In Unanimous Vote, Russia Passes Bill Making It Illegal To Tell Kids Gay People Exist

0

Editor’s note: As this story was published, Russia passed the bill by a unanimous vote, 434-0.


Russia today is voting on a Vladimir Putin supported bill that makes it illegal to tell children gay people exist or that homosexuality is equal to heterosexuality, and provides for fines, jail time, and deportation for those who violate the law.

“The bill provides for Russian citizens engaged in the ‘propaganda of non-traditional sexual orientation’ to be fined, while foreigners could be arrested and immediately deported,” The Independent UK reports:

In recent weeks there have been two killings in which homophobia appears to have played at least a part, and the loose language of the law suggests that even services such as counselling for gay teenagers, or safe-sex advice, could theoretically be deemed illegal.

If the Duma passes the law in its key second reading, it could come into force by the end of the month.

A number of regions have already adopted a similar law, and now MPs from President Vladimir Putin’s United Russia party want to implement a nationwide ban on “gay propaganda”.

Written By: David Badash
continue to source article at thenewcivilrightsmovement.com

NO COMMENTS

    • In reply to #1 by Jos Gibbons:

      Then I’ll just tell all the kids bisexuals exist & ask them to guess whether homosexuals do (in less technical terminology,of course).

      Unfortunately: ‘propaganda of non-traditional sexual orientation’ seems to cover that.

      In the unlikely event I find myself in Russia again, this won’t stop me from informing a few kids somehow. If deportation and a fine are the worst that can happen to a foreigner…

    • In reply to #2 by Graham1:

      Now that the Russian Orthodox Church has got its grubby little claws into the flesh of Russian society – it sounds more and more that things were better under communism.

      Hardly – the communist regime in the former Soviet Union was one of the most totalitarian and oppressive regimes the world has ever seen. Its rapid implementation following Kerensky’s brief liberal government in the aftermath of the Second Russian Revolution basically reigned Russia back for decades.

      • In reply to #28 by TanyaK:

        In reply to #2 by Graham1:

        Hardly – the communist regime in the former Soviet Union was one of the most totalitarian and oppressive regimes the world has ever seen.

        Like the Nazis, that is primarily because technology facilitated it. There was nothing particularly special about the USSR other than its size– the oppression and close scrutiny of individual conduct were only new because they were not possible before. Elizabeth I had secret police, as does any competent ruling faction that unjustly holds power.

        Technology has moved on. It is naive to say there could not be something worse.

        Further, the degree of oppression varied considerably. To consider the Soviet period as homogenous, with the only difference being the effectiveness with which their wickedness was concealed is pure paranoid thinking. The idea that the USSR could not have been reformed, that there were no positive aspects to it is dogma. We’re possibly better off without it, but not as much as was imagined by its opponents, and certainly the people of Russia have suffered in practical terms and large numbers because of the reforms forced on the country in its absence.

        It is no coincidence that the USA started engaging in the practices it used to distinguish itself from the USSR once it had fallen.

        • In reply to #33 by PERSON:

          In reply to #28 by TanyaK:

          In reply to #2 by Graham1:

          Hardly – the communist regime in the former Soviet Union was one of the most totalitarian and oppressive regimes the world has ever seen.

          Quote by Person: “Like the Nazis, that is primarily because technology facilitated it. There was nothing particularly special about the USSR other than its size– the oppression and close scrutiny of individual conduct were only new because they were not possible before. Elizabeth I had secret police, as does any competent ruling faction that unjustly holds power.”

          Etc.

          From the moment the hardcore communist movement lead by Lenin attempted to gain control following the seemingly forced abdication of Tsar Nicholas II in 1917, they displayed both a ruthless brutality and a total ineptitude at even the basic aspects of proper governmental management. The regime was only established due to the circumstances prevalent in the First World War, and all nations’ wish to end it. After that, it was a primary source of potential trouble – even to the extent that many later saw the German National Socialist regime as a potential means by which Communism might be removed from the former Russian Empire.

