Lewd behavior is no surprise in a culture of unrestraint

US Secret Service and its dirty secrets

By Julio Severo

Colombia, the South American Thailand according to the US media, threw the presidential trip of Barack Obama in a scandal when some his secret agents engaged in prostitution.

The Colombia scandal erupted the morning of April 12, when a fight over payment between a prostitute and a Secret Service officer spilled into the hotel, local police and media.

The secret of the secret agents was exposed for lack of payment to a prostitute!

Several Secret Service officers have been forced out.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano assured skeptical lawmakers that what happened in Colombia was an “isolated” incident.

But an investigation is being made to check whether secret agents hired strippers and prostitutes in advance of President Obama’s visit last year to El Salvador.

This week, The Washington Post reported that Secret Service senior managers had tolerated similar behavior during previous official trips. The Post described a visit to Buenos Aires in 2009 by former President Bill Clinton, whose protective detail it said included agents and uniformed officers. During that trip, the Post said, members of the detail went out for a late night of partying at strip clubs.

In Brazil, Mariners serving the US Embassy attacked prostitutes and ran over a young prostitute last year. They were demoted as punishment.

Lewd behavior should be no surprise for a nation where Hollywood, the biggest propaganda machine in the world, reigns supreme in its movies shamelessly promoting prostitution in the name of “free love”. Hollywood teaches the world to have a good time with any girl. Any wonder about the “good times” of JFK, or Bill Clinton, or FDR?

Just try to talk about sexual restraint to a JFK or Bill Clinton!

In a recent book, Mimi Alford tells that her virginity was taken when she was a 19-year-old intern in the White House. The seducer was President John F. Kennedy. By some reason, the Secret Service was unable or unwilling to protect the teen intern from a serial adulterer, but successfully kept his lewd behavior a secret. Other lewd behaviors of Kennedy and other US presidents were also protected by the Secret Service. At least one of Kennedy’s mistresses, Mary Pinchot Meyer, was allegedly murdered by the CIA.

Mimi Alford was lucky to be left alive.

Having watched and loved Hollywood and known the sexual freedoms of their bosses, why could not Secret Service agents use some of this freedom too?

The Colombian prostitutes were lucky that they did not end as Mary Pinchot Meyer. But there is no doubt that the Secret Service would have had no problem in the South American Thailand if one of its agents had not fought over payment to a prostitute, turning their prostitution into a scandal that exposed a dirty secret.

But why so much fuss? The Secret Service has protected the immoral proclivities of US presidents, even by allegedly killing some of their mistresses, in a culture where Hollywood has imposed its debaucheries internationally as a norm.

Ted Kennedy, a late US senator and brother of JFK, rented an entire brothel for a night during a trip to Chile in 1961.  At the time, he had been married to his first wife, Joan, for three years. Had he and his brother some respect for marriage vows or morality?

Why should the Secret Service do differently?

Prostitution and sex without commitment are a blatant legacy of sexual unrestraint.

When a nation and its government advocate for unrestraint, they cannot expect a clean behavior from their representatives.

By rejecting her Christian and moral foundations, America cannot expect from her leaders a sexual restraint she is incapable of defending in her society.

With information from AP, Daily Mail, Rock Center and Estadão.

Portuguese version of this article: Conduta depravada não é surpresa numa cultura de desenfreio moral

Source: www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

United States: between Gayland and Mohammedland

Brazilian doctors: disabled unborn babies will either be cut to pieces or torn apart with aspirator

by Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

April 20, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) — In the wake of a decision by the nation’s Supreme Federal Tribunal determining that babies suffering from the birth defect known as anencephaly aren’t “legally” alive, and therefore can be freely aborted, Brazilian doctors are explaining to the media how such babies will in fact be killed under the new legal regime.

In a recent interview with Brazil’s most popular news magazine, Veja, the Vice-President of the Federal Council on Medicine, Dr. Carlos Vital, explained that doctors will have two choices: either “curettage” or “aspiration.”

Abortions of ancephalic babies will be performed in the second or third trimester.

