In Austria, same-sex couples were able to marry from 1 January 2019. That brings the total number of EU Member-States that recognise same-sex marriage up to thirteen. However, that still leaves 15 European countries where same-sex marriage is not legal. In many Eastern European countries, the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman is enshrined in the constitution.
For same-sex couples, this confusing legal landscape throws up several issues. If they move from one European country to another, will they have the same rights as straight couples in terms of things like pensions, guardianship of children, legal wills, and so on? Should their marriage be recognised across the entire European Union?
What do our readers think? We had a comment sent in from Luca on our ‘Suggest a Debate’ page, asking how LGBT rights (including on issues such as same-sex marriage and adoption) can be improved across the continent. Would recognising same-sex marriage not be a good first step?
Should same-sex marriage be legalised across Europe? We asked Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) from all sides of the political spectrum to stake out their positions on this question, and it’s up to YOU to vote for the policies you favour. See what the different MEPs have to say, then vote at the bottom of this debate for the one you most agree with! Take part in the vote below and tell us who you support in the European Parliament!
Yes, of course. I think that’s important. Human rights are for all.
Yes. When it comes to gay marriage, there is a clear contradiction in Europe. On the one hand, we do not define marriage at the European level. Family law is a national competence. Yet, on the other hand, we have decided at the European level (because it’s in the treaties) that we’re not allowed to discriminate against people. So, if you apply that principle logically, somebody should be able to go to court and ask: ‘Why am I not allowed to marry as a homosexual?’
We also have freedom of movement in Europe, and if you are a heterosexual married couple and you move to another country, you have no problem. But if you are a same-sex couple and you move to another country, you lose your rights: Social security, child benefits, and so on. That is discrimination on the basis of sexuality…
I would say that, for me, the most important element for this issue is the first article of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which speaks about respect for human dignity… On the other hand, I believe we should approach this issue in dialogue and in full sensitivity for the diversity of views.
There is also another aspect, which we speak about frequently in the European Parliament. I belong to those who think that this issue it is not a European competence to decide, but rather it should be left to Member States. So, we do need to respect the principle of subsidiarity, which is very important within the legal structure of the European Union,.
Beatrix von Storch (EFDD), Member of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs:
Curious to know more about same-sex marriage across Europe? We’ve put together some facts and figures in the infographic below (click for a bigger version).
IMAGE CREDIT: CC / Flickr – European Parliament
With the support of:
1,671 comments Post a commentcomment
Yes but such things should not be done in church
and no right to adopt children.
Andrius Adomaitis and no right to be happy. Equal marriage yes but less equal than the other. 😒
Agree with Vladislav 100% on this. State ceremonies and equal rights in status. But forcing churches to change their view on this is just as oppressive to the religious groups as not permitting same sex marriage is to homosexually orientated people. While we’re at it, what about state recognised polygamy? Many people the world over practice this, yet it is considered immoral in many states. . . . .
NO! NO! NO! and again NO!!!
Next step after the marriage is to allow adoption of child and what example they would give to the child? “Be like daddy marry uncle John”… that sucks! In your bedroom you can be anything you want but you shouldn’t be allowed to give bad examples in public!
Yes, cause being in orphanage is better than being adopted by same-sex family.
Sure
Bad examples like prejudice?
bad examples? have you ever been with a gay/lesbian couple? would you like to be judged? So sad
so basically you are saying that people marry the opposite sex because they learn it from their parents? thats not how this works. thats not how it works at all…
If you ask me, you’re what’s wrong with this world. Not gay marriage!
Bad examples in public. Shame on you.
The only bad example I see here is you.
Same sex marriage and adoption have proved to work perfectly well in all the countries that have legalized it!
Elton John has adopted children – what’s the problem?
No bad examples in public, for the kids. Of course. Right so not drinking, not swearing, not yelling, not fighting. And what about writing homophobic comments?
Do you know how stupid and ignorant you sound!!! What bad examples in public are you talking about!!! Isn’t it possible for heterosexual couples to give bad examples in public???? As they say you can’t fix stupid@@
Bad examples to children like smoking, drinking, swearing? Why not forbid everything btw? Grow up, soviets. You are not in 1945 anymore.
I agree. It’s just not God’s way. Europe should be based on traditions not on cheap liberalism.
I am against anyone being discriminated or treated poorly because of their sexual orientation and I can tell this story: discussing this topic with my boyfriend some time ago he unexpectedly revelead that he was against homosexuals having children and said basically the same things as the poster above. He is from a catholic country and is thus shaped by this growing up. I tried to argue against his position, but he didn’t change his mind. I anyway accepted it but hoped he would sometime change his mind. After this, he has become friends with a gay friend, Friend A. Seeing this debate I turned to him and asked: “Do you think Friend A should be forbidden to ever have children?” And he replied No. He had changed his mind about homosexuals having children.
In other words: it’s easy to have prejudice and deny rights to people who in your mind are far from you, but once you really get to know a person, you will realize we as humans have more things that united us than divide us.
The center right guy put it right: ” It should be left to member states to decide. “
Then they should decide on other basic principles too but would have to leave the EU after of course. No à la carte europe.
Civil gay marriage should be legal, but gay marriage as a religious ritual should be decided by the different religious churches and organizations. It is their right to decide for themselves if they allow it. The two types of marriage are a different thing and should be viewed as different matters because of secularism. There is separation between state and church and this is how it should be.
For your information, matrimony is always done in church and has no legal value on its own. Marriage is a legal, non religious ceremony. So yes marriage should be legal for everyone.
Matrimony in church, marriage outside the church, people mistake this often.
The only thing that matters is the civil law of each country, therefore, what is important is civil marriage because it gives important rights to couples. Religious marriages is out of the debate. It’s up to each religion what they want to do and how idiots and bigoted they want to be. But the state shouldn’t have his laws based on religions issues, so civil marriage should be open to all couples.
Regulating the activity of religious organizations is also a matter of civil law. That’s why the issue is two-sided.
Любомир Иванчев The only country that forces the church to perform same-sex religious marriage is, if I am not mistaken, Denmark, because of them being a religious state, there is an oficial state religion and is regulated. It’s just how their constitutionalism works. :)
Yeah respect, kindness, chivalry and do as we say…
WHY should be my rights on a debate? It feels horrific. I am so happy to be Spanish, been legal since 2005 and no problem. Eastern Europeans and the Italian Government will not accept we are all equal
.
Until you can give birth to new life you are not equal, the Italian government do not say so, nature does.
then I guess you are not equal too, nature does not give you a vagina mr burrows
we are asking for the right to get married, not to give birth…maybe you’re a bit confused
Ivan Burrows, so you are against old couples to marry? Or couples who don’t want child? Or couple who can’t have children?
Oh, come on, we are all equal. It’s just that some of us are more equal than the others.
Actually guys… In italy it’s been a while already since the civil union law passed, and it differs from a marriage only for the adoption policy, which is now being worked on separately by the government, to reform the whole adoption system, so that then the same right will be granted to homosexual couples too.
I agree with Paule, how on earth someone can think they’re superior enough to debate on someone else’s rights?
How can anyone say “No you cannot do that! but YOU can!” and then think they support equality for all human beings, as our Human Rights Declaration, heart of EU, states?
Disregard Burrows, he’s a nationalistic backwards shithead.
Just look at his comments elsewhere.
Legalise also drugs and pedophily and tell the nation it’s great to do, cause we’re all different.🙄 Slovakia has 20 times lower AIDS % than UK, Spain for example. In last years AIDS started spreading in EU again . Guess why? I am proud of Slovakia , that they didn’t let this happen and even strictened the laws on it here.
Two, so you think the way to stop the spread of sexually transmitted diseases is to outlaw people pairing off into monogamous relationships for life, effectively increasing the number of possible transfers of the disease from 1 person, to however many people that legally mandated carrier can have sex with? What have I missed, because by my calculations this cannot be right. Are you certain people in Slovakia aren’t just “not getting any”?
Paule Egé, we are lucky iberians.
Alberto Pérez
Alberto Pérez
According to my beliefs there can be no same sex marriage, there can be no civil marriage as well. But, because not all people have my faith and my beliefs, and people are people, we need to see it as it is. Two people want to bond legally so as to be able to share assets and act as legal partners for one another. If the case did not involve any sexual connotation why two people who want to live together and share legal burdens should not? There are also many loners who are simply friends into this world who would benefit from such a law.
Or course.
Of course.
Of course
Definitely, but right wing blockheads would use that for their xenophobic propaganda in countries like Poland, Hungary and the rest of Eastern Europe :(
Arkadiusz, Orban and Kaczyński won’t last for ever. We are going through a period of nationalism. In the long run there has always been a steady developpment towards more enlightenment. We need to fight but also have faith to tackle this absurd situation. The brave polish people already show how strong they are opposing this Kaczyński period.
Dirk Schönhoff
If believing in a failed European experiment of the 1950’s is ‘enlightenment’ then you really are in trouble.
Fascism, Nazism, Communism & now Europeanism, only the colour of the flag changes.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/02/07/top-world-britain-outpace-g7-next-three-decades/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw
I am proud of Slovakia and Hungary that they didn’t allow this and 64 more genders.
Teo Nagy, what a pitty a guy with your chances and talents does not make use of what was given to you. It’s not Putin or Orban giving you the freedom to live and travel where ever you want. It is the idea of equal chances and freedom besides national boarders to developp your own ideas . Be fair and allow just the same to other people. Think about it and I am counting on your support!
Why limit the number of people involved? If you want to get rid of one criterion (opposite sex) “just because”, why would you stop here? Alternative lifestyles are limitless.
At the very least there needs to be equivalence. Civil partnerships have to provide ALL the same tax, legal and cvil benefits as marriage.
Andrius Adomaitis and no right to be happy. Equal marriage yes but less equal than the other. ?
Can never be married.
Can only be a civil union!!!
So they can have all the same rights and obligations but not the same name? It is a semantics problem for you?
Yes, I know. How is that in any conflict with what I said? I am just saying gay marriage should be legal, but religious organizations should have the right to refuse performing gay weddings.
.
Why are you obsessed with this ‘Across Europe’ nonsense ?
Because EU will be a state!
It’s called predictive programming.
Tiago Pereira
Only in the minds of fanatics comrade.
No, in the minds of people who want unity and peace.
If you want to get out, there is the UK. Hop to it
My nation has no war in it’s land since the first half of the 1800’s. Finally, as a croatian you are quite hypocrite with that argument. Why haven’t you stayed within Yugoslavia? O right. Go preech in the Balkans.
Why is this even up for discussion? Of course it should be. We are a modern, tolerant continent, it doesn’t hurt anyone and it would make many people very happy.
No. What’s next, paedophilia and incest “marriages”, because why not, according to such liberal degenerate doctrines.
very rational arguments i must say
Uli Czeranka .
Rationally speaking nature says male+female = new life, not male+male.
It is you that is being irrational by putting personal sexual preference above the natural order.
Homosexual marriage involves 2 consenting adults with no family ties, what gives you the right to decide someones else’s rights when it doesn’t infringe on yours?
Ivan, explain this ‘natural order’ please.
Cooking food also goes against nature.
The page is called ‘Rational Ethno-Nationalism’, don’t expect any valid arguments from them lol
The nature argument is as old and stupid as it can be… Religious based nonsense..
Sure!!
The is nothing “across Europe”. Europeis not a state and it will never be and the EU is a useless, incompetent and corrupt institution that shall be dissolver sooner rather then latet.
So why are you here?
Without the EU there’s no buffer, there’s nothing to prop up the smaller countries, Portugal would be one of the countries that would crash and burn because we simply don’t have economic nor diplomatic strenght to holds us up.
Lol…Portugal is one of the oldest countries in the world. We don’t need the EU to have a diplomacy that suits our needs, in fact we always pushed above our weight. I guess you never saw an history book And certaonly never read a newspapet. Also, economically, Portugal already “crashed and burned” and that is EU’s fault. Our purchasing power was bigger in 1974 after the Colonial War, than today. Our debt, made rescuing banks that the ECB was charged to control, was never as high, not even in 1891 when we last bankrupt. That is enough to “crash and burn” your theory. The EU brought us nothing but poverty and subjugation.
I wonder were all of you lesser educated and certainly less polite “we know better and facts don’t count” were living when there was no EU and countries like Portugal had strength to do what they wanted. In fact I would like to know where do you live this days because foreign policy is still in part a national matter. I wonder what you would say to tiny Switzerland or the unpopulated Iceland. Better! What would you say to the absurdly rich Singapure. Please tell them they have no strength in the international stage a then explain them how wonderful it is to be a broken country within thr “powerful” and “transparent” EU. What a bloody joke. The mathmatic is simple. The portuguese are poorer now than before the EU logic shows the EU was a disgusting deal. Now, call me a “nationalistic cunt” because I desagree with you foolishness, but stats will not change and history is there to be seen.
THIS COMMENT HAS BEEN REMOVED BY MODERATORS FOR BREACHING OUR CODE OF CONDUCT. REPLIES MAY ALSO BE REMOVED.
I agree with you Jose,, Greece is sitting in the same situation and believe me we don’t belong in the EUROZONE!!! I’m all for Grexit!! This debt was never Greece’s debt!!!
It’s ridiculous it’s a discussion still. The EU should definitely pressure these eastern countries on human rights issues. This is not a religious thing it’s a human rights thing. Religion has no place in politics or law because it’s nonsense.
.
Can you make nature bend to the will of political correct ‘human rights’ law ?
If you want to be a naturalist, go into the jungle and hang out with irrational animals, don’t come here to the human rational world making statements 😏
Ivan Burrows No one is talking about nature, we’re talking about human rights.
Furthermore, it doesn’t even matter because homosexualism is natural since it naturally occurs in nature between animals.
Btw marriage in general is not a natural thing. It’s a made by man thing. 😏 don’t see animals getting married.
.
Who are you to tell whole populations what they should be, the gay Mafia ?
Should be legalized all over the world — happily married taxpayer.
Arkadiusz, Orban and Kaczyński won’t last for ever. We are going through a period of nationalism. In the long run there has always been a steady developpment towards more enlightenment. We need to fight but also have faith to tackle this absurd situation. The brave polish people already show how strong they are opposing this Kaczyński period.
Yes, individual freedom and rights should always come first.
NO, NEVER!
What about society is natural? Is using the social media to be an ignorant naturalist wannabe nature? ? shove that bullshit elsewhere.
Yes, without any doubt. It harms noone and protects citizens.
Buggers!
If you want to be a naturalist, go into the jungle and hang out with irrational animals, don’t come here to the human rational world making statements ?
I’d rather have the discussion about why people still think marriage is a good idea. I personally don’t see the need for marriage to be a ‘thing’ and why as a single person I cannot have the same tax breaks as a married couple whatever their sex.
Yeah!!!!
Gay marrages are more stable and lasting than same sex. Children growing up in this have the foundation of a stable family. Oh the horror……
It would be wonderful, but the EU hardly has the competence to introduce such a unified solution. However, legally contracted marriages should not lose their status, when they move across the borders. That is a real obstacle to free movement.
And what exactly gives you the right to take people’s rights away?
Don’t like gay marriage, don’t marry a gay person.
Those pants needs to be taken to the dry cleaners.
Yes of course
Why stop there, why not polygamy as well? …At the end of the day people should be free to have relationships with whoever they choose, the issue comes when you use the word “legalise”….once this happens the law becomes the stick for the PC liberal left to beat into submission those who’s beliefs are being fundamentally challenged
Of course!
No.
Well, that is somewhat unrealistic in the next few years, but it is important to ensure that marriages conducted by any given EU member are recognized across the continent, as are adoptions. Without that freedom of movement is not properly working. This needs to fully extend to SSM.
Yes!
Dirk Schönhoff I agree, but these kind of policies, like forced migration quotas, or forced gay marriage legislation are fueling right wing populism and increase their chances to re-election. Kaczynski and his party were opposing the EU law about domestic violence. I see that you have some knowledge about Polish politics, but to give you some perspective, CDU would be called in Poland leftist. That’s how right-wing our current parliament is.
Yes
That is for the churches to decide, and not you.
It’s illegal to force a priest/church to marry someone they don’t want to so all the gay people that do get married there, it’s because the priest wanted to.
No, it is a joke.I am scared.
Scared? Don’t be: nobody will force you to marry a man.
I know i will not be forced, but i will see that, i will live with that in my comunity, it s hard to see that, is hard to see two people that do things against nature.
Then look away.
There are 168 species that exhibit homosexual relationships, and only one species that exhibit homophobia. Grow up and stop using “nature” as an excuse for your bigotry
Creation is the ultimate target. If is not is wrong, ok? I try to be not just a simple animal.
You try to not be a somple animal, yet you claim it has to be for creation in order to be ok.
Contradictory, much?
Then those not willing to breed, the old and/or infertile should be forbidden too by your “logic”.
:] + special fasion preseted under song “money’ https://youtu.be/H4xW3U8Azxw
Yes,this is not religious thing,but human right thing.
Dirk Schönhoff
If believing in a failed European experiment of the 1950’s is ‘enlightenment’ then you really are in trouble.
Fascism, Nazism, Communism & now Europeanism, only the colour of the flag changes.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/02/07/top-world-britain-outpace-g7-next-three-decades/?WT.mc_id=tmg_share_tw
Of course it should be. The fact we’re even discussing this still is an embarrassment.
Ivan Burrows marriage is a construct of culture and society. What exactly the relation to making babies (in a natural sense) is, you need to show me. Anyway my remark was against the equation gay marriage, pedophilia and incest.
No.
This has nothing to do with liberals or conservatives (whatever that shit is) but with fundamental Human Rights. ;)
Yes absolutely!
Yes. Also people immigrating to Europe should be asked if they accept same sex marriage, gender equality, disabled equality, human rights, etc. Refusal to do so, should result in immediate deporation.
they are coming to escape American/European funded wars, not to get a same sex marriage.
JD Blaha Doesn’t matter. If they ahve a problem with any EU minorities then they should either adjust their attitudes or not come.
What Andrea means is that they should be asked that in order to understand if they are prepared to integrate our society and accept our cultural values.
If you don’t like gay marriage, don’t marry someone the same sex. It really is that simple.
IF you want to destroy and deprive a civilization .. go on on this way!
all European Citizens should have equal rights. Pretty radical idea, eh?
JD Blaha Doesn’t matter. If they have a problem with any EU minorities then they should either adjust their attitudes or not come.
Yes of course! But in countries like Poland will be very difficult to see the law pass in parliament since the Catholic church has too much influence in the society.
I am in Italy, in Rome, where the Catholic Church is not only an influence, it actually resides here. If we did the civil union law, you can do the same, and both can advence to the marriage step, which for us it would only require to add the adption policy to the now existent civil union.
No
NO!
Never!
Btw marriage in general is not a natural thing. It’s a made by man thing. ? don’t see animals getting married.
Nonsense, big no, it’s foolishness. Great sin
Is the Pope Catholic? Of course it should – yesterday.
If I mention the Pope, it’s cuz marriage, regardless of gender or sexual orientation, is a civic bond between two consenting adults that has no relation to faith or religion. Anything else is bigotry and discrimination. Now can I get an amen in here?
Amen
It is a human right. Identical to the human right already granted for non-same-sex marriages. A right is nothing to discuss, neither to vote for. It just needs to be granted
i diritti civili , da soli , senza i diritti sociali ed umani “è la vittoria di Pirro ” cioè una battaglia persa
It’s harm’s no one and it’s the right of those people to be treated as equal. .off corce adoption of children from those couples should be debated more on the basis of the childs interest
Yes!
No. Social and religious issues like this should be decided on by individual member states, whatever the predominant views might be across the EU. Hungary’s constitution has a clause recognising marriage as between a man and a woman. If you think imposing one EU view is more important than European unity, I don’t, but I do support recognition by states of equal rights across a range and variety of partnerships.
I want my brothers and sisters in Hungry to have all the rights that equal human beings have according to our European values, and i certainly want them to have as much civil rights as i do have in Italy, because they are not different than me. Why should i let them be less? Why should i let Hungry’s government treat LGBT people like second-class citizens just because they’re a few kilometres across the alps from me? No.
EQUALITY IS EQUALITY, and it is not “a view”, it is one of our, the EU, fundamental principles.
LGBT people ARE treated equally in Hungary. It’s just that same-sex partnerships are seen as being different which, of course, they are. Being equal is not about being the same.
So, your ‘unity’ is based on surpressing other people. Thanks, we don’t want your unity. Obviously; you just want our money, it’s time for the EU to through hungary out. Democracy gone, human rights gone, there is not much european culture left in hungary. Go russian, putin will show you (again) how much a hungarian life is worth for them. A unity right the way you like it, I guess.
Andrew Chandler How are they different? Is it not a committment based on love, trust and stability, just like the marriage of a heterosexual couple?
The Bible (New Testament as well as Old, including Jesus’ teaching on marriage, Matthew 19), states clearlz that marriage is between one man and one woman. Hungary has chosen to put this definition into its constitution. It is entitled, as a sovereign nation state, to do so, even if other states and institutions within the EU take a contrary majority view. Some of these distinguish between secular rights and religious sacraments, as I do, and my churches do (Anglican and Baptist). According to their teaching, laws and liturgy, one of the purposes of marriage is procreation. That purpose is clearly not present in a same-sex union and therefore the relationship is fundamentally different in that respect. For some countries, like Hungary, this is a practical issue, as a combination of high emigration and low birthrate leads to a weak demographic structure compared with other countries in the EU with high levels of immigration. It is possible to support a traditional definition of marriage and the family while supporting equal rights for other types of relationships and families. That’s what toleration means. Forcing everyone to be the same is not liberalism – it’s dictatorship or even fascism.
true :)
Also, you have just called me a fascist. Are you aware what fascism is? How is allowing two people of the same sex to get married in a civil ceremony (nobody’s forcing your church to marry anyone, don’t sweat) fascism? Are you aware how serious using that word is?
No
yes! of course!! every human being with the same rights!!
Is this a question?? Really?? Where are u living, guys? XXI century…
OMG, what a nightmare !
no
Of Course, however the EU can not even handle basic issues at the moment.
NO
With time, yes.
It should be left to individual countries to decide when.
I have always felt that gay marriage should be a separate act of union to heterosexual marriage. There should be equal rights given to gay and straight couples who have made a lawful commitment to each other but why can’t one be called marriage and the other something else? They are two clearly different things in terms of the sex of the couples involved so why homogenize the two? The very word ‘gay’ was chosen, by gays, to define their sexuality. Can they not choose a word to define their legal union? And why not have their own words to replace husband and wife?
If the word marriage was confined to heterosexual union then all of the difficulties and prejudices associated with gay marriage would dissipate. The primary objection seems to be the attempt to legislate dogs into cats instead of allowing them to be two different things with an equal right to exist and to have their own ceremonies.
wich same sex between 124 sexes recognized in the world? just stupid question
there are only 2 though
not at all unfortunatelly https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAHvLAJ-5aQ
Хартия търпи всичко! EPISTOLA NON ERUBESCIT!
Хартия търпи всичко! EPISTOLA NON ERUBESCIT!
freaks
Of course. No debate on human rights, and no voting. According to our core principles, people MUST be treated as equals, that’s it. Give all the citizens the same civil rights!
Yes
Yes…But, don´t worry about those things…Europe is falling down, worry about that instead! Do a usefull job telling people how to prepare themselves for what´s coming: the fall of EU and the 3rd world war!
Yes…But, don´t worry about those things…Europe is falling down, worry about that instead! Do a usefull job telling people how to prepare themselves for what´s coming: the fall of EU and the 3rd world war!
Yes, a right to marriage is a basic human right.
If it’s a human right then woman can’t get married? What a sexist!
Nu
Yes. People should just accept the fact that people now do sex for pleasure, not for reproduction.
Without going into more details of your half baked comment- you seem to suffer from illusory superiority, amorality & arguing from ignorance. Not even any great religion concurs with your statement. Sorry, fake “FACTS” from A-Z!
Yes
Yes
I think that when homosexual people choose to use a word not ment for them, psicologically accept that they are different to the others.
So if we pick a different word and attribute all the same rights and obligations this type of commitment, that would be ok for you? It is a semantics problem for you?
we could call it Gayrriage… maybe ppl would accept it…
Wim Jansens Let’s put it this way….if the sea is blue, why call it pink? either is a lie or somebody is got strabism.
Però a veure, qui diu que no és una paraula que no els convé? Ho vols dir de punt de vista catòlic? Pq es veu que al 2017 es pot casar-se per l’estat i fora de l’església eh… no sé si estaves al dia amb això Enric
Casament no és nomes referint-se als catòlics…..a tot el món casament és la unió de un mascle i una femella, però actualment els “progres” , els dels miembros y miembras, han posat de moda aixó de dir “matrimoni” a la unió homosexual, només per tocar els penjolls a la gent normal.
Yes
vi risulta che uomo e donna non si sposa quasi più nessuno perchè la UE ha tolto loro i diritti fondamentali dell’esistenza ? Gli omosessuali si sposano per condividere il destino di quale vita ? Stessi diritti di buttarsi giù dal ponte, cioè nessun diritto sociale per nessuno. Ma quale società si sta costruendo ?
There is that man and woman are not married hardly anyone because the EU has taken away their basic rights of existence? The homosexual get married to share the fate of what life? Same rights to jump off the bridge, ie no social right for anyone. But which company you’re building?
l’amore non ha bisogno di sottoscrivere nessuna carta. Il matrimonio è un contratto per condividere diritti e doveri oltre l’amore I doveri li conosciamo sono tantissimi e i diritti quali sono ? Portando i ragazzi a non avere un futuro perchè la UE ha creato disoccupazione ! Toglie le pensioni ! Se qualcuno ha un bene può fare testamento non ha bisogno di sposarsi. La famiglia è un bene per la società e non è protetta dalla UE, da qualche anno la distrugge . Ci parlate di diritti omosessuali quando non rispettate i diritti fondamentali di nessuno
vi risulta che uomo e donna non si sposa quasi più nessuno perchè la UE ha tolto loro i diritti fondamentali dell’esistenza ? Gli omosessuali si sposano per condividere il destino di quale vita ? Stessi diritti di buttarsi giù dal ponte, cioè nessun diritto sociale per nessuno. Ma quale società si sta costruendo ?