          Under Nicholas II previously, Russia was poised to become a major industrial nation and his leanings were towards peace and co-operation – he started the movement which lead to the League Of Nations, for instance. Communists did nothing much initially other than murder members of the former Imperial Family in basements.

          • In reply to #35 by TanyaK:

            In reply to #33 by PERSON:

            In reply to #28 by TanyaK:

            In reply to #2 by Graham1:

            Hardly – the communist regime in the former Soviet Union was one of the most totalitarian and oppressive regimes the world has ever seen.

            Quote by Person: “Like the Nazis, that is primarily because technology facili…

            Careful with your use of history here. Conditions were appalling in Russia before the revolution….that’s what fueled it. I wouldn’t be painting any rosy pictures off live under the Tsar. The Russian Orthodox Church also had an iron grip on the populous…it was part of the problem.

          • In reply to #54 by Nitya:

            In reply to #35 by TanyaK:

            In reply to #33 by PERSON:

            In reply to #28 by TanyaK:

            In reply to #2 by Graham1:

            Quote by Nitya: “Careful with your use of history here. Conditions were appalling in Russia before the revolution….that’s what fueled it. I wouldn’t be painting any rosy pictures off live under the Tsar. The Russian Orthodox Church also had an iron grip on the populous…it was part of the problem.”

            I understand Russian Imperial history quite well. The conditions present in Russia just prior to the abdication of Nicholas II were a function primarily of the First World War, which was of course being won by no-one and was just a massive disaster for all nations concerned. Prior to that, Nicholas II was actually involved with attempting to reform Russia into something resembling a modern industrial power, and without the intervention of the war – and without the spineless exploitation of the circumstances of the war by the Bolshevik revolutionary movement (which, incidentally, was essentially masterminded by Jews such as Trotsky, as I’m sure you know) even following the war Russia would most likely have followed other nations along this path, which it had enormous potential to achieve.

            The history of what actually followed the abdication of Nicholas II is well documented. The Bolshevik leaders rapidly sought to overtake the liberal government of Kerensky to which the Tsar and his declared heir (his brother Michael) had basically surrendered authority of the Romanov Dynasty. The result was a rapid descent into civil war across Russia, and the signing of a ridiculous and hasty peace treaty with the Kaiser by Lenin’s shaky government, over which he had almost negligible control. After 1922, the Bolshevik government was established in position but only really by virtue of brutal overbearing exercise of authority. Russia’s potential as maybe the greatest industrial nation on the planet was never fully realised, therefore – and it looks as though the current government is wasting time too, with nonsense such as this.

          • In reply to #62 by TanyaK:

            In reply to #54 by Nitya:

            In reply to #35 by TanyaK:

            In reply to #33 by PERSON:

            In reply to #28 by TanyaK:

            In reply to #2 by Graham1:

            Quote by Nitya: “Careful with your use of history here. Conditions were appalling in Russia before the revolution….that’s what fueled it. I wouldn’t be paintin…

            No one would question what happened after the revolution. The results are well documented and agreed on. However, you made a claim that Russia was poised to become an industrial powerhouse before Nicholas was deposed. Pre revolutionary Russia was largely an agrarian country. The conditions if or workers in the industrial centers was similar to those in Britain during the Industrial Revolution, that is ….appalling.

            The aristocracy in Russia was removed from the daily life of the inhabitants. They didn’t even speak the language of the people, but preferred to speak French. This is not the way to endear yourself with the population at large.

            I realise that Russia suffered terribly after WW1. The huge army was not even adequately armed and suffered terrible losses. Grain shortages also added to the privations of ordinary people.

            As you well know, Russia is not an easy country to live in. The weather is harsh and life is tough. The latest moves by Putin will make the lives of many much tougher than they already are.

          • In reply to #63 by Nitya:

            In reply to #62 by TanyaK:

            In reply to #54 by Nitya:

            In reply to #35 by TanyaK:

            In reply to #33 by PERSON:

            In reply to #28 by TanyaK:

            In reply to #2 by Graham1:

            Partial quote by Nitya: “Pre revolutionary Russia was largely an agrarian country. The conditions if or workers in the industrial centers was similar to those in Britain during the Industrial Revolution, that is ….appalling.”