A curettage abortion uses a loop-shaped knife to cut the child to pieces, and then scrape his body and placenta from the uterine wall. An aspiration abortion uses powerful suction to tear the child apart, and likewise separate him from his mother.

curettage abortion

According to doctors, if these methods are inadequate in later term abortions, Dilation and Evacuation (D&E) would be required, involving a clamp that is used to tear apart the baby’s larger body.  Dr. Vital told Veja that abortions on anencephalic children could be performed up to the ninth month of pregnancy.

Dr. Vital added that such abortions will require a committee of doctors to determine the proper “criteria for diagnosis” of anencephaly, a condition whose exact definition is not agreed upon by physicians.

Anencephalic babies fail to develop the top parts of their heads, including the skull and upper brain. Most die in the womb or shortly after birth, although some have lived for days, months, and even years with the condition.

Although medical professionals often claim that such children are unaware of their surroundings and unable to suffer, parents of anencephalic babies report that their children show signs of awareness and seem to react in very specific ways to their environment.  Some doctors theorize that the brain stem of such infants is able to adapt to the needs of rudimentary awareness, a phenomenon known as “neuroplasticity.”

In the United States, an estimated 95 percent of anencephalic babies are killed inside their mother’s womb.

In a public statement on the Supreme Federal Tribunal’s decision, Brazilian pro-life activist Fr. Luis Lodi da Cruz called the verdict “monstrous” and noted that, according to the Tribunal minister who oversaw the case, the abortion of an anencephalic child “is a procedure similar to removing a cadaver.”

“Paradoxically, [Minister] Marco Aurélio admits that the anencephalic dies in a short period of time. Tell me, how can he die if he’s already dead?” asked Lodi da Cruz.

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

Brazilian Evangelical, Catholic congressmen seek impeachment of top pro-abortion judge

Brazil’s Supreme Tribunal says anencephalic babies not alive, ok to abort

Pro-lifers rally outside Brazilian high court as it weighs allowing eugenic abortions

Abortion games between Brazil and UN

The “unwanted” and the untruthfulness propaganda: Julio Severo answers pro-abortion arguments of Brazilian newspaper Folha de S. Paulo 

Brazilian Evangelical, Catholic congressmen seek impeachment of top pro-abortion judge

by Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

April 20, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) — Members of the Evangelical and Catholic caucuses of the Brazilian National Congress have submitted a formal request for impeachment of a Supreme Tribunal minister who lead his colleagues to vote for the legalization of abortions of babies suffering from anencephaly.

The petition was submitted following last week’s 8-2 vote by the Supreme Tribunal, the nation’s highest court, withdrawing the protection of the law from unborn children suffering from anencephaly, a condition in which an infant fails to form all of the upper brain and skull.

Although children often die of the developmental defect before being born, some have been known to live for days, weeks, months, and even years with the condition, and parents say they are responsive to their environment.

According to Brazilian media sources, the parliamentarians presented a request of prosecution by the Senate for a “crime of responsibility” against Minister Marco Aurélio Mello, for allegedly having pre-judged the case.

Aurélio was the “relater” of the case, who has the responsibility of reviewing the facts and presenting a detailed defense of a proposed verdict, which the full court has a right to accept or reject. Aurelio’s publicly stated position for many years before rendering his vote was in favor of permitting abortions in such cases.

“The relater of today’s case declared his position beforehand. That is a break of decorum,” said representative Eros Biondini, a Catholic delegate to the nation’s Chamber of Deputies from the state of Minas Gerais, on April 11.

Pastor Marco Feliciano, an Evangelical deputy from the state of Sao Paulo, noted that the case could lead to a massacre of infants in Brazil, by creating a precedent for legalizing abortions in general.

“Minister Marco Aurélio did something that he should not. He anticipated his vote before judgement, leading the other ministers of the STF to follow his vote,” said Feliciano.

“What is being established here is an opening so that the mass murder of children in our country may be supported,” he said, adding, “we want the impeachment of Minister Marco Aurélio.”

Minister Aurélio discarded the arguments of the representatives, claiming his position had already been revealed in 2004 vote of the Supreme Federal Tribunal on the same subject.

