America's Queer "Peculiar Institution" - child slavery
Posted in the Columbia Forum
#1 Mar 30, 2013
The Russian president has opposed the adoption of Russian orphans by LGBT foreign couples, and has instructed the government and the Supreme Court to prepare changes to existing law before July 1.
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s order will most likely be fulfilled by the Ministry of Education and Science, which is currently dealing with issues concerning orphans and adoptions, Izvestia daily reported.
The ministry has not yet commented on the news, saying that Putin’s instructions had not yet reached their office.
Tensions over the issue arose in mid-February, after the French National Assembly voted to legalize adoptions by same-sex couples. At the time, the Russian plenipotentiary for children’s rights Pavel Astakhov said he would do everything to ensure that Russian orphans are only adopted by heterosexual families.
In mid-February, the Russian Foreign Ministry reported that it planned to verify the possible “psychological damage” inflicted on Russian orphan Yegor Shabatalov, who was adopted by a US woman who lived in a same-sex marriage with another US citizen, but concealed her relationship from Russian authorities when she filed the adoption request. Two years after adopting the Russian boy, the couple split and started a legal dispute over parental rights.
The head of the ‘All-Russian Parents’ Assembly’ movement, Nadezhda Khramova, told Izvestia that a total ban of foreign adoptions would be a smarter move, as “it is technically difficult to verify the adoptive parents’ sexual orientation and their legal status can be marriage of convenience.” Khramova and her NGO previously organized mass events in support of the ‘Dima Yakovlev Bill,’ which banned US citizens from adopting Russian children.
The main sponsor of the Dima Yakovlev Bill, MP Yekaterina Lakhova, earlier drew public attention to the French adoptions, claiming that only traditional families can offer their children a proper upbringing. Lakhova noted, however, that introducing new regulations could be a lengthy process, and that no one should expect the ban to immediately come into effect.
The Russian Family Code does not allow same-sex marriage, making adoption by same sex-couples impossible. Adoption by unmarried individuals is allowed; authorities do not require future parents to present proof of their sexual orientation.
America's media obsession with the perversion of Homosexuality is creating a new kind of slavery, child slavery. If you are adopted by questionable parents you are subject to their whims and perversions regardless of their legitimacy, just like slavery.
#2 Mar 30, 2013
Russia will be blessed for this position. We in the West are "out of control" on this issue.
#3 Mar 30, 2013
the American duck lied about her real sexual preferences in order to adopt that poor boy Yegor . When he got older you just know those feminazis would do all they could to feminize that boy. the LGBT have no shame for they are the devil incarnate
#4 Mar 30, 2013
Ruthless KGB dictator, that said, he makes perfect sense regarding Syria, Egypt, Chechnya, and now homosexual parents. Doesn't he realize that Al Qaida isn't in Syria, the Muslim Brotherhood are good guys, he should make nice with terrorists on his own border, and all the fabulous advantages children have being raised by homsexuals?
#5 Mar 30, 2013
The Russian president is looking out for his people. That is more than you can say for Obama.
#6 Mar 30, 2013
I guess the only Men Left are in Russia , it strange how the Femenist didnt destroy the Russian Man in the Soviet Era
Whereas the Femenist Destroyed The American White Man .Perhaps it was the Communist Control of The ........Fill In the Blanks . The Ones Who Control the Sewer Pipe of Hollywood
#7 Mar 30, 2013
Tapettes need not apply, Kudos Putin. Maybe we can get Valerie Jarrett to knit Obama a pair and have Moochelle sew them in place! What a waste! Our "boy wonder" outshined again! More Speeches, More PhotoOps, yes, that's what we need. LOL!
#8 Mar 31, 2013
It is queer that this country could think they could somehow change what has been an established union before God for eons. Men with Men, Women with Women, vacant, self-abusive, self-involved BS artist. The 60's confused them by teaching them that sex was love and visa versa. It is not.
Purchasing children to prop up their miserable and God forsaken lives, hearts, minds and spirits, it is no wonder that Obama is their spiritual icon. This however, will not go unpunished as both the righteous and the wicked will be punished just as it was for the travesty of slavery the first time.
#10 Apr 2, 2013
Implicit to the demands for "Gay" rights is that gays are a minority group in America whose life-choices warrant all the protection given to any citizen. The same sort of civil rights movement which fought discrimination based on the color of skin is now being trotted out in defense of enforcing the right to personal choice, in this case, sexual choice. But the moral, historical, and cultural arguments that compelled a nation to take notice of equality of race is sorely lacking in the case for recognizing the gay minority. The kind of confusion about the meaning of a minority group is very evident, for example, in "The New Civil Rights Movement," a web-blog that advocates gay rights and gay marriage as an absolute freedom. As far as this group is concerned, "gays" are a persecuted minority who therefore deserve new legislation. The American Foundation for Equal Rights, as the title itself asserts, uses the same tactic. On what social or ethical grounds "gays" can be called a minority community is never defined. Instead, freedom is defined almost exclusively as freedom of choice.
We have come to believe that the act of making choices is intrinsically virtuous when, in fact, many of them are extrinsically vicious: pedophilia, prostitution, dealing in the pornography of minors, etc. Such "choices" are still unlawful, whether the crime is committed in one's own home or at the local mall. The reason is not hard to find: sexual activity does not carry a basic standard of principle upon which society should be governed. Black civil rights fought for exactly such a principle; not for the right of mere choice. This is a crucial point that seems to slip all too easily between all the rhetoric. If Mr. Obama thinks he is helping to bring freedom to the present-day victims of oppression, he'd better first discover the difference that exists between the foundation of civil rights and the advocacy of popular preference.
Perhaps the most disturbing symptom of gay minority rights is that social organizations (such as the Boy Scouts) are no longer permitted to regard gay behavior as a moral subject that deserves watchful and deliberate consideration. The arguments whether homosexuality is genetic, or whether gay parenting might harm or enable a child's development, are far from over. To take one example, academic researcher Mark Regerius at the University of Texas found that children raised by "gay" couple are not as well as adjusted as other children. Needless to say, his findings were immediately dismissed as biased and ill-founded, even though his methods were exonerated as completely legitimate.
As the dialogue heats up, reasoned arguments will continue to suffer. Specific personal dramas of "couples" whose rights to marry are being violated claim center stage as if the actual ethical debate over homosexual relations is really smokescreen. To suggest otherwise, one is presented with the conversation-stopper called "gay rights." Such an automatic categorization bypasses the pertinent fact that the choice about its minority status has already been made for us.
Add your comments below
|Is Jeb Bush 'evolving' on same-sex marriage and...||1 hr||Christsharian Law||281|
|HB Rhame Student||4 hr||Beachy||1|
|cattle ranchers||Wed||SUSAN PAGE||1|
|Lexington Poker Ring: Where "The Tape" Came From (Aug '12)||Wed||Friv 4 school||95|
|holy temple church of the lord jesus christ of ... (Mar '13)||Mar 3||Alonzo||186|
|brown boy dog food||Mar 1||slammed||1|
|DC legalizing pot, ignoring House Republicans||Feb 28||goonsquad||51|
Find what you want!
Search Columbia Forum Now
Copyright © 2015 Topix LLC