Friday, May 29, 2009

Christian shows face ban from daytime TV in Brazil

Christian shows face ban from daytime TV in Brazil

Christian TV programmes that mention the Bible’s teaching on homosexual conduct face being banned from daytime viewing by the Brazilian government.

The government has already proposed that a notice should be broadcast before such Christian programmes, warning viewers that the shows are not recommended for people under the age of 18.

Brazil’s Justice Secretary told a newspaper there that while such programmes would be restricted to after 11pm, “the ideal is that they not be shown at any time.”

A critic of the move, Peter LaBarbera, said: “It seems that the Brazilian government is moving towards a pro-homosexual totalitarianism which directly impinges on the rights of Christians to be Christian.”

Pro-family campaigner Julio Severo said: “Catholic radio and TV shows now run the risk of being rated as ‘morally harmful,’ ‘homophobic’ and ‘unsuitable for children and teens’.”

If the policy is carried out in accordance with Brazilian President Luiz Lula’s definition of “homophobia,” the new restrictions will effectively ban public statements on television that identify homosexual behaviour as sinful or unhealthy.

President Lula is also seeking to pass an “anti-homophobia” law that would ban any public criticism of homosexuals or homosexual behaviour.

He recently reiterated his commitment to “criminalise words or acts that are offensive to homosexuality”.

The British government is determined to remove a free speech clause from the offence of ‘inciting hatred on grounds of sexual orientation’.

The clause makes clear that mere criticism of homosexual conduct is not, in itself, a crime. It was approved by Parliament last year but Gordon Brown’s government wants to remove it.

Source: The Christian Institute


Thursday, May 28, 2009

“Homophobic” Christian TV on the outs in Brazil?

“Homophobic” Christian TV on the outs in Brazil?

Charlie ButtsOneNewsNow

The Brazilian government is seeking to ban from daytime television what it refers to as “homophobic” Christian programming.

The government initially wants to put up a disclaimer that the shows are not recommended for people under the age of 18. A Brazilian government official told a newspaper there that while such programs would be restricted to after 11:00 p.m., “the ideal is that they not be shown at any time.”

Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality offers his reaction. “It seems that the Brazilian government is moving towards a pro-homosexual totalitarianism which directly impinges on the rights of Christians to be Christian,” he shares. “I think that this is a very dangerous road, and we need to be watching it from the United States.”

The move, he points out, also means children will not be getting the biblical view on the subject from television.

“This is the new socialism, which now appears to be directly repressing biblical speech on the issue of homosexuality — and we need to watch it because there are socialist advocates in the United States,” LaBarbera cautions. “The idea that Christian programming needs to be labeled as... ‘homophobic’ is just bizarre, but it’s very dangerous that this is being done so openly.”

The family advocate believes the Brazilian government is so beholden to its homosexual allies that it is directly suppressing speech. He contends that homosexual activists know there is little support for homosexuality in the South American country, so they want to suppress opposition to it before it mounts.

Source: OneNewsNow


Related coverage:

Brazilian Government Seeks to Remove “Homophobic” Christian Programming from Daytime TV

Anti-“homophobic” state censorship in Brazil

Brazilian President Will Seek to “Criminalize Words and Acts Offensive to Homosexuality”

Prominent Pro-Family Activist Julio Severo Flees Brazil to Escape Charges of “Homophobia”

Brazilian President: Opposition to Homosexuality is a “Perverse Disease”

Brazilian Homosexuals File “Hate” Charges Against Brazilian Christians

Brazilian Gay Groups Launch Multiple Lawsuits to Silence Christian Opposition

Leader of Brazil Homosexual Movement Under Investigation for Pedophilia

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

The omnipotence of the Brazilian state

The omnipotence of the Brazilian state

Augusto Zimmermann

If statism is defined as an ideology which provides a preferential role for the state in society, placing the state as the main agent of social action and transformation, this sort of statism is very pervasive in Brazilian society. It unites people from all social classes and ideological inclinations.

Brazilians seem to expect just about everything from the State. From jobs, stable prices, credit, subsidies for carnival masquerades, there is hardly anything for which the government is not expected to provide. It is not that the ruling elite in Brazil comprises only bureaucrats but rather that the state bureaucracy is the base to which all other groups adhere either through alliance or dependence. Since the state is the ultimate provider of resources, “the citizenry expects to live at government expense and under full protection”.

Consequently, statism has been supported in Brazil by old-fashioned socialists, neo-mercantilist businessmen, conservatives who oppose social change, the military, privileged bureaucrats, intellectuals who seek after state subvention, and all sorts of “compassionate” individuals who think the state is the only entity with power to reduce social inequalities.

To understand the intrinsic correlation between statism and Brazilian-style corruption, for instance, one needs to consider the reality of a state that has historically been above society. Statism in Brazil is a by-product of an old “spoils-system” inherited from Portugal, a country where the monarch granted to his staff, and preferred subjects, all sorts of graces and favours at the expense of the law.

Statism also finds its early roots in Portugal's disdain for individual freedom and initiative. In Portugal’s Catholic medieval hierarchy, the class of entrepreneurs (traders) was ranked lowest on the social scale. In that country, “as in Communist China and Marxist Russia”, C.R. Boxer commented, “the merchant was regarded as a parasitic and profiteering middle-man, resolved to enrich himself at the expanse of his fellow-men”.