There is that man and woman are not married hardly anyone because the EU has taken away their basic rights of existence? The homosexual get married to share the fate of what life? Same rights to jump off the bridge, ie no social right for anyone. But which company you’re building?
l’amore non ha bisogno di sottoscrivere nessuna carta. Il matrimonio è un contratto per condividere diritti e doveri oltre l’amore I doveri li conosciamo sono tantissimi e i diritti quali sono ? Portando i ragazzi a non avere un futuro perchè la UE ha creato disoccupazione ! Toglie le pensioni ! Se qualcuno ha un bene può fare testamento non ha bisogno di sposarsi. La famiglia è un bene per la società e non è protetta dalla UE, da qualche anno la distrugge . Ci parlate di diritti omosessuali quando non rispettate i diritti fondamentali di nessuno
Of course! It’s ridiculous that we can be married in one country, but the second we cross a border, it no longer counts. The legal repercussions of that alone are a nightmare, plus it messes with one of the fundamental freedoms (movement of people.)
Any European country that fails to legalize same sex marriage cannot at the same time criticize Islam,or any of the backward states like Pakistan or Saudi Arabia.
You are no better then they are.
There is no debat possible, this is nobody concern except the ones getting married, therefore I don’t understand how can be illegal. Maybe on top of this the human rights art. 16 should be changed. It states “1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family.”, maybe it should say “1.2 or more humans of full age ….”
There is no debat possible, this is nobody concern except the ones getting married, therefore I don’t understand how can be illegal. Maybe on top of this the human rights art. 16 should be changed. It states “1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family.”, maybe it should say “1.2 or more humans of full age ….”
Never
Absolutely YES!
No. Same sex marriage is not marriage at all. Marriage can only and is only valid between a man and a woman. The dynamics are not at all equal. Not in any way.
In fact, it is well hidden but, this practice has been quite disastrous for the institution of marriage in its meaning.
http://www.demogr.mpg.de/papers/working/wp-2004-018.pdf
In the UK the laws on marage to make it possible for Same Sex couples had to be changed to allow for infidelity. And numerous other unacceptable requirements for devotion to each other from the participants.
Read this for enlightenment as to how marriage in the UK is no longer for people who are devoted to each other of opposite gender, both physically and spiritually. It is an outrage.
http://www.marilynstowe.co.uk/2014/03/28/six-facts-about-gay-marriage-and-number-four-will-surprise-you/
And here you will read of the Lords who gave good reasons to vote against.it passing into law.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/06/18-arguments-made-against-gay-marriage-house-lords
And last but by no means least, those children who suffer terribly because of such a law having been in the West who tell us they criminalise abuse of children.
https://illinoisfamily.org/homosexuality/same-sex-parenting-is-child-abuse/
Catherine, criminalise abuse of children? That’s been a criminal act here far longer than same sex marriage has been legal. . . . .
As for no longer being for people of opposite gender, that would be the entire point of it surely? To make it for all people who connect to another human physically and spiritually? I might not understand the mindset of those who are attracted to people of the same sex, but that doesn’t mean I, or anyone else has the right to try to prevent them from thinking that way. That kind of thinking is . . . . . Ethically reprehensible at best. And so if they can feel about a person who is the same gender as them the way I can feel about a person of the opposite gender then why should they have less right than me to publicly declare this with a state ceremony? My religion may not support this, and I see that as right also. But why should these people have less state given rights than any other member of our state? Care to give a single rational argument for why? Who do they harm with such an action? It might offend certain bigoted thinking individuals, but it doesn’t harm them. My counterpoint would be that bigoted opinions offend me, but they are still legal. If we banned everything that offended anyone we wouldn’t be allowed to do anything at all.
No of cours
Absolutely No
Of course you’re polish…
You’ve got a problem with that?
Luis Terra having a problem with someone’s national identity makes you a chauvinist.
I don’t agree with Jaroslaw, but trying to point his nationality as the problem is a despicable act. Shame on you Luis Terra. I’m Portuguese too and this is not how we should behave babes.
The Portuguese learnt to smell fascists in the distance. Too much experience with little dictators controlling other people’s lives.
I can’t understand why is this still a matter of debate… are these people consenting adults? Yes? Than why do they need the authorisation of the rest the society? Two consenting adults should always be able to marry if they chose to.
Of course…we already voted to legalize it here in Ireland, we are Europeans not backward Americans (or screwed up Hungarians)
Yet you have some of the most restrictive abortion rights in Europe. Hopefully that can change soon, because that’s pretty backward, in all honesty
i diritti civili , da soli , senza i diritti sociali ed umani “è la vittoria di Pirro ” cioè una battaglia persa
Ivan Burrows If we want to base it on a natural reproductive criteria then sterile people or older people shouldn’t be allowed to marry either. If we want to argue that only natural sexual orientations are allowed then we should actually allow gay marriage as it occurs naturally in the world in many different species.
Ivan Burrows if you equate all of these isms as the same, you have some serious brain damage.
Last time I checked, the EU didn’t exterminate Jews, didn’t build gulags.
Why is Ivan Burrows such an edgy alpha primitive fuck?
They should reduce marriage, not enlarge it
NO!
I can’t understand why is this still a matter of debate… are these people consenting adults? Yes? Than why do they need the authorisation of the rest the society? Two consenting adults should always be able to marry if they chose to.
Because they demand to become parents, enter our kids school class & dictate society. Behavior generates behavior.
We live in the 21st century…yes
Of course. It shouldn’t even be a debate
Andrius Adomaitis A common problem with no adoption; A man has a child with a woman; turns out he is gay and leaves the woman to marry another man. The man gets custody of the child and they have a family, two dads one child for over a decade. Then the natural father dies, and leaves a husband and a child behind. But regardless how close the band between the father and the son, they are not allowed to legally recognise that relationship? Or would you allow an exception to this situation? If so what is the difference with just allowing adoption altogether?
Yezz
yes explain? We are all of this earth and so we as humans are of natural order so our actions however horrific or evil or just gay is of natural order. There are no rules in this life and there should be no self proclaimed judges except for in a court of law. Unless you go by fundamental religious views which have no standing then live and let live.
Ps… not gay just human
It shouldn’t.
It shouldn’t. It is not a “marriage” at all.
then what is it, babe? :))))
Just nothing more than friendship.
Alexander Glogowski we’re not talking about two friends, we’re talking about two people who are in love
In the past the talk was about “friendship” indeed. Poles still live in the 1930s.
What are the fruits of that love? Children? Or HIV, gonorrhea, papilloma, syphilis..?
Never.
Yes. It’s 2017 – how is it still even up for debate?
Leah, how a year on a calendar is an argument in a debate? ;)
Maybe I’m just ahead of my time, but I really strongly believe in equal rights :)
Well, homosexual people have an equal right to marry now — that is, to enter a legal union between a man and a woman called marriage.
So you approve of civil partnerships then? – That’s good, a step in the right direction :)
Ja pierdolę :D
This is not debate topic. Why should anyone ask for permission to love or marry who ever he wants?!
Rajmund Klonowski As a heterosexual man, would you like to marry a man?
Legalise also drugs and pedophily and tell the nation it’s great to do, cause we’re all different.? Slovakia has 20 times lower AIDS % than UK, Spain for example. In last years AIDS started spreading in EU again . Guess why? I am proud of Slovakia , that they didn’t let this happen and even strictened the laws on it here.
Absolutely.
Well, homosexual people have an equal right to marry now — that is, to enter a legal union between a man and a woman called marriage.
Good for you Paule keep it to yourself, don’t promote it. Gay marriage isn’t a basic right let me remind you. Left argues that if we don’t let gays to marry we discriminate them. Well that’s not true by definition, in countries where gay marriage isn’t legal, gays are NOT discriminated. Because gays have the exact same rights as heterosexuals, they don’t have any less rights as they can use the bathroom they want (There is no such thing as gay bathroom or gay sink like there was for african americans in early 20th century), they can do what they want with each other, etc. They live the exact same freedom. When gay marriage is allowed it equals as a ‘normalization and promotion’ of being gay. When debating, you are not talking about your rights, you are talking about everyone’s rights. Because if it is legalized then I get that right too. And as a citizen I am free to say that I don’t want that right!
Yes it should :) any human has the right to marriage if he or she understands what it means for his/her happiness and as a value for the society.
Ja pierdolę :D
Любомир Иванчев The only country that forces the church to perform same-sex religious marriage is, if I am not mistaken, Denmark, because of them being a religious state, there is an oficial state religion and is regulated. It’s just how their constitutionalism works. :)
Rajmund Klonowski Nope, the definition of marriage quote: the legally or formally recognized union of two people as partners in a personal relationship. But historically and in some jurisdictions specifically a union between a man and a woman.
Also it is a good example of how much impact a society has on us. If we were never told by the society and could form our opinion on gay people purely from our observation and self growth, how that would change our thinking?
Surely it’s nobody’s business . If you are against simply don’t marry someone of the same sex .
Since when are we “debating” human rights of any group?
Of course it should be legalised!
Yes, of course!!! 💖
Yes, of course!!!
Τίνα Α.
Τίνα Α.
People..! PLEASE Read YOUR HISTORY..!!!
Gay people is not something new..!!
Just every single time religions and politicians says that is not right and turn people against the own nature..!! Just start Sharing the true history..!!
END OF STORY..!!
Teo Nagy, what a pitty a guy with your chances and talents does not make use of what was given to you. It’s not Putin or Orban giving you the freedom to live and travel where ever you want. It is the european idea of equal chances and freedom besides national boarders to developp your own ideas . Be fair and allow just the same to other people. Think about it and I am counting on your support!
Of course it should be.
Yes. According to our core European principles, people must be treated as equals. There’s no voting or debate regarding human rights. Just grant them already.
non è un diritto umano ti correggo è un diritto civile.
They are treated as equals: any man (regardless of his sexual orientation) can marry a woman and vice versa, what you are talking about is not marriage
Any person should have the right to marry whoever they want. No matter the sex. That’s what i’m talking about – the right to marry. It’s a fundamental human right that should include everyone. This what equality means. It’s simple really
No. We should treat as equal what is equal.
And what’s unequal between you and a person who was born to have a certain sexual orientation ? Just the same random way yours was ‘decided’ that way too ? Makes zero sense dude
I am for the same rights for both unions. Just prefer to have a different name for it, other than “marriage”.
insane
If you don’t like a word don’t use it. It is your problem not other people’s.
Fernanda Parente If we are asked about it´s because one can answer yes or no, don´t you think so?!
Of course it shouldn’t.
It is not that easy to express yourself with a simple YES or NO. Showing respect be in compliance with human rights the answer must be yes, for it is the right of each individual to live the way he desires provided he/she showw respect to human laws and most importantly to NATURE΄S Laws. Yet, i wonder why do we have laws concerning marriage, what is the reason for getting married. Men in particular had many problems and still have if they do not like to get married the woman they have relation with. Why is it necessary to be married and not have free relations. I guess it must the children΄s interest and protection from vulgar human curiosity and brutal behavior that made societies establish laws that you have to be married to have children. If this is the case there is no reason or necessity for homosexual humans to get married. Provisions regarding their legal protection for any aspect of their cohabitation and liberty are enough. If they are for more rights as state benefits or children adoption then it must be condemned and be considered immoral action. I support this stance of mine for i have always condemned the adoption normal couples do. It is correct, it is devine to adopt a child abandoned from parents provided the child at a certain age be informed who his/her parents are. It is inhuman and brutal action not let you know who you are. We all know what happens when children are informed that their parents are not their real parents. What a traumatic experience. One can imagine the trauma of the children when they realize that only women give birth to children or will not be easy to understand why two men should share the same bed. And when they reach the age all children do not accept the wisdom of parents one can realize what the rection of the children. I have red interviews of homosexual parents who say how they achieve the adoption The cost is about 150000 dollars. The case is carried out by lawyers. It is of great importance that the mother need the money so that when the moment to realize, during the pregnancy the crime she is going to commit comes she must not be able to refuse compliance with the agreement and refuse to give the child. I can no find and use proper words to characterisee the attitude of people who are given the right to behave so brutally.. I might aknowledge their right to adopt children provided the child isis old enough to know and understand the rules, to know what will happen in the home, to be reassured that when decides to leave΄΄parents΄΄ will have the right to do so and the parents will be obliged to support the child until a certain age. Respect to human indignity and rights above all.
mi sembra il commento più intelligente che ho letto. Al diritto del bambino nessuno lo ha menzionato
Stefania Portici Stefania ti ringranzio. Sono fermamente convinto che l΄uomo ama solo se stesso. Non e la mia filosofia, ma ΄΄homo homini lupus e un grande verita.Quindi io sostegno, e mi opognio a lidea che lui chi mostra mancanza di rispeto a le leggi della natura non possono pensare che hanno la possabilita di adotare bambini. Scuza mi per i sbagli linguisti.
It is not that easy to express yourself with a simple YES or NO. Showing respect and be in compliance with human rights, the answer must be yes, for it is the right of each individual to live the way he desires provided he/she show respect to human laws and most importantly to NATURE΄S Laws. Yet, i wonder why do we have laws concerning marriage, what is the reason for getting married. Men in particular had many problems and still have if they do not like to get married the woman they have relation with. Why is it necessary to be married and not have free relations. I guess it must have been the children΄s interest and protection from vulgar human curiosity and brutal behavior that made societies establish laws that one must be married to have children. If this is the case there is no reason or necessity for homosexual humans to get married. Provisions regarding their legal protection for any aspect of their cohabitation and liberty, are enough. If they are looking for more rights, as state benefits or children adoption it must be condemned and be considered as an immoral action. I support this stance of mine, for i have always condemned the adoption normal couples do. It is correct, it is devine to adopt a child abandoned from parents, provided the child at a certain age be informed who his/her parents are. It is inhuman and brutal action not let you know who you are and people hide your identity. We all know what happens when children are informed that their parents are not their real parents. What a traumatic experience. Furthermore one can imagine the trauma of the children when they realize that only women give birth to children or will not be easy to understand why two men should share the same bed. And when they reach the age all children do not accept and reject parents΄ ΄΄wisdom΄΄, one can realize what the reαction of the children. I have red interviews of homosexual parents who give details of the procedures and how they achieve to avoid traps and adopt a child The cost is about 150000 dollars. The case is carried out by lawyers. It is of great importance that the mother need the money so that when the moment to realize, during the pregnancy, the crime she is going to commit comes, she must not be able to refuse compliance with the agreement and refuse to give the child. I can not find and use proper words to characterise the attitude of people who are given the right to behave so brutally.I might aknowledge their right to adopt a child provided the child is old enough to be able to know and understand the rules, to know what will happen in the home, to be reassured that when he/she decides to leave΄΄parents΄΄ will have the right to do so, and the parents will be obliged to support the child until a certain age. Respect to human dignity and rights above all.
mi sembra il commento più intelligente che ho letto. Al diritto del bambino nessuno lo ha menzionato
Stefania Portici Stefania ti ringranzio. Sono fermamente convinto che l΄uomo ama solo se stesso. Non e la mia filosofia, ma ΄΄homo homini lupus e un grande verita.Quindi io sostegno, e mi opognio a lidea che lui chi mostra mancanza di rispeto a le leggi della natura non possono pensare che hanno la possabilita di adotare bambini. Scuza mi per i sbagli linguisti.
I can’t understand why is this still a matter of debate… are these people consenting adults? Yes? Than why do they need the authorisation of the rest the society? Two consenting adults should always be able to marry if they chose to.
Unfortunately, some countries around Europe are still very religious and quite homophobic. Europe is not as homogeneous in values and way of thinking as it might seem.
I can not even call them marriages.These sorts of strange human relationships shouldn`t be part of our everyday life nor debated all over the world.
might I respectfuly ask in which way do you feel it affects you? (just curious to listen to your reasons really)
sure, why not? who cares?
Most European countries (if not all) are secular states. I understand no one can force a church, and a religion, to accept religious gay marriages, but civil marriage, in Secular States, should be allowed to any consenting adults. I can’t understand why we need to debate this.
yes
It should!
+ polygamy ! ( 2 is good, but 3 is better :) )
The is nothing “across Europe”. Europe is not a state and it will never be and the EU is a useless, incompetent and corrupt institution that shall be dissolved sooner rather then later.
que eu saiba é um continente
Nem isso é. Geográficamente o correcto seria Eurásia já que a Europa não passa de uma invenção.
por essa lógica todos os países são também uma invenção :)
Exactamente. Todos os países são uma invenção. Mas a Europa é o único continente que não obdece às regras. A lógica também diz que país e continente não são a mesma coisa. Em suma ficamos na mesma. A Europa não é nada.
que eu saiba é um continente
Abnormal behavior of Europe. You will be destroyed one day and soon !!!
Yes, of course
Nem isso é. Geográficamente o correcto seria Eurásia já que a Europa não passa de uma invenção.
Not at all! Fuck the idea
Fernanda Parente If we are asked on the subject it´s because one can answer yes or no, don´t you think so?!
Well, it is sad to see young people with these thoughts. You cant imagine the suffering of the gay community in countries like yours. Be proud of Slovakia but I do not think you represent the European values :)
No!
Of course it should.That’s a given actually, I can’t even begin to understand why I still have to worry about this in 2017
ρε τι διαδηλωση εκανες παλι?
Debating λεει , πες κι εσυ τη γνωμη σου
Βαλε ταξη ρε Μαρω
pizza and burgers is life
Πηνελόπη καταλαβες οι ασυνειδητοι
Γιώργος Χριστόπουλος οχι αυτη τη γνωμη 😂
:(
ρε τι διαδηλωση εκανες παλι?
Debating λεει , πες κι εσυ τη γνωμη σου
Βαλε ταξη ρε Μαρω
Πηνελόπη καταλαβες οι ασυνειδητοι
Γιώργος Χριστόπουλος οχι αυτη τη γνωμη ?
Yes
No…..if they say yes…then should those who does not support it have their right not to support it in anyway? The EU looks after the individual rights of everyone, is tr true? Or they will only be liberal and tolerant with those who are in sync with them? Or if they do not get what they want, those tolerant people will go around rioting and destroying other people’s property?
what? everyone has the right to either support it or not. Then the votes are counted, and if the ones who support are the majority, they win and those who don’t support will always have the right to not support it and speak freely about it. It’s called democracy and freedom of expression
Adrian, how would same sex marriage affect your right to be married? Or how would it affect your right to hold views? Would it affect it in a negative manner?
@Emyr, your definition of freedom to love does not cater to you only. If one group of people can have that..so will another…such as paedos…you are talking about diversity, equality and individual human rights, are you not?
It is not how it would affect my right to my views but rather can those so called liberal and tolerant people allow me to hold my views, usa is a good example.
So yes, it would impact on the whole in a negative manner because anyone with a short circuit fused brain will want their rights to do what they want.
por essa lógica todos os países são também uma invenção :)
Good…please tell those liberal and tolerant people about that. That means to say you agree that a pastor has the right not to solemnised gay marriage and a bakery have the right not to bake a wedding cake for gay marriages, right?
Yes!
Absolutely not,thei live the life an eny case haw they liket ,what for they need marriage ?
So what’s the need for marriage in heterosexual couples, as they also live their lives as they like?
Ok so under a different name you would be perfectly fine with a gay couple commiting to the same right and obligations as a straight couple could do under a legalised marriage. The two situations would have the same legal consequences but the name would be different?
Però a veure, qui diu que no és una paraula que no els convé? Ho vols dir de punt de vista catòlic? Pq es veu que al 2017 es pot casar-se per l’estat i fora de l’església eh… no sé si estaves al dia amb això Enric
What is needed is not “gay marriage” but precisely privacy. But people don’t even seem to want that so I expect they will get the Europe they deserve.
Just sitting back and watching the closet haters and extremists out themselves on here.
Yes
Because they demand to become parents, enter our kids school class & dictate society. Behavior generates behavior.
Extreme…liberalism….will bring about more resurgence of extreme fundamentalism…we should promote what nature intended for us…on the other hand leave a,lone people having private life styles
Nature? There’s +1500 species on earth of which we know they perform homosexual acts for several reasons and there are also some papers out there suggesting some reasons why it’s also common with humans, so not sure what you are seeing as “natural” here
You can always use the unnatural thing called Google scholar on the PCs that grow from trees to look into research
Ask gastroenterologists and urologists how “healthy” this “natural” practice is…
Obviously
Yes, what’s the big deal?
It was mentioned it’s none of the EU’s business and I concur.
What else do THEY want to regulate and decide upon? The EU already fails in their core business of economic transformation. Just a diversion to gain popularity?
If ethics are moral principles influenced and shaped by cultural practice, religion & prevailing social norms- one can imagine if one or more of the (three) principles change – ethics will change with time as well.
If that is for better or worse- unstoppable global evolution in cultural change, norms and progress in medical and science technologies will determine it pace & outcome.
Personally, I am disgusted by the exhibitionist gross & tasteless nature of gay parades. Rub it in- or be decent, private and reserved about it?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3284025/
Exactamente. Todos os países são uma invenção. Mas a Europa é o único continente que não obdece às regras. A lógica também diz que país e continente não são a mesma coisa. Em suma ficamos na mesma. A Europa não é nada.
Eno Anda Kawer I’m not suppressing anyone and neither, in my opinion, is the Hungarian State, which respects gay rights. You know nothing about me, so please don’t assume that you do. I pay taxes in the UK and Hungary, am a British subject living in Hungary, earning a quarter of what I earned in the UK. I have campaigned for gay rights since the 1970s, and have many gay friends, some of whom are married and others who, like me, share the Christian definition of marriage. Like I said, you know nothing!
Campaigning for Gay Rights used to be about campaigning for the right to be recognised as being different, and for a heterogeneous, tolerant society.
Sure.
Great, thanks for that, now you can answer a few questions:
Am I right to believe that it is possible to get married by the state in Hungary, without the blessing of the church? (A man and a woman, I mean)? Am I also right in believing that only a civil service is legally valid in Hungary, and not a religious service on its own, which has no legal value? As God is not “present” in a civil, state service, how is the religious definition of marriage relevant in this case? And does the fact that God is not present in a non-religious marriage (a civil marriage) take away a man and a woman who have got married by the state the right to call it a “marriage”?
Secondly, you talk about pro-creation. If a 65 year old heterosexual couple were to meet, fall in love and get married, logic says (and biology too) that they will be unable to procreate. Does this take away the right to call their union marriage?
You talk about it “being a practical issue”. Hungary just held a racist referendum on refugees as they don’t want immigrants yet complain about a falling birth rate. Are you suggesting that gay people should start entering in unhappy, psychologically damaging heterosexual relationships in order to procreate? Or do you respect people’s right to live their lives in the most natural manner possible?
Ethics never change, it is a constant of time, however, reaching enriched ethical values might require inputing predictive algorithms of possible behavioral relations. Avoiding corruption has been considered ethical. Avoiding killing has been considered ethical. Marriage , by definition, and by virtue of reality, is a consideration of a union between opposite genders in order to possibly yield an offspring, a fundamental feature of biological processes. Same sex unions cannot be placed thereafter under the a nominator of a common realization. But, the right of choosing a lifestyle should remain an objective to parameters regarding once ability to judge reality through his/her own education, cultural, and ethical agenda acquired by the process of educating oneself onto biological principles. It seems that financial benefits regarding marriage constrains could be differentiated based on a predictable behavior of expenditure. Generally, same sex marriage should not fall under jurisdictional values of heterosexuals. Although rights to adoption may be considered equal, same sex union, SSU, should be distinguished from the epistemological and the ontological values of a heterosexual union called marriage!
Hi Rado, – “never” or evolutionary? If ethics is subject to evolution and serves to extend the survival of our species- than it may follow that same sex marriage can & should reduce overpopulation (one of several probabilities)- and save part of global humanity from itself. “Generally” laws are made for all (majority)- otherwise everyone invents its own bubble & own law.
However, if spearheaded by politicians of an “extinct” going EU population- ethics should not (be) change(d) but should remain true to its more traditional norm. One may conclude: promoting “s.s.m.” legislation is another counterproductive policy to reverse Europe’s falling birth rate . It is driven by the system and their liberal lawyers & politicians to satisfy a (liberal?) minority- not the majority- to comply to “modernity” and out of self-interest.
Yesteryear’s norm (ethic) has to give way to new criteria to sync with the latest interpretation of today’s “HR laws”. This can only accelerate the end of a traditional European society, where ethics is/was thought to be static.
http://www.evolutionaryethics.com/index.html
No, why should you interfere?
Liberty is about accepting and/or respecting a choice, but equality of rights due variations of ethical values!
Definitely not!!
Yes.
Very few countries on the planet allow same sex marriage. This list below is a group of them. Meaning, in the democratic sense, the planet is against such a union for whatever reasons. And remember many European countries still do not allow or want SSM. And only one country in the world had a referendum for their people on it. Ireland. Which one does have to question. It seems very odd they oppose abortion but welcome SSM. When something doesn’t make sense it’s usually not true.
https://www.buzzfeed.com/saeedjones/76-countries-where-anti-gay-laws-are-as-bad-as-or-worse-than?utm_term=.plkj0Y1ng#.tswQAxeaD
Then there are the voiceless. Children. The ones we want to deny exist as part of this issue. Politically correct data doesn’t like opposition in any form.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/06/12/study-finds-host-challenges-for-kids-gay-parents.html
And, has anyone correlated the decade when same sex relationships became acceptable? Wasn’t it after the spread of AIDS. Now, how could you be treated for a disease, thought at the time to be spread via homosexuality, when that practice was considered illegal?
Catherine, would you like to collate your thoughts and try to form a rational coherent point? Because this just seems meandering.
Homosexuality means death: any children, any survival of society and nation.
Only heterosexuality can secure this.
So why something, what is so little valuable in biological sense, must be considered as “equal” on the legal level (institution of marriage)? Its make no sense.
Casament no és nomes referint-se als catòlics…..a tot el món casament és la unió de un mascle i una femella, però actualment els “progres” , els dels miembros y miembras, han posat de moda aixó de dir “matrimoni” a la unió homosexual, només per tocar els penjolls a la gent normal.
Yes it should
Wow, lets see who is from the medieval world and who lives in the 21st century…..
@ D. Whittington
The Roman world was nothing but a promoter of homosexuality until they outlawed it as a result of unwanted disease and social one upmanship. A head would be cut off if a man of higher birth allowed a slave to penetrate. Only the higher caste was allowed to be on top.
http://www.ancient-origins.net/ancient-places-europe/roman-law-and-banning-passive-homosexuality-00832
Medieval life was inundated by all kids of sexual prohibition. Not simply homosexuality. And it was carried out as a result of family inheritance. The passing of wealth from one generation to another. It was then decided by wealthier families that sodomy prohibited family inheritance.
http://www.historychannel.com.au/articles/medieval-sex-and-sexuality/
There are much more issues to debate in Europe.
