Saturday, August 24, 2013

Andrei On that "horrific" law that is as bad as the Nuremberg ones, or so we are led to believe

JAY LENO: Something that shocked me about Russia. I'm surprised this is not a huge story. Suddenly homosexuality is against the law. I mean, this seems like Germany with let's round up the Jews. Let's round up the gays. It starts with that. You round up people who you don't like. I mean, why is not more of the world outraged at this?
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, I have been very clear that when it comes to universal rights, when it comes to people's basic freedoms, that whether you're discriminating on the basis of race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation you are violating the basic morality that I think should transcend every country, and I have no patience for countries that try to treat gays or lesbians or transgender persons in ways that intimidate them or are harmful to them.
This post will be far longer than I'd like but it can't be helped. Part A will briefly illuminate some of the sheer nonsense that has occurred in the past two weeks over the objections some people have to a Russian Law.  A law which when it comes down to it is none of their business since the law only applies within the Russian Federation to those who live there or who are visiting.

In Part B I will briefly detail the law as best I can so you can make up your own mind about how "horrific" or "draconian" it is or actually isn't for yourself.

Part A

A few days after the words at left were uttered it became a "huge story". The world athletics championships were being held in Moscow, you see. Valerie Adams had already won her gold and all was well with the world.

But then two Swedish athletes who did not set the world on fire with their performance in the field drew attention to themselves with rainbow colored nail polish, to protest "that law".

And Stephen Fry called for a boycott of the Sochi Winter Olympics next year, he even got to meet with David Cameron.
The extraordinary ‘gay rights pub summit’ between the actor and the Prime Minister on Monday evening came days after Mr Fry had written an open letter to No 10. He claimed that Russia’s President Putin was making scapegoats of gay people, just as Hitler did with the Jews. Mr Fry had made no attempt to conceal his lifelong disdain for the Tories, although he praised the Prime Minister’s stance on gay rights in the UK.

And a Russian world champion was asked her opinion of the Swedish girls protest and the law they were protesting and when she gave response all hell broke loose around her

And then great excitement over two more Russian female champions when a photo of their congratulatory kiss was spun as Lesbianism and/or a protest when, of course, it was neither

Part B

The law causing all this angst is titled in Russian: "О защите детей от информации, причиняющей вред их здоровью и развитию"

or in English: "On Protection of children from information harmful to their health and development".  So far so good but here is where it gets tricky - the information the Russian Duma deem harmful to children's health and development is that pertaining to "non-traditional sexual relationships". Cue outrage.

Whether or not preventing non related adults presenting material on "non-traditional sexual relationships" or promoting them to other people's children is a "violation of human rights" is up for you to decide but parents within the Russian Federation overwhelmingly agree that they don't want these  sort of concepts presented to their young it seems and this particular law has the support of 85%+ of Russian citizens.

So what are the penalties under this "horrific" law, I hear you ask? Well an individual may be fined up to $5000 roubles for violating it - in New Zealand's currency about $190 - just a little more than the penalty for not wearing your seat belt while driving   and a trifle less than you would receive for not displaying a current warrant of fitness.

For organizers of events that break this law the penalties are steeper, fines up to 50,000 roubles may be imposed - ballpark NZ$2000.

And for corporations the fines can be as high as $1,000,000 roubles, let's say roughly NZ$40,000.

You can of course hold events promoting "non-traditional sexual relationships" in private spaces provided you do not admit those under 18 to them and nobody under 18 is exposed to any materials that may be distributed to those who attend.

Foreigners who break the law may cop the fine, and be sent back to from whence they came being  held for up to 15 days in custody before deportation.

There are other aspects to this law relating to broadcasting and so forth but that is the gist of it.

Is this really something worthy of an Olympic boycott? Or is this all just hysterical nonsense?

13 comment(s):

Psycho Milt said...

Hmm - plenty of scope here for further examples of legislative no-big-deals. I look forward to an NZ law protecting children from information about "non-secular belief systems." A simple fine would do - well, that and instructions to the Police to arrest those who protest the law and ignore/participate in any beatings of religious types that the citizenry wants to deal out. And I guess adjustments would be needed to other laws so that employers could dismiss superstition-mongers without consequence. But that's all quite trivial, really - no big deal at all.

Of course, openly being a Christian would constitute promotion of that lifestyle so would be against the law. Some liberal busybodies might consider that a breach of human rights, but really it's not - if the Christians merely kept their perverted beliefs secret from everyone else they'd be fine, so there's really no human rights issue at all.

You're right - it's all nothing to worry about. I look forward to its introduction.

Andrei said...

Loj Milt you will have to do better than that.

You have obviously missed the Herald's ongoing campaign to remove the Bible from schools even though of course no child has to be exposed to classes on the Bible if their parents don't want it and that the Bible is part of the cultural heritage of 99%+ of all children currently attending school here. The King James Bible is of course one of the rich cultural artifacts of the English speaking world but there are many who would keep children oblivious to the treasures it contains.

Now here's an odd thing there is those who would zealously protect children from knowledge of bible stories like Joseph and his coat of many colors and Moses in the Bull Rushes are quite happy to and sometimes zealously promote the teaching of "sexuality" to the young.

Strange times in which we live

I.M Fletcher said...

The thing is, Leno isn't quite speaking the truth. Homosexuality is NOT against the law in Russia (as Andrei points out), it is the promotion of same. That is a fair enough law. Wouldn't mind it in NZ. That's where the gays are not content - they don't just want their conduct to be lawful, they want to flout it and advertise it - push it in schools. They want more people to be like them.