During colonial times, the Portuguese Crown possessed an enormous variety of commercial monopolies, ranging from the importation of sugar to the control of the soap industry. Regional and district monopolies were granted to favoured individuals and courtiers. Even the manufacture and sale of soap was, for centuries, monopolised by the Crown. In 1660, for instance, the white soap monopoly of Lisbon was granted to a Carmelite nun, the Countess of Calheta, on condition she gave a share of the profits to two distinguished general officers, Dom Luís de Menezes and Gil Vaz Lobo. According to Boxer:

It would take too long to enumerate… all the overseas sources of wealth which were exploited by the Crown at one time or another, whether in the form of a (theoretically) rigorous monopoly, or a percentage of the profits, or in the way of Customs duties and export and import dues … Even such trivia as river ferry-crossings and the dues from washermen, limeburners and fishermen were often rented out by the Crown or by its representatives. Perhaps more than any other country, it was a long-established practice in Portugal for the Crown (and its successor republic) to farm out the smallest public offices which might be expected to produce any revenue; and the same procedure was followed in Portuguese India, Ceylon, Africa and Brazil.

Another factor that contributed to the growth of statism was slavery, which lasted longer in Brazil than in any other nation in the Western world, only being abolished in 1888. In his 1879 visit to the country, US historian Herbert H. Smith associated slavery with a “culture of indolence, pride, and selfishness” that, in his opinion, made many Brazilians aspire to live “as parasites on others or on the government”. In brief, slavery left as its heritage a mass trained to be dependent on the government and others. According to the late historian José Honório Rodrigues:

It was not recognised that ... poverty could be overcome by work and saving. Work was scorned; it was reserved exclusively for slaves. No attention was paid to saving, with the result that the capital required for possession and enjoyment of the riches so greatly vaunted in speeches was never accumulated.

Centuries of slavery had indeed the effect of debasing the value of labour and perverting the sense of individual liberty and responsibility. It left “deep prejudices against active life … and disinclination to serious endeavour in the areas of commerce and industry”, thus generating a society with marked contempt for any work other than that of a public position.

The State became, in the words of the great abolitionist (anti-slavery) leader Joaquim Nabuco, “the refuge of the descendents of the rich and noble families who squandered the fortunes acquired through slavery”. Nabuco established the intrinsic connection between slavery and statism as follows:

Among the classes which slavery artificially generates, the largest is that of the public employees. The close relationship between slavery and the epidemic of bureaucratism is not more open to doubt than the relationship between it and the superstition of the All-Providing State. Under that system, the government is counted on for everything.

Being the only active organisation, the state covets and absorbs all disposable capital by means of taxation and loans, distributing among its clients by means of public employment, absorbing the savings of the poor through inflation and rendering precarious the fortunes of the well-to-do. Any twenty or thirty Brazilians to be met wherever our most cultivated society gathers can provide the example. All of them either once were, or now are, or will one day be public employees; and if not they themselves, then their sons.

Complaints over excessive statism were commonplace throughout the country’s period of constitutional monarchy (1822-89). In 1870, prominent politician A.C. Tavares Bastos argued that there existed in Brazil a “fear of companies”, which he directly associated with an “anachronistic tradition of despotism that denies the modern spirit of liberty”.

In fact, as early as 1853 entrepreneurs like the Viscount of Mauá complained that “everything is expected from the government and that individual initiative does not exist”. He argued that any economic activity depended on “official sensibilities” continuing to exist, and that people were much inclined to consider the state as the “tutor” (paternal protector) of society. As a result, the most successful businesspeople were merely “clients” of the landed gentry who controlled the state machinery and expected to receive “unbearable tutelage of the government”. They saw this as an easier means of acquiring wealth than through work and production.

Unfortunately, the reality of statism hasn’t changed over the years. Brazil’s most successful business people are still neo-mercantilists who practice all sorts of cartel capitalism with the state. Under the pretext of defending “national interest”, they request privileges such as preferential interest rates and special loans from state banks and other governmental agencies, which they often do not have to repay. As a result, law professor William Prillaman explains, “aspiring entrepreneurs are unable to seek relief, because economic decision-making is based on political concerns rather than rational dictates of the rule of law”.

This kind of cartel capitalism is developed when the government exercises its power for the enrichment of private interests. It involves, in countries like Brazil, a form of embezzlement of national wealth disguised as protection of the so-called “national interest”.

The deleterious effects of statism in Brazil were aggravated in the 1960s with the ascension to power of nationalistic military officers. At the end of their long, authoritarian regime in March 1985, these army rulers left behind more than 600 state-owned companies. By 1983, state companies accounted for three-quarters of the assets and half of the sales, profits, and employment of the 200 largest corporations. In 1985, government expenditure represented 37.6 per cent of GDP, by far the highest of all countries in Latin America.