Wow, lwt us see who is a deluded idiot and who has a bit of a common sense…
George Agavriloaiei, nobody died here in Portugal with the gay marriage. Just open your mind and let people be happy.
Paule Egé, we are lucky iberians.
Yes, but no major media coverage. Marriage is a symbolic bond between people and no one should interfere in their choices. At the same time it does not deserve any special attention, because it should be no different than a regular marriage.
Yes, same sex marriage allows people to be free and be who they are. It is exactly the same as a regular marriage. This is the 21st century, people are allowed to marry who the want to marry, people are allowed to be attracted to whoever they want!!
Here are the views of adults raised in SSM households. It is dire and not something that should not be discussed because political correctness doesn’t like to hear the truth.
http://australianmarriage.org/quartet-of-truth-adult-kids-of-gay-parents-speak-out/
I never understood why they want to marry? Why living together as life partners isn’t enough?
Why does anyone want to marry?
Hanne Cokelaere Marriage is something sacred. A woman and a man can reproduce themselves, and marriage has benefits for them. Same sex marriages aren’t sacred, and they cannot reproduce themselves!
Faddi Zsolt What about male-female couples that cannot have children for whatever reason? Sacred or not?
Fabio Van Deun of course sacred! I can tolerate homosexuality when it is out of my sight, out of my yard! When i read such a provocative article, i immediately began to radicalize!
Faddi Zsolt what you consider “sacred” is only on Churches and mosques. Here we are talking about civil marriage, nothing to do with religion.
Faddi Zsolt what you consider “sacred” is only on Churches and mosques. Here we are talking about civil marriage, nothing to do with religion.
Faddi, so you can tolerate me and my husband. Very happy about that, I will tolerate you as well, out of my sight of course.
Faddi, so you can tolerate me and my husband. Very happy about that, I will tolerate you as well, out of my sight of course.
“I can tolerate homosexuality when it is out of my sight”…Funny enough I can’t tolerate bigoted pricks whether in my sight or not. If two men or two women choose to marry, what the hell has it got to do with you?
“I can tolerate homosexuality when it is out of my sight”…Funny enough I can’t tolerate bigoted pricks whether in my sight or not. If two men or two women choose to marry, what the hell has it got to do with you?
Partners for life, one of the two dies and 50% of his fortune goes to nephews and other relatives who had been judge mental and mean to the couple since forever. The other partner left alone, in grief, lost his property amongst all… let someone else judge them, the sacredness of marriage is about love, not reproduction.. reproduction has to do with animal instinct and continuation of the species.. get your story straight and let people do what they want and need, they do not harm you in any way..
Dora Sofroniadou this philosophy leads to extinction. Human reproduction isn’t just animal instinct, it is the meaning (one of) of existence. By the way, i mentioned above, that i don’t have anything against them to live together or to love each other…
I never understood why people feed these discussions!
Lol, you never understood why fellow human beings want the same rights and protections as you? I think that’s called being a sociopath
Lol, you never understood why fellow human beings want the same rights and protections as you? I think that’s called being a sociopath
Lol, you never understood why fellow human beings want the same rights and protections as you? I think that’s called being a sociopath
Hear hear
Hear hear
Hear hear
Nice faddi took the lowest animal instic and presented it as the meaning of everything… well here goes all the philosophy of humans being better than other animals
Faddi Zsolt marriage is a legal contract, giving civil protection in many aspects. You mixing religion with civil rights
Faddi Zsolt we are 7 BILLION living in this planet. Are you really concerned about Human reproduction?!
First: I’m not religious. Second: I answered on a question. Third: I and another 6.99 billion people are against same sex marriage, especially against male-male marriage. I don’t think that we can continue with argumentation, because I am against it. It is only my opinion.
I never understood why they want to marry? Why living together as life partners isn’t enough?
Parisa Shirazi interesting re: your diss last year
ohh, thanks Rach! :)
Not for it but it’s better to recognize those communities so they won’t hide from the entire society and hurt people or themselves by using different-sex partners for having children or have heavier psychological issues. Alternative words to marriage should be ok.
Is definattely a way to help these people feel at home but just take all these people saying no in the commends
yeah, good luck pulling this one in eastern europe :))))))
Unfortunately..
Daniel Tufeanu sry mate, i’m actually happy it happens like that… that’s why i laughed in the first comment :)))) out of my sight out of my mind… cand vad cum isi dau limbi in public si se uita zeflemitor in jur sa vada reactii , aia nu mai e de tolerat… they’re just asking for it…
Daniel Tufeanu sry mate, i’m actually happy it happens like that… that’s why i laughed in the first comment :)))) out of my sight out of my mind… cand vad cum isi dau limbi in public si se uita zeflemitor in jur sa vada reactii , aia nu mai e de tolerat… they’re just asking for it…
Daniel Tufeanu sry mate, i’m actually happy it happens like that… that’s why i laughed in the first comment :)))) out of my sight out of my mind… cand vad cum isi dau limbi in public si se uita zeflemitor in jur sa vada reactii , aia nu mai e de tolerat… they’re just asking for it…
ΝΟ
ΝΟ
ΝΟ
You already have gay marriage in Greece. Get over, you have serious things to think about.
Yes
Yes
No.
No.
James Murphay just fuck off simply
Yes, of course. It should be a civil right equal for all, no matter the religion, sexual orientation or any other criteria. I have the freedom to choose the person I marry and should be the same for everyone.
I m with you! 👍🏻
Me too
Me too
Me too
No ,never ,hawever thei live haw thei like ,the next step is to recive the aceptacion of oll the society and thei want to adopt children like a normal family is a big mistake to go in this direccion.
Lmao your written english is funny😂😂
Grow up and mind your own business. Normal is where u can find love, definitely not in your hateful opinions.
Btw, i’m straight
I m with you! ??
No!
Νο
Νο
NO !!!!!!!
NO !!!!!!!
Amazing how in the 21st century still people saying no this, of all the places, in Europe. Why does it bother some people so much? Don t be ridiculous, let them marry and adopt! Fucking losers!!
Why not?
Not yet?
Absolutely NOT.
why?
why?
I don’t think she has a reason beyond hatred
I don’t think she has a reason beyond hatred
I don’t think she has a reason beyond hatred
Richard W. Jacquard I do have, and many!! But first I want to say that i’m not homophobic! I respect them and what they want, I simply do not believe in it! And I have all the rights to think as I want to, and I will not agree for them to get married in church, it is unacceptable! I believe in God and i’ve been raised and I have proven, myself, that there is only one love, the one between a man and a woman! There is brotherly love between brothers and sisters or even friends, and the friendly love between friends, but i will never believe that exists love between a man and another man! It can be attraction or something in their head making them believe it’s the same love of a man and a woman but no, it isn’t! And I repeat, everybody’s free to do and to be with whoever they want, but marriage is too much, it is against nature.
Lmao your written english is funny??
If you see the map, it’s still funny seeing how western member states are more advanced and developed in social rights. Eastern Europe should take advantage of this to evolve accordingly, so I don’t get the point of anchoring themselves in the past and against human rights!
Evolve like Germany, Sweden and France… Thanks but no thanks. We will just stay as “backwards” Eastern Europeans to the rest of Europe and nosy outsiders…each nation can decide what’s best for their nation.
What’s wrong with the German, Swedish and French evolutions? I find in those member states really developed societies that, by the way, are very advanced in diversity, inclusion and equality as well as follow the European Chart of Human Rights. If you are talking about following Russia as a model, I hope you’re just representing a minority among Eastern Europeans!
Besides, since the Treaty of Lisbon, Member States pulled more than 65% of sovereignty into the EU, so technically they are not nations anymore – only from a cultural and historical point of view. So we discuss in Brussels and agree on policies instead of making wars… but we’re so connected that if a woman married another woman in Portugal or the Netherlands, they should have the same social rights in Poland and in Rumania!
Donika Pashoja Agree! Tired of this so fake tolerance all around and the normal ordinary people are the one to be discriminated! You Pau Chi stay away from Eastern Europe if you don’t like it. We are not keen you to like us!
If you see the map, it’s still funny seeing how western member states are more advanced and developed in social rights. Eastern Europe should take advantage of this to evolve accordingly, so I don’t get the point of anchoring themselves in the past and against human rights!
Absolutely yes!
Absolutely yes!
Of course It should but not the adoptions in any other matter it’s a civil right for everyone to live there lives as they wish
I’m interested in the dichotomy your answer presents, why not adoption? Are you suggesting same-sex parents are worse than opposite sex parents?
I’m interested in the dichotomy your answer presents, why not adoption? Are you suggesting same-sex parents are worse than opposite sex parents?
I’m interested in the dichotomy your answer presents, why not adoption? Are you suggesting same-sex parents are worse than opposite sex parents?
Obviously she means that a baby needs a mother figure,and taking that away from him it’s a criminal act,not talking about the kids who lost their parents ofcourse but to deprive a kid a mother is just cruel, and anw the kid is entitled to a mother and a father anything depreived by another human being is a criminal offence and should stay that way..Don’t get me wrong about opposite sex i’m not a racist or anything but i believe this is the natural way..
YES
No
Let the migrants in, they will solve this problem for the developed west Europe.
Let the migrants in, they will solve this problem for the developed west Europe.
Let the migrants in, they will solve this problem for the developed west Europe.
I love how all the homophobic bigots respond NO! And when questioned have no argument or defense beyond silence or #becauseprejudice
Get with the program and realise you don’t have the right to oppress people. And no, equal marriage at a civic level does not remove your religious freedom one iota, in fact people with different views living the life they were born to, essentially coexisting actually enhances and protects everyone’s rights.
I love how all the homophobic bigots respond NO! And when questioned have no argument or defense beyond silence or #becauseprejudice
Get with the program and realise you don’t have the right to oppress people. And no, equal marriage at a civic level does not remove your religious freedom one iota, in fact people with different views living the life they were born to, essentially coexisting actually enhances and protects everyone’s rights.
I love how all the homophobic bigots respond NO! And when questioned have no argument or defense beyond silence or #becauseprejudice
Get with the program and realise you don’t have the right to oppress people. And no, equal marriage at a civic level does not remove your religious freedom one iota, in fact people with different views living the life they were born to, essentially coexisting actually enhances and protects everyone’s rights.
Yes!
Faddi Zsolt Imagine if a gay would flirt with you lol
I’m straight but apart that they have they own life and we shouldn’t interfere there’s actually some benefits there for all.
Just gonna mention two : Adoption, and the second as harsh as it may be refering to reproduction … the world is already overpopulated.
Yes
DEFINITELY YES! Every person in Europe are equal.
Yes. Why not?
Marriage is not just two people sharing expenses and the same house.It’s an emotional, spiritual and sexual bond between man and woman in order to give birth to children and raise a family. That is why there are legal implications regarding a marriage aiming at protecting the mother and the child. Same sex couples are just two persons who share a distorted sexual behaviour and it’s their right if this what they want. However they cannot be defined as husband and wife because they cannot fullfil such a definition
So basically you´re saying that your views are the only views that are right, based on judgements, and that you want to impose them to all of us. I do believe in a society to defend equality, equity and same access to human rights; instead of a society that defends a biased homophobic speech. Again, my hope is you represent very few Europeans.
Let’s change the definition then and leave bigotry behind. You know, evolve…
You don’t change the rules, Machado, simply because you don’t like them. It doesn’t really work this way…
No, No, No and again NO!!!
If you don’t like gay marriage, don’t marry a man? Seems like the simple solution to me.
Of course it should. And if you don’t want to marry a man, marry a woman just like vegetarians should not be made to eat meat. Now can I get an amen in here?
Gotta admire that man’s coherent argument thought ?
Gotta admire that man’s coherent argument though ?
Repeating the word “no” doesn’t make your argument any more convincing. Marriage may historically belong in a religious context, but this doesn’t mean that religion owns the definition of marriage; inherently, the core meaning of marriage has nothing whatsoever to do with “god” or religion, and is simply the recognition of a loyal, loving, committed union between two people. It has long since primarily become a ceremony legally recognising love, and the sex/gender of the two individuals has become irrelevant anyway; if marriage is about the starting of a family, then why do we allow infertile heterosexual couples, or heterosexual couples too old to have children, or heterosexual couples who have no intention of having children, to get married? The “traditional definition” of marriage has ALREADY changed, and allowing gay couples the same rights as straight couples, will not affect anything about any existing or future heterosexual marriage. Straight people whining about the “sanctity” of marriage being under threat are like petulant children at a party refusing to allow other children to sit at their table even though there’s plenty of seats to spare.
Yes, or at least marriages in one EU member should be recognized in all.
A better option should be that the state stop managing private contracts such as this one. There is strictly no need for that if both persons are adults, free and responsible.
Christians could reclaim their marriage institutions and gay could develop their own ones.
No, I consider this people ill, they have a pathological psychiatric disorder and they need to be helped, not accepted as having a normal human behavior.
You can help them by shutting the fuck up
You are literally medieval. This is what people in the 15th century believed told by the church.
Sure, the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder back in ’73. After 23 years in which it had been listed as a mental disorder. Why was it decided, at that particular point in time, that it was not pathological? Because gay activists threats and intimidation accomplished what discussion could not?
There’s no medical consensus that homosexuality is a “normal” condition, or a normal ‘lifestyle variation’ on a par with being introverted versus extroverted. But true, neither would I regard homosexuality to be a psychopathology in the same sense as schizophrenia or phobic disorders.
There is no medical consensus? Where do you live? They are not ill.
Because you said so? It’s not about taking sides, it’s about understanding these phenomena that are not fully understood.
So why do you take sides? you call them ill and now you claim that its not fully understood? i also never heard that extrovert cant marry an introvert? i think you dont understand the concept of marriage in the modern world and generally. Marriage is a cultural concept, not connected with medical conditions
Marriage may historically belong in a religious context, but this doesn’t mean that religion owns the definition of marriage; inherently, the core meaning of marriage has nothing whatsoever to do with “god” or religion, and is simply the recognition of a loyal, loving, committed union between two people. It has long since primarily become a ceremony legally recognising love, and the sex/gender of the two individuals has become irrelevant anyway; if marriage is about the starting of a family, then why do we allow infertile heterosexual couples, or heterosexual couples too old to have children, or heterosexual couples who have no intention of having children, to get married? The “traditional definition” of marriage has ALREADY changed, and allowing gay couples the same rights as straight couples, will not affect anything about any existing or future heterosexual marriage. Straight people whining about the “sanctity” of marriage being under threat are like petulant children at a party refusing to allow other children to sit at their table even though there’s plenty of seats to spare.
Homosexuality occurs naturally amongst a minority of the human population worldwide, and even amongst many animal species. The definition of “illness” can only apply to a condition that is in some way harmful or detrimental to an individual’s rational perception of reality or their psychological or physical well-being – but the only harm that occurs from people being gay is the physical abuse/violence they suffer from homophobia, which is external to their sexual nature. In an overpopulated world, there is nothing “ill” about homosexuality – it is a harmless minority sexuality that can exist harmoniously alongside heterosexuality, and even helps ease the rise of unsustainable population levels. I’m gay, and there’s nothing whatsoever that suggests I’m ill in any way.
It is as natural as being heterosexual… http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html
I stated my own opinion based on what information I gathered on the subject. Then I made the observation that the problem is more complex and there’s no consensus yet, I accept the existence of other opinions and I consider the debate is still open on the subject. But I didn’t do judgement on you or others who doesn’t embrace my views. It’s not about faith, or about what we want to believe. And it’s not about feelings. You’re entitled to your opinion and I will listen to your arguments, but “it’s obvious” is not enough.
Andreia Teixeira Are you animal! OK then, lets equate the homosexual to the animals and then just stop the debate! It works fine for me!!!
Bobi Dochev is right, let’s extend marriage to zoophiles and pedophiles too. Goats would make especially fine brides for some, I think. And it doesn’t affect me directly, right? So why not? :D
Róbert Bogdán please do a more profund research before claiming such dangerous, unethical and completely non european statements…
Simon Schlegel I was sarcastic, evidently. Since when is dangerous and non european to have a moral compass? To have conservative set of values and objectives? Anybody who is not convinced by now that progressive values are superior then the conservative ones, the ones which made our society as prosperous as it is today, I might add, should be ostracized? I thought social progressivism meant to be tolerant. But all I can see from the liberal left is argumentum ad hominem, bullying and name-calling.
Nelson GI thanks man, you just made my point.
Róbert you strike me as a closet case, maybe that’s where all the hatred comes from
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/hide-and-seek/201509/when-homosexuality-stopped-being-mental-disorder
Yes, civil rights should be the same across the Union.
Should we allow the paedophilia? There are already people who what that and fight for their “social rights” to have sex with infants. Do you want some bloody old bastard to have sex with your child – according to you he has social rights as well !!!
Are you talking about Catholic Church priests? No, I think they are not all paedophiles, only some of them. And even those have civil rights.
No way. No role for bureaucrats in brussels to enforce moral standards.
Bureaucrats in Brussels? No, civil rights are for the people. Churches, fascists and far-right politicians are trying to impose moral standards. When you allow same-sex marriages you are giving rights, but no one is forced to marry, no one is imposing moral standards. While, when you forbid same-sex marriages, you are imposing your morality and discriminating your fellow citizens.
No. It is a horrible lifestyle that brings no happiness and offends God.
God don’t exist!
And if exist have better things to be offend about that the way of adults choice to live their lifes.
Have you ever talked with him?
To them it bring happiness, and God can defend itself if need ;)
P.S. Homosexuality isn’t “lifestyle”. Rock and roll or bicycling is lifestyle. Homosexuality isn’t choice. Are you choice your sexual orientation?
Didn’t God say love is what really matters?
even if he exists, wouldnt it be his fault to begin with and how come he failed in so many species…
Yes, ok …and how about same wage, while you re at it…
No.It is disguisting! It is against God. One man and one woman! Stop with these liberal points that lead nowhere.
God doesn’t care, he’s too busy playing candy crush sweety.
God is against nature.
Nonsense! When we reject Him, He reject us!
You should read again the sacred books. God is with the poor, the offended ones. In that case he would be with the ones others like you reject… the Gay community.
Call it “registered partnership” and not marriage and I think it would be much better tolerated/accepted.
Fuck you and your “tolerance” in your term’s.
If they have the same rights as heterosexual couples so why they bother by the name of the union :p
Because that would remove the excuse for resistance by traditionalists, who consider gay marriage a degradation of the institution of marriage. You cannot just go and oppress your views on more traditional societies. Calling it something else would be a very reasonable compromise. The gay community usually wants the legal status of marriage, they could have it without calling it a marriage.
Marriage by tradition is the foundation of a new family that will produce offspring.
Nope.
Yes, that shouldn’t even be a question in 2017, is a question of basic civil and human rights.
Yes. Without any doubt.
“If you hate gays, don’t marry a gay person” – (c) Jim Jefferies
Civil unions should be allowed for heterosexual couples and marriage should be left as a Church institution similarly as baptism or confirmation.
Sure, the EU must be a push for progress wherever it is lacking
They did it in America. It never stops at marriage. It turns into a minority that can’t be ignored, ever.
Yes but should be step-by-step for each individual country.
Multiple – wife marriages have actual traditions and they are illegal. So this should be legalised first begore sex-driven marriage types are discussed
Traditions aren’t always something well thought and positive. Polygamy should never be legal, a stable society is based on the marriage between one man and one woman.
it would be good but i think you need to give people time, sometimes pushing something like this creates a nasty backlash, so sometimes you need to give countries time to get used to it, others adapt much more quickly so maybe stagger it. Personally i think it would be great but realistically it could if a country or society is not ready, create very nasy backlashes.
Yes, same sex marriage should be put on the same basis as marriage in Europe. That would annoy USA, Russia and Middle East.
Even refugees will return to their countries LOL
EU should not force laws on its members. That would be tyranny. I stand for equal rights. Forcing laws will put a final nail in the coffin of EU.
Yes definitely. Let those people who think it’s against God know that religion has nothing to do with the state. Let those people who think they can make a distinction between other people based on a preference that doesn’t affect their lives in any way and can’t be helped know that they’re the unwanted ones. Let anyone living or moving within your EU borders know they are safe if LGBT+, make sure people in Europe or moving there know they may not like LGBT+ but they WILL respect their rights.
Civil marriages …Yes. But not religeous marriages !
Religious marriage is no law and can not be adapted like law. That’s why it is not science!
It’s ok, but wouldn’t allow kids adoption
Why? It’s legal for a guy (and a woman of course) to leave a child, never see them again, let them grow up with one parent or no parent and definitely be negatively impacted but it’s for example not okay for two loving mothers to care for a child instead. Fine. Then there should be a law that forbids people to leave their children (last statement is sarcasm)
Kids need mother and father !
And it’s wrong to say “when father or mother to leave…”
It means that gay community doesn’t have problems!!!
You want to say that gay people get separated!!?
It depends on people, civil rights are important and we are all equal, but we need to look at the national tradition of each member state. Registrated partnership would be accepted, but marriage in Church should be left for heterosexual ,because it is an old tradition
Live and let live. Its that easy. Just try it … :-)
Absolutely!
I think NO ,but that is just my opinion :)
.
If marriage is a union in the eyes of god and homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of god how can it be acceptable ?
Ps. before the haters start with their abuse please note I am an atheist.
Marriage is a contract
Ricardo Moreira Rodrigues
You are incorrect.
Marriage is a religious union, it is a ‘ritually’ recognized union of faith, the same faith that condemns homosexuals to eternal hell & damnation.
A civil partnership is a ‘contract’.
It is all words… but marriage is a contract. Call it what you want and celebrate it in whatever way you want. It is still a contract.
Nando Aidos .
You can call it what you want but the reality ‘marriage’ is a religious event, why would someone go through a religious ritual knowing that religion condemns them ?
He is not incorrect, you are incorrect. A marriage is a contract, you uneducated Brexit supporter.
Rodrigo Salgado de Oliveira
lol, there is the hate I was talking about from pro EU nut jobs.
Thanks for that comrade lol
http://www.times-news.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/marriage-a-religious-term-before-it-was-a-legal-term/article_49e0eec1-a33f-5af7-827d-85a2d641207c.html
Marriage is a contract. Nothing to do with gods.
Does it matter?
James Eckford
It does if you are a Christian and if you believe ‘Europe’ is a Christian continent.
Yes. No one but yourself should concern about your own wedding. It’s your liberty to choose who you marry and who you want to spend your life with. It’s not damaging anyone or anything. It’s not a threat to the state, to the people, to nature, to economics, to religion, to nothing. Pure liberty.
Yes. It does not bother me if one belives in invisable Granddad sitting on clouds, why should real love bother me.
shure, why not? who cares what people doing with each other if they want do it?
This is the real problem. When you use something as gay marriages to justify doing this to generations to come….. But ultimately, if 2 adults want to be together they can be. There is no need for anybody else to dictate to anybody what they can do as long that doesn’t come at expense of someone else.
https://www.facebook.com/jookosnews/videos/10154453885523277/
We must work a lot more in much more important affaires in Europe. We are near a war in the balcans, GB Just left EU, much more to come with elections.
It seems that either the EU will fall apart or its families…
This is exactly why people stop supporting the EU. There is absolutely no added value in trying to interfere with the democratic processes on this that are solidly based in the countries. The EU has to focus on subjects where synergies exist, competition erodes or working together strengthens everyone. Defence, border protection, economic distortions, international policy, food protection,.. Not mariage laws.
Human rights.
No way. No need for european union to intervene.
Tell that to all the gay couples in countries where they can’t get married.
yeah it should
I’d say yes, but that would be interfering with national options. Each nation should decide for themselves.
Yes, let the EU dig its own grave. Then “we” can all lie down in it together and go to sleep. Silly.
The EU has nothing to do with it, and each member state should decide for itself what works best for its people.
It does have something to do with it. Let’s say Tony and John got married in the Netherlands and then move to Poland, are they suddenly no longer considered married then?
Timothy Roes, if they decide to move to Poland, they have to take Polish laws into account when they make that decision. This goes for marriage laws, fiscal system, social security, healthcare system, and so on. What the EU should and does establish is their right to move to Poland.
Filipe Nunes maravilha, criar um problema jurídico.
I don’t care so much about the sex of those committing to live and share some portion of life together, but how about being able to marry more than one person anyway? Serial monogamy is popular enough, I’d introduce flexibility for overlaps.
Of course. It’s ridiculous that an LGBT+ couple goes from legally together to single by crossing a practically non-existent border. Their rights (e.g. spousal visit in hospital, any parental rights to the children they might have adopted, etc, etc.) Vanish. There are those who say “well, just don’t go where you don’t have the same rights” – that is in direct violation of the freedom of movement of people, which is one of the backbones of the EU.
It shouldn’t even debatable, people. Not within the EU as a body, or any member-state. IT IS UNDOUBTEDLY A “YES”.
Yes. Let’s get it over with.
I don’t even get why this is even still debatable. Of course it should.
Each country decision, not EU
Why should same-sex marriage be forbidden?
This is the better question.
Because forbidding is fun. Makes you feel important.
btw: WHY IS MARRIGE A PRIVILAGE? Why do married people get benefits?
NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS PROMOTES THE DEVIL AND DESTROYS THE NATURAL STRUCTURE OF THE FAMILY! GOD CREATED ADAM AND EVE NOT ADAM AND STEVE! SIMPLE!
You have an Anarchist picture as your profile picture and clearly you do not know what it means you moron…
Guilherme Ribeiro De Oliveira Anarchism doesn’t promote gay people, moron…! Read Mikhali Bakhuini!
Should we be asking these kind of questions in 2017?
Depends on the country.
If by marriage are getting civil and low benefits yes
Yes, absolutely
I think that State and Society interfere with individuals’ rights if and only if this interference is beneficial for such wider entities as the State and Society. So the State provides individuals with rights such as the right to live(the State needs people),the right to have property(the State needs taxes) ,the right to marry(the State needs more people to secure its future).So for the purposes of State and Society, marriage among people is meaningful when it follows the laws of human reproduction.
No absolutely. Especially the “rights” upon children. They are not pets.
Όχι
It should. Immediately.
