Tuesday, December 29, 2009

Socialism, Islam and Hell

Socialism, Islam and Hell

Liberals and their paranoia

By Julio Severo
The same socialism condemning conservative Christians as “fundamentalists” and “fanatics” protects Islam by calling it a “religion of peace” — while its adherents persistently take away the peace and lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent people yearly.
That protection is largely an effect of the effort of some Western liberal Jews, who managed to establish laws to protect minorities. Those laws are today exploited by homosexual and Islamic activists to protect their own interests and impose on the Western societies the homosexual and Islamic ideology. Christians eventually pay the bill, suffering pressures and oppressions from completely antagonistic groups.
By contrast, Christians are routinely persecuted in Islamic nations. But, incredibly, now Islamic groups demand an international law against “Islamophobia”, because they say that Islam needs protection from people that do not like terror and terrorists produced by the “religion of peace”. Muslims, with the support of socialists, have learnt how to exploit the Western paranoia against intolerance, prejudice and discrimination and they are being able to persecute and oppress Christians and Jews in their own turf.
When it comes to paranoia, the Islamic mind is not much different from the socialist mind.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran that denies the Holocaust and says that he wants do destroy Israel, has an administration that sees no problem in the torture and murder of homosexuals. But Ahmadinejad was never annoyed by the same socialist human right groups that routinely blame Christians for “crimes” against homosexuals. Those Christian “crimes” do not consist in acts of real violence, but exclusively in views that reflect the Bible condemnation of homosexual practices. That is the socialist reality: silence about what Islamic Iran does, and many coward charges against Christians. 

The visit of president of Iran to his friend Lula in Brazil

Speaking about Ahmadinejad, he visited Brazil November 23. He was warmly welcomed by his socialist friend Lula.
Ahmadinejad funds terrorist groups against Israel, because he ignores and rejects God’s covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Lula has friendship with Ahmadinejad because… Why? Choose the reason:
Lula does not care about God’s covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
Lula does not care about the human rights abuses, torture and murder of Christians in Iran.
Lula does not care about the human rights abuses of Jews in Iran.
Lula does not care about torture and murder of homosexuals in Iran.
Lula does not care about the Iranian sponsorship of Islamic terrorist groups against Israel.
You could present a long list of problems in the Islamic Iranian Dictatorship, but Lula does not care. Socialists act this way: they do not care about God, about moral values, about hell and about their own socialist friends — unless they have significant personal interests involved. There is nothing more important for an ambitious socialist than to promote his own glory.

Socialist Shimon Peres visits Lula

Attempting perhaps to weaken the visit Ahmadinejad to Brazil, Israeli president Shimon Peres visited Brazil before Ahmadinejad, November 10. Yet, Lula does not also care about the fact that Peres has the same “democratic” socialist feelings regarding to abortion and homosexuality.
Nevertheless the ideological, moral, political and ethical affinity with Peres, Lula prefers friendship with Ahmadinejad, whose stances are opposed to the stances of Lula and Peres in the abortion and homosexual issues. Would Lula fail to hug Ahmadinejad only because socialist comrade Peres is not easy with the wish of Ahmadinejad to destroy Israel? For some reason, Lula sees in Ahmadinejad another expedient to promote his own glory.
In turn, Shimon Peres does not care much about the fact that, in his about eight-year administration and having visited several Islamic nations near of Israel, Lula has never had the least willingness to visit Israel. In response to the apparent disregard of Lula toward Israel, Peres said, “He has his agenda and priorities. I am not supposed to lecture him. We consider him a friend. We know one another for a long time. We began in the same socialist path. So I can say that I remember him ‘since his childhood’. He has his own way of priorizing things”.
Liberal mind lives hand in hand with paranoia — whether in Brazil, US and even in Israel. Liberal mind does not care about evil when it sees it. When a homosexual rapes a 6-year-old boy, liberal journalism sees only a generic “rape against a child”, without mentioning specific identifications compromising the gay agenda. When an Islamic terrorist murders innocents, liberal journalism applies the same measure, reporting only “the bomb that murdered several people” or the “terror that murdered several people”, leaving radical Islam completely untouched and protected.
Conversely, any crime against a homosexual is used as an opportunity to launch against Christians a specific and detailed blame for the crime, even though no Christian were involved and criminal circumstances suggested possibility of violence among homosexuals. This is part of the liberal paranoia.