The bureaucratic sector charged with managing this huge and notoriously inefficient, state machinery resembled in many respects the notorious nomenklatura of the former communist regimes in Eastern Europe. Some of these state employees worked only nine months a year and yet received a salary that was the equivalent of 16 working months. In an attempt to finance the numerous privileges of these bureaucrats, Brazil has become one of most heavily taxed nations in the world. Unfortunately, many of these privileges have not been abolished. For example, in today’s Brazil, John Fitzpatrick says:

While the government’s subsidies amount to almost R$25,000 (US$8,000) a year for former state employees, the subsidy for “normal” pensioners who get the ordinary state pension is less than R$1,000 (US$320). Pensions take up so much of government spending that the state has little left for other social benefits. Since there are not enough contributors to fund this long-term generosity, the government makes subsidies amounting to more than 5 per cent of GDP to keep the system solvent. Since the government does not have this money it has to borrow and pay sky-high interest rates to do so.

The state bureaucracy, however, has over the present “democratic” period managed to retain its traditional power and prestige in society. They have convinced many Brazilians that the archaic model of national-statism is still a valid option in terms of socio-economic development. They have been able to do this even though a May 2001 document of Transparency International reveals that a sound process of privatisation would “significantly reduce the amount of resources and positions subjected to political bargain”.

Regardless of its would-be federal organisation, the collective fancy in Brazil is still dominated by the omnipotence of the state as the ultimate provider and protector of the citizen. Hence, despite the military period eventually coming to an end (1964-85), statist traditions have survived in a society invariably “colonised” by the bureaucratisation of social life. Arguably, societies with extensive public property holdings, as is the case in Brazil, are vulnerable not only to problems of corruption but also to political arbitrariness.

As Boston University law professor Randy E. Barnett asserts in more generic terms, whenever public authorities “enjoy a vast range of privileges denied their ordinary citizens, and are subject to few of the economic constraints of private institutions, their citizens are forever vulnerable to governmental tyranny”.

In reality, it is evident that all attempts to find a solution to the country’s complex socio-economic problems by increasing government interference have provoked a clear reduction of public accountability. It is a fact that many abuses of power that have occurred throughout Brazil’s history were masqueraded as guaranteeing top-to-bottom rights to the population. For instance, history professor José Murilo de Carvalho comments:

A characteristic of the military government was its concern with welfare policies. Copying the first [populist dictatorship] of the thirties, the military tried to compensate for the removal of civil and political rights by promoting social rights. Social legislation was extended to the rural population, to domestic workers and to the self-employed. Repression for the opposition, paternalism for the poor, support for and alliance with the business community. To use Barrington Moore’s expression, the military tried to modernise the country from above … by means of political authoritarianism.

Consequently, there has been a considerable increase over the years of a bureaucracy ineffectively conducting Brazil’s public affairs, wasting its own resources, and watching out for private and corporate interests. The latter reap immense, often illegal, benefits from a notoriously corrupt and inefficient government. This has resulted in abnormally ineffective government action in areas such as public security, healthcare, and education, which are areas where the government’s constitutional obligation is to exercise its power much more effectively. Currently, the situation in Brazil benefits only a minority of privileged individuals at the expense of society as a whole. The problem of statism needs therefore to be seriously considered, and remedial action needs to be taken. Who is going to lead the charge?

Source: On Line Opinion


Saturday, May 16, 2009

Brazilian Government Seeks to Remove “Homophobic” Christian Programming from Daytime TV

Brazilian Government Seeks to Remove “Homophobic” Christian Programming from Daytime TV

Will add warning to such programs, pushing them to 11 pm or later

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman, Latin America Correspondent

SAO PAULO, May 14, 2009 ( — The Brazilian government is considering adding warning labels to Christian programming it regards as “homophobic,” according to Folha de Sao Paulo, one of Brazil’s largest-circulation newspapers.

According to Folha, the programs will display a warning label that reads, “not recommended for people under the age of 18.”

The newspaper reports that the policy decision stems from a plan for the “promotion of the citizenship of LGBT (lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transvestites, and transsexuals), which will be launched today in the afternoon by the President’s Secretariat of Human Rights.”

Brazil’s Secretary of Justice reportedly told Folha that, while such programming would be restricted to after 11 pm, “the ideal is that they not be shown at any time.”

If carried out in accordance with Brazilian President Luiz Lula’s definition of “homophobia,” the new restrictions will effectively ban public statements on television that identify homosexual behavior as sinful and/or unhealthy.

“Pornographic sex education classes that praise homosexuality cannot be rated as ‘unsuitable for children and teens,’ because they have the approval from the pro-homosexuality socialist State,” writes pro-family activist Julio Severo, himself in exile from Brazil because of charges of “homophobia.”

“Yet, evangelical and Catholic radio and TV shows now run the risk of being rated as ‘morally harmful,’ ‘homophobic’ and ‘unsuitable for children and teens’ and other attributions, until the social climate is ready for heavier measures, including jail, for those transgressing the state standard for social behaviors.”

The measure is only one example of the Lula administration’s national and international homosexualist policy.

Working closely with Brazilian homosexual leader Luiz Mott, Lula has created a nationwide campaign called “Brazil Without Homophobia” that seeks to normalize and legitimize the behavior of homosexuals. As LifeSiteNews has reported, Mott is an open defender of pedophilia and pederasty.

Lula is also seeking to pass an “anti-homophobia” law that would prohibit any public criticism of homosexuals or homosexual behavior. He recently reiterated his commitment to “criminalize words or acts that are offensive to homosexuality” (see LifeSiteNews coverage at

However, even in the absence of the proposed “homophobia” law the Brazilian government has already fined individuals and groups for opposing homosexuality, including the Evangelical group National Vision for the Christian Conscience (VINACC), which was ordered to cancel its pro-family campaign for quoting the Bible’s strictures against homosexual unions.