You can ask him to marry you anyway ;)
It is a conduct I cannot promote. I can sustain freedom of speech and opinion, the protection of the vulnerable, a better life for the people with disabilities, anything that need human compassion but whatever it will be decided I can’t do anything to stop this LGBT agenda; the only thing I can do is to sustain my principles. What other people do is their bussines not mine.
Should marriages with multiple partners be legalized across Europe?
simply NO
How about fix the Euro’s flawed design first and stop smoking the Austerity crackpipe second? Gay and straight people will thank you for both.
why this is necessary?!
Because it is human right to be with the one you want ;) … and it is normal and accepted in the European countries
No. Each country must decide.
Let s encourage the traditional family as Europe is already depopulated. Young generations should keep up with the demographics
Should Debating Europe Stop Asking for the Obvious?
Of course, yes
Europe is dying slowly…and now its worried about same sex marriage..? WTF… no wonder its languishing…
I’m straight, and I have nothing against same-sex marriages, good if they can be happy and, in any case, their personal lives and sexual-orientation it’s their business, not mine.
Same sex married: FORBIDDEN!!!!!!! NEVER!!!!!
WE WAZ SOSHUL DEMOKRATS , Europe needs less Poz ,not more , Based Slavs are happy not to have GRIDS and bug chasing ,most gays don’t marry ,they are degenerate
Why a minority of people can’t enjoy the same rights as everyone else !
Without any doubt.
If you do it by force, you will lose. EU is becoming tyranny. Use force and you fall appart
You are right… the right strategies must be applied in every case in order to get a natural social acceptance as opposed to forcing it.
ensuring the rights of a minority is not a tyranny.
Sexual orientation is not ethnic group. Equal rights are important, but the issue here is definition and semantics. This can be overcome, but if you try force you will get backlash. Also using force is undemocratic. This will break EU.
I wish all countries could enforce such tyranny as ensuring basic human rights…
Depends what constitutes as human rights. Being forced at something can be breach of rights. Just a reminder that Saudi Arabia is on woman rights comitee, and EU is fine with it. How about starting to condemn legal murder of gays and atheists and christian and jews in certain countries EU trades with.
Elisa Malva EU does not have Water as human right. WATER. Think about that.
You ask same question again and again, I’ll give same answer again and again – NO, NO, NO!
First we should remember that PACE accept the position that each country should decide on its own for this question, taking in mind what is the best for the children – but this is the least important here.
The desire for own family and rising of children is natural and even the gay-couples could have it, but this issue should be looked from the position will it be in the best interest of the child, not from the position of the gay-couples. Their will is totally irrelevant here!
And I truly believe that it is not in favour of the child, to be adopted and raised in homosexual marriage and there are plenty of reasons why – not only my common sense, but the science and researches show it. (Unfortunately it is hard to be found in the media, because the gay “issue” is 100% media propaganda and only the “right political line” is allowed).
Each child has the right to grow up in a good, healthy environment, which gives it the freedom to self-determine as a person, to have the possibility to grow in heterosexual environment where it can observe both genders and build its own conception of right and wrong. Only when it reaches 18 years and the society accept it as “Free” and “conscious” person it can do the sexual choice.
It’s a fact that homosexual marriage can’t give the possibility to observe the other gender – it is one sided view. Another fact 26% of the 12 years old children are insecure in its sexual orientation, but only 2-3% of adults is homosexual. This shows that almost all of the insecure children will grow as heterosexual, but only if they are not put under the influence of the gay-couples or sexual violence.
There is more, the attitudes of the homosexual part of society, where homosexuality and pedophilia are largely overlapping, are really disturbing. If we look back at the history, the New York gay organization Cay Activist Alliance, established in 1969, since the first day of its existence, insist the age limits which prohibit adults from having sex with children to be dropped.
The gay men are heavily attracted to young boys, regarding some researches over 80% of the interviewed admit they had sexual act with boys under 15 years and younger. Research made over 260 pedophiles convicted of crimes against children, show that from the all three categories – hetero, bisexual and homo way over 40% are homosexual and bisexual, having in mind the fact that just about 3% of the population is homo and bi we end up with the conclusion that there is extremely high percentage a tendency to pedophilia among them.
Even if we assume that for this children, who would be adopted by gay-couple, have no potential risk from aggression, violence or seduction it is still questionable if this adoption is “In the best interest of the child” and how secure for the child us the environment, when the partners are not only from same sex but also very inconsistent.
The statistic shows the homosexual relationships are indiscipline. A research over the “male couples” shows that only 0.5% of the homosexual had no sexual contact with others except with their partner. However even this couples had partnership relation with the same partner for less than 5 years. ALL THE REST – 99.5% admit that during their relationships they had sex with other partners, as the number of the partners’ varies between 100/500 to a 1000!!! Other researches show that the average duration of the homosexual relationship between gays, who live together is between 2 and 3 years.
With such facts can we have any guarantee that the child will not be relinquished at the breakdown of apparently fragile gay relationships, even if everything else is “normal”? If the child grows up with parent, who changes his partners often then what kind of role model will it gave? How we can guarantee the safety of this child? Even if his adoptive parent take care, what are the guarantees that none of the different partners he has will not attempt to seduce or force the child?
The risk for the emotional, psychic and even physical health of a child raised under such conditions is unduly high. This is amplified for a child raised in state institution before the adoption.
That is why my strong position is AGAINST THE ADOPTION OF CHILDREN IN GAY-MARRIAGES!
THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD!
This should be the only motive, not the gay “rights”!
Having said all that as a base on my personal view I’ll go one step further – all in all pederast and LGBT are just sick bastards and need serious medical attention. Homosexuality isn’t natural instinct and I can’t find a single reason why we should tolerate it. Humans are supposedly thinking creatures, which are able to form society – the ability of making society is the ability to control our mind and actions. If somebody cant, why should be assigned to the human race and have the same rights?!
This should be more then enough reasons to say NO,NO,NO!!!
sure, why not??
Nope. A lot of Europeans are conservatives. And when today’s progressive millennials will reach 40, their views will change too. Well, some will remain infantile, I guess.
Don’t count on it, buddy.
Homosexuality is not a trend. It exists since humankind exists. The difference is that people nowadays feel more at ease to express who they really are.
No, we more likely will remain aware that we occupy an unimaginably tiny point on a speck of dust lost in the middle of an incomprehensibly large cosmos and find more dignified pursuits than jumping about and hooting like excitable chimpanzees over some meaningless and arbitrary cultural taboo against same sex attraction.
Ah, I see. Protecting conservative feelings trumps legal equality. Makes perfect sense pally!
Louis Jeffs the question is, does it do good ? Not does it feel good. Feelings are irrelevant. We can have all the sympathy and understanding for all the diverse forms of sexuality, but still, accepting them as the new norm, I can’t see how this would be beneficial to a society, in the long run. It’s one thing to accept that nobody is pure and perfect, to be tolerant ’cause we all are sinners, trying to live a moral life, and a whole lot of another to legalize the sin. And I’m not a religious nut-job, I just value the christian moral code.
Infantile. Right. How do you get to decide who is right and who is not buddy? If according to your view, everyone who doesn’t agree with you is wrong or “infantile”, that means you asume you are always right. But if by any chance you happen to not be right, then you wouldn’t know and so you would stay mistaken forever. Think about it. You can thank me later.
Marcos Markko that’s what debates are for, we share our views, seeing things from different angles could bring us closer to the right answer. Convincing others doesn’t happen in an instant, we tend to stick to our principles even when others have better arguments. But progress is made only when conflicting views are discussed, when everybody are clapping hands and nodding, things are stalling.
Róbert Bogdán so, do you also stone people for working on Saturday or give women to be raped? because this is the christian moral code. No?
You don’t need to convince others. When the Bill of Rights was signed in the US the vast majority of white people opposed it as they opposed MLK and the movement of colored people. Should their feelings triumph over other people’s rights? Absolutely not.
Yes, of course the question is, does it do good? And of course the answer is yes, it does. Of course it is beneficial to a society, in the long run, for more couples in love to marry each other and commit to caring for each other for life, in sickness and in health and so on, and for their commitments to be respected by society. People committed to taking care of each other is what society is all about. And when those couples are less likely to accidentally worsen the overpopulation problem by having unwanted babies they’re not well prepared to raise, so much the better.
What can you possibly worry would be *bad* about same-sex marriage? You can’t stand the idea of children growing up without same-sex parents? First of all, large numbers of couples don’t have children at all, so no children will have to be raised them, so surely you must agree that there’s no reason to discriminate against those couples. Second, children are regularly raised by different numbers and genders of parents for a wide variety of reasons, and if you haven’t met anyone who was raised by same-sex parents, you need to get out more often and start talking to more people, because then you’d find out for yourself that same-sex couples make very good parents; but in the meantime, you can also read plenty of research studies on the topic, which also consistently find that same-sex couples make very good parents. Third, if you’re still so terribly worried about children growing up without a parent of one gender or another, try doing something useful to actually alleviate the problem, rather than just discriminating against those children’s families: for example, set up services to match lesbian and gay couples who want to parent together so both couples can be involved in caring for the child. And how about this: encourage grandparents and other extended-family members to show proper respect for same-sex marriages so they can get along well with the same-sex parents in their families and be a welcome part of the lives of those children. Encouraging people to get along and respect each other benefits society. Encouraging people to discriminate and reject one another over the gender of their spouses does not.
Spyros Kouvoussis chill man, why are you so angry? And where exactly says in the Bible that Christians should stone people or rape women? Are you sure you’re talking about the Christian moral code??? And the American Bill of Rights was against the wish of the white people? In what alternate reality? Actually the Founding Fathers were pretty religious, mostly protestants. The Republican Party (conservatives) was the party of abolition of slavery. Abraham Lincoln was a Republican president. And the Civil Rights final law passed with the votes of Republicans and Northern Democrats, in Congress. Check your sources.
Róbert Bogdán last time I checked most democracies in Europe are secular, there’s a separation of church and state. So you should keep your Christian moral code to yourself and out of civil society where it does not belong, especially if it’s serves the purpose of influencing legislation that affects people that can’t care less about your religion. It’s funny that you mention America’s founding fathers that were “pretty religious”, and then again 50% of them were slave owners…
And your first comment is so patronising… As if all millions of millennial will have a revelation when they turn 40 and realise how wrong they were all their lifes with their “liberal” values. Please….
The Republican Party wanted to achieve the gradual extinction of slavery by market forces, for its members believed that free labour was superior to slave labour.
Of course democracies are secular, nobody talks here about religious fundamentalism. But the core values of western democracies are rooted in christian morality. That’s what I believe, but you’re free to believe that its roots are in fact in the polytheist antiquity, or something else.
EU and America are trying by force to legalise anything and that’s the problem. Our society ain’t ready yet. Of course same-sex couples have all the rights as heterosexual couples have and they should be allowed to have a political marriage. But you can’t force the church to accept it or every human because they will react badly to that even if it isn’t a bad thing.
You mean like women voting?
Pedro Castro You are so funny 24/7 or you have breaks too ??
Thank god EU is a secular entity… (pun intentional*)
Considering the fact that straight people continue to disappoint generation after generation by producing rapists, child abusers, and homophobes, I’d say we’re not ready for straight marriages either. Yet, we have them.
I am homosexual, but I am afraid of bisexuals, hence I’m biphobic. My she-brother is transgender, but is afraid of homosexuals, hence homophobic, but she accepts bisexuals. Hence, we need to make a distinction between these kinds of phobias.
Sounds like the perfect topic for the next European parliamentary session. You should propose it so they can feel important, and maybe it will even provoke an entertaining outburst from Nigel Farage so he can feel important. ;)
Yes. Without question.
Forbidden? Legalised? Imposed? Each country should decide accordingly its own culture, otherwise EU will be a dictatorship.
no…
In Portugal it has been legalized and the world goes on, conservatives remain conservatives, and everyone is free, respecting eachother.
marriage itself is a part of the human history, gender etc. are also a relative concept nowadays, the marriage in many countries is a deal, in USA or India for instance – I do not have any problem with this, being with strictly strait sexuality by the way.
So what’s the logic after all!? If it’s a contract why should it be reserved for straight couples? You can’t deny people of their rights just because you don’t agree with their life choices. Why is other people’s sexuality your business?! Your comment says nothing whatsoever. Other than showing that you’re a bigot.
Yes!!!
Tъп ли си?
А ти?
Why not call it registered partnership and get over with it.
this is not a main problem …
Why not? Is there an explanation?
We are talking about human rights and you’re leaving it up for discussion?
lololol “international day against homophobia, but should they get married? it’s up for debate!”
“Vote now and receive a free FUCK YOU sticker so you can show those homosexuals how you really feel!”
” And if you vote yes, well, that sticker is for YOU! Vote now and you’ll get a SECOND sticker so you can stick it on your gay boyfriend’s back while you fuck him in the ass you fucking disgusting pig! :)”
No, that’s final.
si sposano e poi che fanno ? Vanno a dormire sotto i ponti ( e crollano anche quelli ) come le coppie tradizionali . Si sposano e poi ? Prendono un utero in affitto e fanno un figlio ? Disoccupazione, lavori instabili , mutui per comperarsi casa che non viene erogato se non si ha una sicurezza stabile lavorativa, pensioni che si vedono sempre più lontani….. Chi si sposa ? Prima si pensa ai diritti sociali che tutelano e incrementano a far famiglia , quando si hanno i diritti sociali allora vengono i diritti civili. Altrimenti è una presa in giro ! Se mi togli i diritti sociali però mi dai i diritti civili ….è carta (straccia ) che vale come un soldo falso
Why do you have to tell to everyone what a fuck you doing with your life’s. Do it and shut a fuck up… We don’t care and we don’t wanna know about it.
Rights means space but also lines, responsibility & respect. Behavior generates behavior thus agreeeveness against society do not help.
The decision should be left to the individual countries by choice or by referendum …not all eastern european countries may be ready to accept same sex marriage…if given time to open up and adjust at a later time they will find it less difficult…may be better to raise awareness first …
Exactly
Away with that bourgeois ceremonial, why do I have to sign a contract if I want to live with someone together? Legal Rights on what? Where to put my dick or not? Who to name my Kids? Grow up please, and start to be yourself for a change. Society will get you back if you are in your coffin.
I agree, away with that bourgeois ceremonial.
a same sex relationship is not marriage
Because of jerks like you is not, yet!
That proves how very civilized and articulated you are: a perfectly able spokesman for your cause. Resorting to insults has always been a clear sign of complex reasoning.
Valeria, have you actually done something different? You have not even supported your troll-like sentence with any factual reasoning or justification. Again, a ‘a perfectly able spokesman for your cause’.
Of course it should.
Yes!!!
How about putting WATER as human right in EU first. EU is not about human rights
y tú pa’ cuando?
Fundamental rights are not debatable.
Restore Democracy first as it is more important for society and leave the individual to please himself with whom he/she likes…after all in some north country’s they are still having sex with animals ….!!! so cut the crap and stop deranging peoples minds morons. Restore Democracy NOW you little fascists.
To be against same-sex-relationships is homophobic. To be against same-sex-marriage is politics. – But what can I tell someone who allways is in confusion with the words Europe and EU. There is also a difference.
nope! ;)
I can’t find a single reason for it not to be. Of course it should!
Uau! Nothing more important, right? Than be surprised with some elections results
well. ask your muslim friends …
No.. marriage is only to reproductive couples I mean man & woman … that is a reality that is not needed to be changed.
.
Strange that in another question often asked on here everyone screams the EU is a Christian continent but Christianity says homosexuals will burn in hell for eternity.
You can’t have it both ways, either its a Christian continent & you condemn homosexuality or it is not in which case gay marriage is allowed.
Of course why not? It’s their right to choose how to live their lives!
OF COURSE NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Of course not. Marriage has been consistently regarded as the union between a man and a woman, bearing an emotional side, but also an openness to life through procreation. Homosexuals should not be persecuted, and there may be a legal framework for same-sex unions. But one does not fight discrimination through social engineering. Homosexual unions are not marriages, and cannot be regarded as such.
#fightthejacobites
Government out of my bedroom and out of my bank account!
Normalophobia :D
Why not ban the hetero marriages,because it’s a discrimination against the fag-nazis? Also allow alive-dead marriages for the necrophiles,they also deserve love and respect.
No, they should’nt!!!
Yes, anything to annoy right wingers :D
Don t annoy them too much tho. Last time when they got upset it was bit of a mess
Another one who thinks that ideologies are linear.
Tell me how they are then, comrade
Try getting an education.
All Doughty your first comment did a great job showing how YOU think ideologies are linear. Ironic how it is you who tells other people to get an education
Andre your comment makes no sense.
All Doughty, mate, trust me..I have 10 times more education then you. You show exactly how ideologies are linear. You can not debate at all and i do not know if it is because you are uneducated or you have a serious mental problem. Now sit down like the frustrated leftist you are.
Dismissed
Yep, it should. Interesting results of polls in Poland says the strict majority somewhere above 70% of society supports it.
.
Do you have the source for that claim please ?
Will publish it here if I find them again.
I’m afraid you read the polls wrong, unfortunately the most recent polls indicate that 70% of Poles reject marriage equality (source: http://cbos.pl/SPISKOM.POL/2014/K_015_14.PDF)
Yes, sure. And the next step should be to legalise marriages with sheeps and goats :)
Nahh, the next step is getting people like you educated.
To be educated you need first off all to have a brain.
For Higaara and all other highly educated big brainers – marriage institution is for man and woman to raise their childlren. Not for homosexuals or any other perverts. Deal with it.
So that you may find love too? Aww :)
Paulo Vicente Yeah, marriage for all kind of deviants :P
Yes, sure. And the next step should be to legalise marriages with sheeps and goats ;)
Defenetly yes!
In Spain it is.
Most Germans support it. Wouldn’t be much of a parliament if it didn’t.
.
How do you know they do, as anyone asked them ?
They sure have. Germany has similar social outlook as Spain and Canada, 87% of respondents reply yes to question should society accept homosexuality, 11% no, and that was in 2013. (Pew Research).
Michael Šimková I could make research in Germany with selected population with 89% vote for stoning gays on a street. Seriously. You think asking 100 people what they think is representative number?
Pew Research studies also show that Russian laws against LGBT reflect the majority Russian opinion. Should we throw this research out also and assume they don’t know what they’re talking about, or now it’s okay because you agree with it?
Michael Šimková
‘87% of respondents reply yes’ ??
The fact most of the respondents had a vested interest voted yes is meaningless, its like asking Ford car drivers if they drive a Ford lol
Asking gay men if they want gay marriage is NOT asking the people. That can only be done via referendum,.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcprZ26qhvQ
Yes – A married gay Person.
No, there shouldn’t!
Should marriage with minors will be legal all around the world just because somewhere it is?
Do you suffer from autism?
Sorin Costea You telling me that applying tolerant ideas for all population just because some places accept it as norm is form is autism?
Nazi very much?
Do you know what consent is? Go research and then answer your own question. It’s really important to be a decent human being.
Paulo Vicente Consent is law term and it varies from age 12 to age 20 depending on culture and law system. Go research then think how consent could be changed just by changing law how it was done by “gay marriage” to promote tolerance.
Now you understand how conservatives feel when you call them homophobes just because they defend their own “decent human being” understanding.
After 20 years you will be given as example how intolerant people were in a past not accepting people who has “different sexual orientations”.
It’s all relative.
The argument of simple minded people :D
Yes, why not? It’s not something that would hurt anybody… what’s the problem?
In my opinion, yes but depends on the country and its people. They decide. This is not a dictatorship. Every part of Europe must take its decision.
the only aim of such decision is to deplete population…
Europe has been doing a fine job for the past 50 years without gay marriage.
Oh please! Do you realise how stupid you sound? Poor human soul
Idiote
because if they can’t marry they will suddenly have sex with people of the opposite sex?
Omg who the hell cares?
gay people
I don’t see any reason why not. If a person wants to marry someone of the same sex, who the hell am I (or you, for that matter) to say that they shouldn’t do it? I honestly don’t understand why is this still debatable.
hmmm you claim that it descreases the population. Me and my girlfriend don’t want to have kids. Should we be discriminated for that?
Why not? This thing is most democratic, everybody should have right to marry best person for him/her.
Yes! It is a matter of two adults.
I can’t believe we are still talking about this in 2017
Neither can I. But the feeling I get is that mostly it’s just the media that’s talking. The people have consensus on this issue. Well… except maybe in those parts of Europe where they haven’t even got consensus on democracy yet.
nooooooooooooooooooooo
And yet you have a picture with the symbol of Anarchy. You are not very Smart :D
João Mascarenhas I had forgotten to remove it! It was my profile photo one year ago! But now it doesn’t represent me anymore! Now, my faith is everything for me and I have found peace next to Jesus Christ and I am never going to change it!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yes, it should be legalised across the EU, with full adoption rights.
Dont force it, or you will lose it. Inspire it. Forcing anything exposes EU as tyranny. It is more and more obvious lately
Definitely No
we wouldn’t want to give people freedom, now would we
Why do you feel entitled to decide over my life?
Guer van der Rivier because it’s you life. it has no impact on mine. so obviously i should be allowed to tell you what to feel, what to think, and what to do. because you’re a complete stranger… yes… exactly!
Bitch, why do you care?
Asking that sounds to me like asking should straight couples be allowed to marry across Europe? I won’t marry a woman, that doesn’t make me reject straight guys marry them. So don’t mind me for marrying a man! Twenty seventeen folks!
Many folks would love to have multiple partners officially. Who are we to oppose their consensual feelings?
Acsai György I’m not against multiple-parter marriages either
Why do you feel entitled to decide over my life?
Germany gives example by example of stupidity…..
You too darling
Should
This is my opinion. I don’t want my son to have a gay example. What you are doing under your blankets is your right. Do not impose it as normal to society.
Yes I agree
Morally? Certainly, I am quite repulsed by anyone who does not support equal rights for all. But like anything it should be subject to the democratic process. Not that that’s what being advocated here or by anyone, but unilaterally enforcing such legislation would set a dangerous precedent. Luckily the majority of Europeans actually support marriage equality, and I hope we’ll be able to sway some of the savages in the near future.
I don’t quite agree. Nobody should be entitled to legislate over people’s life. If we speak about democracy and freedom, this right should be automatic and not up to other people making the decision over someone else’s life
That’s problematic, though. As much as you and I agree that equality should be a default right, bringing about this right through undemocratic means sets a precedent for other legislation to be passed undemocratically. All of our human rights were previously legislated. We should be striving for full equality in a democratic way.
There is no undemocratic way of doing it, it would be a normal Direttiva Europea, a guide law for all the member states to decide how exactly to redact domestically, made via common EU legislative procedure. Plus European law does not create legal precedents. why do you say it would not be democratic? As any other Directive it would be proposed by commission, edited and then applied to all the member states ONLY if approved by the two chambers, council of ministers (governments voice) and parliament (peoples’ voice)
Andrea Morrone I’m not disagreeing with you, and I wasn’t making a practical point. If done through the proper procedure like you outlined above, that is perfectly in order. My response to the question above is basically “Yes, if done in the proper democratic way”. I merely meant to caution against undemocratically enforcing even the best of legislation, as this may have unfortunate consequences.
You want a majority deciding for a minority?
YESSS
He is Bulgarian. Many retards over here unfortunately. Not their fault, they live in the middle age mentally
Seeing as both the EU, and all current 28 Member States of the body have ratified and are bound by the ECHR, I think we should keep in mind that marriage rules are still firmly the purview of nation states. That said, I think a recent ruling by the European Court of Human Rights against Italy has shown that discriminatory definitions of marriage – such as one man and one woman – should not be allowed to stand. I think the EU, as a body, can promote marriage equality, but should leave the legislation on this to Member States , so that each continues to take the step when their national populations are ready. The Council of Europe has been working on an equality project in Eastern Europe, and it may be an idea for the EU and the Council of Europe to collaborate on marriage equality campaigns. That’s if they’re not doing so already. It is ultimately up to those who support marriage equality to use every means necessary, within the bounds of the law, to secure it.
I cannot understand how anyone still argues that marriage equality is somehow a slippery slope that leads to marriage with children or with animals. Marriage equality is based on giving the right to consenting adult humans. Arguments like that are ignorant, and based in absolutely no fact.
sim.
George DimopoulosAnastasia QkaEleni Panagakou should it?
Mια Ελληνιδα εγραψε, no ειπε
If it was something natural you wouldn’t have to pose such a question.Should peopke drink water?
I have another one: Should stupid people be allowed an opinion?
Is nature natural? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior
Yes of course.
Noooooooooo. ..pleassssssse
Why is this even up for debate Anna Caterina
OHRFIUWHFLDSFHKDSJFKJDSHFKWSDFKHRWRKWFKJREWKJWRHKJREKJWHRHRE
I don’t against a marriage…it’s about money, rights for immobility and so on…But who will ask a child does he/she want to have two papas ?…It’s a matter of two adults…but not children…
Yep
Ofc
You are also Bulgarian perhaps. The debate is about gay marriage.
I don’t like this and I say no.
Don’t say bad words to me like retard etc.. Oh I forgot it is typical for gays to accuse sb.else
Mentally you live in ass age
Yes and we shouldn’t need to discuss about that so much and not only that they should have also full taxation, inheritance and insurrance rights as every other straight couple has in Europe, also they must have the right to be parents through adoption in the same level as the straight couples can.
no, it is wrong in the eyes of God
lol you are also wrong and God will give you cancer
João Mascarenhas :)
João Mascarenhas actually, God does not give cancer or any other illness, satan does, satan comes to kill and destroy, Jesus brings life more abundantly and eternal …. because mankind has a Free Will, God allows things, but does not bring them upon us
Anyone crazy enough to get married should be allowed to.
Hhahah exactly. Let them be entitle to marriage and divorce alike!
Basic human rights being debated. Way to go!
No way in Poland haha there is too much hate against everyone that is not hetero or christian.
Of course it should be legalized.
Yes, it should.
No & absolutely no parents.
Because…?
Well too bad, my husband and I are both married and have kids and it hasn’t destroyed the country/society or done our kids any harm. You can ask their teachers, counselors or anybody else
Is it a crime a man and a woman living together without being married? Freedom my friends, only freedom in our relations.
only after the state and the various religious institutions are completely separated
YES, freedom and equal rights for everybody, no matter the sexual orientation or sexual identity, we’re all people, and we shouldn’t have less rights only because another part of ourselves so normal as another! We’re in Europe!