Paranoia of the diversity and tolerance ideology

In nations where socialism controls everything, the enemies of the system are eliminated for any and every reason. See Cuba, North Korea, etc. In nations where the population is under gradual conditioning to embrace socialism, society is firstly led to paranoia. It is sheer paranoia to approve laws condemning Christians for the fictitious crime of “homophobia”, because Christians do not have a tradition of murdering homosexuals. But Obama and Lula act this way.
Homeland Security Department says that a true terrorist can be identified by some special characteristics: he can be an individual opposing abortion and homosexuality. Adherence to Islam cannot be considered as terrorist characteristic, because Muslims are minority and they deserve protection. Therefore, even though all the 9/11 terrorists were Islamic and even though all the terrorists attacking Israel are Islamic, liberal ethics orders the establishment to ignore this fact. Similarly, it orders the press to omit the word “homosexual” or “homosexuality” in all violent crimes where young boys were victims of a homosexual.
Recently, Islamic terrorist Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab tried to blow away a jet heading to Detroit. American service secret had information on him for at least two years, but they had a hard time to give exclusive attention to him, because the Muslim individual was in a politically-correct, broad security watch list containing more than 500,000 other threats: conservative Christians, abortion and homosexuality opponents, etc. How to sort out from this massive database the real threats without singling out the followers of the religion of peace?
Mutallab could not be halted months earlier because it would be very expensive to probe all of these “threats” together. Besides, he could not be screened by his Islamic name and religion, because — for the overjoyed followers of the religion of peace — profiling is a crime in the US. In their typical ideological paranoia, American liberals do not care if 100% suicide terrorists against the US have consistently been followers of the religion of peace.
In fact, Obama administration cannot profile people with Muslim names — because Obama is one of them. (Can you convincingly prove that some of the acts of Obama put America at risk?) But Obama administration can freely profile abortion and homosexuality opponents — because Obama is not one of them, being a fervent abortion and homosexuality promoter.
Yet, after this recent terrorist attack, Homeland Security Department is likely to launch more aggressive measures against all the other “threats” in its database without profiling any Islamic name and origin! This makes me wonder who will defeat America first, al Qaeda or PC paranoia? I certainly doubt al Qaeda is stronger than PC paranoia.
If the US had embraced PC ban on profiling in the World War 2, American military would be trying until this day to figure out their real enemies from some another PC massive database containing thousands of thousands of fictitious enemies, and World War 2 would be the perpetual, endless World War. PC paranoia is the best way to perpetuate criminals and their crimes.
In World War 2, Americans forgot only to profile communists, and for such negligence they — and the world — paid an excessively high bloody cost for the next decades. Liberal America creates her own nightmares.
The protection of diversity and tolerance toward perversion in Brazil, US and Europe while supporting Iran and other Islamic nations that hate diversity and tolerance is a trademark of the liberal paranoia. Liberals may criticize, condemn and revile God and his followers, but for them diversity and tolerance are sacred — only in Brazil, US and Europe, and never in Iran, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, etc. I know it for experience, because my blog has been targeted by federal prosecutors in Brazil for criticism of homosexuality and Islam. On March 2008, four Islamic journalists in São Paulo filed a complaint requesting federal prosecutors to shut down my blog for prejudice against Islam, because I denounced Islamic terrorists.
Right to free speech to criticize homosexuality and Islam? This is capitalist talk!
In July 2007, in the same time when Google interdicted my blog for some days because of charges and defamations of homosexual activists, I denounced the homosexual website ParouTudo for posting “Amando Garotos: Pedofilia e a Intolerância Contemporânea” (Loving Boys: Pedophilia and the Contemporary Intolerance), an article defending openly pedophilia. (See more information here: http://lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com/2009/12/day-sex-between-men-and-boys-is-no.html) I had requested authorities to investigate and take action, but today, more than two years later, nothing was done. Is diversity and tolerance paranoia a free way for homosexuals to advocate pedophilia?
ParouTudo remains active on the internet, without any problem, but my blog has been under risk of being closed by federal prosecutors.
So if you think that it is paranoid for Lula to hug Ahmadinejad (whose administration hates Christians, Israel and homosexuals), this is socialism. If you think that it is paranoid for Obama to profile conservative Christians opposed to abortion and homosexuality and not to profile terrorists whose common identification is the “religion of peace”, this is socialism. If you think that it is paranoid for Shimon Peres to humble himself before a Lula that wants alliance with Ahmadinejad, this is socialism.
Modern Israel, dominated by socialism, has gay parades and legal abortion. But with all this incredible ideological affinity, Lula prefers Ahmadinejad, who does not allow abortion and homosexuality in the Islamic Iranian dictatorship. For the sake of his own glory, a socialist — whether atheist, Catholic, Islamic or evangelical — could deliver his own mother and homeland to the devil.
Rebel Jews in the old Israel, whose history of apostasy is found in the Old Testament, belittled hell, where they eventually ended. Today, even knowing in lesser or greater measure this account, Lula, Obama e Shimon Peres equally belittle hell and fall down before the same socialism that is selling their nations to the fatal deceitfulness of the homosexual, abortion and Islamic ideology.
Portuguese version of this article: O socialismo, o islamismo e o inferno
Spanish version of this article: El socialismo, el islamismo y el infierno
Read more articles by Julio Severo:

Thursday, December 17, 2009

The day sex between men and boys is no longer offensive

The day sex between men and boys is no longer offensive

Brazilian movie seeks to shatter “taboo” of incest and homosexual sex among boys by presenting both behaviors as “love”

By Julio Severo
Two men hugging and kissing one another. What kind of scenario is this? It is a scenario that, for the audiences, is objectionable, but for the media, with its disproportionately high number of gays, is beautiful.
Nevertheless the massive systematic indoctrination from government and media, this scenario still offends the Brazilian audiences. The omnipresent state propaganda of the federal campaign Brazil without Homophobia did not still achieve the level of total change in the people’s mindset. Shock still persists.
To avoid shock, gay activists are forced to embellish at the utmost this scenario, by utilizing everything calling to mind innocence and purity: children, angels, Jesus, etc. Nothing is exempt from exploitation when it comes to the gay agenda and its advance.
That was exactly the strategy of the producers of the Brazilian movie “Do Começo Ao Fim” (From Beginning to End), which opens using the scenario of two boys to achieve its greater objective to shatter all barrier and resistance against incest and homosexual sex. Its producers warn, “If the intent is to smash a taboo or to provoke impact, this movie is certain to achieve its aim”. Its preview, with English subtitles, is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DVa2DKSnU0
From Beginning to End” seeks to convey the idea that 6, 7 or 8 year-old boys look for homosexual experiences. Homosexual groups as NAMBLA have preached for many years that boys have interest in homosexual sex. “From Beginning to End” comes to confirm this ambition.
Sooner or later, a filmmaker will come, similarly abusing free speech, to promote a movie about “love between a man and a boy”. In fact, everything is ready to smash this “taboo”. The most important homosexual leader in Brazil, Luiz Mott, has been accused of defending pedophilia. But he is not the only Brazilian homosexual to do this. Years ago, Denilson Lopes, a homosexual university professor in Brasilia, wrote and published the article “Amando Garotos: Pedofilia e a Intolerância Contemporânea” (Loving Boys: Pedophilia and the Contemporary Intolerance). He is the author of the book “O Homem que Amava Rapazes e Outros Ensaios” (A Man that Loved Boys and Other Essays).
I denounced publicly this defense of pedophilia, but federal prosecutors — who always answer the call from gay militants to take action against my blog — have never taken any measure against the article “Loving Boys”, demonstrating that a “taboo” is being smashed. The looming homosexual pedophilic threat proves its inseparability from the entrails of the homosexual movement.
Brazil, in its current phase of high homosexual indoctrination, will not stay forever only in “From Beginning to End” of homosexual sex between a boy and another boy. This movie is only a preparation for a more advanced phase, where another opportunistic filmmaker will launch another taboo-smasher. This will be the “Beginning of the End”. In that darker future, the presentation of homosexual sex between a boy and another boy will be passé subject. The fad will then be to present the normalcy of the homosexual sex between men and boys.
Yet, do you think that homosexual activists are foolish to show the End at the very Beginning? Eventually, they will talk plainly, but only in the End. However, until that time, with all taboos smashed, nobody will care if the fad then is to think that 6, 7 or 8 year-old boys look for “sexual love” from homosexual adults.
From Beginning to End” is one of the first seeds for the building of this new way to think.
Read also:
Homosexual groups ask reforms in the children’s “rights” in Brazil