“To defend the position [taken in 2004], I had to reveal my opinion. I am not at fault if I didn’t change my opinion up to now, and if I only bow to my science and my conscience.”

Brazilian law prohibits judges from expressing their opinion on any case while it is still in process, whether their own or that of another judge.

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

Brazil’s Supreme Tribunal says anencephalic babies not alive, ok to abort

Pro-lifers rally outside Brazilian high court as it weighs allowing eugenic abortions

Abortion games between Brazil and UN

The “unwanted” and the untruthfulness propaganda: Julio Severo answers pro-abortion arguments of Brazilian newspaper Folha de S. Paulo 

Brazil’s Supreme Tribunal says anencephalic babies not alive, ok to abort

by Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

April 17, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) — Despite constitutional guarantees for the right to life and a national criminal code that prohibits abortions, Brazil’s Supreme Federal Tribunal has ruled that abortions of anencephalic babies cannot be penalized, with many of the court’s ministers claiming that such children are not truly alive.

Anencephaly is a condition in which part or all of the upper brain does not develop during gestation, and the top of the skull is incomplete. Although most anencephalic babies die before or very shortly after birth, some have lived for years with the condition, and parents report that they show signs of awareness.

However, eight of the Tribunal’s eleven ministers rejected such arguments, and ruled that the government cannot penalize women who abort their anencephalic children. Two of the ministers voted against the ruling, and one recused himself on the grounds that he had litigated such cases as a prosecutor before his appointment.

The case’s relater, who is charged with reviewing the facts and presenting a detailed opinion before voting occurs, claimed that anencephalic babies are “biologically alive” but “juridically dead.”

“Abortion is a crime against life.  A potential life is protected,” he wrote. “In the case of the anencephalic, a potential life does not exist. The anencephalic fetus is biologically alive, because it consists of living cells, and juridically dead. It does not enjoy government protection.”

Minister Rosa Weber, who voted in favor of depenalization, claimed that “anencephaly does not apply to the concept of abortion.”

“The crime of abortion means the interruption of life, and for all the debate that occurred in this case, anencephaly is not compatible with those characteristics that constitute the idea of life under the law,” she added.

Other ministers who voted in favor of the law expressed similar sentiments, claiming that anencephalic babies are lacking in awareness. One claimed that prohibiting their killing in the womb is a form of “torture.”

However, Minister Cezar Peluzo disagreed, noting that “the anencephalic fetus is alive and, however brief, his life is constitutionally protected.”

Minister Ricardo Lewandowski, also voting against the decision, expressed his fear that it would “open the doors to the interruption of gestation of numerous embryos that suffer or would come to suffer other genetic or acquired illnesses that might bring about the ending of their lives within or outside of the womb.”

The decision, which was in process for over three years, seems to contradict the Constitution of Brazil, which states in article 5 that “all are equal under the law, without distinction of any kind, being guaranteed to Brazilians and foreigners residing in the country the inviolability of the right to life…”

Piero Tozzi, a senior attorney with the U.S.-based Alliance Defense Fund who specializes in the right to life in international law, expressed his disappointment with the ruling.

“Every innocent life deserves to be protected. Instead, Brazil’s high court has approved of slaughtering the country’s most vulnerable people, the severely disabled,” said Tozzi in a press communiqué.

“Eugenic abortion further erodes respect not only for human dignity in general, but the dignity of the disabled in particular. Protecting the innocent is a chief duty of the legislature, and the court was wrong to overstep its authority and tear down the protections long ago established by Brazil’s lawmakers–protections that are consistent with the pro-life views of most Brazilians.”

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

Pro-lifers rally outside Brazilian high court as it weighs allowing eugenic abortions

Abortion games between Brazil and UN

The “unwanted” and the untruthfulness propaganda: Julio Severo answers pro-abortion arguments of Brazilian newspaper Folha de S. Paulo 

Bestselling Hitler book promoted in Pravda

Evangelist's new project hits Portuguese-language version of Russian publication

A New Zealand-born evangelist now based in America has written a book about a German dictator and God, so where is it most likely to be promoted?

Russia’s Pravda, the Portuguese version, of course.

That’s what has happened with the new bestseller “Hitler, God & the Bible,” by evangelist and author Ray Comfort.

