;-( Also a sad story of how the church failed the society and became marginalized.
Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 13, 2018, at 07:41, Billy Rojas <1billyro...@buglephilosophy.com> > wrote: > > > "The Religion & Society Report" Online Edition [SwanSearch] > Our Publications: The Family in America | New Research | The Religion > & Society Report | Family Update, Online! > 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 <PASTEDIMAGE.PNG> > > 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] In the PT official website there is even an entire page flattering > “comrade Jackson.”[2] > > 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 > > 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] 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 > > 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] > > 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] 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] 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] > > 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] > > 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] > > 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] > > 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] 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] > > 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] > > 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 > > 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] > > 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] 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] > > FACING THE TSUNAMI > > 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] > > 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] > > 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] > > 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 > > 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? <PASTEDIMAGE.PNG> > > 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. -- -- 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.
