"The Religion & Society Report"    Online Edition    
[SwanSearch]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/search/swan_all.php?x=11>

Our Publications:    The Family in 
America<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/archive_fia.htm>  |  New 
Research<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/archive_nr.htm>  |  The 
Religion & Society 
Report<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/archive_rs.htm>  |  Family 
Update, 
Online!<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.worldcongress.org/WCFUpdate/wcf_update_archive.htm>


Volume 23  Number 05


July / August 2006






The Howard Center for Family, Religion, and Society







Behind The Homosexual Tsunami in Brazil

By Julio Severo*



*Julio Severo is the author of the book O Movimento Homossexual (The Homosexual 
Movement), published by the Brazilian branch of Bethany House Publishers. In 
November 2004, he gave, in the Chamber of Deputies in Brasília, the 
introductory speech in the First Evangelical Parliamentary Front Meeting. The 
first magazine of the Front also published an article by Mr. Severo on 
homosexuality. His book has been the first writing in Portuguese to expose the 
homosexual movement and it has been a reference for Christian parliamentarians 
in Brazil.

Until 1994, gay rights and parades were virtually unheard of and non-existent 
in Brazil. Yet, from 1995 on, after the first ILGA conference in Rio de 
Janeiro, homosexual activism became increasingly powerful in visibility, until 
the arrival of the Lula government, when their highest intentions and values 
became a threat and reality predominant in the Brazilian society.

The social and moral structure of Brazil in the decades of 1950 and 1960 was 
basically strong, largely because of the predominant Catholicism in more than 
90 percent of the population. In many places, evangelicals were threatened with 
lynching if they tried to evangelize, especially in small towns. Homosexual 
activity was a shameful and secret behavior, despised by the society.  A girl 
pregnant out of wedlock ran the risk of being expelled from her house. The 
Brazilian people were socially conservative, although the Carnival and public 
prostitution were tolerated.

The largest threat to the society came from radical leftist movements. 
Communists almost took control in Brazil in 1964, but the military took over 
the government and was able to stop a communist coup.

The Catholic Church was a driving force against the communist threat, but after 
Vatican II many Catholic leaders began surrendering to the Theology of 
Liberation. In the decades of 1970 and 1980, traditional Protestant churches 
embraced Protestant versions of Liberation Theology. In the late 1990s and 
early 2000, some Pentecostal and charismatic churches also subscribed. These 
leftist Christians are today known as progressistas. The Brazilian term 
progressista (progressive), according to the noted Aurélio Dictionary of 
Portuguese Language, means “someone who, though not being a member of a 
socialist or communist party, accepts and/or supports socialist or Marxist 
principles.”  So evangélicos progressistas are evangelicals committed to 
supporting and promoting the socialist agenda.

Liberation Theology can boast an important victory in Brazil, for having a 73.6 
percent Catholic population; Brazil is the largest Catholic country in the 
world. Protestants are 15.4 percent.  “Progressive” Christians are a growing 
presence and influence among both of these Christian religions.

After the military left the government in 1985, leftist politicians, supported 
by the Comunidades Eclesiais de Base (Base Ecclesiastical Communities [BECs], 
where progressive Catholic leadership encouraged poor Catholic communities to 
get involved in political action according to Liberation Theology  tenets), 
began to heavily affect the political and social system, leading Brazil 
gradually leftward. BECs were the most important support behind the main 
popular leftist party in Brazil, Partido dos Trabalhadores (Workers’ Party), 
better known by its acronym PT.

With such leftism, abortion and homosexuality began to be promoted as rights in 
the decade of 1990. (In the decade of 1980, there were leftists advocating 
abortion and homosexuality, but while abortion advocates had limited visibility 
and no legal influence, the rare gay advocates had none at all — except in a 
very few isolated examples, especially in universities.) Even though there are 
no anti-sodomy laws in Brazilian society, its religious heritage had always 
been an important social factor discouraging such behavior.

Less conservative in the heart and more in the image: the current political 
ethics in Brazil  [cid:aecfeb38-e0b7-4e47-917c-ce097cbd376d] 
<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23>

In Brazil, abortion is presently legal only in cases of rape and when the life 
of a mother is at risk. Because of religious influence, the fight to expand 
legal abortion has faced considerable obstacles to achieve the success that 
feminists achieved in the U.S. in 1973.

However, that religious influence, both Catholic and evangelical, is 
increasingly less conservative and more liberal, even though most of the 
population does not understand the gradual change.

Nevertheless, the best way to popular appeal in Brazil is to have a 
conservative image. To draw votes, political candidates in Brazil are supposed 
to present the image of being conservative Christians on moral issues. Even 
radical Socialists (who are clearly pro-abortion and pro-homosexuality in their 
political actions out of election times) make this kind of appeal. On the other 
hand, “conservative” candidates have to demonstrate their sympathy for the 
welfare state. Yet these “conservatives” are not solid in their moral stand on 
abortion and especially on homosexuality, and eventually make moral compromises 
after their election.