            Indeed – yet Britain managed to become the major industrial nation in the world for quite some time, without descending into Communist revolution, and by gradually allowing workers rights a proper measured appraisal and acceptance.

            Yes, Russia prior to the First World War was largely agricultural – much of it is still – but that wasn’t the way the Imperial government saw it remaining. Quite the opposite, I assure you.

            As for the use of French – it was primarily the Court Language – ie, it wasn’t used privately, but formally – including for banquet menus and so on. The Imperial Family, for instance, actually spoke English half the time, as Alix (The Tsaritsa) had been largely educated in England. Russian and English were the main languages spoken by all four daughters of Nicholas II. The use of French in this context was commonplace in most European royal courts at that time.

      • In reply to #28 by TanyaK:

        In reply to #2 by Graham1:

        Now that the Russian Orthodox Church has got its grubby little claws into the flesh of Russian society – it sounds more and more that things were better under communism.

        Hardly – the communist regime in the former Soviet Union was one of the most totalitarian and oppress…

        Obviously they plan to regress even further. It looks as though Putin has embraced part of the maxim that states “rulers find religion useful”. Short memories, methinks.

    • In reply to #5 by papa lazaru:

      Gays : The new Jews?

      Papa, gay people have always been the ‘other’ Jews. Certainly Nazi Germany gives proof of that. Having done extensive research into the treatment of gays in the camps, I can attest to the fact that they were by and large in the same category of ‘lowest of the low’ as the eastern Jews, and suffered the same almost universal abuse.
      In fact, just as men’s genitals were examined to determine whether they Jewish, men suspected of being homosexual had their anuses examined for signs of penetration, though – since this test was unreliable – they might exonerate themselves if they could provide two female witnesses who would testify they’d had sex with him.

  1. Shades of Animal Farm …
    “The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”

    Russia is becoming indistinguishable from the religious right.

  2. I see! – A new reincarnation of Stalinist scientific “facts” – moving from revolutionary dogma, to wooist dogma!

    Editor’s note: As this story was published, Russia passed the bill by a unanimous vote, 434-0.

    Complete with scrutiny and safeguarding by the new politburo!

    • In reply to #9 by Alan4discussion:

      I see! – A new reincarnation of Stalinist scientific “facts” – moving from revolutionary dogma, to wooist dogma!

      Editor’s note: As this story was published, Russia passed the bill by a unanimous vote, 434-0.

      Complete with scrutiny and safeguarding by the new politburo!

      It’s all good though. They’re capitalists now.

    • In reply to #9 by Alan4discussion:

      The Russian Orthodox Church is one of more reactionary and less salubrious religious institutions on the planet – if you think Western christianity is bad for gays or women, you’ll choke over orthodoxy, particularly in its Russian avatar. In my not so humble opinion, the Bolsheviks didn’t do enough to eliminate it (or any of the other religious mumbo-jumbo they came across). And its restoration to a central place in Russian society has thrust that society back beyond the nineteenth century.

      The first constitution of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (the Russian portion of what was to become the USSR), promulgated in 1918, was remarkably liberal on matters sexual. Divorce was legalized for the first time since Russia was christianized, as was abortion at all stages of pregnancy, and laws against ‘deviant’ sexuality (including homosexuality and prostitution) were abolished. These measures were later extended throughout the USSR.

      It was the 1936 constitution that recriminalized homosexuality, restricted abortion and ‘discouraged’ divorce. Whether this, and the concomitant ‘recognition’ of the Orthodox Church, can be attributed to Stalin personally (“raised in a devout Georgian family,” “trained as an orthodox priest”) or to the bureaucracy’s perception of the demographic ‘needs’ of the USSR at the time is a question whose answer depends on one’s view of History – the point is that, like Napoleon’s 1801 Concordat with the Catholic Church, it was a dangerous concession to the past.