The article – “Como Hitler torceu a Biblia para matar judeus!” – appeared today in the online version of the Russian paper. It’s a translation of an earlier WND column by Jim Fletcher, the director of the evangelical group Prophecy Matters.

Fletcher’s review, which explains how the “monster” came to be, said the book already is on pace to become his “Book of the Year.”

He recounted how the unknown Hitler burst on the scene in Germany in the wake of World War I, when Germans “pushed carts of paper money … in hopes of finding a stale loaf of bread.”

Hitler promised change and hope, and Fletcher described how, “raised by a domineering and prideful father, Alois (until the old man’s fatal heart attack when Adolf was 13), and by a doting mother, Hitler developed large doses of sense of self and ego.”

In his book, Comfort writes: “When he didn’t get his way – or if others proposed that they had better solutions – Adolf would immaturely shout over his own ignorance and feel a great deal of self-pity.”

Fletcher noted that in the “run-up to World War II, Germany was infested by the so-called German Christian movement, which tried to ‘Nazify’ Christianity by, among other things, suppressing the teaching of the Old Testament. Interestingly, Hitler and his top deputies, along with the majority of the officers and troops themselves, were life-long Catholics or Lutherans.”

He said Comfort “uncovers some super-weird evidence that the stage was set for Hitler to pervert Christianity in Germany, and his own origins in this endeavor came from being influenced by the American automaker, Henry Ford, and the composer, Richard Wagner, among others. Wagner in particular was infected with the virus of anti-Semitism, actually going so far as to claim that Jesus was born a German! (No wonder Yasser Arab claimed Jesus was a Palestinian.)

Fletcher also pointed out that the book explains that Hitler was a disciple of Charles Darwin, fully embracing his principle of “survival of the fittest.”

The article was translated by the multilingual Julio Severo, a Christian activist known for his defense of biblical standards in Brazil.

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

Brazil Condemned for Allowing Abortions on Disabled Babies

Steven Ertelt

The Catholic South American nation of Brazil is coming under criticism for altering its pro-life laws to allow abortions in very rare cases when the unborn child has anencephaly, the absence of a large part of the brain and the skull.

Reports indicate 8 of the 11 justices on the nation’s Supreme Court voted to allow abortions in those extremely rare circumstances while two voted to keep the nation’s abortion law more fully pro-life and one justice recused himself. As Fox News indicates:

One of the two “no” votes was cast by Chief Justice Cezar Peluso, who predicted the decision would lead to a “massacre” of anencephalic fetuses.

Until now, Brazil has permitted abortions only in cases of rape or a threat to the life of the mother. A woman who terminates a pregnancy under any other circumstances faces up to three years in prison, while the doctor who performs the procedure can be jailed for four years.

Chief federal prosecutor Roberto Gurgel presented to the court an advisory document in support of decriminalizing abortion in cases of anencephaly. The high court’s ruling came in response to a suit filed in 2004 by the National Confederation of Health Workers, which said that denying the option of termination to a woman carrying an anencephalic fetus violated the mother’s right to dignity.

Alliance Defense Fund Senior Legal Counsel Piero Tozzi responded to the decision to allow, what he calls, Brazil’s Supreme Federal Tribunal’s decision to “decriminalize the killing of pre-born children for eugenic reasons.”

“Every innocent life deserves to be protected. Instead, Brazil’s high court has approved of slaughtering the country’s most vulnerable people, the severely disabled. Eugenic abortion further erodes respect not only for human dignity in general, but the dignity of the disabled in particular. Protecting the innocent is a chief duty of the legislature, and the court was wrong to overstep its authority and tear down the protections long ago established by Brazil’s lawmakers–protections that are consistent with the pro-life views of most Brazilians.”

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

Pro-lifers rally outside Brazilian high court as it weighs allowing eugenic abortions

Abortion games between Brazil and UN

The “unwanted” and the untruthfulness propaganda: Julio Severo answers pro-abortion arguments of Brazilian newspaper Folha de S. Paulo 

Pro-lifers rally outside Brazilian high court as it weighs allowing eugenic abortions

by Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

April 4, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) — Demonstrations by the pro-life organization Brazil Without Abortion have begun outside of the Supreme Federal Tribunal of Brazil as the date approaches for a decision on permitting abortions for anencephalic babies.