EU= Sodoma and Gomorra…
yeah right.
First off you’re basing your judgement on an irrelevant, primitive and ancient book.
Second in the same story Lot offers his virgin daughters to be raped and maybe even killed for the sake of two strangers, hardlly a more objectively moral choice than letting them face the mob.
Third, those very same daughters, apparently dumb enough to think the world ended, got their father drunk, raped him and got pregnant by him.
It seems to me that the bible does not really see incest and rape as being very bad, and even murder is ok in many cases, but two consenting, same sex people loving eachother is the epitome of imorality.
start using your own brain and stop filtering your thoughts with barbaric garbage.
In the Bible incest and homosexuality are acepted (as they are in many cultures) but the name is “to join togheter” not to marry. Ethics and morals have left Europe sweep by the fashion born in 1968.
Please move before the angel comes to crisp you.
If by that you mean the longest period of peace Europe has ever seen, then yes
This is beginning of the end!
Most religions have no issue with murder, rape and incest when it suits their purposes, but a same sex consenting relationship is somehow evil.
At the very least when commenting on these subjects use your own brains and stop filtering your thoughts through barbaric stone age garbage.
yes. I think adults should be entitled to be responsible for whom ever they genuinely love as long as they actually do take care of the other people who they are surrounded with. Regardless of whether a person is attracted to a person another person would not be attracted to, people should be authorised and socially supported to emancipate their thoughts of peace and love towards others. From my perspective, people who consider that supporting and promoting the mental peace of others is against good will or the greater good are inevitably a bit socially masochistic as they preach repression of the most genuine feeling of mankind (yeah..feeling love) based on feelings and thoughts of fear, angst and hate. …at least my point of view. we should support people being happy, colourful, joyful… it makes more sense than causing them psychological harm… ¿? now that, would be the beginning of the end in my opinion.
This is so wrong
Because…?
This is not related to any religion
Only people with no principles do this
You’re not even European, so shut it.
I am from Morocco. I am close to Europe
In reality, very few people in Europe actually believe in religions, they may pay social lip-service to them, but few actually believe in pre-medieval inventions.
Well, first of all, you have a right to state your opinion even though you are not in Europe, of course. Second of all, I disagree because you see my husband and I have various foster children and are married, so I think we do have principles and deserve the same respect for it as everyone else, especially those who do not have principles and still can get married
Close does not mean in Europe.Sorry …
the ones that want non-traditional things shuld go to USA, because here its Europe, and we promise that we will take care of this when time comes the ones that have push europe to abysm will pay. the dictature of bruxells is doomed. support ur local nacionalist party or remove ur-self from ma friend list.
dont need the islamics to take care of this wrong things, we in europe we will take care of this problem. and also the islamic problem. dont say islamics are threat to lgtb ,because we in europe we will take care of this abobination the right way. support ur local nationalist party we will take care of this problems.
we will revert this abobination. support ur local nacionalist party. the golden dawn in europe is starting
Naturally, LGBT+ rights are Human Rights!
They are allowed to be together and to do whatever they want. Why should they be allowed to go against our religion, church and God? What do they win from having a marriage in a church? Do they level up like in video games or something? No, nothing changes for them except that they did a demonic act in Gods house. So tell me again people, why should they be allowed to do this? Am I against them? No, im neutral. Am I against a symbolic act that bonds a woman and a man in the face of God to be done by same sex people? Yes. Same thing about parades. Go protest in countries that homosexuals are oppressed if ya want, why show your sexual attractions to everyone to see in your free country? Why make children go with you? What is wrong with this world??
That is not healthy …
No. It’s against the God and nature.
I cannot argue with the God argument, but I can surely argue that this is definitely not against nature: http://community.lovenature.com/wild/why-do-some-animals-exhibit-homosexual-behaviour
God is dead. Get over it.
of course…
Marriage perhaps ….. but NEVER adopting/ raising children . That .. should be banned .
Oops, we already have kids, what should we do now? Give them back. O wait, the state thought we were the best option they had… Maybe you should ask some kids raised by gay parents about their input. You might be surprised
No, this will put society to great risk . If you ve seen the gay parades in the cities it makes you sick . Naked people celebrating sex. If you happened to be to one of their parties , or in a gay bar you see drags ,booze and more indecent behavior . It s decadent . Married , this people will adopt children and raise them to be like them . From homosexuality to pedophilia is only one step and we can see this happening all ready . All these is wrong, will bring nothing good in the world. . They are tolerated as they are , living together ok, but marriage is gonna push things too far , to the point of no return. They are gonna pretend they are the norm and the rest of us abnormal.
If we allow man to marry man and then who will marry the women?
That’s really pathetic
#abomination
No!!
And why ? Do you have more rights than another European citizen ?
Nein
Doch
Just because Germany became a bordelo, it doesnt mean that now this becomes a debatable issue.
Actually, Germany became a “bordelo” a long time ago when it legalized prostitution. You’re getting topics confused here, silly.
The only one confused here is you. You are confusing what body-part of yours does what…
It might be because my husband and I are so busy raising our children to be loving and respectful human beings who accept everyone for who they are that we sometimes forget about ourselves and get “confused”. But hey, if it helps our kids, that’s something I can accept.
Stop…you brought me to tears ! 😀
NO, absolutely NO!
<3 = <3 ,Where is the <3 . <3 = <3
No wonder our European civilization is fading away! Soon we will die of old age and childless…
Absolutely vomitous. Clearly no.
… be grateful that gays marry each other. Because if they didn’t, they would take all your girlfriends away. Gay men are better looking, more sensitive to women’s needs, share the same interests with women, cleaner and tidier and great listeners. Gay men make great husbands. The only reason you sad, disapproving bunch do get married is because there is not much choice. As the argument for dying of old age and childlessness is concerned- there are plenty of married heterosexual people without children. Let them have kids first before worrying about the few percent who cannot have children.
There is no reason why not.
Why not, but is the threat of a nuclear WW3 erupting in Europe not a more urgent subject ?? WW3 is here, its already started, lets all talk about marriage .. God help us with this kind of dumb.
Leave children out of that shit
No! Tripple no! Don’t convert Europe in Sodom and Gomorrah! God will pour His sacred anger.
Marriage is a legal contract to enforce a man-made construction on whether it can thus be considered sacred which is basically a tool used to make society operate in best and most universal possible
راولپنڈی شہر-اور-کینٹ کے کاروباری ایریا میں،
کمرشل پلاٹ____کمرشل بلڈنگ___پلازہ___ دکانات__ برائے فروخت۔
نیز__ بہترین ___رہائشی پراپرٹی ___کیلئے بھی رابطہ کریں
معلومات کیلئےفون یا میسج SMSکریں
رابط_ اعوان پراپرٹی سنٹر__ریلوے ورکشاپ روڈ راولپنڈی
92-300-9877812+
92-300-9726224+
Cannabis first!
As long as it is not something forced upon the member states by “Europe”, but something chosen for by the constituent nations’ people, yes, why not.
Well it is chosen: if you do not respect the civil rights upon which the European way of life and rule of law are based you should simply leave.
Yes! No doubt
Bleahhh!
NO, no way! That’s really stupid and gross!
Because every gay couple who gets married inmediately drives to the destruction of human kind, yes. I agree.
Then don’t have one but let others be happy and live their lives. Simples!
Acceptance is the first step towards imposition.
I don¨ care what they do in their home, but I don¨ want to spread homosexuality in schools, teaching the kids that 2 men or 2 women make a family, to see kissing to men on the street….itś gross!
NOPE!!!
Shit .Marriage is meant to give birth to children, not for fun
Of course! If the only criterion is the partners’ sexual orientation, e.g same sex partners there is nothing ethical or rational to justify why legal rights are differentiated accordingly. Legal rights should be differentiated only when it comes to something which is criminalized. Otherwise we have a situation which is “semicriminal” or “semilegal” and affects people’s personal relations. I does not make any sense!
Marriage is meant for heterosexual partners who can give birth to children in a natural way. It’s not for fun or support, if it is, it has to be called (business) contract. No, ridiculous!
No, marriage is meant for people who love each other and want to live with each other forever. And what if any of the hetero partners is unable to have children? They should be denied the right too?
Michał Jarski Not denied , they are free to look for another partner. Parents and children also decide to live together sometimes because they love each other but they don’t need a marriage, nor two homosexual partners do
They cant inherit without marriage thats their problem!
Lucy Prelevic-Popova so what you suggest is that if two people love each other and can’t have children, should stop loving each other and instead find someone who can? And you call homo marriage supporters ridiculous …
Ridiculous is the word. ( As to the heteros who cant have children they are exception to the rule, they can follow a treatment, in vitro et c or adopt naturally as female mother and male father)
Lucy Prelevic-Popova but you know that lesbians can also use in-vitro, right?
And that anyone can adopt? (I mean, theoretically)
A lesbian can have children of course but the father will be missing. So no grounds for marriage (no doubt that the other partner probably would like to profit from the clauses of a marriage or the mother with the children to inherit property?)
Lucy, your cynisism and overriding belief in your own sense of entitlement is clearly driven by your own prejudices and denying other European Citizens the rights and responsibilities that you have. This is deeply sad and worrying!
Marriage comes from the bible… and there are situations of same sex marriage in the Old testament…
Šimon Novák Baudot, a good point , but I would add that marriage pre-dates organised religious beliefs.
Christian Weale You are insulting me without giving arguments in the dispute(Im a fan of ABBA too)
Lucy, there is absolutely no insult intended. Your comments are loaded with a belief that equal marriage legislation is purely driven by self-interest and gain, rather than from the perspective that whole groups are being denied the dignity and opportunities that their fellow citizens enjoy and accept without question.
You also fail to mention love in your comments, but instead you favour perspectives that elude only of self interest!
This is my point as previously mentioned!
“Yes, absolutely!”
“Recognising inequality and addressing these issues is about people, not politics, and we should remember that these very straightforward reforms are ultimately about our families, friends, neighbours and colleagues, and in essense are about fairness for all and not the privileged few.”
I agree with Lucy. Marriage is an institution and we should not change a pillar of our society
My country legalized it a few years back – unsurprisingly society didn’t fall apart and it’s generally been regarded as a positive decision by the vast majority here.
Christian Weale I did mention love. Unfortunately it is missing even in a great many instances of traditional heterosexual marriages
Lucy Prelevic-Popova, but what if a heterosexual couple don’t want to have kids (even they could)? Have they right to get/ to be married or not, according to your theorie?
Šimon Novák Baudot, not good example. We live now in XXI century, not in Medievals, when the Bible was a source of answers in every questions, first of all. Sceondly – what if I don’t believe in Christian god? What if I don’t believe in any god? You can’t rise a law from religiuos text.
Victė Dźiaugytė They may change their mind😀 . Ok, I am not a marriage fan at all, so I think they shouldnt encourage a homosexual marriage on top of it. I think marriage contract should be abolished at all
No. There are so many other social problems to be solved. It’s ridiculous to give priority to such selfish abnormal minority which ignores God, the Bible, ignores majority and have no basic common sense.
Who does in 2k17 still give a f* to the fairy tales written 2k years ago ?
Paweł Kunio stupid and infected homo’s don’t, scumbag!
Infected, wow. Just one question: what the hell are you doing visiting a group like this? You should be kicking queers like the other nazi dudes…
Does the Bible teach you to insult other who don’t agree with you?
Who gets this angry about decisions about decisions that don’t affect them in the slightest?
Unless you are overcompensating for something Sento Pop? Come on man, no need to lie to yourself anymore ;)
I love it when the bigots come out of the closet under the umbrella of their imaginary super friends. Such hypocrisy can only be met with a smile :D
Oh yes. Put a ring on two dudes and the big scary man in the sky gets angry. Seems reasonable
Bjorn Schembri I’m too polite with you, snobs , ignorants ,idiots and super selfish creatures!
Paweł Kunio That is quite hypocritical, basically the whole idea of marriage is based on a fairytale, that is what you are saying…
You don’t have another priority in Europe?! How about people who are looking for jobs and there are not enough jobs? How about people who don’t have the minimum income and have no money to pay their food and utilities?How about people who don’t have a roof over their heads?! Shame on you, snobs and ignorants! How about big corruption which affects many countries across the Europe? How about Health, pollution?!
You are mixing everything with your homophobia ! This is not because you allow weddings for all that you cannot take care of all the rest. You are not on taking care of things one after another but in parallel. After I would be happy that Europe does more on lot of subjects.
Benoit De I don’t care what snobs or homosexuals think about me! What would I care about such scumbags like you?
Thank you, Benoit De!
Christian Weale Bleahh!
Creating jobs is a long and difficult process. Legalizing same-sex marriage is only changing few words in the law and doesn’t cost anything. Your argument about priorities is stupid.
Šimon Novák Baudot Really? Why would I care about your opinion? Ignorant and snob are compliments for creatures like you.
So let me get this straight Sento Pop – the people on this thread who want people who want to get married (at absolutely no cost or impact to anyone else) to be able to do so and live their lives the way they want to live them are “ignorant” and Sento who wants to impose his religious issues on everyone else and doesn’t care what the people who’s freedom he wants to restrict have to say about it, isn’t ignorant?
How does that make sense?
He’s just an idiot who can’t take in others’ opinions. Judging everyone else’s point of view as ignorant or snob just makes one idiotic and shortsighted and he should be ignored…
Yes, absolutely!
Recognising inequality and addressing these issues is about people, not politics, and we should remember that these very straightforward reforms are ultimately about our families, friends, neighbours and colleagues, and in essense are about fairness for all and not the privileged few.
Well, in constitution of my country is said that marriage is possible only between one woman and one man. That means that this decision would be against our constitution.
Change your Constitution. It’s wrong, like many others.
No and no! It’s not wrong because you think it’s wrong, and we cannot change constitution every time something new is in fashion and popular kids think you should have it. Think with your own head.
I agree with Joaquín.
Hopefully we change our constitution and I’m happy we did even if it was thought fight. This is not a mode, this is to give the same rights to everyone. We fight for liberty, women rights, still against racism, and now for LGBT people rights as well. Happy to do so, by the way I’m hetero and have kid
European Right is more than constitutions. So this will become invalid if EU legalise same-sex marriage..
And Leopold Rotim… it’s not “in fashion”… same-sex marriage is even in the Old Testament.
Slavery was once legal and common practice. I’m glad we were able to change that..
Joaquín Alberto Puche Jiménez what about: fuck you? (simple as that)
Šimon Novák Baudot wake up, old testament is: OLD!
Yes!!!!!!!!
The world is toooooo crowded. Same sex marriages should be encouraged.
Exactly! Plus foster kids could have a loving family.
But fuck no, the man in the sky will be angry if you let that happen
Except of course western society is declining, the Muslim world is increasing and they just love to throw gay people off roofs.
Their life is their business. BUT No way they should adopt / raise children and confuse them more !!
That’s not the way it works
Confuse who and how?
You are confusing me !
Read some studies about adoption. Children are not homophobic like you.
Children have the right to be brought up by a female mother and a male father, that’s best for their mind, not by 2 mothers, the father missing, or vice versa or by a crosdresser father or mother!
So you will remove the children from all not traditional families and what? Stupid.
Why should your insecurities effect which children get to be brought up in a loving home?
Have you any evidence for your claims?
Why not?
Also… Lucy Prelevic-Popova… So single parents and grandparents and uncles and aunts are a no?
Also… Is it not more important the quality of a person who rases a child then his or her sexual preference?
Nikos Voudouris confuse the already confused like you ;; don’t you get the picture ?? Too bad 🤣
Lucy Prelevic-Popova very true !!! But very few will understand that . Nothing is normal 😩
Conor Ryan excuse me ????
Would you rather a child remain in an abusive mother-father relationship than be raised by two loving mothers or two loving fathers?
Šimon Novák Baudot my dear it needs some brain with certain IQ level to understand your comment , Too bad . Don’t give up.
Šimon Novák Baudot not traditional ??? I call it SICK !!!😭😱😱😤
Conor Ryan insecurities ??? Hahahaha. .., no thanks God I am quite normal and v v calm . Pervert z😂🙃😡😭
Conor Ryan hahahaha generation of IPad YouTube drugs and pervert dad and dad …or pardone Moi mother and mother . How sick !!
Marriage is the most stupid prison for mankind..get rid of that and let the people free..!
Amen. 😎
No,is not necesary ,we have a lot of problem to rezole , they cud have a simple contract and not includet children in his caind of life!
Legalizing same-sex marriage is only changing few words in the law and doesn’t cost anything. Your argument about priorities is stupid.
What is wrong with two people rasing a child?
Maybe a kind of union but not a marriage.
Lol… why?
it’s a matter of etymology and common sense.
So your problem with this is etymology? Really?
Definitions evolve all the time. This isn’t going to effect the marriage of anyone who is heterosexual. What is the issue here?
Definition is a thing, etymology another. What I meant is that the concept of marriage is deep rooted in the social tissue, maybe too much for a change.
If I remember correctly… Marriage is a civil institution that predates christian world by a long shot.
And… There were types with one man and many woman, one woman and many men and so on…
So your argument just commited suicide.
Oh no, you don’t remember correctly, the OED can clarify your doubt 😉
We must separate the concept of union between individuals and our concept of marriage.
Not yet, because Europe is the centre for many reasons and human modernazation and constitutional civilization. At the same time legalizing the same sex. But whole Europe legalizing can be no wrong but personally i don’t agreed.
Can be legalized in any country at the same time can be also contrasto and contradiction between etero sexual marriage.
I wonder why, in 2017, anyone be they straight or gay would want to get married at all. Such an outdated institution.
Yes! XOXO
Da
No !
No !
No!
Hvala. 🏳️🌈🇷🇸♥️
Of course ❤️ thank god I’m from Western Europe. Feels good to be free and to see my rights right in front of me
Of course ❤️ thank god I’m from Western Europe. Feels good to be free and to see my rights right in front of me
Of course ❤️ thank god I’m from Western Europe. Feels good to be free and to see my rights right in front of me
Of course ❤️ thank god I’m from Western Europe. Feels good to be free and to see my rights right in front of me
Of course ❤️ thank god I’m from Western Europe. Feels good to be free and to see my rights right in front of me
Of course ❤️ thank god I’m from Western Europe. Feels good to be free and to see my rights right in front of me
Of course ❤️ thank god I’m from Western Europe. Feels good to be free and to see my rights right in front of me
No, because the next step will be the question of childrens adoption! Same-sex couples should not adopt children!!!
Are you from UE ?
You would rather they didn’t have a loving home at all just to satisfy your insecurities?
And why not?
Because the adopted child will be raised up as a homophilic adult, or he/she will be homosexual, too!
Reead Fitch I am from Saudi Arabia
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAAH
:facepalm:
Faddi in my opinion is the saudi that should not adopt children, they fill their heads with wahabi bullshit until they became intolerant thugs or terrorists!
“Across Europe”? Depends on what each country thinks.
What exactly do you mean? One of the basic rules countries must apply to be part of the EU is the respect for Human rights, the right to marry is basic human dignity. It shouldn’t be open for discussion for any country wanting to belong to the EU.
Europe and the EU are not the same thing. “Marriage” is not a basic human right to anyone. The EU is not a country and should not even exist. Every country sets it’s own rules.
José Bessa da Silva lol – anti-EU detected… Human Right #16
Marriage and Family
1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
Yes I am indeed anti-EU and anyone with sight and respect for social, economic and democratic values should be as well.
Although I find ridiculous to consider a “human right” any contract (yes, marriage is a contract, not a family), I will remind you of your own words:
“…without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion…”
The basis used to prevent gay marriage is neither race, nationality nor religion but sexual preference and therefore logic says…
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against gay marriage, I just find “marriage” ridiculous overhall and I hate how anti-democratic the EU and it’s followers have become.
Children have the right to be brought up by a female mother and a male father, that’s best for their mind, not by 2 mothers, the father missing, or vice versa or by a crosdresser father or mother!
WOW, I am not sure what you are trying to say here, it appears to be pure projection?
Children deserve to be raised in a loving environment. The concept of love is sadly lacking in your comments.
As for suggesting that a mother or father missing or raised by a crossdresser father or mother. I utterly despair at your flippant comments. It is almost as though the enlightenment never occurred…very sad!
Comments like yours shock me so much that it makes me think if everyone should have the right to vote, so limited your way of thinking is! What about people brought up by their mothers only, like me, or their fathers, uncles, grandparents, or when their parents died and no other family member is present? A high number of children is brought up in non-conventional families, without mother and father, are you implying they all have grown up in a ‘wrong way’?
“that’s best for their mind”?? Says who??
João Machado and WHO are you to question that??? Is a mother, the best person who HAVE THE RIGHT to speak, you little freak!
Nando Sousa unfortunately . Me too -brought up by my mother(grandparents too). The presence of both mother and father(a father who cares for the child) is the best option
Evidence suggests otherwise. Children above all need loving parents/home, and in this regard sex/gender is irrelevant. You disguise your prejudice as “consideration for the children” but you’re actually harming children by contributing towards preventing them from being adopted by a gay couple and remaining in care. Incidentally, orphaned children were abandoned and unwanted by STRAIGHT parents, whereas a gay couple who adopts is willing and able to provide the child with a loving, safe home.
The point is, even IF there are some benefits to having both a mother and a father, this benefit is far outweighed by the negative consequences of having NO parents at all. Plus, children have father/mother figures in many other forms; grandparents, aunties/uncles, neighbours, friends, teachers etc.
But then, the sex/gender is unimportant compared to how loving/kind/positive influence someone is to a child, as a PERSON.
Nando Sousa The ‘natural’ order of life is wrong ? maybe you are the one that should not have the vote.
João Machado Nature says so, otherwise it would not need a male and a female to create life.
Ivan Burrows https://www.google.nl/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/17/female-snake-gives-birth-without-male Please, what is “natural order of life?”
Ivan Burrows So you work at the European Parliament… First time brexit makes me happy!
Lucy Prelevic-Popova based on what? Is it better for a child to grow up in a violent environment with both, mother and father, than in a loving household with two fathers, mothers or just one of them?
😀if a female gives birth without a male ok. She doesnt need that means to marry someone. As to natural order – any rule has exceptions, dont try to turn them into a rule!
No. It isnt. But two fathers or two mothers you know is too much. Let then the child have a chance as an exception and what on Earth they have to be married for those partners?
You are clueless on what gender and gender roles mean and come from. The nature argument is absurd. Biologically, human reproduction requires a male and a female. Not even in its entirety. Not anymore at least. Only a small contribution from a male will suffice. You infer that it’s best for a child to be raised by the two parts because of the biological requirement (or limitation if you prefer). It’s not an easy distinction to be made I know. Gender roles are a social construction, and a dangerous one indeed. You can thank millennia of organized religion for yet another piece of wonderful insight on the human behaviour. But what you seem to ignore is the bulk of it. What actually matters and there’s absolutely no factual argument that can state otherwise. The only thing a child needs is love. Regardless of what gender it comes from. Regardless of what form that gender might have. You have a lot of hate to spread around that’s for sure.
Nando Sousa you do have to understand that you’re talking to people that have very strongly shaped minds according to misconceptions that are projected in society by religion, generalized bigotry, and a profound lack of understanding of sociology and human behaviour. The result is: hate. “If it’s not like what I see in the mirror, it must be bad. That’s what I’ve been told so.”
Daniel Meternă Thanks for the love hermano. A mother that throws her 2 day old son into a garbage can because she doesn’t want him, is she also the ” best person who HAVE THE RIGHT to speak”? Maybe I’m a freak. A freak with two brain cells..
She s not the best. There is a way for the child to be adopted in a family
Yes of course… But it´s not that simple. It´s probably best to wait a while longer because in many states there are still majority conservative people and that would make them dislike EU even more than they do now.
Fear of change is never an option. Let them have it. It’s also a very important subject, because we’re talking about human rights here. Sadly, homosexuals are still treated as secondary citizens.
So the solution is to hold dignity of life a little longer for some of us?
I agree but forcing it will only cause more harm.
no of course they can be what ever they wish in their miserable life but they must be cut off from all the social benefits and state positions according the rule of the first democracy of ancient Athens and all of the rest that they have any kind of mental problems because the world does not go like that
Are you being ironic or for real?
real
sorry
Lol… you are funny
Ancient Athens, where same sex was practiced among all citizens?
I hope you are being sarcastic.
lol sexually repressed aren’t you?
In that case, the state had also better take back our foster kids and get ready to pay for the 50,000 euros a year per child that it is currently saving because the kids are living with us and not in an orphanage, not to mention the long-term costs of not ensuring that the children grow up in a loving family. Quick totally unrelated question: What have you recently done for your community?
Nando Sousa well so far i have never seen gay people with arms fighting killing and slaughter for their freedom against millions of armies. so it will be nice for you if you read some real history of ancient athens and find out how it was all the rest are just fairy tales
This shouldn’t be open for debate, it’s basic human right!
No. It isn’t.
Edu Lluzalti
Human Right # 16
Marriage and Family
1. Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
2. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
3. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
Where is the morality and the respect of people ?
In your ass
João Mascarenhas what about your ass disgusting satan prayer , i dont speak with anonymous cowards !
But you just did 😥
Hero behind labtop is charachteristic of a real man scumbs !
F****K NO..NO..NO…
Why? How would it effect your life?
WILL EFFECT THE CHILDRENS LIFE BECAUSE U TRY TO CONVICE THEM THIS IS RIGHT…WHEN THIS IS FKN WRONG…
F****K YES..YES..YES…
Yeah better have an abusive marriage between a man and a woman. Much better than 2 loving fathers. Cunts.
Sure. Maybe you could explain what marriage means! Some people need those kind of informations.
‘marriage’ is a union before god, a god that rejects gay people.
That’s my guy! 😊
DEFINITELY NO!!!
Why? How would it effect your life?
Conor Ryan are you moron or what? This is not just marriage, this go’s to adopting children too, and this is WRONG! Why? Because a child needs a mother and a father and MUST BE conceived by an man an a woman. What will be next “step”, to legalise pedophily and necrophily???? SICK PEOPLE!!! Europe complains about getting old ….with this kind of measure never gonna get young ……recently import muslims to “renew” the populations, but muslims are a trojan horse inside Europe. And what is wrong is that EU oblige members to adopt what that f*** retard from Germany (A.M) wish. THAT’S WHY! And I want A NORMAL WORLD, not a twisted one. What is normal? Definitely not gay’s couple! Who says that? I said. I want that my children to live in a normal word, they don’t have to be exposed to f**** perversity of stupid and sick minds! But the way, gay can receive treatment to get normal. Most of lesbians are unsatisfied women, lets say nymphomatics. 5% of them are born gays, the rest of them are induced or pervert sick people. And I don’t want that my children to adopt such behaviour just that some moron consider that “is cool”. Enough arguments?