Related LifeSiteNews coverage:

Brazilian President Will Seek to “Criminalize Words and Acts Offensive to Homosexuality”

Prominent Pro-Family Activist Julio Severo Flees Brazil to Escape Charges of “Homophobia”

Brazilian President: Opposition to Homosexuality is a “Perverse Disease”

Brazilian Homosexuals File “Hate” Charges Against Brazilian Christians

Brazilian Gay Groups Launch Multiple Lawsuits to Silence Christian Opposition

Leader of Brazil Homosexual Movement Under Investigation for Pedophilia


Thursday, May 14, 2009

Anti-“homophobic” state censorship in Brazil

Anti-“homophobic” state censorship in Brazil

Lula administration wants to rate as unsuitable for children and teens TV shows with contents contrary to homosexuality

By Julio Severo

Have you watched Pr. Silas Malafaia preaching on the Brazilian television that homosexuality is sin? Or, have you already had the opportunity to watch R. R. Soares or another preacher explaining that the Bible condemns homosexuality?

Do not miss the opportunity to record these shows and, when given a chance, record also Pope Benedict XVI in his statements explicitly condemning homosexual acts, because as far it depends on the Brazilian Lula administration, Brazilian radio and TV shows broadcasting views contrary to homosexuality will be forced to have the rating of “unsuitable for 18 years old and under”.

No, what you are reading is no delirium, nor from this author, neither from your eyes. It is obvious state ideological delirium turning into political nightmare.

Today, May 14, according to prominent Blog Reinaldo Azevedo and liberal Brazilian paper Folha de S. Paulo, the Human Rights Secretary of the Presidency of Brazil will be launching a plan for the promotion of LGBT (lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transvestites and transsexuals) citizenship. This plan includes a measure of the Lula administration to “rate as unsuitable for children and teens TV shows with homophobic contents”.

Silas Malafaia show? Lula administration rating: “Show with homophobic contents. Unsuitable for children and teens”.

R. R. Soares show? Lula administration rating: “Show with homophobic contents. Unsuitable for children and teens”.

Televised statements by the pope? Lula administration rating: “Show with homophobic contents. Unsuitable for children and teens”.

And if Brazilian Christians become cowardly, giving in to this fascist tyranny, many other evangelical and Catholic shows will be rated as “homophobic” and “unsuitable for children and teens”.

What will not be rated as “unsuitable for children and teens” are the pro-homosexuality books and classes in the public schools. In fact, those books and classes will be rated as compulsory for children in every age.

The Brazilian State unconcernedly indoctrinates children on every kind of immorality, homosexual and otherwise. There is no censorship for this immoral indoctrination, because the one imposing the censorship is the State itself.

If a strange man approached your son to teach him the same filth the State teaches in its schools, you would call police. Why does the State, in the same crimes, deserve exemption when it rapes psychologically children?

It does not only rape, but also wants to classify as criminal people trying, through sermons or warnings to parents, to protect children against this rape.

The pornographic sex education classes that praise homosexuality cannot be rated as “unsuitable for children and teens”, because they have the approval from the pro-homosexuality socialist State.

Yet, evangelical and Catholic radio and TV shows now run the risk of being rated as “morally harmful”, “homophobic” and “unsuitable for children and teens” and other attributions, until the social climate is ready for heavier measures, including jail, for those transgressing the state standard for social behaviors.

When it comes to giving perks and privileges to homosexual fascists, the state chorus, abundantly paid for with our tax-money, yells, “Everything”.

For Christians? “Nothing”, “censorship”, “jail”, etc.

A recent study by a group connected to the socialist party of Brazilian president Lula found that 99% of Brazilians do not accept homosexuality. How do these 99% passively accept that the Lula administration is establishing and protecting immoral pro-homosexuality politics and working to criminalize the views of 99% of its population?

Possibly, with so many unbelievable absurdities, the Brazilian people think that this is unreal. While the people see their government deliriously, thinking that it is impossible for an administration to be so devilish, the ideological delirium of the Lula administration — and its measures to implement it — has no limits.

Portuguese version of this article: Na mira anti-“homofóbica” da censura estatal


Brazilian President Will Seek to “Criminalize Words and Acts Offensive to Homosexuality”

Brazilian Ministry of [in]Justice of the Lula administration wants strict control on Internet

Brazilian Government Says 99% of Citizens Are “Homophobic” and Must Be Reeducated

“Study” in the Brazilian newspaper O Globo: 99% Brazilians do not accept homosexuality

Brazilian President: Opposition to Homosexuality is a “Perverse Disease”

A president Hell asked for

Wednesday, May 06, 2009

Iran, hatred of Jews and the schizophrenic Lula administration

Iran, hatred of Jews and the schizophrenic Lula administration

Brazilian representatives at the UN condemn evangelicals, but do not Hitler’s successor

By Julio Severo

On 20 April 2009, dozens of Western representatives walked out during Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s address at the UN-sponsored Durban II conference against racism in Geneva. Even to Westerners, used to tolerating all kinds of prejudice against Israel, the address of the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, at the conference was too much. As usual, he accused Israel of racism and other attributes.