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

Rick Warren attacks anti-homosexuality bill

Rick Warren attacks anti-homosexuality bill

Meanwhile, Evangelical Alliance Ireland supports pro-homosexuality bill

By Julio Severo
Gay activists, who despise the divine condemnation of homosexuality, do not hesitate to use and distort the words of Jesus Christ to teach Christians that the only way for Christians to be able to demonstrate love for homosexuals is by supporting the approval of anti-“homophobia” bills.
Without such support, homosexual militants insist that Christians deserve labels as “homophobic”, hypocrites, murderers of homosexuals, etc. Their insistence is steady throughout the media. Their charges against Christians are incessant.
If constant dripping will eventually wear away a stone, then it seems that homosexual dripping is wearing away the evangelical resistance.
In Ireland, a pro-homosexuality bill received the support from the Evangelical Alliance Ireland (EAI), which explained its stance by saying that if Jesus Christ did not discriminate, so Christians are not also supposed to discriminate. EAI declared,
“Co-habiting couples are a reality — this legislation seeks to deal with that reality from a legal perspective. We may disagree on the detail of the legislation but as followers of a just and compassionate God we can recognise the justice and fairness of providing some legal protection for the reality of both same-sex and opposite-sex cohabiting relationships”.
On the other hand, Rick Warren embraced similar stance to use God’s compassion to condemn a heavy anti-homosexuality bill in Uganda. This African nation, which formerly had homosexual kings that abused boys, still faces today sexual abuses against boys. Moreover, Uganda is under international pressure to support the gay agenda. But it was not to condemn vehemently homosexual abuses against boys that Warren meddled in Uganda.
Differently from Islamic nations as Iran, which executes homosexuals arbitrarily, the Ugandan bill condemns to capital punishment only men persistent in homosexuality, homosexuals that rape boys and HIV homosexuals that infect other people.
Warren explained his motives to meddle in Uganda,
“We are all familiar with Edmund Burke’s insight that, ‘All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.’ That is why I'm sharing my heart with you today. As an American pastor, it is not my role to interfere with the politics of other nations, but it IS my role to speak out on moral issues.”
Yet, Warren, whose experience includes meetings with religious Muslims leaders, does not use his role to speak out to Muslims that they should stop persecuting Christians. He also does not use his role to speak out against the Islamic laws that condemn homosexuals to death.
In his own nation, the United States, Warren has refrained from using his role to speak out against aggressive homosexual bills. He has also refrained from bothering Obama and his administration, which are explicitly pro-abortion and pro-homosexuality. Before the Obamanian majesty, instead of using his role to speak out on abortion and homosexuality, Warren limits himself to a smooth-tongued behavior.
The Ugandan bill is likely not to be approved, because international opposition — stemming from homosexual groups, UN and EU — has been massive.
In my view, the most problematic part of this bill is the imposition on Ugandan citizens to denounce to police homosexual practices. That imposition would harm Christian ministries that help homosexuals.
But Warren’s view is that the heavy Ugandan bill does not reflect the Gospel.
Yet, let’s talk plainly. What is the law that reflects the Gospel?
Does a law that condemns, fines, arrests or executes murderers reflect the Gospel?
Does a law that condemns, fines, arrests or executes pedophiles reflect the Gospel?
Does a law that condemns, fines, arrests or executes rapists reflect the Gospel?
Let’s be realistic: the Gospel does not condemn, fine, arrest or execute anyone. The Gospel did not come to condemn, fine, arrest or execute any criminal. The only kind of condemnation the Gospel mentions is eternal condemnation, making it clear that men that choose to live in sin shall be condemned to eternal death, being destined to suffer in Hell, eternally separated from God.
The Gospel came to save sinners. That is its exclusive occupation. So if because of the Gospel human laws cannot condemn homosexuality, then because of the same Gospel they cannot condemn murders, rapes and pedophilia
As far as the Gospel is concerned, we love homosexuals, pedophiles, murderers, rapists, etc. We love them because Jesus loves them and wants to save them. Yet, this does not mean that we should oppose laws that condemn homosexuality, pedophilia, murders, rapes, etc.
Twenty years ago, International Amnesty got in touch with me asking for my support against death penalty in Texas, because in the 1980s I was a member of a team that ministered, by correspondence, to prisoners in death row in Texas. My mission was to minister to Spanish-speaking prisoners. All of them had committed gruesome murders.
Can the Gospel save such criminals? Of course! For a long time I talked about Jesus’ love to them, sending Christian literature in Spanish, etc. Yet, whether they wanted to open their hearts to Jesus or not, my view is that they should pay their social debt.
Human laws were fulfilling their role, condemning a murderer with maximum penalty. My mission was only to lead the murderer to know the love of Jesus Christ.
There is a separation between law and Gospel. The State should fulfill its role to punish those that violate just laws. The role of the Gospel is not to destroy just laws, but only to fulfill another role: to reach out all the sinners with the message of salvation.
It is unfortunate that in his own country, Warren has refrained from using his role to speak out on behalf of Christian efforts to defend natural marriage against systematic assaults from the homosexual movement. Doubtless, Warren does not want to offend and infuriate homosexual groups or the liberal media, which does not praise of kind of defense.
Apparently, that same media, which does not condemn Islamic laws against homosexuality, is condemning the anti-homosexuality bill in the Christian Uganda. And, with all of these spotlights, Obama enters the stage.
Obama defends openly the murder of innocent unborn babies. If Warren, who in his public opportunities with Obama, has never used his role to speak out against such murderous inclinations, why is he now meddling in Uganda? Where is his consistency?
Is it fair for Warren to remember his “role to speak out on moral issues” only to Uganda, and not to Obama and his administration? Is it fair for Warren to be forceful and vehement only to Uganda, and not to Obama and his administration?
I like Warren when he says what is fair. But it is hard to appreciate when he and others, in the name of a smooth-tongued Christian love, seem to demonstrate more interest in getting media sympathy than challenging the unfair standards imposed by liberal trends.
As the Apostle Paul teaches in Romans, we have to transform ourselves by the renewing of the way we think. Without this regular transformation, we are inevitably dragged by the maelstroms, fads and traps of this world. Without this regular transformation, we get entrapped by the way the world thinks. Without this regular transformation, the Gospel becomes, instead a message of salvation and deliverance from sin, a creature in the image of human ideas and wishes:
In the hands of gay activists and liberal and progressive Christians, the Gospel is a tool to promote the acceptance of sinners with their sins. They use the Gospel to preach insistently that the only way for Christians to prove that they are as compassionate as their God is by supporting bills stemming from the entrails of the homosexual movement.
In the hands of Christians that want to please both sides, the Gospel is a tool of political, social and religious conveniences.
In the hands of the Holy Spirit, the Gospel is a tool distinct, but not opposed, from laws condemning sin. A fair law deals with misdeeds by punishing the violator. The Gospel deals with sinners to save them from eternal condemnation, without exempting them from paying their social and criminal debts here on the Earth.
Without this understanding of the separation between law and Gospel, you can easily stumble into the same delusions of the Evangelical Alliance Ireland.
May these examples help us to be balanced, impartial and fair on the law and Gospel.
Portuguese version of this article: Rick Warren ataca lei anti-homossexualismo
Read more:
Int’l Pressure on Uganda to Accept Homosexuality Caused Over-the-Top Sanctions: Christian Activist

Wednesday, December 09, 2009

Dividing land with Palestinians or returning it to Mexicans?

Dividing land with Palestinians or returning it to Mexicans?

