Brazil’s Supreme Court criminalizes “homophobia,” making discriminatory acts and views against homosexuals a crime like racism

By Julio Severo

Brazil’s supreme court officially forged “homophobia” and “transphobia” as crimes similar to racism on June 13, 2019. Eight of 11 justices voted to treat “homophobia” in the same way as racism under Brazilian law, making it a criminal act as racism.

The big homosexualist advance in Brazil made headlines in major U.S. and international newspapers, including:

Reuters: “Brazil Supreme Court rules homophobia a crime.”

Associated Press: “Brazil’s supreme court votes to make homophobia a crime.”

The Wall Street Journal: “Brazil’s Supreme Court Criminalizes Homophobic Acts.”

USAToday: “Brazil's Supreme Court criminalizes homophobia and transphobia.”

The Daily Beast: “Brazil’s Supreme Court Votes to Criminalize Homophobia.”

Racism was made a crime in Brazil in 1989 with prison sentences of up to five years. The Supreme Court’s judges ruled that “homophobia” should be framed within the racism law.

“Homophobic crimes are as alarming as physical violence,” Supreme Court Vice-President Luiz Fux said on his vote, citing “epidemic levels of homophobic violence.”

This definition of violence encompasses not only acts but also views. “Every preconception is violence,” said justice Carmen Lucia. So a Christian advocating the Bible teaching that homosexual acts are sin would be seen as an individual with a “religious preconception.”

The Oxford Dictionary defines “preconception” as “an idea or opinion formed prior to having evidence for its truth or usefulness.” In this case, the provider of the evidence of “truth” is the State and any view, biblical or otherwise, not conforming the state view is “preconception.”

In the Brazilian law of racism, any view or a single word calling a black individual of “Negro” is liable of legal punishment. So if the anti-“homophobia” law is now framed within the racism law, it follows that an individual expressing any negative word about homosexuals will be liable to legal punishment.

The action judged by Brazil’s Supreme Court to make “homophobia” a crime was originally brought by the Socialist Popular Party and the Brazilian Association of Gays, Lesbians and Transgenders (known as ABGLT).

The Socialist Popular Party is behind of the criminalization of “homophobia” in Brazil because it is just natural for socialists to seek to criminalize the main threat to socialism: Bible-believing Christians.

ABGLT is also behind of the criminalization of “homophobia” in Brazil because it has for many years persecuted Bible-believing Christians who have never harmed any homosexuals, but have defended what the Bible says: that homosexual acts are abomination in God’s sight and that homosexual will not inherit God’s Kingdom.

In 2011 ABGLT filed a complaint to federal prosecutors against Brazilian Pentecostal televangelist Silas Malafaia, the most prominent evangelical leader in Brazil, for “inciting violence against LGBT people.” ABGLT’s interpretation of “inciting violence against LGBT people” is to preach against the homosexual sin and oppose homosexual indoctrination of schoolchildren.

In 2007 ABGLT filed a complaint to federal prosecutors against me, Julio Severo, for “for maintaining a website that incites violence against the LGBT community.”

My blog seeks to inform, in a Christian perspective, the public about homosexual subjects censored by the mainstream media. For example, while Brazil’s Supreme Court was busy criminalizing “homophobia” the mainstream media in Brazil was keeping a blackout on the horrific case of Two Brazilian lesbians who stabbed a boy one year after cutting off his sex organ to make him a “girl.”

The Brazilian media is silent. ABGLT and other homosexualist groups are silent. What I am supposed to do? To be silent to be an accomplice of their evil silence? Yet, when I expose this and other horrific cases of homosexual violence against children I am accused of “inciting violence against LGBT people.”

The federal prosecution against me only did not advance because I left Brazil in 2009 just when prosecutors were summoning for their hearings the man responsible for the domain of my website to give them my location to advance their action.

So the “homophobia” law in Brazil is based on socialism and on a gay group that has a history of persecuting evangelical leaders, including me. Such law will certainly target Christians like me, because it is a law produced to serve ideological groups at their own requests. More convenient than this, impossible.

BBC said, “For almost 20 years there have been efforts to make homophobia a crime in Brazil, but legislation on the matter has faced resistance among conservative and religious groups in Congress.” My book “O Movimento Homossexual” (The Homosexual Movement), published in 1998 by the Brazilian branch of Bethany House Publishers, was used by evangelical congressmen on the floor of the Brazilian Congress. “The Homosexual Movement” was the first book published against the homosexual movement in Brazil and prepared prophetically the Christian Church in Brazil for the coming homosexualist assault on the Christian free speech.