      As the Soviet economy began to falter in the late 1980s, the Marxian formulation of “religion as the opiate of the people” began to be brought home in all its starkness. Religiosity increased, both in the USSR and in the other states of the Warsaw Pact (often promoted by Western interests). Anti-semitism had been a feature of orthodoxy and of anti-communist rhetoric both inside and outside Russia, but had seemed defeated in the USSR itself, where, for example, over 100 Jews rose to the rank of general in WWII. It emerged again in the 1980s, hiding under the Soviet animosity toward the US client state of Israel, and has flowered in the new era of capitalism.

      Like Gorbachev before him, Putin has made the Orthodox Church his ally in ‘reconstruction’ and social control. This latest move is a return to the ignorance, intolerance and obscurantism of Tsarist times.

      (Incidentally, Putin has claimed that he views Stalin not as the heir of Lenin (much less of Trotsky!) but as a leader in the mould of Peter the Great and Catherine! :O )

  3. This surely must coincide with some planned attempt to censor the internet. No government could hope to shut out so basic an idea as non-hetero sexualities without clamping down on the primary means of global communication.

    A perfect photograph of Putin, too – I call that expression the “anti-smile”. What an intellectually puckered and vicious cretin he is (and apparently so are most of Russia’s elected politicians).

  4. If the law makes it illegal to tell children that homosexuals exist then the law prevents itself from being enforced. Any attempt to prosecute someone under this law must also reveal the existence of the thing the law is designed to conceal, and make the police and the courts equally guilty. This is a bad law with an absurd purpose.

    The fact that it was passed unanimously also says bad things about Russia’s parliament. It reminds me of a joke I heard about The New Russia: “Russia is now a democracy with ‘One Man. One Vote’. Vladimir Putin is that man and what he says goes.”

  5. Frightening! So it’s illegal to hurt people’s feelings about their gods, who don’t exist, and also illegal to tell children that gays exist, who do! Will they ban performances of music by their, perhaps, greatest composer Tchaikovsky because he was gay or will they just say he never existed?

    • In reply to #22 by TanyaK:

      I think most kids will work it out for themselves anyway, lol. Yes, it’s a stupid move for a nation such as Russia to make. But, then, Russia hasn’t been quite sane since 1917.

      I think Russia has never been quite sane, and not since 1917 but since the foundation the Russian state in the IX century. Most of its rulers have been psychos.

      • In reply to #65 by Odalrich:

        In reply to #22 by TanyaK:

        I think most kids will work it out for themselves anyway, lol. Yes, it’s a stupid move for a nation such as Russia to make. But, then, Russia hasn’t been quite sane since 1917.

        I think Russia has never been quite sane, and not since 1917 but since the foundation the Russ…

        Most of the early rulers of nearly all nations were ‘psychos’, lol – but the last few Tsars were not. The only psychos in later times were groups such as carried out the violent assassination of Alexander II for instance. Revolutionary Communists.

    • In reply to #22 by TanyaK:

      I think most kids will work it out for themselves anyway, lol. Yes, it’s a stupid move for a nation such as Russia to make. But, then, Russia hasn’t been quite sane since 1917.

      Russia only became sane in 1917!

      As far as they could, starting from economic backwardness, exacerbated by the Civil War, the ‘godless commies’ of the USSR began to build a new society, based on a new paradigm. Over the seven decades of its existence, and despite having to spend so much time preparing, fighting, and recovering from wars, Soviet socialism managed to create one of the great achievements of human history — a mass industrial society that eliminated most of the inequalities of wealth, income, education and opportunity that plagued what preceded it, what came after it, and what competed with it, a society in which health care and education through university were free (and university students received living stipends), where rent, utilities and public transportation were subsidized, along with books, periodicals and cultural events, where pensions were generous, and inflation was eliminated.

      By 1933, with the capitalist world deeply mired in a devastating economic crisis, unemployment in the USSR had been abolished, and remained so for the next five and a half decades, until socialism itself was abolished. Excluding the war years, from the time socialism was introduced, until Gorbachev began to take it apart in the late 1980s, the Soviet system of central planning and public ownership produced unfailing economic growth, without the recessions and downturns that plagued the capitalist economies of North America, Japan and Western Europe. And in most of those years, the Soviet and Eastern European economies grew faster. The Communists produced economic security as robust (and often more so) than that of the richest countries, but with fewer resources and a lower level of development and in spite of the unflagging efforts of the capitalist world to sabotage socialism. Soviet socialism was, and remains, a model for humanity — of what can be achieved outside the confines and contradictions of capitalism.