Politically-correct justice of Obama wants violation of the territorial integrity of Israel, but no violation of the territorial integrity of the US

By Julio Severo
Barack Obama is the man of inclusivity, plurality and diversity. What does it mean? It means that he respects the politically-correct ideology above traditions, morality and Christianity itself, which is an inseparable and undeniable part of the founding of the United States.
PC ideology commands Obama to remind in his speeches the Islamic participation in the building of the US. Even though that participation was insignificant, the law of inclusivity, plurality and diversity commands their inclusion in full equality.
Were men that lived in homosexual vice discriminated against because the population in the past did not tolerate their behavior and obscenities? With Obama in the presidency, the order now is “change”. The law of inclusivity, plurality and diversity commands their inclusion also, and Obama is proud to appoint to high posts in his administration active and actively pornographic homosexuals.
Now, at last, Muslims and homosexuals can hug one another and say, “We are included by what were are and do!”
The law of inclusivity, plurality and diversity is today an important exportation commodity “made in USA”, largely scattered abroad by the United Nations. Obama, who knows how to pervert the Bible for his own interests and whims, is using the American experience in the Gospel exportation in the past to export now the “gospel” of inclusivity, plurality and diversity.
He wants to teach the world, in the new world order style, that the old barriers and “prejudices” should be broken. And those barriers do not refer only to homosexuals and Muslims. They refer to communist dictators too.
And they refer also to lands!
Do Muslim Palestinians reclaim lands to establish in the world another anti-Israel Islamic nation?
No problem. Obama knows that, in the 1847 war, the US defeated Mexico and forced it to sell and deliver Mexican territories, which included what today is California, Arizona, Nevada, Texas and other “American” states. What about to grant now those territories to Palestinians?
If he cannot treat as sacred the land God gave only to Jews, so why should He treat as US sacred property lands that formerly were Mexican?
After all, there is no God’s promise in the Bible saying that those territories are to be or remain exclusive American property forever. So if the law of inclusivity, plurality and diversity commands Obama to break old barriers and “prejudices”, what is the problem about giving those lands to Palestinians?
Yet, because of an issue of politically-correct ethics, Obama cannot do it. What he needs to do is to ask forgiveness from Mexicans and return to them California, Arizona, Nevada, Texas and other former Mexican lands.
That example would give the world the assurance that Obama is consistent and faithful to his own ideology, making his own country to pay the cost of his “change”. That act would show the world that Obama is willing to overcome any nationalist tradition for the building of a New World Order.
Yes, he will do sacrifices on behalf of his faithfulness to inclusivity, plurality and diversity — on the condition that only Israel and other nations pay the cost. Do Palestinians want half of Israel? Obama is determined to grant them their wish. Do they want also Jerusalem as the capital of their yearned Islamic nation? Obama will not hesitate to break the old tradition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel!
As far as it depends on Obama, “change” will be reality for the division of the land God gave only to the posterity of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. “Change” will be, by the imperial will of Obama, the only option for the Jews.
His “change” would never sacrifice California, Arizona, Nevada, Texas and other “American” states to Palestinians. Similarly, Brazilian president Lula, the socialist friend of Ahmadinejad of Iran, would never sacrifice Amazon to Palestinians. But they will readily sacrifice the territorial integrity of Israel.
However, whether they like or not, by imposing the forced division of the land of Israel, Obama and other American leaders are investing in the division and destruction of the US. No nation and empire can impose itself on the small nation of Israel without going unpunished. There will be, sooner or later, “change” for the US — a “change” determined and decreed by the One that overthrew all the haughty empires that violated the territorial integrity of Israel.
By violating the territorial integrity of Israel in behalf of Islamic Palestinians, the US will never be able to preserve its own territorial integrity. The strengthening of the homosexual and Islamic minority in the Obama administration is evidence that the empire is collapsing.
In its long history, Israel saw the fall of several empires that wanted its territorial division. With Obama, now is the American turn to enter the list of the fallen empires.
Read more:

Monday, November 02, 2009

Educational slavery for four-year-old children

Educational slavery for four-year-old children

Trojan horse in the Brazilian Congress alters Constitution to establish compulsory institutionalization of young children

By Julio Severo

Congressional measure PEC 96A/03, which increases the education budget, was approved 28 October 2009 in the Brazilian Senate. The vote had the participation of 52 senators, who unanimously approved the budget increase — an increase that will cause more sacrifices from the pocket of the Brazilian taxpayer.

Yet, it is not just in their pockets that Brazilians will be hit. PEC (which means Proposta de Emenda à Constituição [Constitutional Amendment Proposal]) makes, according to the liberal newspaper Folha de S. Paulo, “education compulsory for children and young people, ages 4 to 17. Today, this imposed obligation comprehends the age group 6 to 14. With this PEC, two years will be added to pre-school and secondary school.”

It was very easy to approve the age reduction for compulsory education, because nobody suspected that an insipid measure on budget contained a trap for Brazilian families. The budget PEC was the government Trojan horse to catch children, snatching them away earlier from parental sphere and directly hitting parental authority.

When enacted, this PEC will make the Brazilian Constitution “to kill two birds with one stone”, by forcing Brazilian citizens to deliver more of their tax money and forcing them to deliver their children earlier to the state control masked as “free education”.

This is the second victory of Lula in education. The first victory was when his administration lowered, without opposition, the compulsory education age to 6. What this imposed obligation will do is to give four-year-old children what six-year-old children are receiving from the State.

According to the newspaper O Estado de S. Paulo, “a study made by the Institute of Statistics and Educational Research (INEP), affiliated to the Brazilian Department of Education, found officially that one third of Brazilian children enrolled in the 4th grade of the basic education even do not know what they should have learnt in the end of the first year in school”.

According to the Brazilian Statistics and Geography Institute, Brazil has 2.1 millions of schoolchildren, ages 7 to 14, who are illiterate. This is, they are children attending school to learn — but they are not learning. At least, they are not learning what their parents would like them to learn: to read, write, etc.

The only kind of illiteracy the Brazilian State bans in schools is sexual and Marxist illiteracy. In these two points, Brazilian schoolchildren would achieve high scores in any national and international examination.

Besides the terrible basic education and of the predominant sexual socialization, there is the socialization of violence: a Brazilian study found 66% of schoolchildren of the basic and secondary education involved in violence.

The two main characteristics of an excellent education are quality and freedom. Apparently, families have the greatest interest that their children may receive an education with those characteristics.

However, control over people requires quality and freedom to be discarded and sacrificed on behalf of compulsory indoctrination. For a State possessed by socialism, it does not matter if schoolchildren are not learning to read and write satisfactorily. What matters is to turn away children from parental sphere, authority and values in order to indoctrinate them directly on the state interests.

This indoctrination is a proven reality throughout Brazil. In a long story on the Brazilian schools, Veja magazine (the Brazilian counterpart of Time magazine) made the following comments:

* A prevalent trend among Brazilian teachers of imposing leftism in the minds of children.

* Leftist indoctrination is predominant in private schools. It is something teachers take more seriously than classroom subjects, as CNT/Sensus poll, ordered by Veja, found.

* It is embarrassing that Marxism has stayed alive only in Cuba, North Korea and in the Brazilian classrooms.