Incredibly, the Supreme Court’s judges said their ruling was necessary because homosexuals are legally unprotected.

Homosexual “marriage” was legalized in Brazil in 2013. Even with such privilege, homosexualists and their propaganda machine in the Brazilian mainstream media keep preaching that homosexuals are victims of violence in Brazil and need special protection and more and more privileges.

When reporting on Brazil’s supreme court criminalizing “homophobia,” the Associated Press (AP) said that Brazil “is still a dangerous country for members of the LGBT community and has a large evangelical movement often critical of gay rights.”

So AP suggested that there is a link between “danger for homosexuals” and “evangelical criticism of the homosexual agenda.”

Just as the origin of the criminalization of “homophobia” was socialist and homosexualist, the origin in Brazil of the main resistance to socialism and the homosexual agenda is evangelicalism. EuroNews said, “Support from conservative Pentecostal churches helped Bolsonaro to win the election,” regarding Jair Bolsonaro, who was elected especially by evangelicals to defeat a socialist candidate.

Reuters said, “Evangelicals and other socially conservative Brazilians helped Bolsonaro win last year’s election as he promised to overturn years of liberal social policies, including more rights for same-sex couples. Bolsonaro [is] a Catholic who was baptized by an evangelical pastor on a trip to Israel three years ago.”

Even though is internationally recognized that Bolsonaro had his victory thanks to conservative evangelicals, he has nominated for his administration especially individuals from a fringe esoteric right-wing group that is misleading many Catholics, some evangelicals and particularly Bolsonaro himself.

On June 14, 2019, Bolsonaro told reporters the Supreme Court was “completely wrong” in criminalizing “homophobia” and had overstepped its powers, moving into legislative territory. He added that such criminalization would hurt homosexuals because an employer would “think twice” before hiring a gay person for fear of being accused of “homophobia.”

According to EuroNews, “Congress has a conservative majority under the influence of the Evangelical Church.” In fact, most of the Brazilian conservative congressmen are evangelicals, who traditionally are in Brazilian politics in the forefront of the pro-family resistance against abortion and the homosexual agenda.

Euronews is right. Many times, I worked in the backstage with Brazilian congressmen to stop homosexualist bills. Since 2003, for example, I was an informal adviser to the president of the Evangelical Parliamentary Caucus.

Eventually, the “homophobia” law will treat as “crime” any critical view of homosexual acts and propaganda, because if it is a racial crime to criticize others because of their skin color, why would not be a “homophobic” crime to criticize homosexual behaviors?

Several U.S. and international newspapers used as their only reference source the Grupo Gay of Bahia (Gay Group of Bahia, a Brazilian homosexualist group) to explain that the “homophobia” law is necessary to protect homosexuals from violence.

The Associated Press report said,

“According to the rights group the Grupo Gay da Bahia, 420 LGBT people were killed across Brazil in 2018, while at least 141 have been killed so far this year.”

BBC, the Daily Beast, USAToday and EuroNews also mentioned the Grupo Gay da Bahia and its statistics.

For them, less than 500 deaths a year is enough reason to criminalize “homophobia.”

Now, because the Associated Press, BBC, the Daily Beast, USAToday and EuroNews did their reports without doing their homework, let us show the facts on violence in Brazil. Over 60,000 Brazilians are murdered a year in Brazil. Homosexuals are less than 1 percent of the massive count of violence. How then should they get more privileges if the general population in Brazil suffers an explosive rate of murders?

Of course, the Associated Press, BBC, the Daily Beast, USAToday and EuroNews reports had no concern about the epidemic of homosexual violence against children. The case of the 9-year-old boy castrated, tortured and beheaded by two lesbians is ignored by the mainstream media. Are reporters afraid of being accused of “homophobia” if they mention homosexual violence against children?

The main cause of murders of homosexuals in Brazil is the irrational passion of a lover of the victim. Murdered homosexuals are mostly transvestites, according to Oswaldo Braga, president of the Gay Movement of Minas, who declared, “They are homosexuals that are more involved in criminality, as prostitution and drug trafficking, being more exposed to violence.” (Tribuna de Minas, 09/03/2007, page 3.)