Calm down, no one will force you to marry, closet gay
Conor Ryan Its not a matter of affecting a few individuals, its a matter of survival of western society..
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/23/baby-crisis-europe-brink-depopulation-disaster
Europe needs less people. The world needs less people, not more. What we should be interested in is to make poorer country stop reproducing as well. Humanity is acting like a plague! Either we control our birthrates or nature will. Better to be us! Less people also means more resources per head and better life standards in general.
Ivan, how about you go procreate some more then. Don’t blame the gays for a lower birthrate
Of course it affects us.
First, legalize it.
Second, normalie it.
Third, impose an antinatural way of understanding family through education etc
No, it’s against nature and human biology.
Synthetic penicillin is also against nature. I don’t hear much complaining about that.
It’s actually very natural tho
Nicola Alos Martinis Homosexuality serves NO biological purpose, it is merely a personnel preference.
Conor Ryan Comparing Synthetic penicillin with homosexuality is idiotic, one saves lives the other is meaningless.
so if it’s meaningless and, thus, doesn’t affect you whatsoever, why does it bother you?!
You should study more… Try to inform yourself about animals in wildlife!!! You will see that your believes will change quickly!!
I am scared, and i can’t trust a homosexual.He can’t be serious.
You can’t trust biologists either apparently, George is an idiot
Ivan, homophobia in society takes lives every day. Check the suicide and fatal hate crime statistics if you don’t believe me. Live and let live my friend.
Go back to your cave, someday someone will invent fire and you’ll probably kill him because it’s against the status quo. 😂
He’s absolutely right. Homosexual relations are objectively against natural order.
no discussion. people should be free always
YES of course, GAMIOLEW
Why would anyone want to be married before a god that condemns you eternal damnation ?
They will not be married before any god but before the state which is the only relevant institution to be taken in consideration in this case. And do not get me wrong, even legal marriage is a useless, dated contract and therefore I don’t even get why they are so keen to sign one, but well…their choice!
José Bessa da Silva ‘Marriage’ is a religious ceremony of union of one man & one woman, which is why the ‘civil’ union was invented for same sex unions. The gay lobby groups know this so I can only assume they demand to be ‘married’ just to annoy people of religion. Not bad for a group of people who complain they are being victimised.
No, marriage is a contract, not religious nor necessarily between a woman and a man (each country decides). But I do understand your point, after all you still live in a country that confuses religion and state. Not in mine. We are past that and I hope we will be past marriage soon. The numbers fortunatly show that the portuguese are indeed seing the uselessness of such contract…
José Bessa da Silva It seems you are falling for the social justice warrior BS, the word Marriage’ as a very defined definition.
https://www.gov.uk/marriages-civil-partnerships/religious-ceremonies
Again, that is your country’s defenition, not my country’s. In your country you also think some blood lines have devine rights and represent the will of god among men. For me and my state that is all a bunch of gibberish. But like I said, everything is fine. I’m not asking you to change anything. I couldn’t even care less. That is the point pro and anti gay marriage people can’t realise. I’m neutral! For me what you are discussing is simply gibberish. The only thing that pisses me off about all of this is how both sides try to impose their views on others and how the EU is using it to once again flex it’s power over sovereign states. That is a crime against democracy that I do not stand for.
Of course, with no doubt of reason!
Propaganda.
Snowflake goes boohoo because the gays say yes :)
Boring…
No way,!!!!!!!!
I would say yes, but not adoption. Not because I think they’d fail as parents, but becauae if you just read some comments here for example, those kids would be ridiculed by assholes
Those assholes had traditional parents. Who’s actually failing, here?
Ohhhh
Matej obviously you are a fan of Angelca Likovic. Shame!
Blaz Bostjancic who?
Why not?!
Because the god they are getting married before hates them ?
They are not being married before any god but before the state which is the only relevant institution to be taken in consideration.
Dude, do you really know what God or any god loves or hates? That’s hybris, and it’s a sin. 😑
We had this debate years ago in Spain, and now we have same sex marriage and adoption.
All the arguments against it have proven to be false or prejudice.
It is a shame that people in Europe do not have the same rights.
If you ask civilized Europe, North and South they say yes. But primitives from the east are against it.
Civilized Europe is that where we do not impose our views on others. If Eastern Europeans decided that marriage is to be only between a man and a woman that is their problem, not ours – “Cada macaco no seu galho”. I find marriage a stupid useless contract, but I don’t go arround saying Europe is uncivilized because it still believes marriages have any validity.
Yes their governments should be free to oppress minorities without western interference about pesky human rights :)
Human rights? Marriage? Lol…that is like saying eating chocolate is a “human right”.
Yes, of course!
Fuck yes, who cares if two gay people marry. I mean, the deal me no harm in any possible way. I say freedom!
You are not even in Europe man 😂
I am in Romania. Even if the flag show something else.😉
Come on, do you really care about what others do under the sheets? As far as I am concerned, two guys or two girls can marry each other as much as they want. Who are we to limit other people’s rights?
Yes but each country should do it on its own or this will be another nail in the coffin of the EU.
no.. Each country to decide by democratic referendum.
Lol wasting money and time to give the majority the right to decide for a minority? Your priorities are wrong
when minoritity rulz, it’s dictatorship.. Sorry, but you are in EU, Not Soudi Arabia or Turkey
Who are you to limit people rights ?
Is this e.u. ? Is this freedom ? No, man, this is medieval mentality. Peace!
Of course it should. I do not see how legally bonding the happiness of a couple could be of any sort of harm to other people. Basic human rights.
Shall we restore Democracy ??? down with Tyranny
Of course, with no doubt.
Oh fuck no! Let’s teach our kids to say suck my mom’s wully! We’re already cheering for he-bitch in a dress with a beard, having 5 year old girls parade for underwear fashion shows and destroying identity with ambiguous sexuality! Let us not tear asunder the one thing our whole perception of self has relied on for thousands of years… Mom and dad…
Of course. Civil rights must be ensured
Not all the events here will be church.
Sanctioned lesbian, gay and trangender, Catholics are holding events, once on which, champions gay parents and their children’s, Pope Francis had pleased the case of same sex marriage and, other family issue felt for many of the church, has not moved far enough.
No. This is not a battle for rights but for imposing the ideology of the very powerful.
Why is this even debatable in the first place? Equal civil rights for all shouldn’t be discussed in a public forum. What other people do are none of our business. ❤️❤️
Why is this even debatable in the first place? Equal civil rights for all shouldn’t be discussed in a public forum. What other people do are none of our business. ❤️❤️
Why is this even debatable in the first place? Equal civil rights for all shouldn’t be discussed in a public forum. What other people do are none of our business. ❤️❤️
Why is this even debatable in the first place? Equal civil rights for all shouldn’t be discussed in a public forum. What other people do are none of our business. ❤️❤️
Why is this even debatable in the first place? Equal civil rights for all shouldn’t be discussed in a public forum. What other people do are none of our business. ❤️❤️
Why is this even debatable in the first place? Equal civil rights for all shouldn’t be discussed in a public forum. What other people do are none of our business. ❤️❤️
Why is this even debatable in the first place? Equal civil rights for all shouldn’t be discussed in a public forum. What other people do are none of our business. ❤️❤️
What’s is going on is the destroying of human rights in exchange of civil rights
of course yes… no doubt about it
I do support same sex marriage 100%. But I think the EU should back up a little and respect the 27 member countries’ independance to make their own decisions regarding social policies.
Obviously not. Mariage is serious. But they must enjoy eventually the same rights.
Who cares?
Actually if I have to be honest and coherent I would have to say no. But it should not be a political issue
No no no
NO!
Why not? i mean what does it matter with which gender someone spends their life with?
as long as they didn’t decide to make or adopt children or it’s not one of my daughters, I actually don’t care 🤷♀️
NO!
NO!
NO!
NO!
NO!
NO!
RECEITA – BACALHAU COM NATAS
(Para 4 pessoas)
Ingredientes:
4 posta(s) de bacalhau demolhado
6 dl leite
1 cebola(s) cortada(s) em rodelas
azeite
2 c. sopa farinha
1 kg batata(s)
noz moscada
2 dl natas
queijo ralado
q.b. sal
q.b. Pimenta
Confecção
1.Coza as postas de bacalhau em leite.
2. Corte a cebola em rodelas finas e refogue em azeite até estar mole e transparente.
3. Escorra o bacalhau e desfaça-o em lascas e junte à cebolada. Deixe refogar lentamente. Polvilhe com farinha, mexa e regue com leite coado, onde cozeu antes o bacalhau. Deixe engrossar, mexendo de vez em quando.
4. Descasque e corte as batatas em cubos e frite em óleo não quente, de forma a deixá-las mais cozidas que fritas. Escorra as batatas e junte-as ao bacalhau. Tempere com sal, pimenta e noz-moscada.
5. Deite tudo num tabuleiro untado de ir ao forno, espalhe por cima as natas e polvilhe com queijo ralado. Leve ao forno até estar gratinado. Sirva com uma salada fresca de alface e tomate.
//www.facebook.com/deliciasdaestrela
Yaaaaaaas
Yaaaaaaas
Yaaaaaaas
Yaaaaaaas
Yaaaaaaas
Yaaaaaaas
Yaaaaaaas
Very very “important” question
Very very “important” question
Very very “important” question
Very very “important” question
Very very “important” question
Very very “important” question
Very very “important” question
No,not natural,man and woman yes
Of course. Let’s finally grow up.
Crescer como se nao podem procriar? Para crescer é preciso nascer. Contra a Natureza.
Sim, porque o casamento por si próprio cresce das arvores certo? Meçam as vossas palavras. Alem do mais tantas crianças para adopção que n tem quem as adopte, certamente que n ia ser dificil achar casais homossexuais dispostos a adopta las.
in 2017…aint that a question only for them…im not a gay, and i will never be…but if man loves a man, or woman loves a woman, that is not something that affect me, or hurt me…it has totaly nothing to do with me…except if i loose potentialy a woman, that escape me with another woman…but, then she is propably better then me…or maybe not…let we live and let we love…no matter who with who…
I find it amazing that sone people find thisntype of subject unimportant and make fun of people trying to live their lives in an honest manner..
Also, marrigae, considering it is a government related matter should be available to everyone. Everyone thay pays their taxes should be able to enjoy equal rights. Period. It seems, sadly some people still confuse matrimony with marriage. ….
Meaning “marriage” is a contract and thus pretty much useless as you do not need it to anything. It is ridiculous how in the XXI century there are still peeple fighting for it, on both sides. I can not avoid feeling amused by this entire discussion between hetero and gay cavemen…
Legalize gay marriage. Outlaw gay parades!
Is it your wedding? No? So why you should care?
Sure!
I am for same-sex marriage, but leave it up to the single state to decide on that. My prediction is that an increasing number of divorces will be the only remarkable social impact it would have.
I like people saying a simple and final “no”. It shows what means a debate for these limited minds.
No@!
no.
fbi like institution can handle the symptoms only.
but we need to handle the reason.
No, no, no! Absolutely not!
why not!? marriage is just a contract.
Yes. Anyone marries who she/he wants. Governments have not to do with this situation.
No, of course.
Yes, of course. We share the same values, don’t we?
No we don’t….
So let’s split this Europe into two again
…but that is islamophobic ;-)
It is normal that an alt-right nazi like you is worried about the feelings of radical islamists.
You all are so similar that you cant tell the diference.
yes, but without forcing religious institutions to perform services for these marriages
They don’t do that anyway.
Sick society
I have seen this topic in my feed 4 times this year from this page. Are you looking to pad your engagement stats?
NO, GAYS
That is rich from someone who is A, not from Europe and B, owner of the gayest facebook profile in this comment section.
Erik Jakub Citterberg nailed it 😂
Marriage is a contract; and contracts between men have been legal ever since our monarchs allowed us to trade freely. It is cruel, and hateful to continue to bait homophobic idiocy to provoke discord among the ignorant and mentally deranged.
Yes (But not sure why anyone wants to be married)
Exactly!…
Why? What happens when you die or decisions have to be made when you are in hospital and can’t decide for yourself? Who can be trusted to do so, your partner in life, or your family?
So your justification for marriage is that you must have someone to make decisions for you when you’re uncapable of doing so in a hospital bed ?
Laura Guthrie can’t really disagree with anything you said. I’m all in favour of gay mariage. I’m not a religious person and see mariage mainly as a civil contract. Can’t really find reasons as to why gay mariage should be forbiden.
Yes (But not sure why anyone wants to be married)
Yes (But not sure why anyone wants to be married)
Yes (But not sure why anyone wants to be married)
No. I personally do support letting same sex couples have the right to marry eachother, but the EU should still respect the countries’ sovereignty. Conservative countries like Poland where the majority of residents do not approve of same sex marriage might feel secluded in the EU because the EU are legalising laws that they don’t approve of.
It is a point that I have not thought
How about liberal Poles? [like me]
Michał J. Ekiert unfortunately in a democratic society the majority always win. If the majority of Poles do not support same sex marriage then same sex marriage should not be legal there.
Michał J. Ekiert but you can always propose an alternative to same sex couples in conservative countries other than marriage, like civil unions or civil partnerships.
The majority can not take basic human rights from the minorities, this is not democracy.
If the majority of a country is not religious this does not mean that you can ban religions.
Alfonso Martìnez Montoya I am sorry but the UN only count basic human rights laws by promoting universal respect for, and observance of, the fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, religion and language. Marriage unfortunately does not count as discrimination.*
Carl Sebastian Steenekamp, it seems like you’ve never heard about liberal democracy. The law is not to opress minorities, law is to let everyone thrive.
Michał J. Ekiert I support liberal democracy without a doubt. But in a democracy the majority will always have a benefit over the minority, whether we like it or not. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, the UN only protects residents according to their race, sex, religion and language; not marriage. So for a democracy to restrict rights involved with race or religion is absolutely unnacceptable, but with marriage not.
Carl Sebastian Steenekamp Actually, the UN (and the international community with various regional instruments) have recognised the right to marry and the (equal) right to start a family. Check out Art 9 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Europian Union, Art 8 of the ECHR, Art 23 ICCPR, Art 12 ECHR etc. The fact that States refuse to comply does not mean that the right to marry and start a family is not a human right nor does it mean that States have not been penalised for their refusal to safeguard said right (check out ECHR case law against Greece, Poland, Hungary etc.). :)
Panos Apostolidis yes the UN recognises the concept of marriage. But in their basic human rights laws and protections they don’t comply with same sex marriage.***
Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are all interrelated, interdependent and indivisible. Panos Apostolidis
It does not comply with same sex marriage…
I wouldn’t call it marriage, it would be a different institution, a contract with same recognized rights except adoption. I hardly believe that a child should have the right to have a mother and a father as nature considers. While a civil union can be considered an anthropological concept, birth is not.
No, Sharia Law does not permit it.
You are not european, so please brexit…
Alfonso Martìnez Montoya Of course we are ‘European’ lol We are leaving the pointless EU not Europe..
https://scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/23380022_10155927721676683_1065380444842862100_n.jpg?oh=f327b482b98f53cb0a554fce84d8f714&oe=5AA4842B
of course they should be legalised…
Yes! No discrimination.
Wtf, should basic life rights be ensured across Europe?
Yes, but in each country individually.
Yes…absolutely!!
Y
They should ban marriage
Ahahahahaha
Sad to see us debating this before we debate how to eredicate hunger across Europe. It just a matter of priority I think.
Only heterosexual couples who can give birth to children must have the right to get married. Anything else is sick and useless
You are sick and useless.
Είπε αφού έβγαλε το ‘πολιτικό νομικής’ :'(
I’m straight and I don’t want kids. Ever. Does that mean I’m not allowed to get married? Panos Apostolidis ακριβώς αυτό.
Obviously.
Here’s my question…. should even this be debated? Give the same sex couples the same rights and move on other serious matters like poverty and child abuse.
Nope
Yup.
NOOOOOOOOOOO no no no
They should be at least recognized across borders, so as not to impede free movement.
This issue is not about same rights for LGBT. Cause nobody cares what 2 consulting adults do with their own affairs. However those that are naive enough to allow this to pass would quickly realize that is an excuse to justify imposing LGBT agenda on everybody and that is starting with very young children. This is how you get drag queens teaching toddlers about sexuality and those that object and would not blindly submit their own children to such influence are then demonized and marginalized as homophobes and rest of such propaganda. So if those that are behind such laws want to change our populations in name of inclusion to this then answer is no. If you think that such indoctrination would stop with children then think again. There has even been one case that Jewish school didn’t want this and were threatened to lose their economic status unless they allow their children to be confused about their identity and even gender. This is how whole populations of a country is affected with one little vote. So now that parents understand what is happening with this “save school” programs want to protect their children. So some schools even have a nerve to go behind parents and allow hormone treatments and even sex change operations. So really who do you think that you are that risk normal life of a child and future that their parents intended so that one day they might have their own children? Having hormone treatment determines development of their bodies during puberty. Messing this up can have serious consequences for rest of their lives.
The homosexual relationship of two people is not equivalent to the marriage, because it does not result in offspring. Homosexual couple does not bear the cost of raising children and does not understand parental love. It is harmful for a family to equalize it with a relationship based on the sexual needs.
The only harmful thing is people like you not using brain.
Why wouldn’t they understand parental love? And milions of straight couples are married and have no kids. Come on. There is love between homosexuals man, it’s not sexual needs only.
Laura Guthrie The word marriage has a definite meaning. We are dealing with a concept attack on the language.
Laura Guthrie They talk about same-sex marriage. The woman is different from the man and it is not wise to question it. People can do whatever they want, but it’s about publicity, about destroying concepts.
Marriage Is a contract that says nothing about producing babies, even if you are a heterosexual couple. That is the definition you have by your own religion, wich you can’t impose on anyone about anything much less what is legal or not. Otherwise it would be a tooth for a tooth 😏
Jerzy Zajączkowski, nope, it’s about you being scared of changing an old, long fixed way of thinking. Almost understandable, except for one thing: this should not be about you…
Laura Guthrie OK. Married not fertile couple is marriage, it is obvious and always it was, and it does not need my confirmation..
Zandra Lilit Terrence
http://cf.chucklesnetwork.agj.co/items/1/4/5/7/0/not-sure-if-trolling-or-serious.jpg
When i think the amount of people that were killed 70y ago in your country, fighting for equality of ethnicity, here you are… wrong ashes
Again a topic which is NOT an EU competence. Why does this site always put topics that are clearly a competence of the Member States and why they don’t debate topics that really matters in the EU. We do not need more interference in the Member States focused on a left-liberal agenda but less interference. We need to focus on topics that are real EU matters. When does this site finally comes out of this EU bubble?
Let them copulate legally! :D
Of course. It’s 2017. Time to grow up.
And yhen politicians complain about the lack of newborn children in the EU.
Because with the “marriage” business homosexuality grows…is the fashion.
Gay people weren’t going to have children anyway. So nothing changes. People don’t become gay because of marriage equality. It’s not like one day I’m dating women and then I read an article about gay marriage and think: oh, hey, now I suddenly like men better. Come on, how stupid are you?
Marriage as a religious procedure? No. Legal marriage? I’d say Yes, personally – but ultimately let the people decide for themselves. Otherwise, aren’t we being a little bit too dictatorial?
The only dictatorial thing happening in this debate is the fact that it can be summed up into “should we give these people equal rights?” and then puts the power in the hands of the majority. It’s called tyranny of the majority, we should not give the power to decide if other people deserve rights at all.
Human rights should not be subjected to majority rule, they should simply be otherwise it’s not human rights, it’s “straight rights” or “white rights” or “men rights”
Evans Fu Notice how I said Religious vs Civil. When you take Religious marriage out of the equation, you’re left with Civil Unions.
On this respect I ask why you think we need to force populations into implementing things they do not want. This is not how democracy works.
If you believe in people’s rights, then you should respect the right to opinion and equal representation in voting – above all else. We need to convince them and really engage with them in dialog so that we can, after 5/10 years of fruitfull dialog, use DEMOCRACY to attain what we seek to implement.
If you believe in anything, then simply convince others on the necessity to implement that thing. If you can’t, you’re either wrong or not capable enough to formulate your thoughts – In either case, you should NOT feel validated in using state power to force other people to do your bidding. That’s what dictators do.
Luís Estanqueiro Marriages were around long before Christianity or any other traditional religion, what gives religious institutions the right to restrict access to something they did not create?
No one is forcing priests, pastors, rabbis, etc to marry people, no one is forcing churches to hold ceremonies.
Human rights should not ever be subjected to majority rule, all we get from that is tyranny as is the case here, people from one group deciding and forcing people from other groups to do as they well please. Your argument falls flat because of this and another very simple point which is that no one is forcing people to enter a gay marriage, therefore there is no “forcing” because the people opposed would never be pushed into marrying a gay person, yet straight people keep trying to force others to do exactly that.
You should think your arguments through, there are a lot of flaws there based on soundbites that kinda sound good if you’re not paying attention, but hold no actual weight.
Evans Fu Also, notice how a LOT of dictatorships rise up precisely because there’s something so unfair going on that they absolutely need to act outside the law and democratic channels to fight it.
Read up on Hitler, Castro and Stalin’s rise to power
When we deny homosexuals the right to get married we are forcing populations. By implementing marriage equality we are not forcing anything on anyone: no heterosexual is going to be forced to marry anyone. It doesn’t change anything for them, it just grants a minority equal rights.
Denying people a right that hurts nobody is dictatorial.
Yes. No one has the right to marginalise love
civil marriage, yes.
Of course yes, let the people love who they want, stop judging as old priests.
Germany legalized same-sex marriage this year. This post is outdated.
Да, но заедно с многоженството.
Obviously yes, and it will.
It’s only a matter of time.
being the marriage a contract, why not legalize?
why not? yes!
Eeli DeSiria
Reading the comments above i can still say you are lucky being European coz at least 50% of people there have no problem with gay relationships
If you read the comments, most people against it are eastern Europeans. That can’t even be considered Europe innit hahaha
Saying that about eastern EU members doesn’t really help our cause to further integration and Union…
André Alves Figueiredo what do you mean! He is just telling the truth, the more east you head the less tolerant people become towards gays and their relationships
Ofc it should only our under developed countries are behind on that.
Yes! love is love always =)
Hello?????…
Seculo vinte e um está a chamar
Definitely No! Do you want Europe to be famous with gay continent. Marriage is only between a man and a woman. Do not want to angry God with that gay behaviour.
Definitely!
Nope
It should’nt be called marriage.
no in Lithuania you will be killed
No. Not marriage but union.
Not in Romania! They should go to San Francisco.
It should not be called marriage.Call it union .
Wjy?
Not in Romania! It may be union, but not marriage. Marriage is between a women and a man.
Yes in the church…but a civil wedding doesn’t need priests, besides church and states are separate. So what’s the point, if ppl want to be happy let them be.
yes, why should I control somebody’s life? the most important is not to hurt anyone, the rest should be allowed
you can legalise it all you want, that still does not make it right in the eyes of God
Which God?
Angie Pantzartzidi there is only One God, I hope you meet Him one day soon
love is love
Anyone crazy enough to get married should be legally allowed to.
YES
YES
YES
YES
I think the state in general should stay out of the marriage business for good whatever the gender of the bride is
Yes and I suggest we return the Member States that refuse to the Soviet Union or the Ottoman Empire
No because This is not right and normal!But you are sick many of you I know
And you know that because of what? You know me? You know that I’m a sick and disgusting person based on what?
I know just what is normally yeah.I can define without for this I need a directive of EU!!!By self reflection.And sorry probably for many people this is painful topic but there are normal and abnormally things in this world!
No because This is not right and normal!But you are sick many of you I know
No because This is not right and normal!But you are sick many of you I know
No because This is not right and normal!But you are sick many of you I know
But of course
No, thank you :)
“thank you”?? I get being an ignorant pig who doesn’t care about civil rights and hates minorities (or let’s call it “having different opinions”), but “thank you”??
Thank you – I do have a different opinion, as per my civil rights. Don’t kill me, please :)
Is that still a question?? Of course!!!
Of course ! What a question !
Of course. The year is 2017. Come on :-)
https://youtu.be/3frkqULr008 Let Lin Manuel Miranda answer that.
DEFINITELY YES!
Yes, mostly to piss off ex-soviets.
Just kidding.
Yes, mostly to piss off ex-soviets.
Just kidding.
Yes, mostly to piss off ex-soviets.
Just kidding.
Yes, mostly to piss off ex-soviets.
Just kidding.
Nancy EvansJessica Ojei-AgwaziamErica MartiniMina Emami
For west europe wil be ok but for est of Europe vil be a desaster, there in est people stil live in 1930 like mentality, honestly it’s not a huge problem if this vil be legal. Im stil no one heterosexual wil not be push to marry with someone non heterosexual. Isn’t ewrione free to chose what to doo with own life?
For west europe wil be ok but for est of Europe vil be a desaster, there in est people stil live in 1930 like mentality, honestly it’s not a huge problem if this vil be legal. Im stil no one heterosexual wil not be push to marry with someone non heterosexual. Isn’t ewrione free to chose what to doo with own life?
For west europe wil be ok but for est of Europe vil be a desaster, there in est people stil live in 1930 like mentality, honestly it’s not a huge problem if this vil be legal. Im stil no one heterosexual wil not be push to marry with someone non heterosexual. Isn’t ewrione free to chose what to doo with own life?
For west europe wil be ok but for est of Europe vil be a desaster, there in est people stil live in 1930 like mentality, honestly it’s not a huge problem if this vil be legal. Im stil no one heterosexual wil not be push to marry with someone non heterosexual. Isn’t ewrione free to chose what to doo with own life?
yes it should!!!!!
No it should not
It would be a very bad idea for the normal people
In what way exactly would it be bad for you as a heterosexual man?
to promote such sort of marriage because it is insane !
panu Kowalik
They simply have to be ignored! I hope that it won’ t be ever legalized in my country R. of Serbia, under any conditions i tez w Polsce
And What do you mean when you say “normal people”?
