This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/world/americas/Brazil-netflix-Jesus-gay.html

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
Brazil Judge Orders Netflix to Remove Film Portraying Jesus as Gay Brazil’s Top Court Strikes Down Ban on Netflix Film Portraying Jesus as Gay
(about 7 hours later)
RIO DE JANEIRO — A judge in Brazil ruled this week that Netflix must take down a short film depicting Jesus as a gay man, arguing that it stands to do “irreparable damage” to the nation’s Christians. RIO DE JANEIRO — The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed Netflix to continue showing a short film depicting Jesus as a gay man, reversing a lower court’s ruling that the film be taken down because it did “irreparable damage” to the nation’s Christians.
The film, a satire called The First Temptation of Christ, had incited controversy in the country and a backlash among conservative politicians and clergy when it was released in December. The uproar escalated when, on Christmas Eve, the production company responsible for the film was hit by a firebomb. The film, a satire called The First Temptation of Christ, ignited controversy among conservative politicians and clergy when it was released in December. The uproar escalated when, on Christmas Eve, the production company responsible for the film was the target of a firebomb attack.
Now, the judge’s decision has placed the film at the center of a broader debate about censorship in Brazil. It is the latest flash point in the country’s culture wars, which have grown increasingly bitter since the election of far-right President Jair Bolsonaro in 2018. This week’s rulings are yet another flash point in the country’s culture wars, which have grown increasingly bitter since the election of far-right President Jair Bolsonaro in 2018.
The Rio de Janeiro judge, Benedicto Abicair, issued the decision on Tuesday in response to a lawsuit filed by Centro Dom Bosco, a Brazilian Christian organization, which has denounced the film as “blasphemous.” In striking down the lower court’s ban, the president of Brazil’s Supreme Court ruled Thursday that freedom of expression was a fundamental right in a democracy.
The judge, writing in a 40-page decision, said he was trying to balance freedom of expression with freedom of religion. He concluded that keeping the film online is “more likely to cause grave and irreparable damage” than removing it from the public domain. “A piece of satire is not going to undermine the values of Christian faith, which has been around for more than 2,000 years,” the court’s president, Justice José Antonio Dias Toffoli, wrote.
The judge said that his ruling would benefit Brazil’s “majority Christian” society. Brazil, home to more Catholics than any other country in the world, also has a fast-growing conservative evangelical population that has gained more political clout in recent years. Netflix had appealed the lower court ruling, saying that it would fight for artistic expression, “which goes to the heart of great storytelling.”
The film remained accessible in Brazil as of Thursday afternoon and Netflix said that it had filed a complaint with the country’s Supreme Court seeking to keep it online. “We strongly support artistic expression and we’ll be fighting to defend this important principle, which goes to the heart of great storytelling,” Netflix said in a statement. On Tuesday, a judge in Rio de Janeiro had banned the film in response to a lawsuit filed by Centro Dom Bosco, a Brazilian Christian organization, which has denounced the film as blasphemous.
The Supreme Court is not in session this month, but a senior judge could rule on the matter soon if he deems it urgent. The judge, Benedicto Abicair, concluded that keeping the film online was “more likely to cause grave and irreparable damage” than removing it from the public domain. He said the ruling would benefit Brazil’s “majority Christian” society.
Porta dos Fundos, the company that produced the film, said in a statement on Thursday that it hoped the courts would uphold the protections within Brazil’s constitution that safeguard freedom of speech. Brazil, home to more Catholics than any other country in the world, also has a fast-growing conservative evangelical population that has gained more political clout in recent years. Many had celebrated the lower court’s ban.
“Our mission is to make humorous content in order to entertain and prompt people to reflect,” it said in the message. Damares Alves, an evangelical pastor who serves as minister for Human Rights, Families and Women, lauded the lower court for a “beautiful and timely decision!”
Damares Alves, an evangelical pastor who serves as minister for Human Rights, Families and Women, called the ruling a “beautiful and timely decision!” in a statement on Instagram. She added that she hoped the producers would be fined for the “pain they caused to many people.” But David Miranda, an openly gay federal lawmaker, called the decision an “attack on democracy” in the Bolsonaro era. “We can’t forget that this attack is rooted in homophobia,” he said in a text message. “We’ll resist.”
David Miranda, an openly gay federal lawmaker, said he saw the decision as the latest “attack on democracy” in the Bolsonaro era. On Christmas Eve, masked assailants lobbed Molotov cocktails at Porta dos Fundos, the company that produced the film. No one was injured, and the firebombs did little damage. But a video posted online took credit for the attack and made clear that it was an effort to silence the filmmakers.
“We can’t forget that this attack is rooted in homophobia,” he said in a text message. “We’ll resist.” Law enforcement officials have identified one of the men suspected of being involved in the firebombing.
Law enforcement officials have identified one of the men suspected of being involved in the firebombing of Porta dos Fundos. The suspect, Eduardo Fauzi, a 41-year-old resident of Rio de Janeiro, flew to Moscow shortly after the attack. In an interview with Época magazine, Mr. Fauzi said that while the attack was certainly a crime, he felt it was “perfectly moral” since the justice system did not stand in the way of the film’s dissemination, which he called a “monstrous crime.”
The suspect, Eduardo Fauzi, a 41-year-old resident of Rio de Janeiro, flew to Moscow shortly after the attack. In an interview with Época magazine, Mr. Fauzi said that while the firebomb attack was certainly a crime, he felt it was “perfectly moral” since the justice system did not stand in the way of the film’s dissemination, which he called a “monstrous crime.”