In addition to denying the Holocaust — with about six-million Jews murdered by Nazism —, Ahmadinejad has already told publicly that he desires the destruction of Israel.

Hitler also had similar intentions. Therefore, nations were correct when they isolated the Nazi dictator, who would have never had the opportunity to address a UN conference. Why Ahmadinejad was given such opportunity is a mystery.

Brazil did not reject Hitler’s successor at UN

Nor would Hitler ever have had the opportunity to visit UN or Brazil. The reason that Hitler’s ideological successor has received such opportunity is hard to understand.

Ahmadinejad should be publicly rejected, isolated and condemned for his hate ideas and speeches against the Jews. Otherwise, UN and the nations — not to mention Brazil — should ask Hitler posthumously to forgive them.

Yet, the withdrawal of the Western representatives from the UN conference was a small, though significant, gesture. Brazilian representatives were also present, but they could not walk out — because they were very busy.

What is behind the state battle against “racism” in Brazil

The Brazilian delegation was headed by Racial Equality Minister Edson Santos, successor of Minister Matilde Ribeiro. Even though the Racial Equality Department was supposedly established to fight racial inequality, Ribeiro, the first black to occupy this exotic federal department, revealed its essence, “I think that it is normal for a black not to want to live with whites”. Later, she was dismissed from her post for abusing the taxpayer money.

For Matilde, blacks have the right not to live with whites, if they so desire, and such a choice brings to blacks no criminal condemnation for discrimination. For her, the racial offense or separation is crime only when committed by whites, but strangely it turns into rights when committed by blacks. If, for example, apartheid in South Africa were a system in which blacks lived separately from whites by the will of blacks themselves, Matilde would see no problem. In fact, she would see such segregation as a right for blacks, because as she said, “I think that it is normal for a black not to want to live with whites”.

Matilde has never been condemned for her racist declarations or her corruption. Doesn’t the Left know how to reward and favor its supporters?

Be that as it may, Matilde’s successor was there at the UN conference, to continue her work.

At the UN, Brazilian pai-de-santo condemns Brazil’s evangelicals

Brazilian representatives, who know how to defend reverse discrimination and homosexuality, complained at the UN “anti-racism” conference about racial and cultural “crimes” supposedly happening in Brazil.

This issue was directly addressed by Ivanir dos Santos, a pai-de-santo from Rio de Janeiro. According to the Michaelis Dictionary, “pai-de-santo is a priest of an Afro-Brazilian voodoo cult”, including macumba and candomble. According to the Brazilian press, this pai-de-santo denounced at UN “a new kind of religious persecution in Brazil, which has aimed at temples of candomble and the followers of African religions, in acts provoked by modern Pentecostals”. Brazil, said he, “is the only country preserving religions brought by slaves and these religions should be defended”.

Actually, not only modern Pentecostal churches, but also all the sound Christian churches seek to help deliver people from witchcraft practices. Yet, increasingly those practices have been placed under state protection, and are now considered “culture”. Even the Catholic Church, which is predominant in Brazil, is not spared the attacks sponsored by the Brazilian State. Recently, a book by the Catholic priest Fr. Jonas Abib warning against witchcraft was banned from the Brazilian state of Bahia and now the priest is being prosecuted. The charge? Racism and prejudice.

The truth behind the Afro-Brazilian “culture”

As a son of a former umbanda leader who accepted the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I see no problem in speaking the truth about the witchcraft derived from Africa. In fact, Brazilians remember, when there was still no veil of racial censorship, the periodical scandals reported by media of pai-de-santos involved in a number of child sacrifices.

In his book Porque Deus Condena o Espiritismo (Why God condemns spiritualism, CPAD: Rio de Janeiro, 1987, pages 66-68), journalist Jefferson Magno Costa tells of a case:

It was noon when he found little Fernando, a 9-year-old boy, walking along the railroad track near the city of São Roque, in the rural area of São Paulo. He took the boy home, asked his lover (with whom he had been living for some weeks), Dalva Braga Medeiros, to give the boy food and change his clothes.

Dalva was slow to comply and he took the clothes of one of the woman’s children and put it on Fernando. After drinking blue rum, he took the boy by his hand and went out, saying that he was going to buy more rum. Upon his return, Dalva saw blood stains on the little Fernando’s clothes. Immediately she understood that the boy had been raped.

Some minutes later, he invited Fernando to go out again, but because the boy refused and showed fear, he decided to call 12-year-old Rogério, Dalva’s son, to keep company with that scared and defenseless child, and to “see how a little pig is killed”.

Leading the two boys up to a hilltop, he drew a trident on the floor. Next, as Rogério reported, he grabbed little Fernando by his neck and jabbed a knife deeply into his chest. But, unsatisfied because the boy was slow to die, pai-de-santo Josué Rodrigues de Souza made a four-inch cut on the neck of the small victim, and began to lick his blood.

After committing this abominable, horrendous and devilish act, the pai-de-santo murderer called Dalva, “because she had never seen a sacrifice”. He showed her the dead child covered in blood. He confessed to her that he’d committed the murder under possession of demon Zé Capoeira, and that he raped the child before killing him, “because Satan does not accept the soul of pure people” (O Globo newspaper, 13/03/1986). “I had to kill a person and give his blood to Satan. He was demanding”, were his words when seized after the crime. (Veja magazine 19/03/1986, p. 111).

