That was a question I brought up earlier, Toni. I remember a photo of one of the Russian government officials, maybe even a head of state, kissing another important male person on the cheek. This is common in a lot of countries, not just Russia. When we learned about this in school, we were told not to read too much into it.
Putin's anti-gay laws and Sochi Olympics
- Thread starter Big Deal
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Country
-
There is a Russian Orthodox seminary in Kodiak, St. Herman's.
http://www.sthermanseminary.org/
A slideshow of sacred sites for Russian Orthodox Christians in the Kodiak area:
http://www.sthermanseminary.org/photos_of_kodiak.html
A number of Russian Orthodox texts have been translated into some of the indigenous languages of Alaska: Aleut, Alutiiq, Tlingit, and Yup'ik.
There are a number of Russian Orthodox saints associated with Alaska. Pilgrimages come to Kodiak to visit the shrines. A group came from Bulgaria just before we visited Kodiak. Another group came from Canada.
http://www.allsaintsofalaska.ca/index.php/the-saints-of-alaska
St Herman is one
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_of_Alaska
So is St. Peter the Aleut
Conversions are still going on. The friend whom we visited in Kodiak is a Coastguardsman from Connecticut. He and his family converted to the Russian Orthodox religion while he was stationed in Kodiak.
Last edited:
That's fascinating, Doris. I didn't realize there was still such a vibrant community there, but I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. A friend of mine is the daughter of a Lutheran pastor originally from Finland. For some years he served a community on the Upper Peninsula of Michigan where some of the oldest members spoke only Finnish. Elsewhere in Michigan is I think the largest community of Chaldeans (Iraqi Christians) outside of Iraq. In New Jersey there's a sizable community of Egyptian Coptic Christians. And there's a huge Baha'i temple in I think Chicago. And after all, the Russian community in Alaska got there long before we Americans did. It's not that they arrived; it's that they never left.
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2011
thanks for the useful info doris,
I knew that the native alaskans had considerable influence as when the Russian company explorers came some of the natives converted to Orthodoxy
but I didn't know some Alaskan towns, larger communities had icons, churches built still standing as mostly the white and other demographics adhere to lutheran or protestantism as most of American churches
I knew that the native alaskans had considerable influence as when the Russian company explorers came some of the natives converted to Orthodoxy
but I didn't know some Alaskan towns, larger communities had icons, churches built still standing as mostly the white and other demographics adhere to lutheran or protestantism as most of American churches
This is getting more interesting by the moment. I just looked up and found that there are two communities of Old Believers waaaay up in Alaska, who moved here and there across the world trying to find a place where they could live away from outside influences. For a long time they apparently lived in Harbin, China, where a lot of Russians had settled, and then after the Communists took over in 1949, some of them ended up in Brazil, but it was hard to earn a living there, and the tropical climate was not what they were used to. (Can't you just imagine!) So they got themselves to Alaska, and there they remain. Of course this is in addition to whatever communities of Alaska Russians were there all along since the first Russian explorers centuries ago.
Thanks so much for opening this line of discussion!
By the way, once for my job I had to look up a very interesting historical figure, whose name I'm not going to get right: Maria Conceptión Marcela Argüello y Moraga. She was called Concha. She lived in Spanish California in the early 1800s, when several European powers still had territories in North America. She encountered a Russian, Count Nikolai Petrovich Rezanov, the commander of an around-the-world expedition. They fell in love, but because they were of different religions, it was agreed that Rezanov had to go to Rome and get the permission of the Pope before they could marry. And, of course, he was on the around-the-world expedition, which at that time took years to complete. One thing after another happened, and he died far away, probably of pneumonia, before he could return to Concha. She never married but worked as a healer in California. It's hard to find information about these two people over here, but I've always wondered whether there's been any writing about Rezanov in Russia. All I know of here is the stuff we worked on and also an old-fashioned romantic novel written long, long ago by a California author named Gertrude Atherton, called Rezanov.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
They must have laws to deal with public disturbance. This law is about protecting children from unwanted sexually related information. To the majority of Russian people, traditional moral value is their moral Standard. You can say anything you want. Use every possible strong word you can find. Call every possible name on them. You are dealing with the majority of the Russian people. Remember, it's the people, not the government.
From my understanding, Putin is supported by Russian people a lot more than Obama is supported by Americans.
Regarding to homosexuality and children, I believe, this is close to the views of the Russian people (Hope the Russian people on this board could correct me if I am wrong):
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/fischer/080707
The problem is the majority dictating not only how LGBT people should act, but also persecuting them (and you can believe that holding hands can be construed as Russian propaganda... these laws were not meant to stifle protests or disturbances -- they are intended to stifle LGBT people from being who they are in public. I don't see why if a couple of men or women kissing each other is something that children need to be protected from. You don't see LGBT people arguing that straight couples shouldn't kiss in public is an unwanted influence.