* CNT/Sensus poll interviewed 3,000 people from 24 Brazilian states, among students and teachers in public and private schools. Its conclusion in this issue was astonishing. Parents (61%) are aware that teachers make political discourses in the classroom and they find it normal. Most teachers recognize that they really indoctrinate children and they think this is their main mission — something more important than teaching how to interpret a text or excel in math. For 78% of teachers, political discourse makes sense, considering that they ascribe to school, above all, the function of “forming citizens” — above of “teaching subjects”.

* Many Brazilian teachers are fascinated by characters that in the classroom deserve a more critical approach, as the Argentine guerilla Che Guevara, who in the poll appears with 86% of positive mentions, 14% neutral, and no negative comment.

This reality of Brazilian schools is in perfect harmony with the government policies, whose interest is not quality and freedom, but exclusively state control over children. This reality makes Brazil to look more like communist China, where four-year-old children are obliged to attend school just to receive state indoctrination. In fact, according to Folha de S. Paulo, Brazil and China just announced the “the creation of a quinquennial plan of targets, as the plans adopted by the Chinese communist government, to create a joint education model”.

If the target is to control four-year-old kids, no one better than China to help the Brazilian State.

Socialism does not tolerate a Constitution guaranteeing the rights of families to choose freely a quality education for their children. Socialist ideal requires that instead of guaranteeing the natural rights of parents, the Constitution may be altered to protect the state ideological whims. When fundamental changes are made, all things are possible for the State.

Therefore, it is no wonder the approval of PEC to impose the educational slavery of all children in Brazil age four on. And it is no wonder that the Department of Education of the Lula administration has just declared that homeschooling is unconstitutional. The way China likes — and not much different from Nazism.

In 1937, dictator Adolf Hitler, leader of the National Socialist Workers’ Party, said, “The Youth of today is ever the people of tomorrow. For this reason we have set before ourselves the task of inoculating our youth with the spirit of this community of the people at a very early age, at an age when human beings are still unperverted and therefore unspoiled. This Reich stands, and it is building itself up for the future, upon its youth. And this new Reich will give its youth to no one, but will itself take youth and give to youth its own education and its own upbringing.”

In 1938, Hitler took from German parents their right to decide freely the education of their children, officially banning homeschooling. Hitler explained why he wanted children forcibly in schools:

When an opponent declares, “I will not come over to your side,” I calmly say, “Your child belongs to us already. . . . What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.”

Who will deliver little children of Brazil from this cruel destiny?

Source: www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

Portuguese version of this article: Escravidão educacional para crianças de 4 anos


Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Brazil’s Lula, the friend of Iran’s Ahmadinejad

Brazil’s Lula, the friend of Iran’s Ahmadinejad

Adapted by Julio Severo

As any world leader knows, breaking bread with unsavory regimes is an occupational hazard. But palling around with pariahs is another matter. So when Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva slapped Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the back at the U.N. General Assembly, stoutly defended Iran's nuclear program, and invited Ahmadinejad to visit Brazil, the world took note. What is Lula’s game?

In part, it’s about his ambition to position Brazil as a “first-class nation.” Lula has visited 45 countries in the last three years alone and opened 35 embassies since 2003, most of them in Africa and the Caribbean. This all fits his “South to South” strategy, a diplomatic blitzkrieg designed to gather political capital across the developing world. As a result, Brazil is well regarded in places many other nations ignore, and its trade relations are well balanced, spread in roughly equal measure between Latin America, the Middle East and Africa, Europe, and the U.S. This helped Brazil keep its footing during the global economic crash to become one of the first to shake off recession. It also turned its president into a global star.

But Lula’s diplomacy has created some compromising alliances while his administration is touted as one of the world’s most vibrant democracies by different socialists, from the United Nations and Europe to Cuba and Venezuela. Domestically, Lula has been befriending abortion and gay groups, with harsh consequences to those not embracing this radical agenda. Not much different from Lula’s proud domestic “democracy”, his foreign policy has remarkably been befriending Muslim and communist dictators.

Recently, Brazil abstained on U.N. resolutions condemning human-rights abuses in Congo, Sri Lanka, and communist North Korea, where thousands of Christians have been tortured and killed just because they are Christian. The Lula administration also balked on Sudan, where Muslim persecution against Christians has been overwhelming, first passing on a vote to give rights inspectors a wider brief, only to reverse course in June after prominent civic groups lashed out. Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chávez has no better friend than Lula, even as the former has muzzled the media, bullied rivals, and smothered trade unions. “Each country establishes the democratic regime that suits its people,” Lula recently told Newsweek. “It's a sovereign decision of every nation.”

But “sovereignty” is a word used only when convenient. In the crisis involving Honduras and its sovereign and constitutional right to halt a Chavez-supported president in his illegal actions to perpetuate his presidency, the Lula administration gave him the Brazilian embassy in Honduras as a refuge and a base of operations, directly intervening in the domestic affairs of the small nation to serve the interests of Chavez. Fidel Castro’s friend lost no opportunity to delight his ideological mentor.

Yet, the bonhomie between Lula and Ahmadinejad has been glaring. During the bloody aftermath of Iran’s elections, Lula called the street protesters “losers” and compared the government crackdown to a row between fans of rival football clubs. This friendship is so strange that Lula, whose administration grants broad rights to those that commit homosexuality, has no qualm to support Ahmadinejad, whose administration murders those that commit homosexuality. In turn, Muslim Ahmadinejad also has no qualm to be with Lula, an enthusiastic advocate for homosexuality.

It is a morally antagonistic and definitely opportunistic friendship, because Ahmadinejad exterminates homosexuals in Iran, while Lula works to exterminate opposition to homosexuality in Brazil. If Ahmadinejad were a Brazilian citizen, in no way he would be able to escape prison from Lula’s socialist “democracy”, and if Lula were an Iranian citizen, in no way he would be able to escape death penalty from Ahmadinejad’s Muslim “democracy”.

Would a nation in friendship with Iran, which funds terrorist groups, have a chance to become a first-class nation? In July 2008, Chuck Pierce, who is considered a prophet in the US, told in São Paulo, Brazil, that a immense tragedy was ahead in the future of the Brazilian society and that Brazil had only a few months of opportunity to change. If in less than 12 months Lula fell down in his corrupt socialist administration and if Brazil befriended Israel, Brazil would become a great nation, even surpassing the United States. More than one year later, Lula is enjoying enormous popularity as a president and Brazil is nearer to the worst enemies of Israel.

Yet, you do not need to be a prophet to see that Brazil is on a destructive road.

Even though Ahmadinejad declared that he wants to destroy Israel, Lula has emphatically defended Iran’s right to enrich uranium on grounds that he heard “personally” that Iran didn’t want to build a bomb.

Others see Lula’s aggressive foreign-policy turn as the hubris of a rising power. “It's partly the idea that Brazil can do whatever it wants in international policy, including standing up to the world’s powerful nations,” says former foreign minister Luiz Felipe Lampreia.