Defenders of the unborn are deeply concerned about the case, which will be decided by ministers largely appointed by leaders of the pro-abortion Labor Party. The final vote is scheduled for April 11.

“I don’t see the possibility of a victory for life in the upcoming vote,” Brazilian pro-life activist Julio Severo told LifeSitenews.com, “not because I am a pessimist, but because one of the ministers has already declared that those who defend abortion for babies suffering from anencephaly will have a big victory.”

Severo also noted that all of the Supreme Federal Tribunal’s 11 ministers were appointed by pro-abortion presidents, and observed that “there are powerful government forces pushing for legal abortion.”

The case, which has been on hold since 2008, will be overseen by an openly pro-abortion minister who has stated publicly that he regards the case as a “hook” for entering into a wider examination of abortion and euthanasia as a “right.”

In an interview with Veja magazine that year, in an office surrounded by Catholic sacred images, Supreme Tribunal Minister Marco Aurélio Mello said “the topic of anencephaly is a hook for discussing more extensive and borderline situations.”

“In my opinion, cases of interruption of the gestation of an anencephalic and those of abortion in a more extensive form, when the pregnancy is not desired, have an important point in common: the right of the woman to decide about her own life,” said Mello who added that “the principle that is at stake in these situations is the right to liberty.”

Babies with anencephaly are partially or completely lacking in upper brain matter, and are born with a large opening at the top of their skulls. The rarely survive more than week after birth, although some have lived for several months with the condition.

Although they are often regarded as lacking any mental activity, the testimony of parents of anencephalic babies often contradicts this perception.

A Brazilian girl, Marcela Ferreira, lived 20 months outside the womb with anencephaly, from 2007 to 2008. Despite the absence of most of her upper brain matter, she sucked her thumb, cried for her mother, and responded to other family members.  Her behavior was so contrary to conventional wisdom on anencephaly that it led at least one physician to deny that she had the condition, despite a diagnosis by multiple doctors.

Various pro-life organizations reportedly plan to begin a prayer vigil at 6 pm on April 10 in the Plaza of the Three Powers in front of the Supreme Federal Tribunal, which will last until all ministers have voted the following day, according to the Catholic news service ACI Digital.

ACI Digital also reports that on the same day, a pro-life Twitter campaign will be directed to the Tribunal, whose address is @STF_oficial, with the hashtags #anencefalo and #avidaporumfio.

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

Abortion games between Brazil and UN

The “unwanted” and the untruthfulness propaganda: Julio Severo answers pro-abortion arguments of Brazilian newspaper Folha de S. Paulo 

United States: between Gayland and Mohammedland

Largest Protestant nation in the world doesn’t know if it wants to be Sodom or Saudi Arabia

By Julio Severo

In American schools, Islam is becoming compulsory subject in many places. In Colorado, students were forced to sing the song “Zikr”, written by A. R. Rahman, one passage of which says: “There is no other truth but Allah.”

In 1963, the Supreme Court ruled that Bible reading in schools was unconstitutional, banning the Christian sacred book in classrooms where most students were from Christian homes. Today American students are forced to sing that Allah is the only truth, under risk of an accusation of “Islamophobia.” What will follow next? Compulsory Koran reading in the classrooms?

Confusing, isn’t it? I agree, but the confusion goes beyond this. In Pennsylvania, Ernest Perce was wearing a “Zombie Muhammad” Halloween costume. As Christian, I don’t like Halloween, but Christians don’t go around beating anybody up because of Halloween costumes.

But some Muslims do. Talaag Elbayomy, a 46-year-old Muslim, attacked Perce physically. Sgt. Bryan Curtis, the attending police officer, testified that immediately following the violent incident, Talaag attempted to choke Perce.

In Saudi Arabia or another Islamic nation, the judge would clear the Muslim.

And in America, what would happen? In fact, what happened?

Judge Mark Martin cleared Talaag of all violence, physical assault and attempted murder charges.

