Russian MP moves to strip gays of parental rights

[CriticalThought]

Russian MP moves to strip gays of parental rights ? RT Russian politics

State Duma deputy from United Russia parliamentary caucus claims that the recently introduced ban on promotion of non-traditional sex relations to minors should be extended to families. Therefore, homosexual parents have no right to raise their children.


MP Aleksey Zhuravlev submitted the suggested amendments to the Family Code to the State Duma on Thursday. The explanatory note to the bill reads that non-traditional sexual orientation of one or both parents would become sufficient reason to deprive both of them of their parental rights.


“Following the letter of the law that forbids propaganda of non-traditional sex to minors we must restrict such propaganda not only in mass media but also the family,” Zhuravlev wrote. His reasoning is that “if one of the child’s parents indulges in sexual contact with persons of the same sex, the damage to the child’s psyche is immense as a mother or father serves as an example for their offspring.”

Interesting. So what do you think? Is having a gay parent the equivalent of child abuse? Will this kind of law pass after the Olympics in Russia? Are these the kind of laws that social conservatives in America would like to see imposed?

 

[CLAX1911]

Russian MP moves to strip gays of parental rights ? RT Russian politics



Interesting. So what do you think? Is having a gay parent the equivalent of child abuse? Will this kind of law pass after the Olympics in Russia? Are these the kind of laws that social conservatives in America would like to see imposed?

You can't be socially conservative and support these laws. Conservatives want there to be no government intrusion into lives. This is absolutely an intrusion.

The people that call themselves conservative that support this kind of thing are not social conservatives they are social fascists. They bark at New York for saying you can't get a 32 ounce soda, or at Michelle Obama for saying there needs to be regulations on food. Saying that it isn't okay to tell people how to live.

I agree that you shouldn't tell people how to live. Yet these people will torn around and do the exact same thing. Meaning it's okay to tell people how to live when they are doing it.

It's so utterly hypocritical.

 

[Hypersonic]

You can't be socially conservative and support these laws. Conservatives want there to be no government intrusion into lives. This is absolutely an intrusion.

The people that call themselves conservative that support this kind of thing are not social conservatives they are social fascists. They bark at New York for saying you can't get a 32 ounce soda, or at Michelle Obama for saying there needs to be regulations on food. Saying that it isn't okay to tell people how to live.

I agree that you shouldn't tell people how to live. Yet these people will torn around and do the exact same thing. Meaning it's okay to tell people how to live when they are doing it.

It's so utterly hypocritical.

Clax your articulation here is ok with me.. I 100% agree with you, too bad in my thread you jumped my bones (no pun intended).

 

[chromium]

Of course they will support. That they challenge adoption rights here tells me quite enough. Many states are no better than russia when it comes to this. Neo-cons think it will turn the kids gay or the kids will get raped etc. Just mindless gay bashing, whether here or in russia.

 

[Deuce]

You can't be socially conservative and support these laws. Conservatives want there to be no government intrusion into lives. This is absolutely an intrusion.

The people that call themselves conservative that support this kind of thing are not social conservatives they are social fascists. They bark at New York for saying you can't get a 32 ounce soda, or at Michelle Obama for saying there needs to be regulations on food. Saying that it isn't okay to tell people how to live.

I agree that you shouldn't tell people how to live. Yet these people will torn around and do the exact same thing. Meaning it's okay to tell people how to live when they are doing it.

It's so utterly hypocritical.

"No true scottsman" :roll:

There are plenty of authoritarian conservatives. Despite their propaganda, "conservative" is not inherently favoring "small government."

 

[CLAX1911]

"No true scottsman" :roll:

There are plenty of authoritarian conservatives. Despite their propaganda, "conservative" is not inherently favoring "small government."

not true, what does conservative mean if it doesn't mean conservative on government?