Presently, Brazil knows no major political figure solid in practical actions 
against abortion and homosexuality. The few Catholics and evangelicals vocally 
opposed to abortion are not politicians.

Evangelicals are only a minority, but their votes are eagerly coveted. In 2002, 
presidential candidate Lula was promoted among many evangelical leaders by a 
moral and religious appeal. In the past, these same “conservative” leaders 
(traditional, Pentecostal, and charismatic) had always disliked Lula and his 
party as a communist threat. Yet, with the assistance of an American minister — 
the Rev. Jesse Jackson — they changed their minds.  Jackson, who was brought to 
Brazil by PT especially for that mission, was able to convince them that Lula 
was not such a threat.  According to the Internet newspaper Folha Online, Rev. 
Jackson has been a friend of many years standing with 
PT.[1]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn1>  
In the PT official website there is even an entire page flattering “comrade 
Jackson.”[2]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn2>

So persuaded, these leaders became signers of the public document Manifesto de 
Evangélicos (Evangelical Manifesto), proclaiming to the evangelical population 
their stand for Lula. Among the great number of signatories were Rev. Nilson 
Fanni, former president of the World Baptist Alliance, and Rev. Gilherminho 
Cunha, a high-ranking Presbyterian minister and president of the Bible Society 
of Brazil. In the paper which was amply distributed by PT, all of those leaders 
state:

We support Lula for President because we recognize that several proposals of 
his Government Program are similar to the prophetic calling of the Church of 
Jesus Christ.

We express our public support to Lula’s candidacy in order to oppose the wicked 
and insignificant rumors leading some to an understanding that his election to 
the Presidency of Republic will obstruct the walk of the Evangelical Churches.

This public document was prepared with the assistance of MEP (Movimento 
Evangélico Progressista, or Progressive Evangelical Movement). Individual 
denominations also expressed their support, especially mainline liberal 
Protestant churches.  For the first time Pentecostal and charismatic churches 
copied their example. Comunidade Evangélica Sara Nossa Terra (Heal Our Land 
Evangelical Community), a large national denomination, said on its website in 
2002:

Evangelical Manifesto in Support of Lula’s Candidacy for President of Brazil 
[excerpts]:

We manifest our support for the Lula candidacy because of an established 
commitment between an eventual Lula government and the evangelicals here 
represented.

We support Lula because:

•  He has been demonstrating that he believes in a balanced and democratic 
Socialism, respecting the highest tenets of democracy;

•  He has been affirming his [belief] in the highest values of the Holy 
Scriptures: God, family, morality, ethics, religious freedom, and democracy;

•  He has made a commitment to develop our society, having the Church as a 
partner with his government;

• He understands and believes in the existence and in the historical role of 
the Church as an instrument for the formation of fundamental values for human 
life, both in individual and social aspects;

•  His greatest motivation for his government project is to help the poor and 
less favored people, according to the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ and 
the Holy Scriptures.

MESSAGE TO THE BRAZILIAN CHURCH:

Why we suport Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva as President of the Republic.

•  Lula deserves a vote of trust from our society... Lula today is one of the 
most trusted leaders of our nation.

• Lula has made a partnership commitment with the evangelical churches for 
social construction, removing the stigma that evangelicals are only sought in 
election times. He has also been declaring that he believes in the highest 
values of the Holy Scriptures, as “God, Family, Morality, Ethics, Religious 
Freedom, Democracy, and the Option for the Poor.”

Thus, we see that the rumors saying that Lula and PT are noxious to the Gospel 
are now refuted, demonstrating that radical attitudes that were taken by other 
PT local administrations were isolated initiatives.

For all of those reasons the Sara Nossa Terra Bishop Council is confident to 
vote for and support the Lula candidacy for president of Brazil.

Robson Rodovalho

Bishop President

on behalf of the Sara Nossa Terra Bishop Council

Comunidade Sara Nossa Terra was, until late 1990s, an anti-Marxist church. 
After many years of an anticommunist stand, it was a surprise to watch 
evangelicals and their leaders turning left. The moralistic appeal of Lula 
among evangelicals was also a surprise: he promised to evangelical leaders that 
his future administration would not promote abortion and homosexuality. The 
result? After victory in the election, Lula and his party kept working on the 
same agenda that they had in the past. PT was again the main abortion and 
homosexuality supporter in Brazil.

Even though most of the Christian denominations supporting Lula and PT do not 
approve of homosexuality and abortion, their shift to the role of evangélicos 
progressistas has left them in a strange and paradoxical position politically.

Homosexuality in Brazil  [X] 
<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23>

No official statistics are gathered in Brazil to determine the number of 
homosexuals. According to the Lula government data, they are over 10 percent of 
the population. Such data come from NGOs that have contacts with American NGOs. 
Their basic source is the Kinsey Report. Almost all the other official data on 
homosexuals in Brazil has direct or indirect influence from information common 
in the U.S. and not from Brazilian studies.  In fact, in spite of the 
predominant, leftist anti-Americanism in Brazil, there is an almost perfect 
leftist cloning of the American homosexual reality.