Miro Lukic You´re not part of the Union (thank God!). So you shouldn´t worry.
you mean us normal people? wouldn’t be bad for us we don’t care but calling yourself normal that’s what worries me
I mean for normal people
In my country such marriage is not allowed and I hope that it will be forbidden forever, that simply is ignored by normal Serbs. The parade is allowed but marriage never, we do not accept that
In Russia either
I have a wife, spose, that is why I am normal and what does worry you Mr Ricardo Exposto???
What do you mean about Normal?
Who is and not normal?
if you think like that then you shouldn’t call yourself ”normal”.
People should always have the right to choose who they love and who they marry. Stop hating people who only want to have that right. Stop to have that ridiculous ideas that are making the world a worst place to live.
They have the right to live together but without marriage, Serbia alows that and even to make the LGBT parade! What else do you want???
Mr Dalton read my comment carefully
There is an answer! In my country with ortodox relligion the LGBT marriage will not be ever welcomed. We will simply ignore them
Miro Lukic Your country can´t really be set as an example for anything. We live in secular states in the EU. Churches have no say in our private lives.
and what about yours???
Alexander Glass after that insult I think that you showed your real face and therefore I leave your group. So long! My country is and will be the example for the positive things and such people like you, … you know the answer
and in Poland as well
they have the rule to live together but not to have the marriage connection
Yes, and polygamy and goat marriage too!
Comment without any interest
How exactly does that stop the decline in births in the west ? Stupid idea.
YES !
good day for everybody I’ll go out of that discussion because for me it has no sense
I don’t think this should be even discussed!! Same sex marriage is a basic fundamental right and should have always been legal by default.
I don’t believe this is a question that should be asked today. Live and let live !!
Obviously yes
Of course !!
I hope and that is my dream that in my country that is not the part formaly of EU, because we will never recognize the fanthom state kosovo, which is the place for terrorists, and that the LGBT population won’t be punished because there are some of them that live together, but they will not be ever allowed their living to be legalized as a marriage, because it is not natural, but insane, crazy and abnormal. One day Serbia will be the formal part of EU without that bloody conditions. Have a nice evening !
down the LGBT MARRIAGE!
definitely yes
Of course, it’s bleeding 2017, get out of the middle ages for fucks sake.
Yes ! But the important is to elevate the income of all the “flexible-working poors” employees and give job to unemployed people, where discrimination to LGBT or straight, is irrelevant ! Don’t eat any System’s bull-shits that tent to divide our societies. Str8 or gay or lesbian, since we don’t have a proper way of decent life, we are in the Same Side and we must be Unite !
Stupid question. Of course it should be part of the great European plan. Equality is for every human, regardless of race colour creed or sexual orientation.
Yep.
Deport
Deport or else
I would like to know what is people’s business against equality… so if everyone cannot have the same rights, bring the slaves back (irony).. i really can’t understand no one is forcing no one, simple equality , not catholic marriage just marriage
So equality without equality.
That’s why people that do not approve equality should be made slaves, they would learn how people without equal rights lived before
Its not an eu level decision.
This is not a matter that have to be voted, there is only 2 questions to answer: do we want equality for every citizen? Do we want human rights? If your answer is yes, for any of those questions, then, your answer to same sex marriage is yes!
People can do whatever they want, but the word marriage has a definite meaning. We are dealing with a conceptual attack on the language. It is harmful to a family to equalize it with a relationship based on the sexual needs.
Big deal if its going to be called marriage or “same sex union”. -.-
It is a big deal,actually
Jerzy Zajączkowski -sometimes is better to just not comment.
So what if a heterosexual couple chooses to never give birth during marriage? Isn’t that also a relation based only on sexual needs, according to your way of thinking?
Michail Panchev, I personally believe that gay people would be more than satisfied with “same sex unions” mostly because their problems caused by the absense of such an option are practical more than anything.
How exactly does one form of family cause harm to other forms of families?
Meaning: Two people in love, living together whom decide to register their relationship in order to get access to rights only available for couples. Stop the nonsense argument, deep down denying rights you already have to the others just because their sexual orientation is prejudice and cruelty.
No grazie, l’Europa non cresce e deve spingere le coppie che possono mettere al mondo dei figli. I figli !! Ma l’Europa e’ in grado di capire questo concetto? I figli!!!
tu sei in grado di capire il semplice concetto che non legalizzare lqueste unioni non porterà le persone omosessuali a contrarre matrimoni eterosessuali e a fare figli? sono le prospettive economiche positive e politiche di welfare a suppotto della genitorialità che sopportano la natalità.
Andrea Martino Quando la famiglia naturale avrà l’attenzione che merita in termini di asili nido, sostegno economico e tutto il resto allora potremo porci delle altre priorità. Non pensi?
A meno che non vogliamo spingere le coppie gay internamente per importare i figli dall’estero … più p meno quello che con somma intelligenza e lungimiranza vuole fare la Bonino …
Sure why not
Definitely NO! How long would take to get married with goats, cows, gorillas, etc…? It would be the next step…..in so called progressivism?
You were born idiot or you worked hard to get where you are? 😕
Zorica Benci You think as you look, a spoiled kid. Ask your mother before you write something….
Gay people and gay sex exist since the very beginning of human history. What the hell are you talking about?
How many times did a goat answer you when you asked her something? Did a cow talk to you about marriage? Did a gorilla ever tell you that he loves you? Animals don’t have a conscience, don’t have free will and cannot speak for themselves, thus not being able to give their consent. Marriage is a partnership between two consenting individuals, man and woman, man and man or woman and woman, because humans are able to give their consent.
Ovidiu Moldovanu Don’t try to be a smart ass….
Doru Beldiman You are really stupid.
Gorazd Grošelj Well, what should I expect from people to be nice, to have intelligent opinion…I could respond in the same way to you, but I’m not going to do it….
Goats, gorillas etc are not people and no one wants to marry them. Your argument is as flawed as hell. Most of the civilised world (22 / 28 EU countries, Norway, Iceland, Switzerland, US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, most of South American states) allows now gay people to marry and what wrong has happened because of that? And put aside religion, as not everyone is religious and forcing those who don’t want to obey the religious rules to do so is a tyranny.
My 6 year old cousin laughed at your comment.
NO WAY !!!
Of course… ever heard of HUMAN RIGHTS……;-)
Ever heard of the definition of family? Sex is sex and a same sex couple will do only that.
Hahaha….. are you religiose……. or just living in the dark space….;-)
Charlotte, marriage is a religious act of showing the bond between a man and a woman before God (depends on religion aka god/gods). Dont understand why they, people going against nature and religion, would want that.. whats the problem in being with each other? Why do they feel the need to show their devilish bond before God?
Cristi Roth you are an idiot.
Hahahha , so you mean we didn`t marry before christ?
-Should same sex marriages be leg…
-No.
-…
-Let the family be a family. Family is so much more than sex.
And please tell me what is a family? Is it a man and a woman with children? If so, a single parent raising his/her children is not a family? Grandparents raising their nephews is not a family? Brothers and sisters living alone, is it not a family?
You telling me that if kids move away they don’t have parents anymore? Or if by some accident the parents died and grandparents take care of the children that family is complete? The family is the entity that can give birth and take care of kids. And don’t you dare to tell me of adoption or in vitro fertilization, by no means my kids will have two fathers.
As if gay couples want to marry to only have sex… 🙄
Adoption. In vitro fertilization.
Well maybe you were happy with two fathers or two mothers
Yes, every human being has to be free to do what he pleases given that doesn’t violate other people’s rights. Europe must be the champion of human rights and same sex marriage is their right even if we don’t like it.
Yes, of course!
In Spain have been legal for years and now is normal, no problems at all.
Yes, but only together with polygamy and same sex polygamy.
Of course it should be legal.
Each church should also have the right to refuse to perform marriages no matter what.
Just let people decide what they want to do. The state has no business interfering with our lives.
No. Fuck!
The debate of a unionisation is both symbolic and also rhetorical too. In this instance, until the operand for the following: was Britain’s unionisation Of prisoners in prison term mitigation should allow or no in the John Law case of French occupation and monopoly of the Louisiana? Regardless of its symbolic and or benefits of the unionisation were goals met?
Although the quest of historians may challenge and debate the possibility of John Law as a smart and successful gambler it is noted I want to say does the event of shipping prostitutes as marry concoct symbiosis. Furthermore in that framework was the eventual collapse evaluated as a failure in macroeconomic element or is there an issue with the sanctity of the pontiff. The church has an element deeply rooted in history only recent revolutions in the spread of information science only allude.
To say the least as pertaining to the scope of unionisation there are many forgone conclusions in America Dtates in establishing a common core element. The fiduciary responsibility has deemed progressive nature to act in the norm rather than the unionisation of faithful heritage.
In the case of John Law it may be presumed when he objected to the Human Resource element of public acts, it’s forfeiture or quants are mere elements deemed quants in terms of production. Thereby the sanctity of British corporatisation as an entity is manifested. This idea varies weight in our civilised society as a Multiple tiered caste in operation, the John Adams’ invisible hand if you conceptualise. The topic in nature of screening stereotypes and personality personifications manifests from identities Freudian et al.
The true scope of endeavour is very well hidden in the nature’s scope: that is to say do humans manifest the inclination as Germany or Korea proved not only Gene manipulation a reality but also Japanese scientist the American test bed of Medical Cloning? Where and when does a soul introduce as spirit of carbon-14 into the body, mind, foodstuff, and limbs?
This discussion is a topic as biopic and insofar is an element of nature history has an answer.
Einsteinium or another famed scientist failed to speak to another living soul after his learnt fate of newborn life. A miracle in earth by the heaven granted his fate to become a father. He lost his soul companion and the
G.co/2017
Honestly, I doubt that anyone is going to read the whole thing :|
Of course as Europe is a human rights pioneer and leads the world
Yes, it should ! Actually it’s a human being status, that has to be protected. In Ancient Greece same-sex couples were accepted as part of societies in many city-states, like in Theves were a whole army body, the Sacred Lodge (“Ιερός Λόχος”) of Epaminondas were male couples-soldiers, who also were unbeatables !
Well, I am sure that there are better arguments pro gay mareige then this.
Ancient greeksal so said sheeps were born from olive trees… that isnt particularly smart, neither should be regarded as true just because ancient greeks said so…
I wilm repeat what I said back then… yes. Off course.
Yes we already have that in Malta.
Forcing your own politics on other member countries is wrong and even tyrannical, yet EU is doing it. EU is even aiding terrorism against its own people. It should be disolved and most of its leadership jailed
😂😂😂
Citations needed
Merkel broke schengen accord to let “refugees” enter, and unvetted even tho experts found ISIS fighters among them, and they come from culture that is opposite to our own(no human rights etc). She had no power to do that, but somehow made it happen like she was new furrer. Refugees should have been allowed to first safe country, but they went trough 10 safe ones. Populace where not protected and where even silenced etc etc etc. Terror attacks could have been prevented. Poland did, they prevented every one. Poland’s model was only one that worked and did not endanger their own people.
Yes you European people have to leave hypocrisy aside and rediscover what made Europe great in the past .and it’s humanist ideas and tolerance. And stop being inhumane and resist….
Being forced to accept homosexual behaviour is neither following humanist ideas or tolerant, its the imposition of the will of the minority over that of the majority and there is nothing ‘great’ about it.
I don’t understand that argument since it only affects it’s own minority and anyone else, and something is not correct/incorrect only because the majority thinks it is, many breakthroughs on Civil Rights and other Human Rights were started and achieved with minorities, the ones being oppressed, ideas that at the time were laughed and the social norm were never to change on those subjects. We need to look to things with more humane eyes because if we just look to the numbers then Democracy only becomes the Dictatorship of the Majority.
Ivan nobody is forcing you to suck dick are they? What do you care what 2 other people do behind closed doors?
Homosexuality even in ancient societies that even promoted it never married. It was allways man and woman that made family. Homosexuals married women and continued their sexual activity as kink. Seeing that gays force themselves on business and force others to serve them against their religious beliefs is force and i oppose any and all tyranny. Civil union is enough imho, untill laws adapt and freedom to people is guaranteed. EU should not force any law, but it is corrupt
NO’!!!
Is this still a debate? We are a liberal, humanistic and secular European society. Something like gay marriage shouldn’t be a debate anymore. All People have equal rights! ️
Is this still a debate? We are a liberal, humanistic and secular European society. Something like gay marriage shouldn’t be a debate anymore. All People have equal rights! ️
Is this still a debate? We are a liberal, humanistic and secular European society. Something like gay marriage shouldn’t be a debate anymore. All People have equal rights! ️
After many times, when this was reposted.
This is insane.
It’s the start of a very slippery slope so the question next year could well be ‘Should marriage between adults and children be legalised across the EU?’
Please, stop breathing. Thanks.
George Stamatakis Are you the official page troll or is it your hobby ?
It genuinely surprises me that you are aware of the slippery slope type of fallacy since you yourself just committed its most blatant version.
Rolf E. Auner I’m surprised that you are surprised, can’t really comment on the rest of your spam post as it made zero sense.
Yes. And it shouldn’t be a debate whether to uphold human rights or not.
Because only your opinion matters ?
Because human rights should be non-negotiable…
Peter Atanassov Says you ? who made you absolute ruler ?
Says common sense. But having seen your brexiter profile, I understand how you wouldn’t know much about that.
Ivan Burrows for better understanding:
http://www.unfpa.org/resources/human-rights-principles
You’re welcome!
Civil marriage between two consenting adults – yes. However, churches and religious organizations should be given the freedom to decide wether to perform marriage ceremonies or not.
I don’t think that gay people would want a church marriage, if the exact same church tells tham that they are sons/daughters of satan… :P
Yes Happy New Year 2018 Debating Europe
Just no.
Yes!!
This is a debate of each country, not an european debate. Each country has freedom to choose if same sex marriage should be legal or not
Just because they have that freedom doesn’t make it right. Basic human rights should be universal and not to the judgement of the countries.
Marriage is a basic human right, yes. It is a religious act that intends to show your bond before God and to promise before him what you have to promise. Don’t think people that go against religion (and nature) should be allowed with their anti-religious deeds to do a religious act. Whats the problem for them to just live with each other? Is it all because normal heterosexual people can actually do it? Or is it because they want to play “family” and it doesn’t work for them if they don’t have that heterosexual aspect? For real, since ancient times marriage wasn’t that important and when Christianity became the main religion of Europe it became necessary to be done. Aka you show your love to the other before God and then you are free to make offspring and live with each other.. So yea, Michalis, it is not that simple as you first thought and its kinda devilish for people to ask anti-Christian acts to be done in the Christian world.
Nobody cares about God or christianity. Muslims get married, Buddhists get married, Taoists get married, atheists get married, satanists get married and none of them believe in the Christian God.
Gods not real grow the fuck up
Andrian Marinov Marriage has existed well before Christianity, it’s Pagan.
But sure, let’s do it your way. Divorce is “Anti-Christian”, let’s forbid that too, oh and go right ahead and forbid sex that isn’t for procreation too.
yes, definitely yes
Absolutely! Of course. Why not?
Yup
In Malta is already a fundamental right. It should be a right by default and I don’t see why LGBT ️ should fight for a fundamental right in Europe since European Union preaches about equality and equal rights but in the meantime we are being asked such questions which in my opinion is discrimination.
Happy New Year
In Malta is already a fundamental right. It should be a right by default and I don’t see why LGBT ️ should fight for a fundamental right in Europe since European Union preaches about equality and equal rights but in the meantime we are being asked such questions which in my opinion is discrimination.
Happy New Year
In Malta is already a fundamental right. It should be a right by default and I don’t see why LGBT ️ should fight for a fundamental right in Europe since European Union preaches about equality and equal rights but in the meantime we are being asked such questions which in my opinion is discrimination.
Happy New Year
Most definitely yes. Enough dark ages, please.
Apparently it’s coming .. if you’re asking
Apparently it’s coming .. if you’re asking
Apparently it’s coming .. if you’re asking
Yes of course, but not mandatory. Every country has to get there on its own time. Portugal did it in 2010, France in 2013, Spain in 2005 and The Netherlands in 2001. Germany did only in 2017, let’s not force any country to do it just because Germany finally realized it was the just and right thing to do.
No absolutely not. I personally do support same sex marriage as I believe that is a union that represents love regardless of gender but we should not enforce these policies onto countries where the majority of their populations do not support it. The EU should still respect the countries’ sovereignty in terms of social issues.
It is rare to see on this issue logical people like you . Respect.
YES. It’s DISCRIMINATION not to instill the same rights to ALL citizens.
No it is anti European it is anti Christian. It will destroy society. Isn’t Christianity a Europe’s value? Who destroyed Slavery? Who stopped killing peoples in Coliseum? Who Unified Europe under one goal? It was made by Christianity and now these bureaucrats try to destroy it
If anybody asks, “Does [GROUP X] have rights?”, the answer is always yes. Some countries might vote no, can those actually call themselves democracies?
Yes, if the majority votes against it, then it is still a democracy.
Soiram Soleristak I’m afraid it’s not that simple. What you describe can be called “tyranny of the masses”.
In a propper, constitutional democracy minorities (regardless of ethnicity, religious affiliation or other factors) are worthy of special protection.
Otherwise the system you call democracy is just about two wolves and one sheep deciding on what’s for dinner.
Definitely NO.Gay people (men or women) are not normal
US/UE is not democracy. This is s corruption, chaos, degradation
Europe needs a strong leader like ME. One person must make decisions, not a group if corrupt and insane people
Europe is degrading progessively. Its end is coming
Off course, bien sur…
Yes. Of course
No. Period.
No .
No get rid of straight marraige too and also people should need a licence to have children if you need one to drive you should have to test to have children.
Also kids must be kept in special cages labelled as “kindergarten”, so they will not harm adults! Then a compulsory vasectomy must also be included for the EU male population. Or well, at least for politicians.
Yes but we have to respect east european countries that are 100 years in the past regarding North and South Europe
Of course! Legalise it already!
I second Niall Lappin’s suggestion – ban hetero marriage altogether. Would break my better half’s heart but hey, who wouldn’t make the sacrifice at the altar of political correctness…
No because same-sex marriage is not natural…But we should let them sign specialpapers in order to let them be kind of married and save their private property-retirement payment from some family members so they can pass them to their husband-wife…
“Same-sex marriage is not natural” peer reviewed citation needed.
TY
anyway that’s my opinion,that’s your opinion…Time will eventually give us the results…!!!!
Same sex attraction is found in every animal species, how can you say it’s not “natural” since it’s found in nature?
Yes it is not natural since we are not developed this way by nature.
fuck no
NO , every country should choose by a referendum . Imposing this kind of things as mandatory has nothing to with liberty or democracy. If you impose something in the name of a greater good it is tirany not democracy . Remember the nazis wanted a greater good so de imposed the killing of jews , the communists wanted a greater good so the killed all the aristocracy and upper class people in all est-europeans contries. Was this good things ? Did this people achieved a greater good ? I guess we all know the answers.
Why should the sexual/ romantic preferances and rights be even debadable in 2017?
Ask the people of Eastern Europe
Very uncivilized people
Wich one of the nations that don’t want to seeks to quit. Not wishing it just why push them away? The excepting of English contract law made this a forlorn conclusion several years ago. All about contract law
No, it shouldn’t
Yes, it must.
to be honest with our selfs, homosexual men and women are living among us since the birth of Humanity.
It is not a “fashion” of the last century and due to the scientists it is not an anomaly as many people still believe but a Human characteristic since the Human Brain give certain “messages” to one Human and other “messages” to another Human.
The only difference with the past is that they stopped living in the “Shadows” and they started to demand their Human Rights.
Most European countries’ people still have their minds right,so no.
Familia e una dintre putinele valori care ne.au mai rămas….eu votez pentru o lume în care mamele au sâni!
why the fuck not
If that’s the only way banksters are safe ofcourse it has to!
If that’s the only way banksters are safe ofcourse it has to!
If that’s the only way banksters are safe ofcourse it has to!
Same sex? I’m wondering if the neutral gender will start to scream about discrimination soon. What the hell you call marriage, between two creatures, which don’t posses gender. And what about hermaphrodites?
When two hermaphrodites marry, it’s technically two marriges. Both of them combined have all the parts needed.
Crezy people say yes. What about when i have kids and same sex people are kissing on the road. What should i say to them. Yha you are free you can be like them. If they are same sex they need separate place from normal people then no problem. They can enjoy as much they want.i can see darkness in the future.
That’s an old, simple, useless argument. I see everyday hetero ppl kissing and I’m still gay, like millions of ppl around the world, then why ypur son would change his sexuality if he is heter? I mean, it’s sad i even need to write this, the only diference will be a happy kid who doesnt have the opression of ppl that loves to get inside someone else lifes, and tat’s it.
Let me doubt of your “normality”
What you should tell your kid is that people are different and everyone deserves respect. Simple as that. It’s better than if your kid does indeed eventually turn out to be gay/lesbian/bisexual or whatever and turn on you, or worse – you disowning your kid. It’s just a matter of respect.
What do we care what you say to your ugly kids? They will probably grow up to be faggots anyway.
I did nt tell you to care. U stupid asshole. Go to..f##.. You know what I want to say.
Yes! Thankfull that this isn’t an issue here in Portugal and in other some countries! The rest of Europe should allowed too. Its about human rights and doesnt destroy family “values”
Let gay people get married !!! Let them be miserable like the rest of us
Let gay people get married !!! Let them be miserable like the rest of us
Let gay people get married !!! Let them be miserable like the rest of us
Corruption across Europe has to stop! And nations should no longer be ruled by banksters and mafia… Anything else is just distraction from the main problems.
sim, quem nao gosta que enfia uns rojões no cu e sai voando…. ninguém precisa aceitar nada nesta merda, bando de hipocrisia, falam que nao podem pessoas do mesmo sexo se casar, mas quando a mulher sai de casa, vai la no xvideos ver porno lesbico ou porno de travesti.. bando de cu sujos siem deste mundo seus vermes malditos. deixem as pessoas amarem quem elas querem.
Arrasou bonita
Why not? But we have to respect people that don’t want, too.
marriage between two people of the same sex should be legislated and approved throughout the European Union because it is a human right to sexual freedom and identity.
Why do so-called democratic countries allow such marriage?
they can have sex without getting married. The question is more about should we change the definition of a family..
Having sex and not being imprisoned for it sums it up? Where is the equality of the individual?
The important thing is to know what is meant by family The conception man / woman? The Union of two people who love and want to live together?
for me the definition of family is love, so in my opinion we don’t have to change anything! We just need to accept everyone as they are, and assure everyone have the same rights by law! Not more, not less, just the same!
Who defines a family?
Yes
No.
No
Wouldn’t legalising same sex marriage provide economic benefits because the amount of marriages would increase and therefore the amount of consumer spending? Or wouldn’t it? Im not 100% sure and would be greatful if someone could clarify (I have absolutely no knowledge of economics lol)
well i don’t like gov telling who can or cannot marry who (as long as we are talking about consenting adults- see islam)
But sure same sex marriage cannot naturally produce children and the gov as an interest to secure future citizen/taxpayers. So IMHO marry who you want but gov incentive should go to natural family in order to produce and support offsprings.
Name it in other way, it’s not marriage. Even if it grants similar rights, it should be defined by a different term.
Why? Who defines family? The Church? The Mosque? The Temple? Or, in a liberal democracy, our elected politicians?
Common sense. Facts doesn’t care about feelings, or ideals. We are a dimorphic species, successful societies are built on reality’s laws.
Homosexuality is 100% natural. Homophobia is an antinatural social construction. Facts are those, regardless of your feelings.
Homosexuality exists, nobody denies it, but it’s not the norm, it’s the exception. Human society develops in spite of it, not because of it. That’s why I believe a homosexual relation shouldn’t be considered equal to a heterosexual one.
Wow, welcome to 1850s Europe.
Some things are worth preserving. Progress doesn’t mean to change everything only for the sake of changing. Change in a society doesn’t always mean progress, sometimes is moral decay.
homosexuality is normal, ofcourse. So is diabetes. That does not mean that it is not disorder.
I cannot comment on homophobia because I don’t know what that is and internet explanations are incoherent and mostly stupid.
Of course it should, but we live in a confederal European polity where Member States retain competence over matters of family and social policy. After the EU elections, the European Commission should come forward with a new version of its horizontal discrimination directive to take account of same-sex marriage.
Democratic governments have the duty to keep all the different situations of our society consistent with human rights principles and people equal before the law in order to give their citizens real choice in life.
Of course yes only idiots religious bigots will say no!!!!
yes 100% defo!!!
Of course it should.
No. Call it union. It is not marriage because it doesn’t produce a family. MAN AND WOMAN GET MARRIED AND HAVE A FAMILY. period. For the rest, yes, they should have some way to legalise their status. If the newest religious zealots (lgbt) want avant-garde then don’t ask to be called in ancient terms. Find one. Not marriage. Not family. They are taken. By the straight freaks…
So then marriages between men and women unable to produce children in a traditional way should be abolished too?
Children are irrelevant to the point. The union we call marriage is between a man and a woman. This becomes a family. I don’t utter these words lightly.
No
We have a lot of things to discuss, in EU. first of all, a great reform is needed. We must vote for the comission and not only for Parliament. We must discuss the budget, we must discuss all the taxes we must pay, for the Oligarcs. And so on.
The wave of the civil rights movement is unstoppable. It’ll be just a question of time until ALL European countries approve marriage equality.
Should have been legal since yesterday. Both same sex marriage and children adoption.
Should unicorns be legalised in EU? How can you legalise something that does not exist?
Should this question even exist?
Leave everybody alone, as long as they don’t hurt you or others. If two men or two women being married hurts you, than it’s only you hurting yourself. Not them. Because you have an idea(l) in your head, that is irrelevant.
Oh and family is only a group of people supporting and loving each other.
As a homphobic person( yes, somehow i am one), i say yes.
Yes.
Marriage as a state institution in general should be abolished. The states have no business in their citizens’ private lives and relationships.
Yes.
Yes
Yes, of course.
What’s important is that countries that DO Have it need to have the EU and member nations RECOGNISE their marriages. Not currently the case.
If you call It anything but marriage ok. Be It legal Union, civil Union, your pick. But marriage/Holy matrimony Is Union by law and by God. God and the Church do not accept homosexuality hence matrimony between a homosexual couple could never Be considered a Holy union.