Rich nations have the vice of exporting and imposing their abortion and homosexual culture on developing nations, but this is not the reason Lula condemns them. In fact, free speech, a right fully used by him to lambast petty issues of developed nations, is a right not fully guaranteed in Lula’s Workers’ Party itself, where Congressman Henrique Afonso, a Protestant minister, was found guilty of pro-life speech and in the Brazilian society, where Fr. Luiz Carlos “Lodi” da Cruz, a Catholic priest, was condemned by courts just for calling “pro-abortion” a pro-abortion individual. Even the Organization of the American States has recently acknowledged that Brazil is not guaranteeing free speech.

Lula has established a number of radical gay, abortion and racial policies in Brazil he imported from the developed world. So it is no wonder that he has never used his speech freedom to denounce the aggressive abortion and homosexual groups funded by the developed nations to destroy the culture and families in the developing countries. And Brazilians doing this have been prosecuted under his administration. Also, he has never condemned the massive human-rights abuses against Christians in Muslim and communist nations.

Touting the abortion and gay culture from the Western mighty and befriending Hugo Chávez, Ahmadinejad and other Muslim and communist mighty will surely draw world attention — but hardly the sort a first-class nation would want.

Adapted by Julio Severo from the article “Brazil’s Lula Befriends Iran’s Ahmadinejad”, by Mac Margolis in Newsweek.

To see this article in Portuguese, follow this link: http://juliosevero.blogspot.com/2009/10/lula-o-amigo-de-ahmadinejad-do-ira.html

Source: www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com

Read also:

Iran, hatred of Jews and the schizophrenic Lula administration

World amazed by unprecedented address by President Lula at the UN Human Rights Council

A president Hell asked for

The cost of the high popularity of Lula


Wednesday, September 23, 2009

American Life League mentions article by Julio Severo

American Life League mentions article by Julio Severo

Evangelical decries “Rivers of Blood” flowing from chemical contraceptives

Evangelical pro-life activist Julio Severo has written an analysis of chemical contraceptives and the prophesies in the book of Revelation that “rivers, seas, and fountains of water will ‘become blood as of a dead man.’ As Severo points out, through the use of hormonal contraceptives, hundreds of millions of women worldwide are causing invisible ‘micro-abortions,’ the destruction of unborn human life at the earliest stage of its development”.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/dec/08121811.html

American Life League: http://all.org/article.php?id=11752

Rivers of Blood: A Brazilian pro-life Evangelical writes about the contraceptive culture and prophecies in Revelation


Monday, September 21, 2009

Homosexual groups ask reforms in the children’s “rights” in Brazil

Homosexual groups ask reforms in the children’s “rights” in Brazil

Children’s rights movement joins homosexual movement to advocate “sexual autonomy” of children, the secular State and measures to confront Christian activism in society

By Julio Severo

Radical homosexual groups joined children’s “rights” government and non-government groups in Brasília, Brazil, from May 6 to 8, 2009, to discuss and pinpoint plans to promote as human rights the “sexual rights” of children and adolescents.

The major meeting, which united the homosexual movement and the children’s “rights” movement, was entitled “Human Rights and Sexual Diversity of Adolescents in the Federal District”.

In the meeting, the following leaders took part in the discussion “Human Rights and Sexual Diversity of Adolescents”:

Márcio Sanches, from the Child and Adolescent Defense Center (Cedeca DF).

Liliana Lemus, director of Associação Fomento Social Planejamento e Gestão de Projetos.

Leila Paiva, coordinator for the National Program to Confront Sexual Violence Against Children and Adolescents of the Special Human Rights Secretary of the Presidency of the Brazilian Republic (SEDH/PR), Cedeca DF.

Tony Reis, president of the Brazilian Association of Gays, Lesbians, Bisexuals, Transvestites and Transsexuals (ABGLT).

Representatives of the National Association of Child and Adolescent Defense Centers (ANCED).

Representatives of the National Council of the Children’s and Adolescents’ Rights (CONANDA).

Jimena Grignani, secretary of the National Forum for the Children’s and Adolescents’ Rights (FNDCA).

Benedito Rodrigues, executive secretary of the National Council of the Children’s and Adolescents’ Rights (CONANDA).

The discussion entitled “A LGBT-Movement Look on the Human-Rights Violations of Children and Adolescents” was attended by the following leaders:

Alessandra Guerra, coordinator of the group Freedom of Love between Women in Ceará (LAMCE).

Beto de Jesus, Latin American and Caribbean secretary of the International Association of Gays, Lesbians and Trans.

Fernanda Benvenutty, public relations for the Paraíba Transvestite Association (Astrapa).

Excepting homosexual activists, whose mission is promotion of homosexuality, the mission of the children’s “rights” advocates in Brazil is to promote the Child and Adolescent Statute (known in Brazil as ECA: Estatuto da Criança e do Adolescente), a legislation notorious for the suffering and injustices it has been provoking in Brazil.

The Brazilian society groans under the weight and threat of murderers and criminals. The society groans because of the omission and lack of serious laws. The society groans because of the partial impunity through which often laws treat adult murderers and criminals. In the case of minor criminals, the impunity is total — to the despair of the population.

Even in the Brazil of impunity, if an adult who murdered 50 individuals is caught, he may be condemned to spend a lifetime in jail. Yet, if the murderer is not over 18, ECA assures total impunity: To condemn such murderer to spend a lifetime in jail is, according to the view of those advocating — and living at the expense of — the promotion of the children’s “rights”, violation of the children’s “rights”. He will stay in a state rehab institution until adulthood. Afterward, total freedom, with no criminal history.

Where did ECA come from? Where will ECA lead Brazil to?

Even though Brazil is able to create its own evils and even though ECA is praised as one of the most progressive legislations in the world when it come to the children’s “rights”, actually Brazil was forced to create ECA. Every nation ratifying UN documents enters the obligation to be submissive to them. Since the Brazilian government signed and ratified the UN Convention on the Children’s Rights (CCR) in 1990, Brazil automatically did the commitment to produce a domestic legislation to mirror the CCR’s interests and impositions.

Under the UN monitoring, which supervises and exacts the “progresses” of the compliance of each nation to CCR, the Brazilian government has been seeking to strengthen and expand, through tutelary councils and other state agencies, the implementation of ECA.

The United States is not yet under the burden of that demand from the world government, because the US government has never ratified CCR. American Christian groups had vision and a direction sense to see in advance the risks and threats of this comprehensive and imposing UN legislation on children and families.

Under the socialist Obama, the US government wants to follow the Brazilian way, ratifying the UN Convention on the Children’s Rights and producing its own “ECA”, but Christian groups, as the Parental Rights website, are alerting American parents on the following risks,

* Parents would no longer be able to administer reasonable spankings to their children.

* A murderer aged 17 years, 11 months and 29 days at the time of his crime could no longer be sentenced to life in prison.

* Children would have the ability to choose their own religion while parents would only have the authority to give their children advice about religion.

* The best interest of the child principle would give the government the ability to override every decision made by every parent if a government worker disagreed with the parent's decision.

* A child’s “right to be heard” would allow him (or her) to seek governmental review of every parental decision with which the child disagreed.

