They raised a sign and a voice. If society can't cope with that then it has other problems causing collapse.
I find the suggestion that tyrannical and autocratic silencing of redress and opinion is required or justified to be repugnant. There are better responses that don't limit the conscience or liberty of others.
We didn't enshrine basic human rights with a little asterisk saying unless I really really disagree with you about what it right and proper.
*****************************
Do you believe in a one-world government? This story is about Russia. We are not Russia.
Homosexuals are mentally ill and morally depraved. Their behavior causes disease and death, and their agenda is to seduce and molest children, thereby furthering the cycle of pestilence, misery, and early mortality.
With that in mind, maybe Russia should allow others with harmful mental problems and criminal tendencies to "raise a sign and a voice." Why not? What's the difference?
It's the same for any tourist. If I can't abide by the laws of a country, I should visit elsewhere. If I want to change the laws of a country, it should be one in which I'm a citizen.
Most of us think it's disgusting that invaders in the US protest to change our laws. How is strident homosexuals going to Russia and trying to change their laws any different?
And PS: Those Pussy Riot performets who desecrated a Church should've been locked up for good.
They raised a sign and a voice. If society can’t cope with that then it has other problems causing collapse.
And by doing so they violated Russian law.
“Human rights” without the illumination of moral and natural law become perverted reflections of real human rights.
They were foreigners interfering in Russian internal matters.