Contributi di Igor V. Ponkin

SUMMARY: 1. Problem description - 2. Business based on commercial “surrogacy” is immoral and inhuman in nature, can be defined as the organisation and implementation of hidden child trafficking and mediation in such trade - 3. Illegal presumption and positioning of a child (whose birth “surrogacy” is aimed at) as an object of a commercial transaction, which is endowed with the characteristics of a product and consumer commodity properties, in “surrogacy” transactions - 4. Ideologically motivated, manipulative substitution of the concepts of the mother of the child and a woman-donor of an ovum, claiming to have a child born as a result of the “surrogacy” technologies use - 5. The practice of “surrogacy” is a gross violation of the child's rights, first of all, the child's right to his/her natural mother - 6. Legal and actual inconsistency and defectiveness of classifying commercially motivated “surrogacy” as an assisted reproductive technology and a form of high-tech or other medical care - 7. Reduction of the value and role of a woman as the mother to the value and role of a paid, commercially exploited living “human incubator”, a means of production by technology and the industry of “surrogacy” - 8. Risks of using children “obtained” as a result of “surrogacy” for criminal purposes - 9. Conclusions.

ABSTRACT: This article presents a critical legal and bioethical analysis of the legal framework and practice of using the technology of commercial surrogacy («surrogate motherhood») - as a paid service provided in the interests of a third party (customers, third parties) with the subsequent transfer ("alienation") of this child to the customer of such a service. In conclusion a moral assessment of such actions is given.

SOMMAIRE: 1. Introduction - 2. Méthodes appliquées dans la recherche et le domaine de la réalité objective et analytique; objet de la recherche - 3. Recherche dans le cadre de la réponse à la question № 1 - 4. Recherche dans le cadre de la réponse à la question № 2 - 4.1. Recherche et l’appréciation de l’image formée et retransmise par le film “Matilda“ de l’Empereur de Russie Nicolas II (Romanov) canonisé par l’Eglise Orthodoxe Russe - 4.2. Recherche et l’appréciation de l’image formée et retransmise par le film “Matilda“ de l’épouse de l’Empereur Nicolas II, Alexandre Féodorovna, canonisée par l’Eglise Orthodoxe Russe - 5. Recherche dans le cadre de la réponse à la question № 3 - 6. Recherche dans le cadre de la réponse à la Question № 4.

About the film “Matilda” in the context of protecting the dignity of believers

ABSTRACT: In 2017, the film «Matilda» caused a strong controversy in Russia. This article is devoted to the study of this film. The authors explore the film in the context of protecting the human dignity and the rights of believers, protecting their religious feelings. Critics of the film "Matilda" indicated that this film represents mockingly offensive images of those persons who are religiously revered by Orthodox Christian believers. The authors of the article check the validity of such critical assessments.

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction. Object of the evaluation: description of the exhibit – 2. Main part. An evaluation - 2.1. Communicative technique of combining the sacred with the low and vulgar associated with homosexual acts and the corresponding semantics condemned in the traditional Catholic religion - 2.2. Communicative technique of metonymic replacement (substitution) of one sign with another - 3. Conclusions.

SUMMARY: 1. Introduction - 2. Main Part. An Examination - 3. Complete exhaustion of the subject of the executive act adopted by the Patriarchate of Constantinople in 1686 - 4. Assessment of the actions from the perspective of the legislation of the Republic of Turkey - 5. Conclusions.

SUMMARY: 1. Problem description – 2. Practical Importance of the issue of the content of “Human Being” Concept – 3. Conceptual Approaches to Interpretation of the Concept of “Human Being” – 4. Conclusion.

ABSTRACT: The article covers the concept of “human being”. It describes the existing conceptual approaches to the concept interpretation and to the development of the concept legal definition. It studies the practical importance of the issue of the content of “Human being” concept. It touches upon the concept of “Chimera” – as a result of fusion of genetic material of a human being and inhuman life forms. It shows danger of such scientific experiments. It presents foreign practices of legal bans on production of chimeras. The authors also use international documents regarding the problem.

ABSTRACT: The construction of human embryo using “mitochondrial donation” technologies is unacceptable, in terms of bioethics, and illegal and clearly and materially contradicts with a number of international instruments on human rights, human health protection, and bioethics.

SUMMARY: 1. Problem description - 2. State of Russian Legislation regulating of the legal status of the child extracted alive as a result of abortion - 3. Legal basis for the recognition of human dignity and the right to life of the child extracted alive as a result of abortion - 4. Legal guarantees of recognition of the right to life and human dignity of the child extracted alive as a result of abortion and emergency medical care in foreign legislation - 5. Conclusions.

SOMMAIRE: 1. Brève histoire de l’affaire – 2. Préambule – 3. Protection de la compétence exclusive des groupements religieux en vue d’instaurer leur structure intrinsèque et les normes intérieures des relations au point de vue de la législation de la Roumanie – 4. Application du principe de l’autonomie des groupements religieux et du principe de l’inadmissibilité d’intervenir pour l’État aux affaires intérieures des groupements religieux – 5. Non-contradiction de la Convention des exigences intérieures des groupements religieux sur la loyauté et la conformité des personnes se trouvant dans les relations de service avec le groupement religieux – 6. Absence des raisons fournies par les faits juridiques suffisantes et justifiant réellement l’assimilation (la mise au même niveau) des groupements religieux avec n’importe quelles autres organisations-employeurs dans la sphère de la réglementation des relations de travail – 7. Légalité de l’instauration des restrictions à la création et les activités des syndicats dans les certaines sphères des relations publiques – 8. Compétence de la Roumanie de fixer dans la législation les restrictions à la liberté des syndicats conformément à la sphère des relations religieuses – 9. Signification des résultats du jugement de l’affaire «Syndicat “Le Bon Pasteur” c. Roumanie» (requête 2330/09) pour L’Église Orthodoxe Russe- 10. Conclusion.

SUMMARY: 1. On the religious significance of baptismal crosses and grounds for the need for Orthodox Christian believers to wear them – 2. On the illegitimate nature of the ban imposed by the state on the wearing of baptismal symbols of Christian religious affiliation – 3. Absence of any grounds for assessing the religious rite of wearing Christian baptismal crosses as a threat to public safety, public order, health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others – 4. The groundless emasculation, denial and reduction of the religious meaning and importance of Christian baptismal crosses.

SOMMAIRE: Introduction - 1. Argumentation du droit à l’évaluation critique de l'homosexualité et de ses aspects sociaux - 2. Caractère agressif de l'idéologie de l'homosexualisme - 3. Atteinte cruelle et inhumaine de lésions corporelles portée à l’individu, les dommages à sa santé dans la pratique de l'homosexualité ”masculine” - 4. Sur la manipulation par les chiffres - 5. Mythe sur la discriminations massives des homosexuels - 6. Violation des Droits de l’Homme et insulte à la dignité humaine pendant les ”gay parades” - 7. Normes de la législation étrangère, émanant de la reconnaissance par l'État des méfaits sociaux de l'homosexualité - 8. Positions juridiques de la Cour Européenne des Droits de l'Homme ayant le point d’impact sur l’élaboration des solutions à propos des questions à discuter - 9. Contradiction à ”l’Ordre public” de la Fédération de Russie des exigences d'établir des régimes juridiques privilégiés pour les homosexuels et leurs groupements et de poursuivre pour toute critique de l'homosexualité – 10. Conclusions.