* Children would acquire a legally enforceable right to leisure.

* Teaching children about Christianity in schools has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.

* Allowing parents to opt their children out of sex education has been held to be out of compliance with the CRC.

* Children would have the right to reproductive health information and services, including abortions, without parental knowledge or consent.

In fact, the “progression” of CCR will lead to many other aberrations. UN has for many years been an arena where radical activists use — or even produce — opportunities and breaches to promote abortion and homosexuality. Even the women’s right to a safe motherhood has been used as a door to impose the world legalization of abortion. And reproductive and sexual rights are a UN term which, besides abortion, also comprises the promotion of sexual freedom, including homosexuality.

So what could be strange in an event in Brazil where those living on the expense of the children’s “rights” ally with the homosexual movement to “improve” ECA? It is a natural progression. The Brazilian creature of the UN — ECA — will sooner or later follow all the ways of the monster that produced it.

If UN, which is the direct responsible for the creation of ECA, has recently recognized ABGLT (the largest homosexual group in Brazil, which has launched legal actions against Julio Severo), why should the Brazilian government — which is so engaged in homosexual issues and so submissive to the UN interests — ban the participation of ABGLT in a meeting of experts who live on the expense of ECA? (See more information on ABGLT here)

As the world homosexual movement, which for years is creating close ties to the children’s “rights” movement in the so called developed nations, in Brazil these ties are beginning to get strengthened.

Caio Fabio Varela, a gay activist known as a consultant for Fátima Cleide — the senator of the leftwing PT who wants to impose the anti-“homophobia” bill PLC 122 on Brazil whatever the cost —, was one of the contributors for the infamous federal program “Brazil without Homophobia”. Varela took part in the event “Human Rights and Sexual Diversity of Adolescents in the Federal District” as a moderator in the discussion “A LGBT-Movement Look on the Human-Rights Violations of Children and Adolescents”.

With his consultancy, what “improvements” will ECA have? Now will ECA, which imposes the state intentions in the family realm, have a federal program “Families without Homophobia”? Will ECA officials monitor each home in search of attitudes, gestures and views contrary to the sanctified homosexual human right?

Message to parents: prohibited to protect children from homosexuality

Instead of dedicating itself to the basic function of punishing criminals and discouraging crimes, the State now begins a partnership with the movement that promotes homosexuality — an anti-natural sexual behavior responsible for many sex abuses against boys.

Instead of protecting boys from the homosexual threat, the State will do the wishes of the homosexual movement, working to classify as “human-rights violation” all attempt by parents to protect their small children or adolescents from homosexual influences.

Now, will children be indoctrinated and conditioned in the public schools not only to denunciate parents for physical discipline, but also for working hard to deliver their children from all kind of trend that might lead to homosexuality? Will a father or mother who does not allow a child to follow the “natural course” of homosexuality feel the weight of ECA, being classified as “violator of human rights of children and adolescents”?

The Brazilian event produced the “Carta de Brasília” (Brasília Charter), a document supported by government leaders demanding “improvements” in the child laws. Here is the complete document:

Brasília Charter: a serpent behind the children’s “rights movement

The Child and Adolescent Rights Defense Centers (ANCED-affiliated), the organizations advocating child and adolescent rights and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transvestite and transsexual organizations that attended the Human Rights and Sexual Diversity of Adolescents conference, held in Brasília, Brazil, from May 6-7, 2009, to discuss and indicate guidelines to promote, advocate and guarantee sexual rights as human rights of children and adolescents declare that:

The full affirmation of children and adolescents as individuals having rights includes the acknowledgement that the exercise of their sexuality is a fundamental right. For the affirmation of the sexual rights is essential to assure information, free speech and to respect the autonomy and responsibility of children and adolescents in the development and exercise of their sexuality, free from any kind of prejudice, shame, omission or violence.

The agencies committed to assure the sexual rights of children and adolescents should have as principles of their operations: the necessary affirmation of a secular State and measures to confront religious fundamentalisms; the rupture from stances reproducing gender hierarchies; guarantee of the children’s and adolescents’ right to the free expression of their sexual orientation and gender identity, respecting their status as developing beings.

To implement the sexual rights of children and adolescents is necessary to develop intersectorial projects, programs and policies committed to:

The effective participation of children and adolescents in the building of political-pedagogical proposals to promote, advocate and guarantee their sexual rights;

Guaranteed access to information on sex, in connection to a human-rights education, in an emancipating and inclusive perspective;

Affirmation of the guarantee of sexual rights of children and adolescents, as an effective measure to confront sex abuse and exploitation;

Acknowledgement and affirmation of the sexual diversity;

Affirmation of every kind of violence, discrimination, prejudice, shame and embarrassment because of sexual orientation and gender identity as a violation of the human rights of children and adolescents.

Aware of the necessary change in ideas and practices for the affirmation of the sexual rights as human rights of children and adolescents, we understand that it is essentially important to promote spaces for the development and discussion involving all the agencies engaged in the guarantee of the children’s and adolescents’ rights, and activists from the feminist and LBGT movements; and the inclusion of the subject of the sexual rights of children and adolescents in conferences and meetings of the children’s and adolescents’ rights movement.

Dr. Alberto Thieme questions the involvement of the homosexual movement in the “defense” of the children’s “rights”

The “Brasília Charter”, filled with subtleties and wiles, has the slyness of a venomous serpent. I had access to the papers about this event through Dr. Alberto Thieme, who worked hardly to discover this meeting where leaders from ECA and from the homosexual movement slept in the same bed covered on the children’s “rights”. Following are the relevant questions by Dr. Thieme:

1. Most homosexuals do not have the experience of having children or how to rear them. How can they give their view about guidelines on how to educate sexually children and adolescents?

2. Why did not the individuals in charge of this event invite teachers and directors of charities caring for many children (as the charity I founded and which today shelters more than 1,000 children)?

3. Why homosexuals involved in the sexual education of children? Is its purpose to decriminalize pedophiles and pederasts to increase homosexual groups? Many boys sexually abused by an adult male eventually believe that they are homosexual. Is it the supremacy of the strong ones over defenseless children and adolescents?

4. Why is the Lula administration directing its policies lately only to homosexuals, giving them huge privileges? Why do leaders of the largest gay groups have special access to the president?

5. Does President Lula want to destroy the institution of family?

6. In his ambition to stay in power and implant socialism or communism in Brazil, is President Lula weakening and destroying Brazilian institutions to exterminate resistance?

Julio Severo answers the “Brasília Charter” challenges

The “Brasília Charter” (BC) is an affront to the Brazilian family and the Christian majority in Brazil. Therefore let us see the most important points of the affront:

BC says, “Guaranteed access to information on sex, in connection to a human-rights education, in an emancipating and inclusive perspective”.

Answer from Julio Severo: Do children need “sexual emancipation”? Not mentioning that the socially-constructed term “inclusivity” has everything to do with the acceptance of anti-natural social inventions. Then will the emancipation of children be compulsory for them to be free to live such sexual inventions?