There may be a religious factor in Brazilian homosexuality. A minority of the 
Brazilian population adheres to Candomblé and other Afro-Brazilian religions 
(similar to Santeria), where homosexuality is common. For a comparison, there 
are some 19,000 recognized Catholic parishes in Brazil.  Informal Candomblé 
temples are supposed to number some 12,000 in Rio de Janeiro 
alone.[3]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn3> 
 In Candomblé, many priests and priestesses are homosexual.

Luiz Mott, the leader of the homosexual movement in Brazil, is a firm adherent 
of Candomblé.

Many famous Brazilians turn to Afro-Brazilian religions in search of miracles 
to solve personal or family problems. Even former President Fernando Henrique 
Cardoso, though a Marxist and an atheist, had sympathy for and sometimes 
visited Candomblé rituals.

Homosexuals were always a very small group in the society, and the current 
impressive homosexual growth in Brazil is due to the seductive propaganda 
directed to the public. Soap operas, very popular TV shows in Brazil, give the 
public positive images of homosexual characters. On the other hand, 
conservative Catholics and evangelicals are represented as strange, intolerant, 
suspicious, fanatical, and unfriendly characters.

Thus, surrounded by the artillery of the homosexual favoritism on the media, an 
increasingly large number of curious youths demonstrate interest in 
homosexuality.

Behind the tsunami  [X] 
<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23>

Capitulation to the homosexual movement on TV has been practically total, where 
many shows use strategies that distort reality, presenting to the public a 
false world where gays and lesbians are glad, happy, fulfilled, and, usually, 
more intelligent and sensitive individuals than normal men and women. The “dark 
side is properly hidden, so that nobody will see that their behavior is linked 
to an indisputable reality of suffering, where gays live, oppressed by serious 
mental, emotional, and social dysfunctions.

There is an immense effort to show that those natural consequences don’t have 
any connection with the abnormality of their sexual acts. That effort also 
tries, with the assistance of fraudulent research and studies, to prove 
“scientifically” that the abnormal is as normal as what is really normal. In 
fact, the document Brazil without Homophobia says: “In the same way that 
heterosexuality (attraction for a person of the opposite sex) does not have any 
explanation, so homosexuality does not too. It depends on each person’s sexual 
orientation.” This document was published by the Lula administration to support 
its nationwide Brasil sem Homofobia (Brazil Without Homophobia) campaign, which 
was launched on May 2005. This federal initiative — described as a “National 
Program for Combating Violence and Discrimin-ation against Gays, Lesbians, 
Transgender People, and Bisexuals, and for the Promotion of the Citizenship of 
Homosexuals” — is virtually unique in the world. It aims to strengthen both 
public and non-governmental institutions that promote gay rights. It does this 
through education on human rights, both of the general public and within GLBT 
communities and by encouraging GLBT people to complain to public institutions 
about violations of their supposed rights.

This federal effort is producing fruits. In São Paulo, the largest city in 
Brazil, there is now the Group for Repression and Analysis of Intolerance 
Crimes and the Racial and Intolerance Crimes Police Station. “The Racial and 
Intolerance Crimes Police Station shall, above all, take into consideration 
cases where society segregates a person for his sexual orientation... 
Margarette Barreto Gracia, police chief of the new station, pointed out that 
victims of intolerance crimes should seek out the police station and denounce 
their 
aggressor.”[4]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn4>

Homophobia, according to the Lula administration, can be obvious or veiled, 
involving discrimination in selection for employment, rental of housing, entry 
into the armed forces, medical school, dental school, a theological college, a 
Christian school...Whatever its manifestation, the Brazilian government 
believes that so called homophobia inevitably involves injustice and social 
exclusion.

It wants to eliminate such “homophobia” throughout Brazilian society. To 
achieve such a wide goal, the Brazil Without Homophobia campaign involves 
twenty ministries and special secretariats: the Ministries of Foreign 
Relations, Justice, Education, Health, Labor, and Culture, and the Special 
Secretariat on Policies for Women, the Special Secretariat on Policies for the 
Promotion of Racial Equality, the Special Secretariat on Human Rights, and the 
National Secretariat on Public Safety. It also involves a series of other 
governmental organizations, such as the National Council on Combating 
Discrimination, State and Municipal Councils on Human Rights, State and 
Municipal Secretariats on Public Safety, universities, the Office of the 
Federal Prosecutor for Citizens’ Rights, the Public Ministry of Labor, in 
addition to the Brazilian Parliament itself.

This massive effort leaves no part of society untouched. The coming generations 
are also of special government concern. So the Brazilian government for the 
first time in its history, on April 2006, initiated a partnership with a gay 
group. With the assistance of the NGO Arco-Íris (Rainbow), the Ministry of 
Education began training public and private school teachers to address 
homosexual issues and teach children to fight 
homophobia.[5]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn5>
 The Lula administration views such partnerships as a necessary strategy, for 
it has been informed by UNESCO that 60 percent of Brazilian teachers think that 
homosexual sex is unacceptable.