Oh, and this article is ridiculous, and written by a notoriously homophobic author working for a notoriously homophobic association (AFA). According to this guy's "logic" are we supposed to deny single parents from having children or keeping their child (since the child would have no second parent acting as a fatherly/motherly influence)? What if one of child's parents dies and the widow or widower is left single, and the child has no fatherly/motherly influence. Is the parent no longer fit to raise the child, and should the child be taken away from them?
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
I suddenly remembered a moment from the opening ceremony in 2006, in Turin. The Olympic flag was carried by women representing each continent. The choice for North America (clearly made because of some of her political views) was actress Susan Sarandon, who was noted for her more liberal views, her opposition to then-President Bush, and her objection to the war in Iraq. There was a lot of worry about whether Sarandon would use the Olympics as a political forum. I don't know what was said behind the scenes, but when Sarandon walked by, she gave a rather coy smile and just moved one hand to shoulder height (barely noticeable, in other words), with her first two fingers making the V-shaped "peace" sign. Then she put her hand down. It was a small-scale gesture that made her feelings known but didn't impinge on the dignity of the proceedings. A similar action that I read about recently at a world championships held in Russia was that some Scandinavian athletes painted their fingernails in rainbow colors.
I know that many posters have brought up the fact that people in many parts of the world would sympathize with the Russian approach to this issue--that gay rights are a hot-button issue only in North America and Western Europe--but in the Winter Games especially, the majority of participating countries are those exact countries.
Many athletes will only be interested in doing the job they were sent for. Nothing wrong with that. But because especially in skating there are so many gay athletes, this issue may go beyond the political for many people, and it makes the situation immensely tricky. I hope that everything is kept to a respectful level, because I believe that this is the way to gain support. I think that just the presence of certain athletes will serve as a reminder that there are LGBT people in the world, and that they have many of the same goals as everyone else.
I know that many posters have brought up the fact that people in many parts of the world would sympathize with the Russian approach to this issue--that gay rights are a hot-button issue only in North America and Western Europe--but in the Winter Games especially, the majority of participating countries are those exact countries.
Many athletes will only be interested in doing the job they were sent for. Nothing wrong with that. But because especially in skating there are so many gay athletes, this issue may go beyond the political for many people, and it makes the situation immensely tricky. I hope that everything is kept to a respectful level, because I believe that this is the way to gain support. I think that just the presence of certain athletes will serve as a reminder that there are LGBT people in the world, and that they have many of the same goals as everyone else.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2003
They're still standing and they're still being used. The church in Kenai is a historical landmark and they allow tours Monday - Saturday but they also hold services (I don't know how, it looks claustrophobic in there for the number of people in the congregation. Every few years the building gets repainted and things get restored. It's quite interesting how they go from being a "museum" of sorts to a church and then back again.
Anchorage also has a very large Russian Orthodox church now that I think of it. But the one in Kenai is the one typically used for the guidebook pictures and other tourist products. (The one in Ninilchik though is my favorite)
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2012
Oh, and this article is ridiculous, and written by a notoriously homophobic author working for a notoriously homophobic association (AFA). According to this guy's "logic" are we supposed to deny single parents from having children or keeping their child (since the child would have no second parent acting as a fatherly/motherly influence)? What if one of child's parents dies and the widow or widower is left single, and the child has no fatherly/motherly influence. Is the parent no longer fit to raise the child, and should the child be taken away from them?
This is an extremely important point often made in LGBT marriage/adoption debates. As far as I know, there's no scientific evidence that children raised without the influence of one parent (aka in a "non-traditional" household) grow up to become stunted, socially inept adults. The actress Jena Malone was raised by her mother and her mother's girlfriend, and so far, she's had a stellar career that includes a major role in the wildly popular Hunger Games saga. Rachael Ray's parents divorced when she was a teenager, and she hasn't exactly been wanting for a successful life.
It can't be both ways. If children "need" the constant presence of both a mother and a father, then single parents -- many of whom have to work grueling jobs/hours just to make ends meet -- are shunted aside as being unfit to raise their own kids. If this "rule" only applies to the adopted children of LGBT parents, then that's blatant discrimination and the children's situations are being exploited to fit the political statements of a specific group.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
Oh, and this article is ridiculous, and written by a notoriously homophobic author working for a notoriously homophobic association (AFA). According to this guy's "logic" are we supposed to deny single parents from having children or keeping their child (since the child would have no second parent acting as a fatherly/motherly influence)? What if one of child's parents dies and the widow or widower is left single, and the child has no fatherly/motherly influence. Is the parent no longer fit to raise the child, and should the child be taken away from them?