 

[douglas]

The word conservative seems to mean different things to different people. It is supposed to mean support for small government, but in American politics, it seems to be used for support of Authoritarian laws that enforce religious morality. They are nearly exact opposites, but the "small government" one is typically only defined as "conservative" in Europe. For American Politics, Conservative doesn't imply any endorsement of small government, whether they use that as a tagline or not; they support authoritarian laws against homosexuals, atheists, and essentially all citizens that don't fit a stereotypical model of Judeo-Christian morality. In a completely hypocritical move, they also support larger government spending on the military and a general meddling in foreign politics when it puts us in a position to buy cheap oil, but not if it's for human rights violations.

As for whether or not these American Conservatives would implement a Russia-esque policy against gay parents? Yes, they would and they are currently trying to. The GOP, religious right, or Conservatives, whatever you want to call them, are the anti-human-rights party. That's what they do, it's self-evident.

 

[CLAX1911]

The word conservative seems to mean different things to different people. It is supposed to mean support for small government, but in American politics, it seems to be used for support of Authoritarian laws that enforce religious morality. They are nearly exact opposites, but the "small government" one is typically only defined as "conservative" in Europe. For American Politics, Conservative doesn't imply any endorsement of small government, whether they use that as a tagline or not; they support authoritarian laws against homosexuals, atheists, and essentially all citizens that don't fit a stereotypical model of Judeo-Christian morality. In a completely hypocritical move, they also support larger government spending on the military and a general meddling in foreign politics when it puts us in a position to buy cheap oil, but not if it's for human rights violations.

As for whether or not these American Conservatives would implement a Russia-esque policy against gay parents? Yes, they would and they are currently trying to. The GOP, religious right, or Conservatives, whatever you want to call them, are the anti-human-rights party. That's what they do, it's self-evident.

I wouldn't call that conservative, that word was hijacked. I call this social fascism. If it was conservative, then Islamic states under sharia law would be conservative.

 

[Texmex]

Is having a gay parent the equivalent of child abuse?

Yes, definitely!

Are these the kind of laws that social conservatives in America would like to see imposed?

It's a start.

 

[CriticalThought]

Yes, definitely!



It's a start.

From your other posts I do not even have to ask why you feel that way. I am just happy people like yourself are in the minority.

 

[ecofarm]

Yes, definitely!

Teaching children hatred and bigotry is child abuse.

 

[Zyphlin]

Wonderful. Throw out random question so someone can make wild accusation with nothing supporting it but GIANT leaps an assumptions, and then spend the rest of the thread acting as if that accusation is actually truth.

This conservative absolutely would staunchly and vocally oppose such attempts if it happened here

 

[CLAX1911]

Teaching children hatred and bigotry is child abuse.

Of course a parents sexuality isn't child abuse. I wouldn't really give thus the time of day.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Yes, definitely!

This is further proof that you have no education on this issue. It has been shown through research that gay parents do as well as straight parents in raising children. Please learn information on topics before posting on them so that easy refutation will not happen so often.

It's a start.

You also don't know what social conservatism means.

 

[Gipper]

If I remember correctly, most claims/studies that try to create a correlation/causation scenario between homosexual parents and increases in abuse based on that criterion alone have been rather thoroughly debunked.

Tell you what - when we have more stable, loving households wanting a child than we do children needing a stable, loving household, then we can start picking and choosing who gets a home based on orientation.

 

[Dragonfly]

Yes, definitely!

Explain why please.

Also, is having an obese parent child abuse?

Is having a Muslim parent child abuse?

Is being a single parent child abuse?

Are unmarried parents child abusers?

 

[CriticalThought]

Wonderful. Throw out random question so someone can make wild accusation with nothing supporting it but GIANT leaps an assumptions, and then spend the rest of the thread acting as if that accusation is actually truth.

This conservative absolutely would staunchly and vocally oppose such attempts if it happened here

Texmex seems to think "It's a start" for what he would like to see in this country, so apparently this is something some American social conservatives would absolutely love to see here.