In the official curriculum of the Ministry of Education, there is the demand 
that every school fight prejudice against differences. The partnership with 
Arco-Íris is seen as a way to effectively train teachers to implement the 
official curriculum itself and to handle issues as human rights (for 
homosexuals, not Christians), homophobia, gender identity, sexual orientation 
and diversity. Arco-Íris has received a government grant to accomplish such 
goals.

Through such a partnership and other efforts from the Brazil Without Homophobia 
program, children are being indoctrinated systematically in the “Gospel of 
Sodomy.”[6]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn6>
 There are even textbooks to encourage homosexuality. “In Brazil, there are, at 
the time being, few titles, but publishers have already shown their interest in 
this market. Educators too:  one of the first books to address the subject is 
Menino Ama Menino (Boy Loves Boy, publisher: Armazém das Idéias), by Marilene 
Godinho, which tells of a boy who found that he was in love with another boy.  
This book is part of the literature package distributed by the Ministry of 
Education in the public 
schools.”[7]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn7>

Brazilian President Luiz Inácio ‘Lula’ da Silva likes to portray his 
administration as a Socialist government favoring interests of less developed 
nations and not accepting American and European influences. Nevertheless, he 
has imitated their worst examples. His Workers’ Party has employed actions no 
past government of Brazil did: it has facilitated the introduction of 
pro-homosexuality laws, and it has been a strong advocate for affirmative 
action based on racial preferences for minority groups. So for the first time, 
Brazilian society sees a president acting in a totally new political way.

His actions are not original to Brazil. American and European societies have, 
under the pressure of special interest groups, known such political experiences 
for a number of years. Interestingly, in the racial issue, advocates of 
affirmative action in Europe and in the U.S. are swift to point to and condemn 
the slavery of blacks by whites in the past and exploit such situations to 
their extreme political advantage, but they are equally swift to neglect, 
excuse, or hide the past and current violent slavery of blacks by blacks in 
some African countries, including modern-day Sudan. So the notion of 
affirmative action, as originally employed in the developed nations by special 
interest groups and as copied by countries like Brazil, is a form of 
ideological oppression that will eventually lead to other forms of oppression, 
including from the gay-ideology activists.

There should be no doubt that the current Brazilian president has a gay agenda. 
 Twice, Lula expressed his support of the homosexual movement. In June 2005, he 
sent a letter to the gay parade of Brasilia, saying, “any way of loving is 
worthwhile.” In June 2006, he reaffirmed such support, by sending to the gay 
parade of São Paulo the following message:

Fellows,

It is with satisfaction that I answer the kind invitation to address the 
participants of the 10th GLBT Pride Parade, in São Paulo. I want to greet the 
organizers of this event and transmit — to all who battle to promote the 
dignity and the defense of the rights of gays, lesbians, and transgender people 
— words of encouragement, faith and trust in the results of the efforts that, 
in partnership, we have been developing, since the beginning of our 
administration, with the goal to change the reality that we had received.

Our government was established with the firm purpose of combating the threats 
to the people’s rights based on any kind of prejudice: of origin, race, 
ethnicity, age, religious belief, political conviction, or sexual orientation.

With that purpose, we have strengthened the Special Secretariat for the Human 
Rights, which instituted, during our administration, Brazil Without Homophobia, 
a program to combat violence and prejudice against GLBT and to promote 
homosexual citizenship. That program has been necessary because all people 
should be made conscious of human rights, which include the free expression of 
sexual orientation. People may only be made conscious through publicly 
integrated politics that include affirmative actions, especially in the 
educational area.

Human rights education encourages people in a formal and informal way to 
contribute for the citizenship construction, for the knowledge of those rights, 
and for the consequent respect to plurality and diversity, not only sexual, but 
ethnic, racial, cultural, sporting, and religious.

However, schools should not be the only source promoting those ideas: the media 
should also get involved in this effort, for they have an enormous power for 
penetrating the society. The media and information outlets, through their 
programs and images, assume a fundamental role in the human rights education as 
they are committed to the propagation of ethical and citizenship values.

Because of their role as public opinion shapers, the press, radio, and TV 
professionals should be a source of production and broadcasting of contents 
related to tolerance and acceptance of multiple differences, and ultimately, 
the respect to the human person with a view to establish a culture of peace and 
love toward the neighbor and build a fairer, kinder, and more solid society.

Our government is firmly determined to defend those values and it wants to 
continue, especially counting on the cooperative action from the organizations 
that bring together gays, lesbians, and transgender people to achieve that 
objective, and it will remain open to welcome other contributions, as in the 
area of STD prevention.