As for Obama he is a hypocrite: let's see him go to one of the Middle East countries where gays are routinely hung and say the same thing there. He wouldn't dare.

Tim said...

Would a law against the promotion of Christianity be a "fair enough" law? You lot don't just want your conduct to be lawful, you want to flaunt (not flout) it and advertise it - push it in schools. You want more people to be like you. Sounds like the kind of thing Something Must Be Done About.

Andrei said...

Would a law against the promotion of Christianity be a "fair enough" law?

My Goodness Tim, are you oblivious to the fact that this has been tried, tried more than once in fact.

And most notoriously in the Soviet Union, the successor state to the Russian Empire and the predecessor state for the Russian Federation which is non other than the nation being slandered in the western media for enacting legislation to protect their children from out side influence promoting non traditional sexual relationships

And here is another thing that drives the ardent "secular" into paroxysms of rage and despair and that is in these once atheist lands where religious were martyred in recent times and churches were demolished in attempt to wipe out all trace of religion now religious authorities are treated with respect and have a voice in public discourse, not only Christian Bishops, but Muslim, Jewish and Buddhist religious leaders as well.

You see the ardent secular actually desire that the GOVERNMENT be the sole voice of authority among the people, they wish to hold a monopoly in "wisdom" and to get there to break the hold other non governmental (and therefore outside their control) sages people might turn to. They seek to eliminate religion from public life.

The Bolsheviks of course tried to get there by killing or imprisoning Bishops, priests, nuns, imams and rabbis and blowing up cathedrals, mosques synagogues and temples, tried and failed.

Whereas in the modern Russian state the value of the religious in transmitting the heritage of the people to the young is recognized and their voices in public discourse are valued much to the dismay of the BBC and Guardian types whose spiritual forefathers are Marx, Lenin, Trotsky,Mao, Pol Pot and so forth even though they are generally oblivious to this fact.

I.M Fletcher said...

Regarding atheism, Solzhenitsyn declared:

Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened." Since then I have spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened."

leftrightout said...

Don't you ever wonder why god forgot Man?

Did he not hear the prayers of the persecuted Russians?

Was he blind to the gas chambers?

Or is it simply that there is no god and no prayers are answered?

ZenTiger said...

No, I don't wonder. I don't think God has forgotten man.

Do you ever wonder if your parents exist? Surely, they would not stand by and let you be such a rude person? Maybe they don't exist. It seems pretty clear, on the evidence offered by your comments on this blog over the years your parents cannot possibly exist.

That is so sad, my commiserations LRO.

ZenTiger said...

The law under attack here is "On Protection of children from information harmful to their health and development"

Children, by definition cannot consent to have such information, and it is up to their parents to decide what is helpful or harmful.

Jay Leno is therefore outraged that the State does not make laws to lower the age of consent, or to over-ride the rights of the parents.

Psycho appeals to the rationale that this law standing in the way of enforcing State approved doctrine might well be the same category as law preventing parents teaching under-age children their beliefs.

It is not at all the same, and is in fact, completely the opposite. The Jay Lenos of the world are suggesting the state can step in an over-ride the parents wishes or ignore the age of consent to push a particular liberal approach to life. That is something to fight against, and so it is fought against, in exactly the same way that the state decide parents had no right to pass on their beliefs and values to children.

We can all collectively agree on a base set of human rights, and this law doesn't infringe upon those. Unless it does decide to ignore the age of consent, and ignore the natural rights of parents.

leftrightout said...

No, I don't wonder. I don't think God has forgotten man.

And yet you have no answer as to why god fails to hear the prayers of his followers, why he forever turns a blind eye to their suffering and why Jesus lied when he said "Whatever you ask in my name will be given".

So, because you have no answer you revert to type and resort to personal abuse.

Nice one. How very Christian.

bamac said...


LRO,

I know where you are coming from but you are wrong in thinking that Christ was referring to requests for temporal things that we feel would be good for us, or for freedom from situations that we would very much like to be able to avoid ... that would make this life of ours some what of a Utopia wouldn't it ... He never promised us that living a life of following Him would be easy ... you must have read that in the Bible too.

Your quote was in the midst of what Christ was saying at the time re, spirituality and man's efforts to love God and grow closer to Him by helps ( that we call graces) God never denies us these spiritual helps if we ask for them sincerely.
this is more of what Christ was saying ....

John 15:16
You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit--fruit that will last--and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you.

1 John 5:14
This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us.

John 15:16
You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit--fruit that will last--and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you.

1 John 5:14
This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. Come to think of it , does any true parent give to their child what is not good for them ? I can remember times when I was young when I felt somewhat deprived when my parents said a big NO to me even when I begged.
Life is not always easy but then , both from your point of view , and from ours, living through a tough situation makes us a stronger character ... agreed?

shalom ,
Mrs Mac


ZenTiger said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ZenTiger said...

LRO, you have the wrong end of the stick.

First, you say I offered no answer, and yet I actually provided an answer (one of several possible answers).

There was no abuse in my response, unless pointing out that you are quite rude on this blog is considered abuse? Even in this instance - the question you posed hijacks the thread and is simply meant to make the same tired old unapologetic arguments, slung at us not as a genuine enquiry, but as some useless sort of point scoring.

The "proof" you offer up to your contention that God forgot man isn't proof at all. Following your line of thinking, God should hold you back from doing anything bad, but he doesn't, so you decide he doesn't exist.

It's as mistaken as me suggesting therefore, that your parents never existed, because surely they would have held you back...an exaggeration to make the point. You calling that personal abuse is just your usual attempt to make a case where one doesn't exist.

To borrow from your playbook - So typical of a rational humanist.

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.