Giggles. Sak, stop making me hungry!
Honestly, I don't see what most of the commentary about Jewish personages really added. Except maybe some nasty rhetorical traps...
I've only followed a few parts of this, so sorry if this has already been done. I suppose this is for Dashenka:
I gather that you feel public displays of affection can be bad -- in which case, I suggest you would come across as more fair IF you said we need a law banning everyone (not just gays) from such displays. This is true even though I might not care to have such a law, myself. But the standing law targets gays and leaves others free to 'flaunt' their sexuality in public (if you see it that way) as they will. We might also conclude that in effect, as far as public space goes: This law actually imposes viewing others' sexual (or if you like, perhaps cultural) performances upon gays, not the other way around.
If I understand correctly, you've said a concern you have about gays in Russia as a group, is that they are pushing an agenda on others in a society where they have an uphill fight (referring to public opinion polls or the like). At times you've compared them to the Jehovah's Witnesses going door to door. Frankly, I feel the Jehovah's example is getting a bit far from the concerns raised in the West (more often) regarding the treatment of gays in public spaces, i.e. is this law being used to defend people who might verbally or physically attack gays simply for being gay? The question was not all about gays going door to door with pamphlets, which would have more comparison to Jehovahs... I do not see how displaying affection in public, or even how simply being known/ discovered/ possibly outed as gay, amounts to a political demand that others change their ways. Or if people are concluding that it does, then I'd like to know what they see as being demanded of them (and if that, then perhaps why it is unfair). In particular, I don't believe that public displays of affection by gays (or simply being known as gay) devalue others' marriages or should make their relationships feel any less "real" -- unless maybe there is something pretty twisted/ wrong with them already.
That is, unless you believe what some American conservatives have suggested: Some of them have tried to claim that there is a "gay culture" which, when visible in any way in public, somehow directly conflicts with the practices of straight culture so there must be some conflict and only one of them can be have what it needs in any given place. However, I believe if you take this view and you are gay, then you are also creating a situation where any time anyone who doesn't like gays for any reason comes anywhere near you, you are going to be continually forced to hide, shut up, or flee. Or you may not get the chance: If the trend continues toward unpunished attacks on gays, then you may simply get subjected to violence and the perpetrators may not be punished. At least in principle, that is where that leads. Of course, in rationalization you can say yeah, yeah, same for minorities everywhere historically... But then if someone feels like murdering you or jailing your lover just because you're gay, you have no practical defense (or does everyone hire private security?) and they might choose to do it on a whim, not only because you were "too loud" or too visible. Being cautious or "politely" avoiding offense if you prefer, will not ultimately ensure you are safe in that sort of environment.