I want all to know that we remain at your side in this fight. A few days ago, 
in the Third High Authorities Human Rights Meeting of Mercosur, in Buenos 
Aires, Brazil suggested the introduction of two items for consideration: the 
theme of torture and cruel and degrading treatment and the fight against 
prejudices for sexual orientation. Another initiative came from the Special 
Secretariat for the Human Rights, launched on June 9, in the State Legislature 
of São Paulo, the Brazil Without Homophobia program, during solemn session 
where the legislative authorities from São Paulo celebrated the GLBT Pride Day 
on the solicitation of State Deputy Ítalo Cardoso [from PT].

I want this parade to result, as has been happening with other similar events, 
in peace and happiness, with a view to being an important sign of the 
increasing visibility of the homosexual movement and a sign of consequent 
gathering of forces in the fight against resistance and prejudice.”

Receive my fraternal hug.

President Luiz Inácio ‘Lula’ da 
Silva[8]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn8>

Of course, the Lula support is not limited to words only. The Brazil Without 
Homophobia program counts on a federal budget of 125 million Real (about 60 
million dollars) for 2006. For a nation that has experienced great economic 
hardship, such an amount is not insignificant. Gay parades, seen by the 
government as cultural events, also receive grants in the millions.

Such support has produced striking results. In 2005, Brazil was the world 
champion in gay parades. In 2006, the São Paulo gay parade was the largest in 
the whole world.

However, the Lula administration has not been aggressive only in its 
pro-homosexuality domestic push. It also has an international agenda, and it 
has shown its domestic policies to other nations.  Before the United Nations 
General Assembly, Brazilian Ambassador Frederico Duque Estrada Meyer said 
Brazil had the program entitled Brazil Without Homophobia, which outlined 
actions to strengthen public and non-governmental institutions for combating 
homophobia; capacity-building for professionals involved in promoting the 
rights of homosexuals; disseminating information of rights and promoting 
homosexual self-esteem; and stimulating complaints on violations of 
rights.”[9]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn9>

In the Organization of the American States, Brazil introduced a resolution for 
the establishment of a future Inter-American Convention against Racism and All 
Forms of Discrimination and Intolerance.  The resolution was approved in 2005.  
Its most important ambition was its leading role in a world campaign, in the 
United Nations Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR), to characterize any form of 
discrimination based on sexual orientation as violence against human rights.

During the April 2003 meeting of the UNCHR, the Brazilian government (supported 
by Canada and the European Union) introduced its Resolution on “Human Rights 
and Sexual Orientation.” This resolution recognizes homosexual conduct as a 
human right. Obviously, Brazil, Canada and the European Union knew that the 
great majority of international public opinion was against the attitude of 
giving special rights for individuals practicing homosexuality.

The resolution was a surprise to the Brazilian Congress in Brasilia, which 
learned about it only some time after the Brazilian delegation in the UN had 
already presented it. It was a surprise also to the evangelical leaders, for 
before the 2002 presidential elections, Lula had made the commitment in a 
meeting with important ministers and bishops not to let his government promote 
issues favoring abortion and homosexuality. Yet, the Brazilian delegation in 
the UN, which represents the Brazilian government’s interests and views, has 
defended just these issues, under a carefully veiled language of “reproductive 
rights” and “sexual 
orientation.”[10]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn10>

Representative Dr. Elimar Damasceno requested directly from the Brazilian 
government an explanation for its resolution in the UN. He noted that it “deals 
with a subject where there are no approved laws in our country and where there 
is no consensus in our society, because of its religious and cultural 
consequences.”[11]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn11>
 The Foreign Affairs Ministry in Brasilia officially refuted Rep. Damasceno,

...in response to your last question on “who has authorized the [Brazilian] 
representatives [in the UN] to present the mentioned Proposal of Resolution,” 
it is proper to point that... the politics of Brazil in the human rights issues 
are explicitly favorable to the promotion and protection of the minority 
rights.[12]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn12>

So according to the Brazilian government’s view, those practicing homosexuality 
are a minority deprived of protection. According to the draft of the resolution:

…human rights and fundamental freedoms are the birthright of all human beings, 
that the universal nature of these rights and freedoms is beyond question and 
that the enjoyment of such rights and freedoms should not be hindered in any 
way on the grounds of sexual orientation.

Brazilian Minister Samuel Guimarães, from the Foreign Affairs Ministry, 
affirmed, “So the main aim of the [resolution] is to guarantee the principle of 
non-discrimination — the cornerstone of the building of promotion and 
protection of human rights since its beginning in the United Nations system — 
regarding groups discriminated against around the world because of their sexual 
orientation. This position is based on the notion that advancement in the 
subject of human rights benefiting a discriminated minority represents gain to 
other groups suffering 
discrimination….”[13]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn13>

Fortunately, the Lula resolution was not successful in 2003. UN Brazilian 
ambassadors made new endeavors in 2004, and were faced with Muslim opposition. 
In 2005, the Lula administration gave its resolution up prematurely out of 
respect to Muslim leaders taking part in the Summit of South American-Arab 
Countries in Brasilia.  Out of respect to them, the Lula administration also 
cut Israel from the map used by the Foreign Affairs Ministry at the Summit.