Soon afterwards, the judge and his staff moved to a more secure place, alleging that they received 200 phone calls and negative e-mails.

In an interview to Daily Caller, Ernest Perce said that he received some 500 threats since his Muslim aggressor was cleared.

“People have said that they would kill me, rip my eyes out, run me over, shoot me and then laugh at me, since I have blasphemed Muhammad,” he said. “They say I will be found out and hanged in front of my family.”

Unlike the judge and his staff, Perce has no special security apparatus.

I don’t know if the judge is Muslim, but he should be jumping for joy over what the US government did in the UN. There is a bill before the UN sponsored by Islamic nations banning “defamation” of Islam, although it masquerades as a law banning defamation of all religions. In that case, if a Christian preaches a message that might offend Muslims (i.e., to say that “Jesus Christ is God”, a high offense in the Islamic law) and Muslims attack that Christian and kill other people, under the UN law the only criminal in this case would be the Christian, who “incited” the crime! (My issue is: Did Muslims learn this strategy from gay activists or will gay militants eventually use this Islamic strategy?) The proposal was about to be defeated, but Obama rescued it, intending to pass it in the UN.

Hey, how did Barack Hussein Obama become president of the largest Protestant nation in the world and besides is working to expand protection to Islam in the UN with an anti-“Islamophobia” law that will promote the “religion of peace” in the whole world?

The ancestral roots of Obama are, on the paternal side, entirely Islamic. On the maternal side, he has progressive evangelical roots. Do you know what you get when you cross a Muslim with a progressive Protestant? Look at Obama, a man promoting the Muslim ideology and the homosexual ideology at the same time! This is something so confusing that Americans themselves don’t know if their own president is Christian or Muslim.

The Obama administration has become essentially the genie of the magic lamp for gay militants and Muslims in America and around the world, ready to comply with their most eccentric requests and demands, strengthening them in all of their anti-Christian hate.

That coexistence of two apparently antagonistic and irreconcilable tyrannical — and equally and fervently anti-Christian — ideologies in the politics of the largest Protestant nation in the world is the essence itself of “Babylon”, a word that means “confusion” in old Hebrew.

If on one side the US government is working for the UN to pass an international law to punish criticism to Islam, on other side America makes no secrecy about her wish to be a global LGBT sex cop to punish “homophobia”, putting me and other Christians directly at risk.

Traditionally, Communists have always sicced their mad dogs on Christians. With the powerful machine of the American empire taken by politically correct madness, Obama wants to sic Islamic and furious gay activists on us!

Unfortunately, the Protestant decadence of Obama is also reflected in the Protestant decadence of the American nation. The largest US Protestant denominations — Presbyterian, Lutheran and Anglican — are already ordaining homosexual ministers.

The numbers of Protestants and Protestant churches in the US are falling. What is increasing are mosques. Since 9/11, the number of mosques doubled, from 1,209 to 2,106 in 2010.

Is Obama to be blamed? Actually, this problem precedes Obama. Immediately after 9/11, George Bush, an odd evangelical conservative, began proclaiming Islam as a “religion of peace”. Next, in a genuinely insane move, the US government under Obama began to show preference for Islamic immigration.

Muslims have always identified America as a Christian nation. Thus, when a US administration intervenes militarily in an Islamic nation, Muslims take revenge by destroying churches and killing ministers and other Christians.

Christians, then, pay a high cost for American interventionist politics. And if those unfortunates try to apply for asylum, or even a visa to immigrate to America, they are often rejected immediately. But their Islamic oppressors are always welcome to asylum or visa benefits, with the paranoid courtesy of the US government, under the Obama administration.

In fact, under Obama the US government has extended that courtesy to gay activists around the world, who now have preference to immigrate to America, immediately behind Muslims.

The result could not be different. Islamic madness is invading America. Traditional Protestant churches in America are already being turned into mosques. And if the churches escape this cruel Islamic fate, they may well end up as gay bath houses!

If the decadence in the American churches doesn’t end and if the US government continues its passionate courtship of Islamic ideology, in the not so distant future a Brazilian tourist arriving at New York will no longer gaze upon tall buildings, but upon tall minarets.

