I'm not in the habit of watching so-called sensationalist programs that Brazilian TV enjoys so much. However, when the subject is homosexuality – not homosexuality as the media insists on repeating ad infinitum – as a duty of office, I have to watch; however, beforehand, I always take a dosage of "Dramin".
That's how I forced myself to watch yesterday, 24/02/2010, Programa do Ratinho, on SBT. The agenda was PLC 122/06 and the debate on the topic in a sensationalist program that turns everything serious into a circus deserves the attention of those who are engaged in the fight for real LGBT citizenship in Brazil, even if they feel uncomfortable nausea.
On one side, former deputy Iara Bernardi, author of the Project. On the other, the pastor of the Assembly of God, Silas Malafaia.
Iara Bernardi's presence was justified, after all, she is the author of PLC 122/06, although she no longer holds a seat in the Chamber of Deputies, which I greatly regret, as a woman whose biography and political trajectory only enhances our nation and our gives hope in these dark times when it comes to politics, he should have a seat and a voice in the National Congress.
Unjustified was the presence of the fundamentalist pastor Silas Malafaia, who since the debate on PLC 122/06 entered the political agenda, has used his program, paid for with the contributions of his followers, to work against the civil rights of homosexual people, using a misinterpretation of the Bible to do so. In addition to distorting at will what the text of PLC 122/06 says, in order to gain the opinion of its viewers: housewives, workers, businessmen, and a large part of evangelical citizens.
The presence of Silas Malafaia was unjustified, as the matter that the Ratinho Program was proposing to debate concerns the civil rights of Brazilian citizens and I don't see what the cross-eyed, prejudiced and mistaken view of a pastor who works against the civil rights of citizens homosexuals can contribute positively to the debate. In his place, the presence of another deputy or senator who positions himself against PLC 122/06 would be justified, but who would stick to the legal arguments of his position and who would not appeal to religion. Just the title of pastor and his ecclesiastical affiliation already demonstrates, in principle, the positioning, bases and assumptions of Silas Malafaia.
The result of this debate, having as the representative of the contradictory a fundamentalist pastor, whose aggressive temperament, especially in the use of his strident voice, always seeming to be in the pulpit, verbose and with a huge appeal to the populace, was predictable: the opposing side "won". I say it won from the point of view of a common sense viewer, especially one who doesn't know how to distinguish what is political from what is religious (including LGBT viewers); and we know that this portion of the population includes viewers of Programa do Ratinho. In other words, the debate about PLC 122/06 in Programa do Ratinho proved to be a disservice to LGBT citizenship in Brazil and certainly gained more opponents of PLC 122/06 among the population.
I know that our society is democratic and our political regime is democratic, we live in a country wounded by more than two decades of an exceptional regime. I know that evangelicals with a fundamentalist bias are part of this society, they are contributing citizens, political agents whose representatives in the Three Powers of the nation only make it grow. I know that Silas Malafaia is a representative of these people, almost a totem and I know, finally, that they must participate in the broad debate on any topic involving laws or bills in Brazil; however, it is illegitimate to debate laws or bills based on religious opinions, as Brazil, according to our Constitution, is a Secular State and this means that we cannot approve laws or reject them based on our religious opinions, because this violates our Magna Carta, it is illegal.
If sensationalist programs want to debate issues such as homosexuality or bills that aim to guarantee real citizenship to the LGBT population from a religious point of view – after all, freedom of expression is guaranteed by the Constitution, they should do so as long as those invited to the debate represent , in fact, what they are proposing! It's not fair to put two people who come from completely different points of view face to face to debate PLC 122/06 or any other controversial issue!
Former deputy Iara Bernardi was there as a public figure, whose life's work is the defense of human and civil rights, from a non-religious, therefore, secular point of view. Pastor Malafaia was there as a totem of the fundamentalist evangelical social segment, starting from a religious point of view, albeit a mistaken one: is this fair?
As I do not believe in naivety on the part of opinion makers like Ratinho or any other, I can only conclude that such an issue on a TV program, of a sensationalist nature, whose airing time reaches a portion of the population that tends to listen more to a pastor or priest that a woman has no good intentions in contributing anything, other than spreading misconceptions about such an urgent and serious matter! And don't give me the tired "exemption" argument, because hell is paved with that!
We will always lose the debate on homosexuality or the processes of building LGBT citizenship if this is the case! Therefore, I appeal to our representatives, whether in politics or in LGBT activism: if they accept to participate in debates with fundamentalist pastors, first empower themselves with inclusive religious and theological assumptions, which deconstruct the religious fundamentalist discourse of priests and pastors like Silas Malafaia. Only in this way will we achieve an honest debate, on an equal footing and with a chance of winning. Religious fundamentalists do not accept secular arguments, they must be fought on common ground. Either we learn this, or we will be defeated in every debate; otherwise, it is better not to accept such invitations.
Finally, a rant: how long will you elected representatives of the LGBT population and you of the LGBT political militancy choose to ignore the inclusive theologians and pastors who work hard from a Christian religious point of view and who produce knowledge in this area, aiming for a positive and effective contribution for the LGBT political debate? Be aware, once and for all, that this debate in Brazil necessarily passes through the Christian religious field! As long as you ignore this you will be shooting ourselves in the feet, doing a disservice and helping people like Pastor Silas Malafaia and his people win debates on national communication networks.
* Márcio Retamero, 35 years old, is a theologian and historian, master in Modern History from UFF/Niterói, RJ. He has been pastor of the Bethel Community in Rio de Janeiro – a Reformed and Inclusive Protestant Church – since 2006. He is also a campaigner for LGBT inclusion in the Christian Church and for Human Rights. He lectures on Theology, Protestant Reformation, Inquisition, Inclusive Church and Christian Homophobia. His email is: revretamero@betelrj.com.