In the Lula’s strategic socialistic agenda, homosexuality may be sacrificed for 
Muslim interests, but not for the Bible or moral interests. It sacrifices 
Israel much more easily than it sacrifices homosexuality.

Gay strategies for visibility  [X] 
<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23>

The main pushes from the homosexual movement are its efforts for visibility, 
especially through gay parades and public kisses, where gay couples kiss one 
another challenging social mores. Through such actions, gay militants publicize 
themselves and their cause. When challenging laws restricting or prohibiting 
their public kisses, their maneuvers appeal for laws for their protection and 
against prejudice. So a mere kiss in a busy shopping mall may seem to them a 
significant legal achievement.

Their major visibility strategy is parades.  In 2005, 75 parades throughout 
Brazil were recorded.  In 2006, Brazil saw some 102 parades. The 2006 gay 
parade in São Paulo drew 2.4 million.

According to the Associated Press:

The 10th annual Sao Paulo Gay Pride Parade saw go-go boys and drag queens 
dancing on the roofs of sound trucks blasting music as they rolled down the 
skyscraper-lined Avenida Paulista — the financial heart of Brazil’s biggest 
city.

The march came two days after police said about 3 million people joined an 
evangelical Protestant rally on the same Sao Paulo avenue, demonstrating their 
growing influence in the world’s largest Roman Catholic country.

“The traditional church doesn’t want us,” said Pastor Justino Luis, 42, who 
started a church serving 200 mostly gay and lesbian parishioners.

Waving a banner with the words, “I’m Happy, Gay and Christian,” Luis said, “I 
know (God) loves me the way I am, and I know when he made me he planned for me 
to be the way I 
am.”[14]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn14>

This visibility strategy is very effective, for two days before the gay parade, 
evangelicals had their March for Jesus, yet the great media outlets focused 
their attention on the gay rally.  The March for Jesus was largely ignored, 
except for a few gays participating and trying to show that they were also 
evangelical.

The political actions are very intense too. Through the assistance of gay lobby 
groups and leftist politicians, a Parliamentary Front for Free Sexual 
Expression was founded, consisting of many members of the Chamber of the 
Deputies. It seeks to introduce bills favoring the interests of the gay lobby.

As for the gay lobby, it seeks:  1) Implementation and monitoring of the Brazil 
Without Homophobia Program;  2) Decentralization of resources and actions in 
STD and AIDS with gays and others;  3) Approval of two federal laws by the 
National Congress (prohibiting discrimination due to sexual orientation and 
registry of civil partnerships;  4) the Brazilian Resolution in the UN’s 
Commission on Human Rights against discrimination due to sexual orientation;  
5) the defense of a secular State that is against religious intolerance towards 
GLTB;  6) the National Day Against Homophobia and Gay Pride Day.

Gay and PT activist Beto de Jesus, who traveled to the U.S. some years ago to 
be trained by his American counterparts and who has participated in the 
Brazilian delegation to the UN, said: “We have a Parliamentary Front for the 
Free Sexual Expression comprising almost 80 representatives and senators, but 
we cannot pass federal laws due to the intolerance of religious representatives 
(Catholics and evangelicals). Our Civil Partnership Bill has been stuck in 
Congress since 1996, in spite of the efforts of Brazilian GLBT groups — over 
200 in the 
country.”[15]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn15>
  This partnership bill was introduced by former PT Representative Marta 
Suplicy, considered the Queen of Gays in Brazil since the first conference of 
ILGA in Latin America in Rio in 1995.

Even though the National Congress has not given its approval to the same-sex 
civil partnership bill, gay activists are successfully conquering the sympathy 
of activist judges. In Rio Grande do Sul State, in South of Brazil, such judges 
are opening ways to gay marriage by giving to gay couples significant 
victories. Judge Roberto Arriada Lorea told, “In no place is it said that 
homosexuals are not allowed to marry and are not allowed to adopt a child.” 
Since 2004, register offices in Rio Grande do Sul are bound to accept the 
register of stable union for homosexuals, who are also entitled to 
adopt.[16]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn16>

Facing the tsunami  [X] 
<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23>

Liberal mainline denominations in Brazil have embraced a psychological, 
secularist stand on homosexuality. For example, the Evangelical Church of the 
Lutheran Confession, a largely ethnic German denomination, officially declared 
on homosexuality in 2001:

There is among specialists, no absolute consensus nor in the science in regard 
to the nature of homosexuality, nor in the biblical interpretation of those 
passages referring to homosexuality. Neither there is such a consensus in the 
Evangelical Church of Lutheran 
Confession.[17]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn17>

The Roman Catholic Church has an official Vatican paper on homosexuality, but 
their progressive bishops in Brazil have a hard time divulging it publicly.  
Many Protestant churches have basically the same stand as the Vatican paper, 
but most of them do not proclaim their views publicly.  In mainline liberal 
Protestant churches, the stand is public, but there is an effort to avoid 
Biblical condemnation to homosexuality. And while most of the conservative 
churches keep silent on the issue, Brazil has seen the growth of gay 
evangelical churches as the Metropolitan Community Church, a gay denomination 
from the U.S.  Apart from the religious people, moral disapproval to 
homosexuality has been rare, because of the social pressures condemning 
prejudice and homophobia.