Journalist Jefferson Magno notes,

The atrocious crime committed by pai-de-santo Josué is only one of hundreds of cases involving people that, thinking that they are serving God, are serving Satan… Given the numerous cases of that kind reported by press, it is sad that the outrage of the general populace has no memory. Society forgets things easily. Some years ago, pai-de-santo Waldir Souza Lima was taken into custody in Rio, because he killed, in black magic rituals, six children abducted in different locations in the State of Rio. (Page 73)

Witchcraft protected, evangelicals unprotected

The ideology “fighting racism”, which has been used to strengthen and promote the Afro-Brazilian “culture” and persecute Christians who warn about witchcraft, has now hit the UN, where pai-de-santo Ivanir dos Santos accused Brazilian evangelicals opposed to witchcraft practices of “racism”.

While the Lula administration advances furiously the protection of the Afro-Brazilian “culture”, the sold-out Brazilian press points exaggeratedly to the supposed violations to that “culture” and it covers up real crimes committed by it.

Today, it no longer reports of pai-de-santos sacrificing children. And it is unwilling to talk about other related crimes.

On 20 December 2008 Rev. Francisco de Paula Cunha de Miranda, 47, was murdered in Rio Grande do Sul. The minister, who was black (and cannot, even after his death, be accused of “racism”), was on his 33rd day of fasting and prayer when pai-de-santo Júlio César Bonato, under the possession of the “cultural” exu caveira (demon of death), left his temple during a ritual to go to the minister.

Pai-de-santo returned to his ritual with his ritualistic knife bloody.

The minister, who was very weak because of the long fasting, was stabbed to death.

If it had been the crime of a pai-de-santo murdered by an evangelical minister, the Brazilian media and the Lula administration would have harped on it incessantly. And pai-de-santo Ivanir dos Santos would be screaming bloody murder at the “anti-racism” UN conference, using and abusing the “example” of hatred of evangelicals against the Afro-Brazilian “culture”.

Yet such was not the case, so the Lula administration and the liberal media dismiss the option of shouting it to rooftops. In fact, they chose cover-up. So far, the case of the black minister has not reached the Brazilian mainstream media. And if it does someday, they will manage to blame the victim, who is dead and cannot defend himself.

Meanwhile, State and media attack and silence every Christian attempt to warn against the serious threat of witchcraft.

Between friends

Is the behavior of the Brazilian representatives at the UN any wonder then? They were so busy spewing their anti-Christian hate that they had no time to avoid the speech of the Hitler’s successor, and he is delighted that the Lula Brazilians did not isolate him.

Other nations have isolated Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for his attempts to produce nuclear weapons to make good his wish to destroy Israel. But this is no problem for Brazilian socialist President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who publicly announced his support for Iran’s nuclear energy program in September 2007. And Lula did more: He invited Ahmadinejad to visit Brazil.

Israel has protested such visit, but Lula — who has since the beginning of his administration in 2003 visited several Muslim countries, including nations around Israel, but not Israel — does not care.

The 6 May 2009 visit to Brazil by Ahmadinejad, the outspoken enemy of the survival of the Jew State, is most significant. It proves, beyond the shadow of a doubt, what Lula and his ideology represent to Brazil.

Will hypocrites inherit the Kingdom of Heaven?

It proves also Lula’s hypocrisy. Lula, whose socialist administration has since 2003 been advancing the homosexual agenda in pioneering resolutions in the UN and OAS, now welcomes in Brazil Ahmadinejad, whose administration allows systematic killings of homosexuals.

This is a perverse political and ideological game, where values and lives are sacrificed for convenience. He who wants to criminalize in Brazil even simple words against homosexuality, attacking free speech head on and directly threatening Christians, sees no problem in his alliance with one who grants no free speech or safety to Christians and homosexuals in Iran.

When it comes to hate, State policies against some social and religious group and their values — do you remember the federal program “Brazil without Homophobia”? —, Lula is not alone: He has Ahmadinejad. Even though the target is different, their hate is similar.

Ahmadinejad is a sponsor of terrorist groups against Israel. In turn, Lula, at the end of a comfortable second term in his presidency supported by opportunistic Christian leaders, is now very unconcernedly sponsoring the presidential candidacy of Dilma Rousseff, who has a history of communistic terrorism.

Ahmadinejad and Lula represent the marriage between socialism and Islamism.

When it comes to hypocrisy, Lula is not alone either.

Many Brazilian Christians and their leaders are also hypocritical, and suicidal: out of strictly economical interests, they join forces with Lula, who is establishing in Brazil a schizophrenic secular State that is essentially an anti-Christian socialist dictatorship.

In turn, Lula makes schizophrenic alliances with those leaders, with homosexual activists (who want to destroy traditional marriage and Christian values), with Ahmadinejad (who hates homosexuals, Jews and Christian values), with witches (whoops! I mean priests of the Afro-Brazilian “culture”, who also hate Christian values), etc.

So how will many Christian leaders in Brazil have the moral courage to condemn the wicked policies and alliances of Lula when their relationship with him is marked by the same insincerity and opportunism? They use Lula — and he uses them.

After all, Lula wants brazenly to establish a National Day Against Hypocrisy, not for himself and his Christian allies, but for those opposing his immoral agenda.