Luiz Mott, the founder of the Grupo Gay da Bahia (Gay Group of Bahia) mentioned by the Associated Press, BBC, the Daily Beast, USAToday and EuroNews, does not complain of drug traffickers killing homosexuals. In 2008, as reported by LifeSiteNews, he posted on the Internet the home addresses of Christian pro-family leaders in Brazil. He included my name too. Why didn’t he post the home addresses of drug traffickers? If he had done it, he would be dead by now.

If I had posted on the Internet his home address, he would accuse me of threatening him and I would be jailed. Why isn’t he jailed?

When the Brazilian Association of Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals, Transvestites and Transsexuals had lodged a criminal complaint to federal prosecutors against me for “homophobia” in 2007, Mott rejoiced then at the news. “We are all proud of the ABGLT for filing charges against our archenemy, Julio Severo,” he was quoted as saying in a Yahoo homosexual email list. “I hope that he is condemned to perpetual imprisonment in Sodom and Gomorrah.”

If I had rejoiced at Mott’s misfortune and said “I hope that he is condemned to perpetual imprisonment in Sodom and Gomorrah,” every Brazilian and international gay group would denounce me for “homophobia.”

So, the main source about violence against homosexuals for the Associated Press, BBC, the Daily Beast, USAToday and EuroNews reports is a homosexual group founded by a homosexualist who does not target drug traffickers who actually kill homosexuals. He targets Christians just like me. Christians who have never killed or even harmed homosexuals. Christians whose only “crime” is to believe and preach God’s Word, where God says that the homosexual sin is an abomination.

How can I doubt that Brazil’s Supreme Court is not criminalizing Christians?

With information from the Associated Press, Reuters, BBC, the Daily Beast, USAToday, EuroNews, Migalhas and Wall Street Journal.

Portuguese version of this article: STF criminaliza a “homofobia,” tornando atos e opiniões discriminatórios contra os homossexuais um crime como o racismo

Source: Last Days Watchman

Recommended Reading:

Two Brazilian lesbians stab a boy one year after cutting off his sex organ to make him a “girl,” but the press and psychologists refuse to link the crime to homosexual behavior

Brazilian Homosexual Singer Calls Jesus “Gay,” “Transvestite” and “Transsexual,” Gets Backlash and Receives U.N. Solidarity

Homolatry: VIP victims in the pervasive violence in Brazil

Julio Severo: ‘How hate crimes laws forced me into exile’

Luiz Mott saves Catholic Church from suffering mega pedophilia scandal

Luiz Mott, the Top Homosexual Leader in Brazil and One of the Founders of ABGLT, Posts Home Addresses of Julio Severo and Other Pro-Family Activists

Luiz Mott Under Investigation for Pedophilia

ABGLT Files “Hate” Charges Against Julio Severo and Other Brazilian Christians

Recommended Reading on the U.S. Left against Julio Severo:

Largest U.S. Gay Magazine Furious Over Evangelical Protest Against U.S. Government Effort to Decriminalize Homosexuality Around the World

Incredible! Right Wing Watch, Which Tracks Conservative Stances to Attack Conservative Leaders, Defends Notre Dame Cathedral Against Julio Severo

Who Is Bothered that I Asked More Conservative Energy from the Family Research Council against the Gay Agenda? Right Wing Watch, of the left-wing group People for the American Way!

What Does Right Wing Watch, of People for the American Way, Have Against Me?

Right Wing Watch, of People for the American Way, Blacklists Julio Severo

Right Wing Watch, of the Far-Left-Wing People for the American Way, Worried that I Am Not Supporting Trump’s Decision Nominating a Gay Judge

Patheos Lambasts Julio Severo for Mentioning Islamic Origin of Statue of Liberty

“Die Hard Democrat” Criticizes Julio Severo for Saying that Statue of Liberty Represents a Pagan-Islamic Curse on America

Atheist Ed Brayton: Julio Severo is a Brazilian ‘wingnut’

Reading the Far Left: Left-Wing Wingnuts Call Conservatives What They Are

Reading the Far Left and Its Attack on Breitbart and BarbWire: Gay Perversion, Veiled and Overt

CNN Attacks Roy Moore Just Because He Shared My BarbWire Piece

“Die Hard Democrat” Criticizes Julio Severo for Not Blaming Hurricane Harvey on Global Warming

“Die Hard Democrat” Criticizes Julio Severo for Saying that Statue of Liberty Represents a Pagan-Islamic Curse on America

Another Recommended Reading:

How to Help Julio Severo through the PayPal Account of the Jewish Institute for Global Awareness

Julio Severo seeks to move Christians to daily prayer with ‘Prophetic Prayers’

Luiz Mott: Homosexuals Are Eunuchs

“If your sexual organ causes you to sin, cut it off.”