You are free to state your opinions. Your opinions actually represent the vast majority's views on skating forums. Allow me to just point out the fact that in this article, Dr. Hansen listed the reasons of an ideal family. He did not deny single parents from having or keeping children.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2012
But may I ask, with the utmost respect for Dr. Hansen and yourself, who exactly is qualified to define the parameters of an "ideal family"?
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Country
-
Despite the fact that Aleuts/Kadiaks/Koniags are a tiny minority in Kodiak these days, not only St. Herman's seminary, but Holy Resurrection Cathedral is still a very active Russian Orthodox parish.
http://oca.org/parishes/oca-ak-kodhrc
Here's info on the pilgrimages
http://www.dioceseofalaska.org/
St. Nicholas in Juneau, AK, (the capital of the state) has an active parish
http://www.stnicholasjuneau.org/
Sitka also has an active parish
http://oca.org/parishes/oca-ak-sitsmk
A lot of Russian Orthodox Christians in Alaska are not indigenous peoples, too. The Archimandrite of the Alaskan Diocese is Rev. David Mahaffey.
http://www.dioceseofalaska.org/
Though the majority of Americans are probably Protestant, there are heaps of other active religions dotted all over the place. As I said somewhere in an earlier post, there are many Eastern Rite communities from different countries, such as Coptic Christians from Egypt, Iraqi Chaldean Christians, Bulgarian Orthodox, Russian Orthodox (including Ukrainian, I think) Greek Orthodox, Serbian, and Armenian. (I once visited a gorgeous Armenian cathedral, built in the traditional style but with modern stained glass.) There's a sizable community of Lebanese Maronite, who are apparently affiliated with the Roman Catholic church. Many Baha'i, both from Iran and converts, live and worship here. I think their largest temple is somewhere in the Midwest. Additionally, there are communities of ultra-Orthodox Jews, probably mostly in New York State and Florida, as well as less conservative Jews of course. This doesn't include the minority Protestant sects who live very traditionally--not even using cars or electricity--the Amish, the Old Order Mennonites, and the Hutterites. There are also some traditional Native American religions still active. I've left out Buddhists and Muslims as well as Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, and Parsis from India. Though I've never actually met any Jains over here, I knew a small group of Parsis, whose religion is based on the ancient Persian religion of Zoroastrianism. And of course almost 80 million Roman Catholics. I'm sure I've left some out.
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
Olympia said:
There is an active Jain community in Detroit. Here is their temple.
http://www.jsgd.org
This is the traditional Jain symbol depicting the three regions of the universe (heaven, earth, and hell). The little semicircle at the top is where your soul goes when you have achieved the exalted state beyond the cycle of death and rebirth. The four arms of the ancient swastika symbol represent the four kinds of beings that you might become the next time around, depending on your conduct in your present life. Angel, demon, human, or animal.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._Chihna.svg/150px-Jain_Prateek_Chihna.svg.png
In the United States, the swastika is replaced by the Om symbol. (The swastika symbol is, shall we say, not regarded as holy in the modern West.)
http://www.organicsoul.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Om_Symbol.jpg
Thanks, Math!
I was very shocked the first time I saw a swastika used in the way it was originally intended. I have an early 20th-century edition of a book by Kipling, and the decoration on the title page is a row of swastikas. They go all the way back to ancient India, and of course their early Indo-Aryan origin (which is exactly why Hitler co-opted the symbol) would have been something respected by Kipling after his years in India. I'm telling you, I was tempted to cut those pages out of the book, because that symbol gives me such a visceral reaction of instant repulsion--and I never deface a book.
I knew a few converts to Baha'i, and it seems like a very enlightened religion, welcoming and tolerant. I know almost nothing about Jainism except that they carry the idea of reverence for life to the utmost, so thanks for the information.
I was very shocked the first time I saw a swastika used in the way it was originally intended. I have an early 20th-century edition of a book by Kipling, and the decoration on the title page is a row of swastikas. They go all the way back to ancient India, and of course their early Indo-Aryan origin (which is exactly why Hitler co-opted the symbol) would have been something respected by Kipling after his years in India. I'm telling you, I was tempted to cut those pages out of the book, because that symbol gives me such a visceral reaction of instant repulsion--and I never deface a book.
I knew a few converts to Baha'i, and it seems like a very enlightened religion, welcoming and tolerant. I know almost nothing about Jainism except that they carry the idea of reverence for life to the utmost, so thanks for the information.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Country
-
Some very, very good friends of ours are Jains. They live in Austin, TX.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
He really is in no position to determine what is ideal. Logic would dictate that a pair of loving parents regardless of gender would be a good influence on any child. He is suggesting children need a man and a woman based on gender norms as to what they can provide. There are plenty of straight parents who are worse for their kids than single parents or LGBT parents, and the opposite exists too. A parent isn't fit to be a parent if they're a bad parent... Not if they're a man or woman or in a particular relationship.
- Status