No
LOL, This is the same as asking, should be marriage be legal in Europe?
I guess if one removes personal preferences from that question so that the public discusses something “public” then the question itself loses the relevance or meaning. It will simply be either anyone can marry or nobody can. In fact, I am saying that marriage is a public affair simply because it is a contract that has legal and tax implications. However, other could argue that marriage is a personal affair (a contract between 2 or more people) and so why would the public even discuss a personal thing? For what?
Common sense folks:
Does it affect people that did not make this choice?
Yes — can be discussed by the public/crowd;
No — Then it is not to the crowd to decide or discuss!
Yes, in fact it DOES affect all people who did not make this choice, judging by USA and Canada.
What? Dude did you understand my point of view? How does it affect and why do you add USA and Canada in this?
Yes
Yes…
Yes.
Yes
Yes it’s essential for an equal society. Sorry, was that a rhetorical question?
And next step, let an adult marry with a child…
I think first you would need too consider “could”
I doubt it. I dont think the consequences would be positive
Yes, it should! Everyone has the right to marry the person she/he loves.
Yes. For principled reasons: people have the right to love whom they wish, and getting married does not in any way hurt others. Indeed, for others to deny them the right get married is a disproportionate and even offensive interference with their personal affairs. As a person of faith, I also see this as religiously entirely justified. As a matter of law, recognition EU-wide is required to maintain the free movement of people. If two individuals get married in a EEA country where they can legally do so, and then move to another EEA country, the latter should not deny them the right to remain married (even if they deny it to their own citizens).
Why not?
Who’s to say it’s wrong – God? Where is?
This shouldn’t be discussed. Yes, of course it should be legal, and no one should say otherwise.
A certain degree of dogmatism is a sign of progress
Of course! No one has the right to decide whom to marry or not.
Two consenting adults ought to be able to marry, regardless of sex or gender.
The question is if by using the word “ marriage “ it really will be possible to change some peoples mind and can help couples to be accepted? I don’t think so ..After all that terror ( sometimes ) same sex couples ( or individual ) had to suffer or are still exposed to , I think accepting the difference that exists should be kept and not try to achieve kind of “ normality “ . The parades done are more then a big party they also are a celebration of the difference and I think if respectful done it should be kept ! So .. indeed its more a game of words , but we should keep the word marriage for the tradional couples but I don’t se any reason to not equal same sex couples to hetero with all the same rights and obligations.
I dont know how many hours you spend to think about a comment that was wrote 4 days ago ….I wouldnt mind at all if someone would say that i will live in a union… as long the SAME laws apply… Thats the most important. Keeping by the way a difference, can also contribute to a better acceptance for the person itself as in the society… One of the biggest arguments that LGTB are confronted with is , “ the love they feel is not natural “ … Well then… there is a difference and maybee its time to accept it and live it… hope you get the point … ! So … dont make problems for a thing that can easily be solved…. grow up 😉 and keep the church in the village as a saying goes !
Everybody is free to do what he/she likes but I don’t think “marriage” is the right word for a monosexual union.
defin marriage so that it’s indubitably heterosexual. I don’t think you can, but give it a try
Marriage used to be the economic and political union of families and nothing to do with love. Nowadays we (tend to) marry for love, so why does this not apply to non-heterosexual couples?
Laura – no, people come together for love but get married to form a family with children (as well as for love),
Every member state has their own legal definition of marriage. We should let the citizens and parliaments of each member state decide if and how to legalize same sex marriages. The institutions of the EU shouldn’t be used to impose policies on all Europeans that should be decided internally by the citizens of each member state, according to their own laws.
No one is having a problem with “monosexual”? Seriously? We are not going to discuss the word “monosexual”?
Yes definitely. If you want to be part of EU you need to follow the rules of equality for everyone. Woman or men it shouldn’t make a difference.
It shouldn’t be legislated on EU level, it should be left to each member state to decide on it’s own. Personally, I have nothing against it.
Maybe you haven’t understand the words… European UNION, or we have the same rights or there is no purpose to belong to it.
Pamela – And maybe you don’t understand what “democracy” means. And you obviously don’t understand what the EU is meant to be. It’s meant to be an economic and political union of nation states, not a bureaucratic superimposing government! The EU is NOT a federation with a federal bureaucratic government, and it was never meant to be one.
Любомир – so you want economical and political union without union in human rights??? No way Jose, we will not tolerate violations of our fellow citizens by fascist psychopaths corrupted governments and on top give them money!!!
Любомир – it started like that but is not meant to stay just an economical union.
Joris – Meant by whom? It should be up to the European citizens do decide for themselves and for their own countries. Really, the EU is becoming more and more like a corporation where policies are dictated top-down, instead of bottom-up, as they should be in a democratic system.
I say, if you have nothing against it, I don’t understand the “but”; if it shouldn’t be legislated in the entire Union, then you do have something against it.
It’s just logic.
It’s not “just logic” because it’s not a simple thing. With legal matters the devil is always in the details. If it is legalized I want it to be because the society I live in has decided this by consensus and the national parliament of my country has put this consensus in legal terms. I don’t want it to be imposed on my society and country from outside. The former is democracy, the latter is tyranny.
No way!
Yes, of course!
Αbsolutely. Let’s not get in legal jargon. Ain’t nobody’s business who we want to marry
This is the way to disintegrate European Union.
I have no objection but only one…,I don’t like the word ” marriage “.It should be left for hetero couples. Just use the word “union “or any other….invent one…,but keep marriage for what it is.
The lefties invented enough words as it is: islamophobia, fatphobia, 3000+ words for gender identification etc. I don’t know about you but I’m fed up with inventing new words.
Jude – thank you 🙏 … my thoughts too
If it’s not marriage then it means that gays don’t have the same rights and that is the point.
Who said that….When you talk about animal rights….you don’t talk about each type of animals….do you ?
We’ve already gotten over this debate. Legally, if we create another word for “marriage”, marriage loses it’s legal meaning. It would be just symbolical. But on paper, LGBT and heterosexual couples would all celebrate “unions”, if you like that word better. And for administrative efficiency, one word or the other would be preferred; just think about adding “Marriage/Union” in every single form, questionnaire, document, registration paper, electronic site… That’s millions of € in investment to change, to add a word: that’s new paper, that’s printing, that’s the hours of work of IT guys changing several lines of code in official, governmental websites, all of them!… Just to satisfy your likes.
But the reality is this: the Church in all its might, wants to reserve “marriage” as a religious (and spiritual) union between man and woman, AND keep the “privileges” of marriage as it is. The Church lobbies to righties that it should be so. Why? Ideology. It’s as simple as that.
You can either accept “marriage” for all; or you accept “union” for all. Any difference is still a difference; any discrimination is still a discrimination.
It’s easier for all to accept “marriage” for all, because all the print is already there. Everything that’s printed, everything that’s coded, is already there. The designs, are all there. So creating a parallel system for something that, in the core, is the same, is wasting money we don’t have.
Do you want to waste money? Because creating a new word “just because you don’t like using the one we have” is wasting a loooooot of money. Just because.
Not to mention that legally equalling one word to another, “marriage = unions”, is a legal, bureaucratic and administrative nightmare! For all and every step of the way.
In other words — grow up, mature; it’s just a word!
I say NO!
Arguments against? Really?
Yeah sure… Let’s have more divorces…
As a divorce lawyer I approve this message
there are no valid arguments against. Just let them be as miserable as we are and let’s get it over with
Marriage between members of the same sex would be unconstitutional in Croatia, an EU member state.
Let other countries do as they wish but don’t force it on member states through EU directives.
Of course
Why not? Will legalisation of same-sex marriage end heterosexual marriages? No.
They should. Family is everything.
It’s basic human right.
Right?
But then again the EU has proven not to be clearly united and supportive of human rights. Look at what positions the member-states take on the refugee issue …
Definitely.
Yes!!!!
Why must a family be legalized, banned or controlled in the first place? Children should have some state support and protection and that’s it. Any further intervention is no politicians job.
No. Period.
Yes because it is not the state’s job to decide with whom the people want to spend the rest of their lives.
Also, it is a Law issue too since married heterosexual couples have rights (in the property for example) while the homosexual couples don’t have this kind of rights. If one goes to a hospital the other one doesn’t have any right to pay a visit or ask the doctor about his health because for the State he is not relative or husband..
Yes
Of course! 👌🏻👍🏻🇪🇺
YES!
Should this be a question at all?
Yes. Period
There’s been a vast improvement in the social acceptance of homosexuals and no negative repercussions since my native Cyprus legalized same – sex unions. Laws do change social attitudes. I say, let’s do it, Europe.
Yes
There is no legal family,only good family ,let’s work on that !
Isn’t it already legalized? No? So we must hurry up! It’s a basic human right!
Yes! It does not affect anyone who is heterosexual. It gives economic, social, family protection to a very small minority.
No, it is a shame for society.
George, it may be, but it would not be a shame of Romania, Hungary, Croatia, Poland would form up their own union, let us say, moram, economic central european alliance, no borders, no borders for fobia, why don’t you work on that.
Yes. Make full womens rights, full diability rights, full childresn rights, full employment rights, full lgbt rights, etc a requirement for joining the EU.
NO
So many problems to solve. This is EU what!!!
Obviously yes
Yes, they should. They are a reality, a fact. This is why governments who care about their citizens should recognise them.
Does it negatively affect others? Yes, it should 😄
As with all media outlets, question concerning this topic (LGBT) occupy between 10-20% of the content. It shows how controversial and defining it is in 2019. But i wonder, is this really the most important issue? Will all the problems of the world be solved if we do legalize it across the EU? What will be the result and backlash? Is this really our nr 1 priority?
Yes
I accept the option of the people ….
But don’t call it marriage….
The marriage it’s a institution of the family between man and woman (with or not children ).
Yes
Marriage is union of one man and one woman to found a family… Call it civil union but not marriage
NO!!!
They can do what they want…but I don,t agree with the word marriage.
why not? finding love nowadays is already nearly impossible and hard enough
Yes it should!! Every kind of family counts.
Each country to have it’s own law on the matter.
So you talk about Eastern Europe in the article yet there is no MEP from Eastern Europe talking about this issue, so one-sided.
🏳️🌈🏳️🌈🏳️🌈🏳️🌈🏳️🌈
yes, does not affect my life as taxes do……
A wedding is a religious ritual, it means something to religious people.
A marriage is a partnership between two people before the state, with a signed contract, rules of conduct, some tax benefits, etc.
In Croatia, a marriage is (almost) the same as a civil partnership (a priest can perform a wedding with a marital contract, but refuses to wed gays, so – > civil partnership. Partnered Gays also face other difficulties in Croatia, like adoption rights, property succession rights, etc. Someone more informed should continue with the list.
Anyway, that distinction between marriage and “gay marriage” should be nullified.
Yes.
Yes.
OF COURSE!!!
Yes but they should not be allowed to adopt children.
No.
Yes. Live and let live.
Ray – exactly. Not sure why that has been historically so difficult to grasp.
It is not my job to decide, not the churches or anybody else. When a EU citizen wants to make this step we should help him achieve happiness.
We have much more things to discuss in Europe.
I think “marriage” is a word used inadequately…
I wonder… there is a foundational problem with this question. The concept of marriage as we know it is something based on religious beliefs. So how come? We are trying to legally restrict beliefs? I know that I am touching a sensitive topic, but I think this simply does not make any sense. Beliefs should be left alone, they are what they are. Aren’t we supposed to have a world where everyone is free to believe in what they want? Of course, your freedom ends, where someone else’s freedom starts, but there is a bigger issue with this topic, than just what is obvious.
Gabor – marriage existed way before religions were established. Get your facts rights before you comment.
Darren, Right…
“Marriage, also called matrimony or wedlock, is a culturally recognised union between people”
Cultural – to me it means subjective, thus something that someone believes is right. You might want to argue about definitions and ignore the point, but to me that is no difference.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage
State and Religion are separate in a democracy.
Then religious marriage and civil marriage are two different things. One is (should be?) managed by state whatever beliefs the other is managed by religion.
A.c. – That is a very good point and theoretically correct, however, raises even more questions in my mind. What are these same-sex couples are asking for exactly? May be some social/legal concepts should be revised from the ground up to accommodate the interests of these people? May be we could avoid this discussion at all if the legislation wouldn’t be based on ignorance and prejudice? Do we really need the legal concept of marriage? Do we need to legally close couples in to this stupid contractual life-form that is only good to create tension by obliging people to do or not to do stuff? (I am married, so believe me please, I speak out of experience).
Of course I understand that most people will not even consider such deep changes and either will be outraged or just ignore me, but that only confirms that the social/legal system is… well let’s just say, it is not perfect….
Since marriage gives you certain legal privileges in a secular state it should be either made available for same sex couples (or established same effort free alternative) or have the legal privileges revoked.
Paulius, Is basically what I am trying to say, but people only get offended before thinking a little bit. Legal regulations should be free of emotions, prejudice and subjective thinking, scientific – if you will. But I would also consider just completely rethinking if we need to legally regulate the relationship of any types of couples at all. If someone is so obsessed by being engaged in the institution of marriage, those could still turn to their preferred religious rituals, but that would have no effect on the legal part of their (or anyone else’s) life.
Darren, In very old times, 2000 years ago or more, only rich people married,
and that “marriage of the rich and powerful” was universal, and happened in any corner of the world.
Paulius – legal privileges?
Tell me one privilege ….
Well, it will depend on the country where are you living.
For taxes payment back to the government if you make simulations for single or couple there is no privilege.
For hospital treatment of a house of retirement when you are old is typically worst to be married,
because you do not receive any help. They say you have e family and the family mus help in first place.
Indeed, many people divorce legally arriving to old age and remain living together to receive more help from the government, than a legal couple will receive.
Gabor. Beliefs are personal. Not to be used to ask THE STATE to restrict rights of others.
Gabor, What same-sex couples are asking for ? I would say they ask to have the same rights than the other couple.
I am married too… and my experience doesn’t make me feel restraint. Not more than when I was with my wife without being married.
If you feel restraint in you marriage, I think you should talk about it with your own wife.
Darren – clearly darreeeen… You do realise before Judaism and Christianity there were other religions that marriage was culturally linked to… P.S. some people 🙄
A.c. – I think you miss my point. I am talking not about myself being restrained (however, it is a legal restrain, whether you like it or not) , but the general concept of putting legal restrains on couples, regulating how they share their income and property, what happens to “their” kids (this part is especially disturbing, as it assumes a sort of ownership of a child) etc. I believe that the concept of sharing your life with another person should not be bound to management of the objects of material well-being (or to be even more general – resources). Right now marriage is not different from a regular business contract between two legal entities. I think this is not appropriate and simply obsolete. And I agree, that human rights should not be bound to any sexual related parameters.
Gabor, I wouldn’t talk about legal restraint but more about definition. I see marriage as a kind of declaration in order to say that two different people are now a same family. As “being a family” gives you some facilities, you have to show you are a “family”, by definition.
However, this definition can be redefine to be adapted with current era. Likewise the gifts allowed after marriage.
Now, I come back to the constraints you were talking. I am surprised because concerning our incomes, nobody cares about how we share it. Concerning the right of kids, they are the same if their parents are married or not. I don’t see ownership on children.
But I can see ownership on the responsability of children. This is slightly different.
Once again, children rights are not perfect… what is made by humankind is never pefect.
Finally, you are right, marriage is contract. But when I look arround me, most of the thing I do is contract. Sometimes contracts are clear (like business contract) sometimes they are tacit (like friendship).
If it’s a reflection of cultural heritage, then why not accept polygamy ?
Paul, exactly!
Paul, And there are waaay to many similar questions that are left without attention…
A.c. – You can declare being a family without any legal background. The fact, that being a family gives you something extra… well I believe it is wrong. The decision to live together as a family should be left to those making this decision and correspondingly all the outcomes should be contained inside of that family as well. I absolutely disagree with giving social benefits to families, as it is simply making the concept of family a subject of becoming a commercial project (again, sensitive topic, but it is up to us to be analytical and not ignorant, covering ourselves up by pretending being offended…). We might argue on this for ages and never reach a common point. My standpoint is that all the family related legislation is ignorant, full of prejudice and completely obsolete, need ground-up revision.
One of the many things I am saying is that we should stop inventing solutions that we ourselves created in the first place and instead start looking for the root of the problems and fixing those.
Gabor – marriage is a legal concept. People can have a religious matrimony as well but that’s their choice.
No this not healthy for natural of human beens
GenoWeva, it’s natural for more than 600 species of mammals and birds. Since humans come from, and belong among, the animal kingdom, it’s just as natural.
Celibacy is not natural, and 100% of catholic priests pride themselves with it.
GenoWeva, that’s your private personal opinion. But if you want THE STATE to enforce one man’s private personal opinions on the rights of others, you probably did not learn the lessons from the failure of communism.
Why would EU have something to say about it? Let each country free to do what it wants.
Each country to decide for itself
Rights are more important than beliefs
Yes it should
should consider banish al corrupted politicians from public service
1. It should be legalized around the world. 2. Each country should decide, not the EU
I think the EU should indeed act as a guardian of basic human rights. Democracy can become a tyranny for minorities if left unchecked. Gays exist and they should have equal rights. This is not something that should be democratically decided, it should just be.
It should be up to each European nation to democratically and openly decide this for itself, not the EU. The EU is and should remain a geopolitical and economic alliance, NOT a giga-government. Even in a federative nation-state like the US this question is up to each state to decide for itself, how can you enforce it in 28 separate nation states? This isn’t democracy.
Любомир, please have a read https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_States?fbclid=IwAR26qOpo0r0WCHeXV-nO_MSslAuDMljyu4XRfnbVBb9utjVbo_nDMy7qVVs
Любомир, I don’t necessarily disagree with you. I do think that we need different levels of integration. Countries that don’t offer a pervasive liberal legal system can be part of the EU, but should be on a lower level, equivalent to their lower civilizational status.
Xavier, Are you sure you have read and understood it yourself? It clearly says each state has it’s own marriage laws and the process to legalizing same sex marriage accross all of the states was a very long, difficult and complex one. And all of this is in ONE country with the same Constitution. We are 28 different countries with 28 different Constitutions and national laws. The fact that the EU law can be used to supercede national law doesn’t mean it’s a good idea to always do so. Ignoring the right of each of these nations to make a free and democratic choice via their own national governments isn’t something good. If such careless disregard for democracy in the nation state continues, the UK probably won’t be the only country leaving the EU. And rightfully so.
Nun, All of the EU countries currently have a liberal legal and political system. Just because gays can’t marry in every single one, doesn’t mean people there live in a dictatorship, for crying out loud!
Любомир, nobody talked about dictatorship, just an inferior society.
Nun, “Inferior” is an entirley subjective and comparative term. Just because you don’t agree with someone’s ideas, that doesn’t make them inferior to you. We are all inferior according to ISIS, for example. Pretending to have a moral highground neither makes it true, nor does it make you right in your ideas and arguments.
Любомир, ISIS is precisely an example of an inferior society, even inferior to what we see in Russia or other countries sharing the same illiberal set of values.
Nun, Yet they have killed hundreds of Europeans and we seem completly incapable of destroying them. Calling them “inferior” doesn’t change absolutely anything, it simply isn’t an argument. It’s just a slightly smarter way of calling someone in a debate “ugly” or “stupid”.
Любомир, I think it’s ok if the EU acts as a guardian of basic human rights. Democracy can also easily become a tyranny for minorities if left unchecked. Gays exist and they should have equal rights. This is not something that should be democratically decided, it should just be.
Yannick, There is no way for it to “just be”, laws and regulations in a democracy are democratically and legally established by the citizens and their institutions. And even if all people have the same right to marry and start a family, the path to getting there should be walked individually by each European society, not enforced by a giga-government 5000 miles away. Currently gay people CAN start families in all EU member states, no one is stopping or persecuting them. There are legal and regulatory roadblocks to marriage in some countries, but they will be probably resolved in time. Let’s not blow the problem out of proportion.
How would that work and who would enforce it. Europe is a continent and not a country. It is for the nation-state to decide
But how much patience do we have to have, to put up with these English people, who do not want to be European, and who really do not want to leave Europe?
Manuel, that makes no, sense, what had brexit got to do with it?
Bye bye you.
Manuel, The English, just like all other European nations and peoples, were European long before the EU existed, and will continue to be European long after it. The EU is a political and economical alliance, European culture and civilization existed long before it. Don’t give the EU credit for something it didn’t do.
Любомир, Dear Lubomir, Europe is a political and a religious construction, and is not a race or an ethnicity group of people.
You say that English people were European before the EU and after the second world war. Yes, you have a point.
It is also true that Europe was non-existent in the times of the Romans.
A Roman Emperor like Trajan (that was born in today Spain in the year 53) was not a European person. He was a Roman citizen.
Europe started in the “dark ages” and with the invasion of the Muslims in the 7 century.
English like all the Germans and like all the Slavic people and all the “Latinos” and the Greeks do not became European automatically.
It was accepting common values based on the feudal laws of kingdoms that were approved by the Christian church (catholic or Orthodox) that made Europe.
Today we do not have the overrule of the Christian church.
The “rule” today about who is European and who is not is made by the European Parliament.
Moving out of the European Parliament and rejecting it, like the English are doing, means they are no more European people.
Chris, There was a talk about if a soft Brexit or a hard Brexit.
Many people commented that was only about how much taxes and how much people moving with no borders.
No, a hard Brexit means that English people will not be considered European people.
You really break and you really are out.
You are not the owner of Europe.
The today legitimite of Europe is in the European Parliamnet.Bye and please do not return with the same face!
Manuel, never wanted to be a member of the EU. Please. Note the eu isn’t Europe. Europe is a continent not a country
Manuel, Dear Manuel, what you say is historically correct up to your point about the EP. No, I am sorry to inform you, the EP doesn’t have a monopoly on defining who is European and who isn’t, because the geographical name and the culture of Europe have existed long before the EU and the EP. So no, I am sorry, but the EP doesn’t get to say who is European and who isn’t. We’ve had a common European identitiy ever since the Enlightenment.
Apart from that, it’s never a good idea to give power to a government to define and control our culture and identity. In fact, it is the other way around – our culture and our identity are a factor to how we govern our societies.
I have nothing against this but their are many more importante things that need to be resolved before this becomes a major issue now a days many normal couples dont get married so what is all this fuss about.
David, what do you mean with “normal couples”? People can choose or not to marry. It is not the state’s prerogative to say if people should or not marry.
Nun, By normal couples I mean 1 man 1 women which is the base to a family for procreation. The last I saw or heard two men or two women could not have children without assistance. and like I said I have nothing against gay marrige.
David – Homosexual couples are normal couples. Human rights and equal rights for all is no minor issue. And anyhow, since you think it is, then it should be sorted in no time and we could focus on those more important matters. 🤷🏻♂️
Each country should decide, not the EU!
of course yes
In my opinion, same-sex marriage should not be a thing across Europe because it causes a bad impact on society and goes against many factors. One reason I disagree with this is because it goes against many religious cultures and teachings. For one, in many religions same sex marriage is not allowed and it is a really big sin or bad thing to do. In many religions, you are taught that love or marriage is between a man and a woman, so you can then develop a family. Meaning same-sex marriage would also go against many religious teachings. Religion is not the only reason that I disagree with same sex marriage across Europe but it weakens the institution of marriage. Having same sex marriage goes against everything of the institution. In the institution the process they go through is supposed to be a couple between a man and a woman. Finally, I go against the fact that the government shouldn’t interfere with same sex religions. If same sex religions are causing bad economic factors to occur in the countries within Europe than the government should be able to get involved to help the economy grow.
My response to same-sex marriage is believed to be the idea that everyone is entitled to having equal rights as a human being and to feel accepted in a world that is made to be diverse. In my opinion, I believe that we should view the LGBTQ community as CITIZENS who are entitled to their own beliefs, as well as their rights of equality that enables others to adapt to new changes that is consistently growing as part of the new generation. Although I see how same-sex marriage can be an issue in the eyes of religion, I believe that the concept of marriage is to be able to commit and express your love to a partner wholeheartedly, and that the impression made by society that is said to believe normalizing same-sex marriage would affect the “true” depiction of marriage between a man and a woman is an ignorant assumption formed by those who lack knowledge on understanding the values of a person, instead of basing rules off religious beliefs. The idea of voicing opinions as a citizen is to be comfortable enough to stand up for our rights and feel that our opinions are being just as valued and important as anyone else.
No it should not be legalized.This is just wrong!
I think that politics should not have a say in these kind of decisions nor I think this should be debatable at all.When we conclude everything I think we can all agree that love is love no matter who loves who.I live with a belief that you should never interfire with a life that does not concern you,so we should live our life and find love whatever kind it is.
Should same-sex marriage be legalised across Europe?
In reality there is no such situation as same sex marriage. A marriage, as same sex are, is based on fidelity having been removed from the status since the introduction of sodomy as lawful partnership. Did you know that? Did you know that? Did you know that the marriage of traditional man and women partnerships has been altered in this most gross way to enable to new laws of this SSM to be introduced. Reducing women as wives and mother to nothing more than legitimate partners, not spiritually connected faithful partners as it once was perceived.
Now why was this not opened up for discussion with the public, prior to making it lawful? Once again, it didn’t want an outrage that adultery no longer existed, in order to allow so called equal human rights. Marriage once equal only to those who would vow to commit spiritually and physically for life. To those who wanted to remain monogamous, which same sex marriage cannot do. This led to the reducing of marriage from vows made to remain, until death do us part, faithful, to each other with our bodies as well as our spirit. Of course the loser is the woman, she now no longer revered in her position as wife.
https://e-space.mmu.ac.uk/594989/1/G_Routledge_06982102_LLM-final-full.pdf
The ancient marriage vows. To pledge thy troth is no longer an expectation of marriage or a vow of, with my body I thee worship.
https://www.wedmagazine.co.uk/wedding-vows.html
And here is the 1552 form of civilised matrimony. The one and only ceremony I would enter into as an expected cherished wife and mother. Anything else is a farce of temporary circumstance to be avoided at all cost.
http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/1552/Marriage_1552.htm
Totally correct.
Yes,Yes,Yes. same-sex marriage should be legalized across the entire world and Europe legalizing it is one step closer to that goal.
Yes, I believe same-sex marriage should be legal. Everybody has their rights and so I believe it should be a requirement for all EU countries to legalize this and this would be closer to equality for all.