By Julio Severo

“Homosexuals are modern eunuchs,” said Luiz Mott, considered the father of the homosexual movement in Brazil.

In what sense exactly are eunuchs and homosexuals equal, according to Mott? Did eunuchs only want men?

Luiz Mott and statue of a naked baby

Eunuchs were castrated men who worked in the palaces of some countries. Daniel, the prophet in the Bible, had been brought as a young man to the palace of Nebuchadnezzar in Babylon. There, he was castrated to work as a eunuch.

Perhaps these peoples thought, at the time, that a man castrated would be less busy with sex and free to focus on governmental affairs.

Eunuchs were also used as guards of harems. It was a role in which they were fully trusted-worthy. They could be close of the most beautiful women, even if they were stripped naked, without feeling an ounce of sexual attraction.

Eunuchs neither have sex nor sexual desires. They don’t occupy their time and minds with sexual interests.

Then, it is not known why Mott compared homosexuals to eunuchs. Men addicted to homosexual practices occupy their time and minds in anal and fecal lewdness. Different from a eunuch, they are unable to be in front of another man without having lewd thoughts. In the case of Mott, he has said that he has had sex with over 500 men.

Almost all the problems of the addicted homosexual revolve around his addiction. If he were a eunuch, he would certainly have a much more peaceful life: without orgies, with unknown homosexual men, in dirty public restrooms; without pornography; without diseases that accompany fecal sex; without the constant pursuit of pleasures in gay bars; without exposure to risks in zones of homosexual prostitution and without the vices of alcohol and drugs that often accompany the vices of fecal sex. And without the danger of suffering aggression and murder by gay lovers.

Although the comparison of Mott is unreal, is it impossible for a man addicted to homosexuality to be a eunuch? Of course not.

Everything that he would need is an operation of castration.

I can hear some politically correct voices saying, “Oh, what horror! Cut our sex? This is unethical, it is against the Bible, it is a crime, it is insanity, it is animalistic, it is wild!”

Do you hear the same hysterical cry when a homosexual activist, in a TV talk-show, calmly advocates that men addicted to homosexuality should have a sugary right to “sex change”?

This change involves much more than just castration. It involves mutilation, disfiguration and perversion of sexual organs. It is a sacrifice for the sake of perversion.

But did you know that there are sacrifices that can be made for the sake of the Kingdom of God? These sacrifices move you away from the sin and vice of a specific perversion. Jesus said,

“And if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than with two hands to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire.  And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame than with two feet to be thrown into hell.  And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell, ‘where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’” (Mark 9:43-48 ESV)

“You can’t do this that Jesus told. This is crazy!” shout many. Shout it to gay militants who require expensive operations of sexual mutilation, for the sake of perversion, funded by Brazilian tax-payers.

To remove a sexual organ as a sacrifice against sin is better than to mutilate it to dive into sin. This is a helpful advice to the followers of Luiz Mott. If the father of their movement believes that those addicted to homosexuality would be best as eunuchs, I just agree.

In the case of Mott, the problem is much more complex. He has been accused of defending pedophilia. There is even an indecent video produced by Mott in which he, almost embraced to the statue of a naked baby, exalts the “wonders” of an erotic museum. If the charges against him are proved, this is not a case for castration.

Castration is for those who feel strong desires for sins, but have not yet come to commit acts of pedophilia or prostitution. For a man who rapes children, the Bible prescribes heavy sentences.

I want to make it clear publicly that I support the pretension of Mott that those addicted to homosexuality are entitled to be eunuchs. Better this than to get to the point of defending and practicing pedophilia. I just cannot afford to pay for their operations of castration, but I invite everybody to help Mott and his followers on this noble pretension.

My piece of advice then, following the suggestion of Mott that homosexuals should be eunuchs and following the pretension of many gay militants who require the Brazilian population to pay expensive operations of sexual mutilation, is castration.