Will cowards inherit the Kingdom of Heaven?

History suggests that while Rome was in flames, Emperor Nero played his harp. Brazil is different: while Christians play their harps, Lula plays with Ahmadinejad and incinerates their freedom by imposing state protection for the Afro-Brazilian “culture”.

Yet it seems that many of them do not understand those dangers and do not care about the threats against Israel or the threats against themselves.

They did not deny the schizophrenic Brazilian Nero their votes and public support and now refuse to confront their president in his immoral anti-Christian agenda. While Brazil is in flames under that agenda, they keep playing their harps, expecting their turn to go to Heaven.

Does Heaven reward cowardice?

Last minute news: The visit of the Hitler’s successor was cancelled, not because of some honorable attitude of Lula opposing it, but because of Ahmadinejad’s decision, who postponed it for some time after the Iranian elections. Honorable men publicly condemn evil, and a Brazilian president has the moral obligation to condemn Ahmadinejad publicly and reject his visit. But Lula’s socialist ideology speaks louder than good character and its responsibilities.

Also published in two parts here:

Iran, hatred of Jews and the schizophrenic Lula administration. Part 1

Iran, hatred of Jews and the schizophrenic Lula administration. Part 2

Portuguese version of this article: Irã, ódio aos judeus e o esquizofrênico governo Lula


In search of the ancient altars: Rejecting the Israel roots and welcoming the Afro roots

Message to President Lula on Israel

The Great Gaffe of Lula Against Israel

Tuesday, May 05, 2009

'How hate crimes laws forced me into exile'

'How hate crimes laws forced me into exile'

Pro-family activist stages own disappearance

Posted: April 20, 2009

By Alyssa Farah


Julio Severo, a prominent Brazilian pro-family activist, has been forced into exile because of the "hate crimes" laws that are being implemented in his native land, perhaps providing a preview of what Christians can expect in the United States should similar "hate crimes" proposals be implemented.

And several organizations are reporting Congress could begin adopting measures similarly draconian to Brazil's as early as this week.

"It is imperative that we contact all members of the House and demand that they vote against this bill as it will not protect a pastor, Bible teacher, Sunday School teacher, youth leader or anyone else from prosecution if he or she teaches against homosexuality if an individual who hears their message then goes out and commits a crime against a homosexual," wrote Pastor Rick Scarborough of Vision America Action, which as a website link to make that contact.

"Hate crimes laws that include sexual orientation are a bad idea, because they elevate homosexuality to the same status as race and do nothing to prevent violent crimes. All crimes are motivated by hate," said Mathew Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel, which also is alerting people to the congressional plans.

"Hate crimes laws will not be used to punish the perpetrators but will be used to silence people of faith, religious groups, clergy, and those who support traditional moral values," Staver said.

Severo reports he was forced to flee his homeland after federal prosecutors there recently charged him with "homophobia' for his statements about the nation's "Gay" Parade in 2006.

Get "The Marketing of Evil: How Radicals, Elitists, and Pseudo-Experts Sell Us Corruption Disguised as Freedom"

Severo told WND that while Brazil does not criminalize Christianity, it does regulate what biblical principles can and cannot be preached, and it bans biblical citations that disapprove of the homosexual lifestyle.

"Brazil grants freedom to preach Christianity, provided that the sermons avoid negative mentions of state-protected behaviors and cultural trends," Severo said. "The Brazilian government is establishing more and more categories of protected behaviors, banning negative mentions. So Brazilian preachers need to get updated on the latest political changes and preach a Gospel according to the state interests."

He said, "Today it is risky to preach a complete Gospel in Brazil. Because of the diversity politics, you cannot say anything negative about witchcraft, especially when such practices are from Africa."

He cited an example of what is happening.

"In Rio, a Pentecostal minister led a criminal to Jesus and convinced him to deliver himself to police. Rev. Isaías da Silva Andrade accompanied the former criminal to police and when they asked how his life had been changed, the minister answered that the former criminal lived under the influence of demons from Afro-Brazilian religions which inspired him to criminal conduct, but now he found salvation in Jesus. Because of this innocent account, Rev. Andrade is now being prosecuted for discrimination against the Afro-Brazilian 'culture'! If condemned, he will serve between two and five years in jail," Severo said.

Severo reported on his blog that prosecutors were working to find him by demanding his address from friends and acquaintances.

So he said he took matters into his own hands to protect himself and his family, as well as his friends, from further discrimination.

'"I was forced to leave the country with my family: a wife in the advanced stages of pregnancy and two little children," he reported on his blog. "We are now in a place that is completely foreign to us. What choice did we have?"

He said Brazil has no law stating that the broadly interpreted "homophobia" – a term used derogatorily against those who choose to follow biblical precepts and not endorse homosexuality – is illegal.

But he said case rulings show that it is considered a crime. In fact, he said Brazil is one of a growing number of countries cracking down on "homophobia."

Severo said an influential homosexual activist attempted to publish his name and contact information, which he believes was an attempt to intimidate him. He said he became alarmed and concerned for his own safety and that of his family.

"Because of the fierce opposition of gay militants and their charges against me, I had limited freedom to appear openly in Brazil," Severo said. "The most important homosexual leader in Brazil tried to publish my complete name, physical address and telephone number, in a stealth way of intimidating me. Yet, even now I have to be careful."