However, many Brazilians, especially the poor and the less intellectual, are 
protected from the electronic media, and they represent a serious hindrance to 
the establishment of amoral liberalism, where homosexuality is just an item of 
a larger, sinister agenda.

Among evangelicals, there are some campaigns to reach out to men and women in 
homosexuality. Movimento pela Sexualidade Sadia (Movement for a Healthy 
Sexuality), an evangelical group headed by an ex-homosexual, leads efforts to 
evangelize in gay parades, talking about Jesus to participants and delivering 
leaflets featuring the testimonials of ex-gays and lesbians.

Catholic and evangelical politicians have also been trying to counter the gay 
tsunami through the introduction of bills. Among them are: Bill 2279/03 
(Federal) authored by Representative Elimar Damasceno that makes illegal the 
act of kissing between persons of the same sex in public; Bill 2177/03 
(Federal) authored by Representative Neucimar Fraga that creates an aid and 
assistance program for sexual reorientation of persons who voluntarily opt for 
changing their sexual orientation from homosexuality to heterosexuality.

State representative Edino Fonseca, an Assembly of God minister, introduced a 
bill in the Rio de Janeiro State Legislature to establish social services to 
support men and women wanting to leave homosexuality. He has also introduced a 
bill to protect evangelical groups offering assistance to such men and women 
from discrimination and harassment. His former bill was defeated by the 
powerful gay lobby. The latter bill is facing severe opposition.  It says: “No 
divulging of information on the possibility of support and/or the possibility 
of sexual reorientation of homosexuals is to be considered prejudice.”

With the kind support of Focus on the Family and Dr. James Dobson, in 2004, I 
was able to publish on several Brazilian websites, the document “The Gay Agenda 
and the Sabotage of Human Rights,” written by Dr. Yuri Mantilla and translated 
and adapted by me, exposing the Brazilian sexual orientation in the UN. The 
following excerpts are from the document:

The recognition of sexual orientation as a human right will demolish the 
universal nature of human rights. If sexual orientation (homosexuality) is 
recognized as a human right, laws that protect family in every country will 
suffer grave assault and will be changed so that individuals practicing 
homosexuality will have the right to marriage, to adopt children, affirmative 
action and service in the military, among many other privileges. If the gay 
lifestyle receives protection as a human rights issue, then the universal 
meaning of the family will disappear. Such acceptance of homosexuality will 
violate the rights of family and the legal meaning of marriage of the 
overwhelming majority of people around the world. If human rights are 
recognized based on the sexual behavior of persons practicing homosexual acts, 
then what about the “rights” of pedophiles and other perverts? This kind of 
approach, extremely subjective, knocks down the universal essence of human 
rights. Homosexuality is not a human right, nor even a human need, but only a 
desire to live sexually against nature, and such desires and behaviors cannot 
be given protection and privileges.

The draft resolution of the Brazilian government also says: “Call upon all 
States to promote and protect the human rights of all persons regardless of 
their sexual orientation.” This action will be a serious menace to the right to 
religious freedom, a universally recognized fundamental human right. 
Christianity and other important world religions consider homosexual behavior 
to be a violation of God’s laws, and if the resolution is approved, it will 
endanger the right to religious freedom of millions of Christians around the 
world.  They could be prosecuted merely for expressing their beliefs about 
homosexual conduct and for quoting texts from the Bible disapproving of 
same-sex acts. Even without the approval of this resolution, it is impossible 
to address the problem of propagation of homosexual behavior without suffering, 
especially from the liberal press, accusations of homophobia (a new word coined 
to discourage those wanting to discuss the problem seriously), intolerance and 
religious extremism. Yet, the promotion of homosexual behavior, especially 
among males, spreads atrocious 
diseases.[18]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn18>

The resolution also notes “the attention given to human rights violations on 
the grounds of sexual orientation by the special procedures in their reports to 
the UNCHR, as well as by the treaty monitoring bodies, and encourages all 
special procedures of the UNCHR, within their mandates, to give due attention 
to the subject...”

It is a strange paradox that a large country such as Brazil, with its huge 
Catholic and Evangelical populations, is spearheading the invention of special 
rights for individuals practicing homosexuality as a priority of its foreign 
policy. Even though the pro-homosexuality position of the Brazilian government 
could be seen by other Latin American nations as a totally novel way to address 
human rights issues, this position is not new.  It was not born in Latin 
America. For several years morally decadent Western nations have, under the 
pressure of pro-homosexuality activists, pushed such ideas, and they have 
always sought to influence less developed countries. The current Brazilian 
government has demonstrated its willingness to follow and conform to those 
influences.