It is a strong advice because the consequences are much stronger. Homosexuals, with other serious sinners, are prevented by determination of God from entering into the Kingdom of God:

“Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10 ESV)

However, the next verse makes it clear that some people who had these aberrant practices had abandoned them. “And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.” (1 Corinthians 6:11 ESV)

Jesus delivers us from all sins. But sometimes some sacrifice may be necessary.

If people in sin can make great sacrifices for the sake of their sin, including mutilation and perversion of their sexual organs, why could not they follow the eunuch idea suggested by Mott?

The warnings of God for homosexuals are that their vice closes the door to enter the Kingdom of God.

In contrast, God has a special affection for eunuchs:

“Let not… the eunuch say, “Behold, I am a dry tree.” For thus says the LORD: “To the eunuchs who… choose the things that please me and hold fast my covenant, I will give in my house and within my walls a monument and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off.” (Isaiah 56:3-5 ESV)

Another version is even clearer:

“’Make sure… no physically mutilated person is ever made to think, ‘I’m damaged goods. I don’t really belong.’ For GOD says: ‘To the mutilated who… choose what delights me and keep a firm grip on my covenant, I’ll provide them an honored place in my family and within my city, even more honored than that of sons and daughters. I’ll confer permanent honors on them that will never be revoked.’” (Isaiah 56:3-5 The Message)

Daniel is a beautiful example of a eunuch blessed by God! Today, he is in the Kingdom of God. On earth, he lived as a eunuch — a sober, pleasant and faithful life to God.

Mott wants homosexuals as eunuchs, but gay activists propose sexual mutilation to sin more and more. The proposal of Jesus is mutilation of a sex organ to stop sinning.

With their sexual organs cut off, individuals who practice homosexual acts will never again make propaganda of their disgusting anal and fecal sexual practices. They will also stop their frequent persecutions of pro-family leaders that denounce the harmfulness of those practices.

In 2007 the Brazilian Association of Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals, Transvestites and Transsexuals (ABGLT) had lodged a criminal complaint against me for “homophobia.”

The complaint was made because regularly I denounce homosexual behavior as immoral, and because I oppose the goals of the homosexual movement.

Mott rejoiced then at the news. “We are all proud of the ABGLT for filing charges against our archenemy, Julio Severo,” he was quoted as saying in a Yahoo homosexual email list. “I hope that he is condemned to perpetual imprisonment in Sodom and Gomorrah.”

Mott is the most prominent promoter of the “gay rights” agenda in Brazil and an ally of the socialist Brazilian government. He is also a promoter of the legalization of pedophilia and pederasty, a fact that I had helped to expose internationally years ago (see LifeSiteNews coverage at: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jul/07073011.html).

The influence of Mott has been instrumental even in the United Nations system, leading it to press Brazil to criminalize “homophobia” — which includes views contrary to homosexual practices.

With castration, his followers would lose interest in the gay agenda, including an obsessive determination to impose homosexual indoctrination on school-children.

Hopefully the followers of Mott, who still do not advocate and practice pedophilia, might cut their sexual organs in order to follow the excellent example of Daniel! The path is open, with the blessing of Jesus, who said (paraphrasing):

“And if your sexual organ causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than with your sexual organ to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire.” (Mark 9:43-44 ESV)

Portuguese version of this article: Luiz Mott: Homossexuais são eunucos

Spanish version of this article: Luiz Mott: Los homosexuales son eunucos

Source: www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

Recommended Reading:

Luiz Mott helping UN to criminalize “homophobia” in Brazil

Luiz Mott saves Catholic Church from suffering mega pedophilia scandal

Luiz Mott, the Top Homosexual Leader in Brazil and One of the Founders of ABGLT, Posts Home Addresses of Julio Severo and Other Pro-Family Activists

Luiz Mott Under Investigation for Pedophilia

ABGLT Files “Hate” Charges Against Julio Severo and Other Brazilian Christians

Will legal same-sex marriage result in religious persecution?

Bryana Johnson

DALLAS, January 25, 2013 — Earlier this month, 1,067 UK priests, bishops and abbots created a significant stir when they signed what is being called one of the largest open letters ever produced in British political history.

The letter was issued as a warning against the legalization of same-sex marriage. Such a development may spark religious persecution against Catholics, who oppose same-sex marriage based on the tenets of their faith, cautioned the multitude of priests.

The letter comes as British Prime Minister David Cameron has announced his intentions to push through a bill legalizing same-sex marriage in the UK by the end of the month.