      Please don’t think that a Russian name makes you an expert on either Russian history or communism — in fact, it may simply explain your partiality.

  6. While we here in the west are discussing and implementing gay marriage, Russia choose to go in the opposite direction. It reminds me of a quote:”The future is already here — it’s just not very evenly distributed.”

  7. Only faithheads consistently display this level of utter stupidity. All of those children being told that homosexuals do not exist will soon find out that in fact they do. This will serve to undermine the trust in religious doctrine and respect of religio-politcal integrity; hopefully bringing about greater skepticism overall.

    It is dreadful of course that anyone should be victimised, as they surely will, by this and other willful acts of (faith based) oppression – however, this does illustrate to me at least, that religions are as successful at engineering their own destruction as are the works and efforts secular, atheist and humanist commentators and educators.

    The way Russia is heading (backwards in time) – I wonder how long it will be before the bacon sandwich is banned!

  8. Its quite funny to see smug liberals gloating about this. Russia has resisted the pernicious liberal revolution fuelled by mass immigration that has been imposed on Britain and Scandanavia particularly, and I think it is a safer, more peaceful place for it.

    • In reply to #29 by Andy10:

      Its quite funny to see smug liberals gloating about this. Russia has resisted the pernicious liberal revolution fuelled by mass immigration that has been imposed on Britain and Scandanavia particularly, and I think it is a safer, more peaceful place for it.

      Wait, so you think the model nation to which others should aspire is… post-Soviet Russia? You’re good with assassinations, rendition, persecution of foreign NGOs, kidnapping, suppression of critical media, massive concentration of ownership, government controlled by corporations, the suppression of the Chechens, etc, etc, provided they don’t let the scary brown people in?

    • Do you even know what you mean?
      “smug liberals gloating….” well, gloating usually refers to what one does when they are winning or have won. There may be smug liberals here but we are BITCHING about the situation.

      You seem to be the one gloating, but I have no idea why.

      In reply to #29 by Andy10:

      Its quite funny to see smug liberals gloating about this. Russia has resisted the pernicious liberal revolution fuelled by mass immigration that has been imposed on Britain and Scandanavia particularly, and I think it is a safer, more peaceful place for it.

  9. What’s “non-traditional” about homosexuality? Homosexuality has a long tradition, indeed. Just look to the ancient Greeks, for one example…

    Looks like a pretty big loophole in that law, to me.

  10. 434-0? They don’t have an opposition in Russia? Zero people don’t understand what a bad law this is?

    And besides, statistically speaking, some of those 434 must be LGBT. For example, several research reports put the number of bisexual people between 10% and 20% of the population. That would mean that somewhere between 43 and 87 people in the Duma are not strictly a zero on the Kinsey scale.

  11. High time for all governments of modern and ethically enlightened nations to condemn Russia and announce a resolve to draft sanctions against this new emergent fascism which is of course as always in happy agreement with the dominant religion. What’s this world going to be, batshit countries hellbent on competing for the Platinum Asshat Brownshirt of the Universe, while gourging down the revenue of our foreign aid and plentiful economic relations? I say no.

  12. Elton John has done more performances in Russia than any other rock star. I guess that’s not going to happen anymore. I wonder if Putin actually believes Ahmadenijad when he states that “There are no homosexuals in Iran,” and wonders if it’s possible to achieve that on a much larger scale.

  13. The moderators are threatening free speech on this website! Even to disagree is with their decisions is met with the instant threat of being banned from discussion. They have deleted my post for containing the word ‘cant’, which cannot possibly be deemed offensive. and many other persons posts in addition. The moderator responsible for this seems very fascist in outlook, and is clearly unsuited to the position.
    Please see the post about Russian laws penalising insulting religion. It seems that the moderators would act the same if they were in power. I’ve been visiting this site for years; this is disgusting.