BC says, it is “necessary affirmation of a secular State”.

Answer from Julio Severo: I understand very well the intentions of this partnership. Without moral and Christian values, the homosexual movement and the children’s “rights” movement are free to control children. If the secular State is a State without God and without Christian values, certainly Hitler and Stalin — who were hostile to the natural family and controlled every decision on children — are the most important defenders and “heroes” of the secular State.

BC says, “Measures” are necessary “to confront religious fundamentalisms”.

Answer from Julio Severo: The partnership between the homosexual movement and the children’s “rights” movement wants now policies to confront religious “fundamentalisms’. Check now if you will be in the state and homosexual list of “threat” to children:

Are you against the sexual autonomy of children? So you are a religious fundamentalist bigot that should be stopped by the secular State and its allies.

Are you against homosexual “marriage”? So you are a religious fundamentalist bigot that should be stopped by the secular State and its allies.

Do you think that homosexuality is not normal? So you are a religious fundamentalist bigot that should be stopped by the secular State and its allies.

Are you against abortion? So you are a religious fundamentalist bigot that should be stopped by the secular State and its allies.

Are you against the “sexual rights” and “reproductive rights” that the UN, the secular State and homosexual groups are advocating for children? So you are a religious fundamentalist bigot that should be stopped by the secular State and its allies.

Because of the moral perversion of the modern society — where the light is darkness and darkness is light —, homosexual activists will no longer be seen as threats to children. Rather, this place will be occupied by loving fathers and mothers committing the PC crime of protecting their children against the actual threats from the children’s “rights” movement and the homosexual movement.

BC says, it is necessary “the rupture from stances reproducing gender hierarchies”.

Answer from Julio Severo: The partnership between the homosexual movement and the children’s “rights” movement asks for the extinction of the distinction between men and women. They want the extermination of the sexual differences so that the doors may be opened for the feminilization of men and the masculinization of women, building in this way new standards and eliminating the natural standard, such as children being reared by a father and a mother. The new standard will impose the acknowledgment and the legal acceptance as “family” of two lesbian women or two homosexual men “bringing up” children. This new standard may yet produce invented “families” with four or more homosexual men or lesbian women rearing children, and a dramatic increase in the acceptance of the patently pedophilic idea that children are entitled to “autonomy”. The doors are already being opened by the homosexual movement and the children’s “rights” movement.

BC says, it is necessary “the guarantee of the children’s and adolescents’ right to the free expression of their sexual orientation and gender identity, respecting their status as developing beings”.

Answer from Julio Severo: While the State is reducing the rights of natural parents to direct their own children, the partnership between the homosexual movement and the children’s “rights” movement demands for children and adolescents the right to free sexual expression. Is a child being influenced by homosexual factors? The State will prohibit parents from interfering and it will give full freedom for homosexual groups to interfere, with the complicity of those living on the expense of ECA.

The State is weakening the rights of parents over their children and strengthening groups that advocate the “rights”, the “autonomy”, the “emancipation” and the “free sexual expression” of children. In turn, those groups strongly defend the “secular” State as a way to separate the State from values damaging the expansion of the children’s “rights”.

The dark, final result will be families with small or no authority over children that, instead of close to the interests and orientations from their families, will be close to the interests and orientations from the State and homosexual groups. While families will have increasingly fewer rights to direct their children, the State and even homosexual groups allied to the State will have increasingly more rights to control the children from natural families.

What to do to avoid the “religious fundamentalist” label?

If you think it is pointless to oppose the partnership between the homosexual movement and the children’s “rights” movement and if you do not want to be put in their black list, you may choose the following positions:

You may say that the Lula administration, the Obama administration and the UN world governance have a real interest in the well-being of children and families.

You may say that every man committing homosexual acts is entitled to a homosexual “marriage”.

You may say that every child is entitled to “autonomy” and sexual and reproductive rights.

You may say that ECA is wonderful and that its advocates are wonderful.

Doing what they want, you will receive the cheers, not the condemnation, from the homosexual movement and the children’s “rights” movement.

After all, what do they want?

The final discussions of the event that produced the “Brasília Charter” were “Has the most Important Brazilian Legislation [ECA] Guaranteed the Autonomy of the Sexual Rights of Adolescents?” and “Discussion on the Subject: Sexual Rights of Children and Adolescents: How to recognize them and guarantee them?”

In the UN conception, sexual rights (or reproductive rights) involve the right to contraception, the right to a free sexual life (with or without marriage) and the right to abortion, because the largest organizations offering family-planning services to adolescents also offer abortion “services”. Those organizations advise UN.

Doubtless, it is impossible to implement policies guaranteeing “sexual rights” without firstly guaranteeing autonomy. Autonomy from whom? Autonomy from the State? Autonomy from homosexual groups? Autonomy from folks that live on expense of ECA? It would be very good if children had autonomy from them.

However, what they want is basically children independent from parents and their values. Children independent from their own families — but never independent from the State. For them, a child that, because of some influence, began to head to homosexuality or another abnormality is entitled to “autonomy”. The law will guarantee the child’s sexual rights, protecting him from the “interference” of parents! Parents will be able to do nothing to help their small and adolescent children, under the risk of suffering the weight of the laws and an ECA “improved” by homosexual activists.

While the homosexual movement is conquering more access to children through the formulation of laws strengthening a State that favors homosexuality, natural families are losing their natural rights to direct the education, discipline and now the healthy sexual course of their small and adolescent children.

Parents will lose the right to teach that there are only two sexes: male and female. And gay activists will receive the right to impose their third invented “sex”. So the power of the gay activism will be greater than the parental authority.

In this ideological climate, where homosexuality — which is simply a sexual construction of a society losing its ethical, moral and natural sense — is praised as normalcy, homosexual activists are seen as perfect partners for the formulation of policies for children.

The fall of an “advocate” for the autonomy and sexual rights of children…

The result is foreseeable. In Scotland, James Rennie, a top advisor to the Executive on homosexual issues regarding children, was caught in the act as a ringleader of a pedophile ring. Rennie, who was the chief executive of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) Youth Scotland, was found guilty in 2009 for his leadership in the pedophile ring and of molesting an infant beginning at three months old over a four-year period.

Who told that homosexuality has nothing to do with abuse? Many homosexuals also report sexual abuse in their boyhood. It has a very clear meaning: a homosexual adult raped an innocent boy.

The answer from the government? Deliver into the hands of homosexual activists the formulation of policies promoting and advocating the children’s sexual and human “rights”!

If such illogic and foolishness become a trend, the protection of henneries will be delivered to foxes and the protection of innocent sheep will be delivered to wolves.

What about to guarantee the “autonomy” of the sexual rights of your small and adolescent children? Foxes and wolves express their gratitude.

Jesus was not joking when he told: “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves”. (Matthew 10:16 NIV)

Portuguese version of this article: Grupos homossexuais querem “melhorias” no ECA

Source: http://www.lastdayswatchman.blogspot.com