“The natural complementarity between a man and a woman leads to marriage, seen as a lifelong partnership,” the clergymen declared in their statement. “This loving union – because of their physical complementarity – is open to bringing forth and nurturing children. This is what marriage is. That is why marriage is only possible between a man and a woman.”

“Legislation for same-sex marriage, should it be enacted, will have many legal consequences, severely restricting the ability of Catholics to teach the truth about marriage in their schools, charitable institutions or places of worship,” they went on to warn. Those who signed the letter make up about one-fourth of all the Catholic clergy in Britain.

Regardless of where we stand on the issue of same-sex marriage, it’s important for us to determine whether or not this statement is backed by evidence and by the collective experience of states and nations that have already enshrined homosexual marriage in law. Surely the rights and religious liberties of the proponents of traditional marriage must be protected even as same-sex partnerships become more widespread and more widely accepted.

Is truth on the side of the UK clergy and should Christian people be taking a warning from their words? Is legalization of same-sex marriage a doorway into an era of universal goodwill and harmony? Or is it merely a sign that a new form of bigotry is at hand – a bigotry of hatred and violence unleashed against the traditional family and its supporters?

The obvious question is, have opponents of same-sex marriage suffered persecution and loss of religious liberty in other countries that have embraced this radical redefinition of marriage? The answer is in no way elusive. Let’s take a look at a little very recent history.

“Tolerance” in Brazil

Last week, members of the Catholic Plinio Correa de Olivera Institute gathered in the Brazilian city of Curitiba to protest abortion and the homosexual ideology and stand in support of the traditional family. Homosexuality has been legal in Brazil since 1830 and enjoys widespread acceptance in that country.

However, the Catholic demonstrators, who marched peacefully and carried signs, were not greeted with tolerance and acceptance. In fact, an angry mob soon gathered around them and began yelling threats and making obscene gestures. The Catholics were spat upon and one of them had an object thrown at his head which drew blood. As he held up his bloodied hand to show the camera, the crowd cheered. These incidents were caught on camera by the Institute and by an onlooker sympathetic to the unruly mob.

In 2007, the Brazilian Association of Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals, and Transgender People (ABGLT) filed several lawsuits against opponents of the homosexual movement in Brazil. One of these suits targeted the websites that had just exposed homosexual activist Luiz Mott for his promotion of pedophilia and pederasty.

Another motion was filed against psychologist and therapist Rozangela Alves Justino, who provided counseling and therapy for homosexuals who wished to change their sexual orientation. Because Brazil’s Federal Council of Psychologists prohibited psychologists from performing reparative therapy for homosexuality, the ABGLT asked that Alves Justino’s license be revoked.

Several years ago, Christian pro-life writer Julio Severo fled Brazil after charges were reportedly filed against him for his “homophobic” coverage of Brazil’s 2006 Gay Pride parade. Severo left the country abruptly with his pregnant wife and two small children. At the time, there was still no official law in Brazil criminalizing “homophobic” behavior.

In February of 2009, LifeSiteNews reported that, “the Brazilian government has determined that 99% of its citizens are ‘homophobic,’ and therefore must be reeducated.” According to Brazilian newspaper O Globo, the federal government of Brazil intended to use the data from the study to “plan new policies.” Those new policies were implemented in May 2012, when the senate in Brazil passed a law criminalizing ‘homophobia.’

In the summer of 2012, Julio Severo interviewed Brazilian Christian psychologist Marisa Lobo, who said that the Brazilian Federal Council of Psychology pressured and terrorized homosexuals who were looking for help in overcoming their unwanted same-sex attractions. Marisa was also attacked by the Council when she questioned the “gay kit” that the Brazilian government attempted to distribute to students in public schools for the purpose of fighting “homophobia.” Due to explicit content in the kit and its favorable portrayal of homosexual behavior, the program was eventually suspended by Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff.

“When they learned that [I was] a Christian, they began to persecute me,” Marisa explained, “as a psychologist who categorizes herself as a Christian, and later in the process as a homophobe, because I said on Twitter that I love gays, but I prefer for my child to be heterosexual. And I still don’t understand why having an opinion instigates violence.”

It seems that the range of tolerated activity in Brazil is fairly narrow, despite decades of campaigns by same-sex marriage advocates against “hate” and “bullying” and “harassment.” And it is becoming increasingly evident that Christian family virtues are not included in the group of “tolerable” ideas.