WND has reported that the Obama administration has stated its dedication to strengthening "federal hate crimes legislation" and expanding "hate crimes protection."

Gary Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission was among those raising the warning of impending "hate crimes" legislation in the United States.

"One of the gravest threats to religious liberty and freedom of speech is proposed hate crime legislation. Even while national attention is focused on the economy and Obama's radical economic and foreign policy, the far left is at work undermining our First Amendment rights at home with hate crime legislation," he said.

"In other countries where these types of laws have been implemented, pastors and Christians have been jailed and fined for their faithful adherence to the Scriptures," he said.

He reported Barney Frank, an openly homosexual congressman, announced Thursday that the House Judiciary Committee will be considering "hate crimes" legislation, H.R. 1913, this week.

"Frank is expecting the committee to pass the bill which would leave it in the House to vote on later this spring, according to a news release issued by Barney Frank on his website last week," Cass said.

As reported earlier by CADC, the bill, H.R. 1913, is named the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act. The bill already had 42 co-sponsors. The bill was introduced into the House on April 2 by U.S. Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

"All freedom loving Americans must voice their opposition to this bill. If this bill passes it lays the foundation for censoring Christians. In other countries, like in Canada and Sweden, where these types of hate crime laws have been implemented, pastors and Christians have been jailed and fined for their faithful adherence to biblical values," he said.

Also raising the alarm was the Traditional Values Coalition, where Executive Director Andrea Lafferty said, "the so-called hate crimes bill will be used to lay the legal foundation and framework to investigate, prosecute and persecute pastors, business owners, Bible teachers, Sunday School teachers, youth leaders, Christian counselors, religious broadcasters and anyone else whose actions are based upon and reflect the truths found in the Bible."

The organization warned based on a broad definition of "intimidation," even "a pastor's sermon could be considered 'hate speech' … if heard by an individual who then acts aggressively against persons based on any 'sexual orientation.'"

The organization noted during markup of the plan in a 2007 committee hearing, Rep. Artur Davis, D-Ala., admitted that the law would not protect a pastor from prosecution.

Scarborough reported the U.S. plan is to be voted on in the House Judiciary Committee Wednesday.

"Hate crimes laws are actually 'thought crimes' laws that violate the right to freedom of speech and of conscience," warned Liberty Counsel. "Hate crimes laws will have a chilling effect on people who have moral or religious objections to homosexual behavior. Evidence of a person’s beliefs will be used against any individuals who are even suspected of criminal activity.

"Hate crimes laws are unnecessary, as criminal laws already provide criminal penalties for the violent crimes," the organization continued. "Additional penalties will subject individuals to scrutiny of their beliefs, rather than focusing on a person’s criminal actions, and will do nothing to prevent crime."

Severo said, "If they wish to continue with their absurd acts against me for 'homophobia,' I state that I am no longer in Brazil. Leave my friends in peace."

But that doesn't mean people won't hear from him.

"I will not be silenced. The voice that God gave me will continue to be used to alert Brazil, whether I am in India, Kenya, Nicaragua, or any other country in the world," he said.

The article that originally sparked controversy, in which Severo criticized Brazil's homosexual parade, also urged homosexuals to repent of their behavior and turn to Christianity. The article went on further to suggest that there are links between homosexual organizations and pedophilia.

Some in the U.S. are fighting back, too, including Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas.

He appears in a YouTube video arguing against the earlier plan.

"A large part of this is that many people do not understand the Christian heart," he said. "They just don't like people who disagree with them. The true Christian heart can disagree with people, and still love them deeply," he said.

But the law, Gohmert said, would allow prosecutors to "go after a minister … who says [sexual] relations outside of the marriage of a man and a woman are wrong."

The congressman says if there is a crime, and the suspect says he was inspired by a minister, the preacher suddenly also would be a defendant in the crime.

Tony Perkins of FRC Action also was busy alerting his constituents.

He emphasized that the scenario explained by Gohmert not only is possible but probable.

"How would it happen? A federal 'hate crimes' law prohibiting 'bodily injury' could be construed by many law enforcement officials and judges to include words that inflict emotional or psychological distress," he said. "That means an 'offended' homosexual could accuse a religious broadcaster … a pastor … Sunday School teacher … or other individual of causing emotional injury simply by expressing the biblical view that homosexual behavior is morally wrong and unhealthy.

"That's all it could take to trigger a wave of federal prosecutions and begin an era of censorship like America has never seen!" he warned.

Critics have said "hate crimes" laws actually criminalize thought because they demand enhanced penalties because of the "perception" of the victim by the perpetrator. A mugger, for example, who attacks a victim while screaming an epithet denoting a race or sexual preference could get a much more significant penalty than a mugger who attacks a victim but doesn't say anything.

Matt Barber, director of cultural affairs at Liberty Counsel, has spoken out repeatedly in opposition to the idea.

"The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees equal protection under the law," he said. "Hate crimes legislation is … [a] violation of the Fourteenth Amendment in that it elevates one class of citizen based upon their chosen sexual behaviors above other people."

Coral Ridge Ministries, launched by the late D. James Kennedy, has published a book on the issue by John Aman, who says such laws put into doubt "the future of religious liberty and freedom of speech for Christians."

Source: WND