Skip to comments.Ukraine Bill Proposes Prison for Positive Gay Depictions
Posted on 07/24/2012 10:38:14 AM PDT by Cronos
If a group of Ukrainian lawmakers succeeds in its mission, television shows and movies like Brokeback Mountain that sympathetically portray gay men and lesbians will be banned. So will gay pride parades.
The recently introduced bill, supported by the presidents representative in Parliament, would impose prison terms of up to five years and unspecified fines for spreading the propaganda of homosexuality, which the measure defines as positive depictions of gays in public.
..Although homosexuality was decriminalized in Ukraine, a former Soviet republic, and Russia after the fall of communism, animosity toward gay people remains high in both countries. St. Petersburg, which is Russias second-largest city, passed a law this year mandating fines of up to $33,000 for promoting homosexuality among minors. A gay pride parade in Georgia, another former Soviet republic, ended in a scuffle with opponents in March.
The Ukrainian bill follows a decision in May to cancel the countrys first gay pride parade because organizers feared violence. Two Ukrainian gay rights activists have also been brutally attacked in recent months.
Pavlo Ungurian, one of the six lawmakers from various parties who wrote the antigay bill, told reporters on Monday that growing acceptance of gay rights in the West was not evolution, but degradation.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
That wouild make every Hollyweird sit-com a felony.
Maybe not such a bad idea....
More like a fascist one. The government that outlaws positive depictions of homosexuality is one that can just as easily do the same if the subject is guns, conservatism or Christianity.
True.....but the whole concept of self government allows the people’s representatives to pick and choose what they wish to make illegal. We used to do the same thing...censorship of movies and books according to the prevalent moral code of the people was always present in our country. Our ancestors were smart enough to know the difference between protected POLITICAL SPEECH and immorality. And gutsy enough to enforce it.
Because we don’t have the intelligence of our ancestors to know the difference between protected political speech and immorality. And we don’t have the courage of our convictions to enforce our morality through tough legislation.
You must have a much better opinion of "the people's representatives" than I do.
I don't want any government official, agency or department telling me what I am forbidden to read, listen to, or see.
We used to do the same thing...censorship of movies and books according to the prevalent moral code of the people was always present in our country.
And it was stupid nanny-statism then, just as it is now. How about we let the market decide?
Our ancestors were smart enough to know the difference between protected POLITICAL SPEECH and immorality. And gutsy enough to enforce it.
Of course, the First Amendment covers more speech than just POLITICAL.
And given such things as the Alien and Sedition Acts (among numerous other examples), I wouldn't say the founding fathers or other ancestors got it right, either.
You sound as if you're advocating less freedom to preserve...freedom?
The answer to speech you don't like should be more speech, not censorship. Once the government gets the idea it can ban controversial ideas and speech, it never stops.
You might think that is fine, if you're in agreement with such government actions. But what do you do when the government turns its censorship powers towards your books, ideas, religion, etc?
The right purpose of law and power is to do good and punish evil.
It’s a rather poor argument to say that they COULD do the opposite and therefore ought to do nothing. And it’s sad to see the good people pleading for a “live and let live” truce with evil because their brothers-in-arms keep capitulating on this point.
I’m with you on this one. Too bad they don’t have a strong constitution that prohibits censorship of ideological opposition. I don’t have any use for turd burglars but I don’t have to take part in their depravity.
On the other hand, I think a constitutional case can be made against promoting homosexuality in schools and other taxpayer funded venues.
This show has been rated FP - Fudge Packing will be depicted as normal and mainstream behavior. Parental Discretion Advised.
Who gets to decide what constitutes "Evil"?
There are too many examples of our own government overreaching its power after people warned it COULD - privacy, gun rights, religion. The list may be endless.
And its sad to see the good people pleading for a live and let live truce with evil because their brothers-in-arms keep capitulating on this point.
If you're opposed to anything then, by all means, shout it from the rooftops, organize your fellow citizens, etc. Doing nothing should never be a solution. Neither should censorship, no matter who is in power.
If it's Obama & Holder, I'm sure you'd see some new respect for the First Amendment on this thread.
The majority. Like it has always been and always will be.
You do understand "sodomy" includes consensual oral sex between a heterosexual couple, don't you?
I understand what the Ukranians are trying to do, and sympathize with their efforts at attempting to hold back the flood tides of Western political correctness.
However, we Americans should have our own form, true to our history, of a solution:
By have more groups and coalitions which would argue (reasonably, not shrilly) consistently against the Rainbow Agenda, to the point where public opinion would be swayed.
There would be less interest in gay themes on tv and in movies; lower attendance at Gay Pride marches and festivals; polite boredom with the gay political correctness campaigns; until one day they would wake up and say, “Yikes. I think we’ve gone out of fashion.” In America, to go out of style means extinction. This is how we truly get rid of the agenda and all its tiresomeness.