“Diversity” and “Freedom of Speech” in Canada

Canada Day in Ontario last year was marked by a disturbing incident when Rev. David Lynn and a small group of friends attended the Toronto Gay Pride Parade. Setting up a small stand on a street corner with a microphone and a video camera, Lynn preached, held conversations with passers-by, and handed out Bibles and tracts – that is, until Toronto police wearing LGBT rainbow stickers shut him down and forced him to vacate the area. Ignoring the profanity and violent behavior of angry parade attendees and demonstrators who verbally assaulted the group and even doused Lynn and his cameraman with water, police told Lynn he was "promoting hate" and must leave. Videos of the incident are available here and here and here.

It seems only certain forms of free speech are protected in Canada nowadays. Criticism of homosexuality, even peaceful and motivated by loving concern, isn’t one of them.

When the Toronto District School Board revealed their new “anti-homophobia curriculum” in 2011 (Challenging Homophobia and Heterosexism: A K-12 Curriculum), many people were understandably disturbed. Naturally, things only got worse when the news came out that parents would not be able to opt their kids out of the program – not even their kindergarteners. Teachers would also not be permitted to decline to teach the course based on religious convictions.

It seems only certain brands of diverse thought are encouraged in Canada nowadays. Christian family virtues aren’t among them.

The curriculum taught students that “you can’t choose to be gay or straight, but you can choose to come out.” In 3^rd grade, it is recommended that students read the book Gloria Goes to Gay Pride. Students are encouraged to have their own “Pride Parade” in their school.

Unfortunately, most real-life Pride Parades are scarcely suitable for elementary school children.

The disturbing and seemingly totalitarian approach embraced by the Toronto District is but a foretaste of what lies ahead, suggests an education minister in the United Kingdom. Elizabeth Truss, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State of the Department for Education, warned in November that school teachers could be punished for not teaching pro-gay topics, should the British government follow through with plans to redefine marriage.

More Instances of Love and Acceptance

The adoption agency Catholic Charities has been systemically shutting down its branches in various states throughout the US, following a series of bitter legal disputes over the agency’s right to refuse to place children with homosexual couples. Similar laws have also forced church-affiliated agencies in Britain, such as Catholic Care, to separate from their churches or shut down entirely.

In January 2012, a New Jersey judge ruled against a Christian retreat house that refused to allow a same-sex civil union ceremony to be conducted on its premises, ruling that the Constitution allows “some intrusion into religious freedom to balance other important societal goals.” Last September, a gay couple filed suit against two Illinois institutions that refused to host their civil union. Christian “Bed and Breakfast” establishments, which are often family-owned businesses, have been especially targeted by homosexual rights activists for this type of harassment.

In Ladele and McFarlane v. United Kingdom, plaintiffs Lillian Ladele and Gary McFarlane were fired from their places of work for declining to perform services involving same-sex partnerships and counseling. Ladele, a marriage registrar for Islington Council in London, “was disciplined after she asked to be exempt from registering same-sex civil partnerships.” McFarlane was a counselor who was fired after he “declined to unequivocally commit to provide same-sex couples with psycho-sexual therapy.” They appealed to the European Court of Human Rights, but the court refused to hear their case.

The Significance for the Future of Religious Liberty

"It seems that a religious bar to office has been created, whereby a Christian who wishes to act on their Christian beliefs on marriage will no longer be able to work in a great number of environments,” commented Andrea Williams, the Director of the Christian Legal Centre.

Certainly this is a tragic remark and one that signals a gloomy answer to the question of whether or not the legalization of same-sex marriage will result in a loss of religious liberty. It is, of course, unfair of homosexual activists to expect people of faith to cast away their creeds and their dear, cherished ideals. But these activists make themselves odious indeed to civilized people when they force dissenters to violate their codes of morality and their very consciences by endorsing and promoting a lifestyle they consider abhorrent.

If the aim of legalizing same-sex marriage is, as we are so often told, to eradicate intolerance and bigotry, surely its activists should be alarmed to find that their efforts have been entirely unsuccessful. However, as shocking as it may seem, the advocates of same-sex marriage are proving repeatedly that they only endorse the toleration of one view and only believe in the protection of one speech – their own.

Source: Washington Times, via Julio Severo in English: www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

Another article by Bryana Johnson:

St. Petersburg Russia law questions if gay rights are human rights?