    Moderators’ message

    Yes, we remove comments containing or quoting “the C word” and will continue to do so.

    Our Terms of Use make it clear that moderation decisions are entirely at our discretion. Comments about those decisions are always deemed in breach of those same Terms and will also be removed. Acceptance of our Terms of Use is a prerequisite for posting on this site: if you are unwilling to accept them, please go elsewhere.

    We are not going to enter into discussion about this. Anyone who attempts to further derail this thread risks having their commenting rights removed without further warning.

    Anyone who attempts to further derail this thread risks having their commenting rights removed without further warning!!!!!!!!!!!

    Seriously, what kind of scare tactics are these?

        • In reply to #48 by Peter Grant:

          In reply to #47 by TanyaK:

          does shocked face…omg! you mean there are Gay People? panics

          Yes, I quite like them. Unlike the breeders, they are less violent and usually have good drugs.

          Oh I agree – I’m bisexual myself, lol. I shan’t comment about the drugs.

  14. People are never unanimous. Putin cowed them into this vote. I heard a Moscow gay libber say nothing really changed. They could never get a permit for anything anyway. This is just one more excuse to deny one.

    I wonder what would happen if all Democratic governments simply pretended the governments of dictatorships did not exist. Refused all communication, refused their money, refused all trade. We tolerate such bastards.

    • In reply to #50 by Roedy:

      People are never unanimous. Putin cowed them into this vote. I heard a Moscow gay libber say nothing really changed. They could never get a permit for anything anyway. This is just one more excuse to deny one.

      I wonder what would happen if all Democratic governments simply pretended the governments…

      Quote by Roedy: “People are never unanimous. Putin cowed them into this vote.”

      lol – ya think?

  15. In Canada, the biggest radio show in the country is called Q, hosted by Jian Ghomeshi, a gay Iranian. It is the place for top celebrities to be interviewed. He usually has some gay related guest or news item. When he goes on tour, he sells out immediately.

    If someone had come back in time and told me this in 1970 when I was starting out my Quixotic gay lib project, I would have thought him mad. Canada was just as backward as Russia is now.

    Russian gays have a big advantage we Canadians did not have, other countries are far more advanced, and their thinking is only a keystroke away.

  16. Mr. Putin should also make it illegal to tell kids that SUN and moon EXISTS. Or he can teach kids science from religion. Tell all Russian kids that sun and moon orbits around the Earth as GOD says in Bible,Torah and Quran.

  17. Taking into account the entire History of that country, we shouldn’t be surprised by the decision taken by its “parliament”(to call it something); the Great Leader says “vote black” and they unanimously vote black; “vote white” and they vote white. If one day Putin decides to deny the existance of cancer, you can be sure the rest will agree with him.

  18. Dear RDFR’s and Premier Putin. I had a strange dream last night. “You have just won 3 weeks holiday to Russian Siberia – tracking and tagging the Siberian tigers – in the presence of Premier Putin.” We track down and drug a magnificent female tigress with 2 cute cubs – knee deep in midwinter snow. I run my hand along its gorgeous fur and I am then allowed to hold one of the cubs. I stand in awe of nature at its very best. Later back at base camp – totally exhausted – we have a well deserved meal and a beer and I am allowed to ask Vladimir one question. Being totally fearless, I ask, “Why, oh why did you give sarin nerve gas to an Islamic state?” There is total silence . . . . I see his jaw drop, struck dumb and realise he is as human as the rest of us. Tell me, did I ask the wrong question?. Yours sincerely, ‘m’

  19. Does anyone else think Putin and his “way too” United party doth protest too much? I think we are going to hear some wild homo-erotic stories coming out the Kremlin one day, soon after his death. And then… oh, the hypocrisy!

  20. I have a website. I would be happy to publish any Russian gay lib material or material “insulting” to religious superstition. Google will find and index it.

    Would Putin block my site in Russia? I have written one time pad email encryption software that even the KGB cannot crack, so they can send me the material safely.

Leave a Reply