Canada and the European countries have been systematically advancing agendas 
that are contrary to the legal, historical, and moral values of Latin America. 
The promotion of abortion and special rights for individuals practicing 
homosexuality is part of these agendas. What is really surprising is the 
position of the Brazilian government, the main proponent of homosexual “rights” 
at the UN Commission on Human Rights. The Socialist government of Brazil is 
imitating the European pro-homosexual radicalism, and such radicalism is 
contrary to the laws and culture of Brazil and Latin 
America.[19]<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23endfn19>

In the document, I introduced all the names, addresses, email and phone 
contacts from the Brazilian ambassadors to the UN. This alert helped mobilize 
some Catholic and evangelical leaders. Later, international gay groups 
complained about the successful Brazilian grass-roots efforts to press the Lula 
administration to abandonits sexual orientation resolution in the UN.

The fight of an evangelical psychologist  [X] 
<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23>

Usually, medical literature in Brazil does not refer to homosexuality as an 
abnormal behavior, for many fear the politically correct police. Yet, a 
courageous evangelical psychologist Dr. Rozangela Justino, has founded Abraceh, 
the Association for Support to the Human Being and Family, an NGO to help men 
and women who want to leave homosexuality voluntarily.

For her attitude of showing compassion to homosexuals in need, Dr. Justino has 
been suffering threats and intimidations even from the Federal Council of 
Psychology in Brazil.

According to Dr. Justino, “Most of the psychoanalysts consider homosexuality to 
be a perversion and in a general way psychologists understand homosexuality as 
immaturity in the psychosexual development. The World Health Organization 
classifies several behaviors linked to homosexuality as disturbances and 
directs people to seek treatment for change. From a spiritual perspective, it 
is a sin. Nevertheless, the Federal Council of Psychology (FCP) issued the 
resolution below. Because FCP issued this resolution, pro-homosexuality 
activists press the Rio de Janeiro FCP chapter to punish me. I have been 
threatened by administrative lawsuits from the FCP chapter, but they know that 
the Federal Constitution and the Declaration of Human Rights favor me, for we 
still have scientific, expression, and religious freedom in Brazil.”

Below are excerpts from the Federal Council of Psychology Resolution

23 March 1999

“It establishes norms of conduct for psychologists in regard to the subject of 
Sexual Orientation.”

WHEREAS, homosexuality is not a disease, disturbance or perversion;

WHEREAS, Psychology can and should contribute through its knowledge to clarify 
the subjects of sexuality, helping to overcome pre-judices and discriminations;

It determines

Article 2: Psychologists should contribute, through their knowledge, to a 
reflection on pre-judice and to the extinction of discrimination and 
stigmatizations against those demonstrating homoerotic behaviors or practices.

Article 3: Psychologists shall not use any action for making homoerotic 
behaviors or practices pathological, nor shall they use coercion to direct 
homosexuals to unsolicited treatments.

Sole paragraph: Psychologists shall not collaborate with events and services 
proposing treatment and cures of homosexualities.

Article 4: Psychologists shall not offer their opinions, nor will they 
participate in public pronouncements, in the media, with a view to reinforcing 
existing social prejudices in regard to homosexuals as sufferers of psychic 
disorders.

What should Brazilian evangelicals do?  
[cid:a2a7477f-cfb4-44d8-ab7d-2ccf95c49e51] 
<https://archive.is/o/CLb4/www.profam.org/pub/rs/rs.2305.htm%23>

The homosexual expansion has been extraordinary in Brazil, because gay 
activists and their allies are completely focused on their goal. Likewise, 
evangelical churches should focus on their responsibility to bring homosexual 
men and women into a relationship with Christ.

Both Catholics and evangelicals need to be delivered from Liberation Theology 
and its Protestant versions, which keep them focused on many irrelevant and 
diverting issues. In order to face the social, political, and legal challenges 
from the gay activism, Christians in Brazil should have a social and political 
involvement free from “progressive chains.”

Even though many evangelicals disagree with the abortion and homosexual 
position of the Lula administration, they are urged by “progressive” propaganda 
to divert their attention to many other issues: health, education, and job 
assistance to the poor, etc. Homosexuality and abortion are just minor items on 
a long list of leftist interests on the agenda of evangélicos progressistas. 
Sadly, evangelicals in Brazil are misled into believing that Christian social 
action preached by the progressistas is the gospel.

Therefore, to counter these evangelical misconceptions about social action, 
there is a need to launch efforts to educate the evangelical public that there 
is real social action other than the progressive approach. Thus they would be 
better prepared to face adequately major challenges, such as abortion and 
homosexuality. Of course the other issues would also be addressed, but not from 
a leftist perspective.

Brazilian people will choose their new president in 2006. Again, the candidates 
promise social and political miracles and everything else appealing to the 
hearts of the voters. The great tragedy is that, according to polls, most 
evangelicals will vote for him who has during all of his administration 
promoted just the values that the Bible condemns.

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<RadicalCentrism@googlegroups.com>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to radicalcentrism+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to