And in the Christian bookstores, you may be able to find the bestselling book, “A Purpose-Driven Mosque,” perhaps by Rick Warren, if he continues his ecumenical courtship with Islamic leaders.

Portuguese version of this article: Estados Unidos: entre a Gaylândia e a Maomelândia

Spanish version of this article: Estados Unidos: entre Gaylandia y Mahomalandia

Source: Julio Severo in English: www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

AllOut wants anti-“homophobia” bill passed in Brazil

Diplomatic safe sex: No US asylum to Saudi gay

Truth is the new hate speech in Brazil

US gay group behind the shutdown of Julio Severo PayPal account wants to defeat Russian law banning homosexual propaganda

PayPal implicated in criminal activity

Gay Pressure on PayPal Named as Fourth Top Anti-Christian Act of 2011

PayPal blacklists Julio Severo

My strange visitors: United States Army Information System Command headquarters visiting my pro-family blog?

Homeland Security surveillance detected on Julio Severo’s website

The power of a single blogger and his faith: the story of Julio Severo and his fight against anti-“homophobia” bills in Brazil

World’s biggest gay magazine and Julio Severo

A Gulag of Your Own Making

State-Sanctioned Homosexuality Causes More Harm

Catholic TV on PayPal vs. Julio Severo

Online ‘hate’ campaign targets Christian sites

Brazilian court acquits child molester: says victims were ‘far from being innocent’

by Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

April 2, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) — A Brazilian federal appeals court has ruled that a child molester who committed sex acts with three twelve-year-old girls was not guilty of rape because, “the victims were far from innocent.”

The case, whose exact number is being withheld from the public, has provoked outraged responses from human rights officials and civil organizations.

According to the federal Superior Tribunal of Justice, the three victims had been engaged in prostitution for some time, and therefore were capable of giving consent to the acts in question. The ruling upheld a lower court decision that affirmed: “The proof offered during the proceedings demonstrates, overwhelmingly, that the victims, at that time, lamentably, were already far from being innocent, naive, ignorant and uninformed regarding sex.”

“However immoral and reprehensible was the conduct practiced by the accused, the types of penalties for which he was denounced do not remain relevant,” the court added.

The Superior Tribunal agreed with the lower court’s reasoning, adding that “an act that has not truly violated the juridical good under protection - sexual freedom - cannot be considered a crime, the proceedings having shown that the minors had already been prostitutes for some time.”

It also rejected the idea that there is an “absolute presumption” of lack of consent on the part of twelve-year-old girls.

“For the third section of the Superior Tribunal of Justice, the presumption of violence in the crime of rape has a relative character, and can be eliminated in particular circumstances,” the court’s news service reports.  The decision applies to the law in effect when the sexual abuse occurred, in 2002.

Brazil’s human rights minister, Maria do Rosario Nunes, reacted with outrage to the decision, noting that it implies that “the human rights of children and adolescents can be relativized,” and asked federal prosecutors to appeal the decision.

“With this sentence, a man was declared innocent of the accusation of rape of three vulnerable people, which in practice means impunity for one of the most serious crimes committed against Brazilian society,” she said in a press communiqué.

“To relativize the rights of children and judge them according to their social origin, if they were already in the streets, is to judge a child who was a victim of sexual abuse, treating her as responsible for the violence that she suffered, is without a doubt an act of perversity that goes against all of the legislative protection of the rights of children and adolescents in Brazil,” she also stated.

The National Association of Federal Prosecutors denounced the decision as an affront to “the principle of absolute protection, guaranteed by the Brazilian constitution, to children and adolescents, and indicates a tolerance of that nefarious practice, instead of discouraging it.”

“We are going to carry out a joint campaign involving public institutions and social organizations to combat the sexual exploitation of minors ... This decision goes against the necessity of the protection of citizens,” the organization also stated.

The decision comes at a moment that federal legislators are considering a reform of the penal code that would reduce the age of sexual consent in existing law from 14 to 12 years of age. The same reform would reduce penalties of infanticide following birth, and eliminate penalties for abortion in a variety of cases.

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

The day sex between men and boys is no longer offensive