Tuesday, March 4, 2014

Beyond The Russian Boarder: The effect of Russia's ban on 'homosexual promotion' on the world

Posted by at
In a previous article located here I showed that the Russian laws that surround homosexuality have been grossly misrepresented. Russia is not as how many pro-gay activists would like to suggest they are; in fact to the contrary Russia is quite permissive of homosexuality. In my article I recorded journalist, Shaun Walker recording Russian President Vladimir Putin in saying ...Russia is "...not forbidding anything and nobody is being grabbed off the street, and there is no punishment for such kinds of relations[; you] can feel relaxed and calm [in Russia],...[i]

So what is the big stink about it then? Its Putin's last five words that has caused all the problems: "...but leave children alone please."[ii] In sum be gay, just don't be public about it when kids are around. Why is that? I explained in my article that Russia amended "...Article 5 of the Federal Law "On Protection of children from information harmful to their health and development" and some legislative acts of the Russian Federation in order to protect children from information that promotes the denial of traditional family values."[iii] So Russia believes that information that insinuates homosexuality being 'good' is harmful information. 

How has this law affected Russian citizens - gay or straight - and the rest of the world?
  1. In North America, a parent can teach their children whatever they believe to be morally good, bad and neutral; and although it would be immoral for a parent to teach racist bigotry to their children as a positive value it is protected under freedom of speech and expression. However this isn't the case in Russia, as it relates to homosexuality at least; a parent cannot teach their own child the values that they hold if those values state that homosexuality is good.
  2. Legal marriage is not extended to homosexual couples in Russia, but this does not mean that two consenting gay adults cannot share their lives together. Wikipedia the Online Encyclopedia, states that single "...persons living within Russia, regardless of their sexual orientation, can adopt children."[iv] However given the ban on publication of homosexuality to children a union of two consenting gay people is excluded from this opportunity on the account of their active homosexual relationship. If these people wish to adopt a child they have to end their relationship; and furthermore each person is also condemned to be a single parent - a situation that is also ill-advised for both the child and the parent.   
  3. Moreover, journalist for Russia: Beyond the headlines Anastasiya Maltseva states in her March 3, 2014 article, New Russian law extends ban on adoptions that this "...Russian legislation has extended an existing ban on international adoptions of Russian children by same-sex couples to all citizens of countries that recognize same-sex marriage. This action discriminates against all persons from foreign countries who, irregardless of their views on homosexuality from adopting Russian children based on the political standing same-sex marriages has in their country."[v] So I a single Canadian citizen cannot adopt a child from Russia because of where I live - Canada, a country that promotes same-sex marriage. However a February 13, 2014 The Telegraph Article suggests that the "...new wording of the law suggests that married heterosexual couples from countries that allow gay marriage will not be affected by the changes,..."[vi] So even though I could not adopt a child from Russia, my heterosexual parents could. 
So the Russian ban on homosexual publication for children has had a ripple affect that extended beyond the Russian boarder and its LGBT community. I am not a member of the LGBT culture and I am being discriminated against based on my country's views on gay marriage, something that I am at odds with. However in my previous article indicated above, I asked the question: 'Is all discrimination bad?' Is it immoral for Russia to exclude me from adopting one of its parentless children on the account of my country's political views on gay marriage? Simply no, in fact the old adage 'better be safe than sorry' rings true. What would Russia have to be sorry for? ANSWER: Having one of their young citizens, and more importantly 'a child' be exposed to homosexuality; they don't want to risk me getting involved in a homosexual relationship and exposing the child to homosexuality, a.k.a harmful information. This however is something that they can monitor within their borders and prevent with the threat of prosecution; this is why a single Russian gay person can adopt a child. 

However is exposing homosexuality in a positive light to children really harmful? The Telegraph article also states that an "...explanatory note that accompanied last year's law said the aim was to "protect children's psyche and consciousness from the potential undesirable effects of artificial exposure to unconventional sexual relationships, and also from forming the complexes, mental suffering and stresses that research by psychologists suggests often affect children of same-sex parents".[vii] However studies seem to suggest that it is the discrimination against homosexuality itself that is causing stress in our children regarding their gay parents. The American Psychological Association states that "...exposure to prejudice and discrimination based on sexual orientation may cause acute distress (Mays & Cochran, 2001; Meyer, 2003),..."[viii] The American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry states that "...research shows that children [from some] ...LGBT families face discrimination in their communities [and] ... may be teased or bullied by peers.[ix] This is a thought provoking idea to say the least, and one would have to be have their proverbial head in the sand to question the validity of said facts. However is this picture completely accurate? I am sure being bullied for who their parents are contributes to a child's stress level, and being told that their parents' union is wrong is unpleasant to hear, and the mere suggestions could also be personally perplexing as one could ask: 
What makes my two dad's (or two mom's) relationship wrong? They love each other and they love me; they look after me and each other; and they are happy together! How is that sort of relationship wrong?
However is bullying and the socialized stigma of having gay parents really *the* avenue of negative effects on children? As it will be shown soon, the answer is 'no'. The problem with the aforementioned thinking is a happy relationship doesn't mean that it is appropriate? If happiness and a commitment to look after each other is *the* (or at least *the main*) criteria for an appropriate relationship then should we condemn the relationship of unhappy partners as a sham? So how is the active homosexual relationship wrong? To conclude I'll highlight the answer in bullet point form and expound on it in upcoming articles: 
  • Are homosexual relationships equal: 
  • In health safety? 
  • Natural compatibility? 
  • Diverse parenting needs for children?
The answer to all of these questions are: No. The promotion of homosexuality is wrong because of it promotes an unsafe sexual practices. It promotes the union of natural incompatibility and it takes away the needs of a child that only a heterosexual union can provide. Although being bullied and told that one's parental union is wrong can have negative effects on a child it is not the only negative avenue of negative effects for children; and it doesn't mean that the unpleasant news of homosexuality being wrong is false. This is not saying that adults should suffer these negative effects, but them being 'adults' suggests that they are old enough to make ill-advised decisions. 
______________

[ii] - Ibid., - accessed March 3, 2014
[iii] - Ibid., - accessed March 3, 2014
[vii] - Ibid.,- accessed March 4, 2014
[viii] - http://www.apa.org/about/policy/parenting.aspx - accessed March 4, 2014

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)