all sexualities and sexual activities are equal. (Post-modernism, of course, accepts this claim on it’s face because post-modernism is a lazy philosophy that denies all purpose and orderliness and likes equality because it gives feelings of warm fuzzes)

The entire point of propaganda is to take something that might be difficult for people to accept (or are likely to reject) and put it in nice, pretty, non-threatening packaging. The next step is to turn the tables and start insinuating (and later explicitly saying) that people who disagree with this viewpoint are in the backwards minority and are wrong.

It’s really not that difficult to conceive propaganda actually. You start out with acknowledging the existence of such beliefs in the general population (“There are gay people around you…”), then you talk about how much they’re like you to fashion an emotional bond ("… who are just like you, …") and how virtuous they are ("… they go to work, they pay taxes, they help old ladies carry their groceries."). Maybe you talk about how misunderstood they are and how they want the exact same thing you want, “someone to love and live their life with”, with the only tiny, microscopic, insignificant addition begin that they want someone of the same sex.

Then you start to explain the why using culturally accepted norms. “Straight people like to get laid. They use contraception and the morning-after pill (and if that fails, abortions), so you can see that sex for them is all about having fun and feeling good”. Once you’ve accepted that assertion, then it’s a short hop to “gay people have sex for fun too!” You talk about how eventually people want to get married and raise a family “because they love each other so much”, and then you point to “it’s the same for gay people”. For a society that has nearly no idea about the ordered purpose of sex and the sacredness of marriage, it’s an easy sell.

Now, there are several fallacies up there (starting with the underlying assumption itself) and lots of information left out, but you don’t talk about those because it’s all about promotion. The next step after is, of course, attacking people who don’t share this view for being backwards (a la GLADD). The more important and influential people you bring to your side the easier this becomes and the harsher the attacks can become.

As you can see, it’s hard to teach the Church’s position because not only do we have to explain why homosexual activity is wrong (dis-ordered), we have to explain to society why their acceptance of sex outside of marriage is wrong and why contraceptive sex is wrong. Let’s face it, explaining to people why a man and a woman should only have non-artificial-contraceptive sex within a marriage (which, by the way, is for life and not dissolvable) is itself an uphill battle.

Am I interpreting you correctly that some propaganda is easier to disseminate than others…for example the growing but relatively new gay propaganda vs the standard “everybody does it” free sex propaganda in popular culture?

 

[Darryl1958]

Seekerz has as much right to offer his/her opinion here as anyone else.

 

[kelvinf]

But who defines what propagandizing is? That paragon of virtues - Putin?

Last I heard the Russian people had trouble even participating in free and fair elections…but if it’s really them deciding, then I congratulate them on the freedom to choose.

Putin’s party has 238 seats out of the 450 seats in the State Duma. The 3 opposition parties have a total of 212 seats.

This law was passed 436-0, with just one deputy abstaining from voting on the bill.

So this incontestably reflects the will of the Russian people since it was supported by all but one MP (who abstained) from both the ruling and the opposition parties.

 

[Lormar]

I think you could go with the general idea of propaganda. At it’s base, it’s an aggressive promotion of some position - in this case of “non-traditional sexual relations”.

Propaganda is generally something we talk about in the context of war. (Just a note, I’m using these examples because they are well known history, not to make a comparison) The Nazi’s had propaganda about superiority (and other BS) and how Jews (and other “undesirables”) were less human. On there other side, the Allies had propaganda about how the Nazi’s were evil and how we all needed to stop them at any cost.

Generally, propaganda involves taking a particular idea (ex - blood purity) and amplifying it up to 11. The ones that get the best traction play to pre-existing prejudices (there was an underlying anti-semitism throughout much of Europe leading up to WW2. Hitler himself was inspired by antisemitism in the slums of Vienna).

So you could say that the propaganda that the law is banning is the underlying assumption that is behind the entire gay rights movement - that all sexualities and sexual activities are equal. (Post-modernism, of course, accepts this claim on it’s face because post-modernism is a lazy philosophy that denies all purpose and orderliness and likes equality because it gives feelings of warm fuzzes)

The entire point of propaganda is to take something that might be difficult for people to accept (or are likely to reject) and put it in nice, pretty, non-threatening packaging. The next step is to turn the tables and start insinuating (and later explicitly saying) that people who disagree with this viewpoint are in the backwards minority and are wrong.

It’s really not that difficult to conceive propaganda actually. You start out with acknowledging the existence of such beliefs in the general population (“There are gay people around you…”), then you talk about how much they’re like you to fashion an emotional bond ("… who are just like you, …") and how virtuous they are ("… they go to work, they pay taxes, they help old ladies carry their groceries."). Maybe you talk about how misunderstood they are and how they want the exact same thing you want, “someone to love and live their life with”, with the only tiny, microscopic, insignificant addition begin that they want someone of the same sex.

Then you start to explain the why using culturally accepted norms. “Straight people like to get laid. They use contraception and the morning-after pill (and if that fails, abortions), so you can see that sex for them is all about having fun and feeling good”. Once you’ve accepted that assertion, then it’s a short hop to “gay people have sex for fun too!” You talk about how eventually people want to get married and raise a family “because they love each other so much”, and then you point to “it’s the same for gay people”. For a society that has nearly no idea about the ordered purpose of sex and the sacredness of marriage, it’s an easy sell.

Now, there are several fallacies up there (starting with the underlying assumption itself) and lots of information left out, but you don’t talk about those because it’s all about promotion. The next step after is, of course, attacking people who don’t share this view for being backwards (a la GLADD). The more important and influential people you bring to your side the easier this becomes and the harsher the attacks can become.

As you can see, it’s hard to teach the Church’s position because not only do we have to explain why homosexual activity is wrong (dis-ordered), we have to explain to society why their acceptance of sex outside of marriage is wrong and why contraceptive sex is wrong. Let’s face it, explaining to people why a man and a woman should only have non-artificial-contraceptive sex within a marriage (which, by the way, is for life and not dissolvable) is itself an uphill battle.

:clapping::clapping::clapping: