LGBT Rights & Issues Thread

[Oneracon]

98% of Maltese identify as Roman Catholic (with 52% attending Mass every single Sunday), and Roman Catholicism is the official state religion of Malta according to the national constitution.

The remaining 2% is mostly Anglican Christian (British retirees and expats), with some small Jewish and Muslim populations as well.

Then we got a social problem I see in Malta, and I don't even know then how trustful that poll is be nor how society really would accept this equal step forward or not.

If the church isn't accepting this, and the large population is religious, and Malta got a state region, then its only a matter of time before their go two steps back after this one step forward.

Influence can do a lot.

Plenty of countries with state religions have no issue with same-sex marriage and other rights for gender and sexual minorities. For Example: UK (Church of England), Denmark (Church of Denmark), Iceland (Church of Iceland), and Norway (Church of Norway).

Beyond that, many countries that are very Catholic have had no issue implementing these rights. For example: Argentina (75% Catholic), Spain (71% Catholic), and Belgium (58% Catholic).

[Ostroeuropa]

Then we got a social problem I see in Malta, and I don't even know then how trustful that poll is be nor how society really would accept this equal step forward or not.

If the church isn't accepting this, and the large population is religious, and Malta got a state region, then its only a matter of time before their go two steps back after this one step forward.

Influence can do a lot.

Plenty of countries with state religions have no issue with same-sex marriage and other rights for gender and sexual minorities. For Example: UK (Church of England), Denmark (Church of Denmark), Iceland (Church of Iceland), and Norway (Church of Norway).

Beyond that, many countries that are very Catholic have had no issue implementing these rights. For example: Argentina (75% Catholic), Spain (71% Catholic), and Belgium (58% Catholic).

The UK gay marriage act explicitly bans the state-church from performing gay ceremonies. Worth mentioning maybe. (Not disagreeing with your overall point here, just highlighting an issue.)

[Oneracon]

Plenty of countries with state religions have no issue with same-sex marriage and other rights for gender and sexual minorities. For Example: UK (Church of England), Denmark (Church of Denmark), Iceland (Church of Iceland), and Norway (Church of Norway).

Beyond that, many countries that are very Catholic have had no issue implementing these rights. For example: Argentina (75% Catholic), Spain (71% Catholic), and Belgium (58% Catholic).

The UK gay marriage act explicitly bans the state-church from performing gay ceremonies. Worth mentioning maybe. (Not disagreeing with your overall point here, just highlighting an issue.)

Yeah, but my point is that a country with a state religion in it's basic governing institution implemented civil same-sex marriage... including having the Queen (who is also head of the Church of England) sign it into law.

[Liriena]

Beyond that, many countries that are very Catholic have had no issue implementing these rights. For example: Argentina (75% Catholic), Spain (71% Catholic), and Belgium (58% Catholic).

You have to keep in mind that, at least in the case of Argentina, there is a deep divide between the Roman Catholic Church and its followers on social issues, and religion-inspired laws have been a tad bit taboo since 1880.

[Aequalitia]

Then we got a social problem I see in Malta, and I don't even know then how trustful that poll is be nor how society really would accept this equal step forward or not.

If the church isn't accepting this, and the large population is religious, and Malta got a state region, then its only a matter of time before their go two steps back after this one step forward.

Influence can do a lot.

Plenty of countries with state religions have no issue with same-sex marriage and other rights for gender and sexual minorities. For Example: UK (Church of England), Denmark (Church of Denmark), Iceland (Church of Iceland), and Norway (Church of Norway).

Beyond that, many countries that are very Catholic have had no issue implementing these rights. For example: Argentina (75% Catholic), Spain (71% Catholic), and Belgium (58% Catholic).

I know that 'religious' countries (especially the Scandinavian+Iceland) got no problems with SSM, adoption and other LGBT rights. We all should be damm glad that more and more countries become better.

But however, what I try to say all the time is that we don't must blind look to just laws. We must first look to society self instead of laws. IDK how this would be going in Malta for a long time (I hope society there would improve), but lets hope for the best case, but remind in our heads that it can also be worse.

I just don't hope this would end up in a Neddie 2.0 Scenario.

[Oneracon]

Plenty of countries with state religions have no issue with same-sex marriage and other rights for gender and sexual minorities. For Example: UK (Church of England), Denmark (Church of Denmark), Iceland (Church of Iceland), and Norway (Church of Norway).

Beyond that, many countries that are very Catholic have had no issue implementing these rights. For example: Argentina (75% Catholic), Spain (71% Catholic), and Belgium (58% Catholic).

I know that 'religious' countries (especially the Scandinavian+Iceland) got no problems with SSM, adoption and other LGBT rights. We all should be damm glad that more and more countries become better.

But however, what I try to say all the time is that we don't must blind look to just laws. We must first look to society self instead of laws. IDK how this would be going in Malta for a long time (I hope society there would improve), but lets hope for the best case, but remind in our heads that it can also be worse.

Sometimes the law must lead society, opinion polls show that once same-sex marriage legislation is introduced support among the general population increases.

Top-down change is sometimes very necessary, especially when you talk about protecting the rights of minorities.

I just don't hope this would end up in a Neddie 2.0 Scenario.

I have no idea what that means.

[Aequalitia]

I know that 'religious' countries (especially the Scandinavian+Iceland) got no problems with SSM, adoption and other LGBT rights. We all should be damm glad that more and more countries become better.

But however, what I try to say all the time is that we don't must blind look to just laws. We must first look to society self instead of laws. IDK how this would be going in Malta for a long time (I hope society there would improve), but lets hope for the best case, but remind in our heads that it can also be worse.

Sometimes the law must lead society, opinion polls show that once same-sex marriage legislation is introduced support among the general population increases.

Top-down change is sometimes very necessary, especially when you talk about protecting the rights of minorities.

I just don't hope this would end up in a Neddie 2.0 Scenario.

I have no idea what that means.

Sometimes yes, but if we depending only on laws, and thinking that legalize SSM is a wonderbox who fix every LGBT issue and removes bigoty, then we are just not thinking clear.

A law is not a society, you living in a society, and that society got laws. The (thankful) support of SSM in Malta is good, but this is just a step forward acceptation of LGBT people. It is a big step maybe, but it don't means we can now sit and do nothing more. Now its time to see how society really would response on this, and that would take some years before we all know sure of this was a great step or just opened the door for even more bigoty/discriminating.


What I did mean with the Neddie 2.0 scenario? That you legalize SSM, and adoption even for same sex couples. But however don't do anything to change society, what causing after years that bigoty, discrimination, hate, depression & suicide of LGBT persons would be the real fact in society.

[Oneracon]

and thinking that legalize SSM is a wonderbox who fix every LGBT issue and removes bigoty

I said no such thing, same-sex marriage is a very small piece of a larger fight that includes everything from improving sex education to ensuring access to knowledgeable health care professionals.

[Othelos]

In other news, Brunei has adopted a new penal code that calls for death by stoning for same-sex relations.

[Aequalitia]

In other news, Brunei has adopted a new penal code that calls for death by stoning for same-sex relations.

Wait, serious?! ;_;

[Thafoo]

The fact that these people get considered by some as less then subhuman is disgusting. They are human beings, same as you. And you should fucking treat them as such.

<3

[Othelos]

In other news, Brunei has adopted a new penal code that calls for death by stoning for same-sex relations.

Wait, serious?! ;_;

I'm not kidding.

It's like half the world is progressing, while the other is going backwards.

[Geilinor]

Wait, serious?! ;_;

I'm not kidding.

It's like half the world is progressing, while the other is going backwards.

As some people progress, others get even more reactionary in return.

[Othelos]

I'm not kidding.

It's like half the world is progressing, while the other is going backwards.

As some people progress, others get even more reactionary in return.

Yeah.

Sometimes I forget how good we have it in the west.

[Aequalitia]

Wait, serious?! ;_;

I'm not kidding.

It's like half the world is progressing, while the other is going backwards.

Well, what I do see last times is that indeed this world starts to be broken in half. When more and more countries accepting LGBT people and rights, more and more nation take dramatic bad, awful choices and (re)criminalize non-straight people and feelings.

Like Brunei does now.

Its awful, and makes us all aware how it all can go sadly also.

[Geilinor]

Brunei has gone all-out with the introduction of Sharia law. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/concern-as-brunei-brings-in-system-of-islamic-law-with-punishments-that-include-the-dismemberment-of-limbs-and-stoning-to-death-9223633.html

[Chedastan]

So I guess Brunei would be warranted to a peacekeeping operation for violation of human rights and acts of genocide then?

[Degenerate Heart of HetRio]

So I guess Brunei would be warranted to a peacekeeping operation for violation of human rights and acts of genocide then?

It's bold for somewhere not powerful as Saudi Arabia, regionally relevant among other very homophobic countries as Iran and a complete hellhole forgotten by God as the other countries punishing us to death to do such a move...

[The balkens]

In other news, Brunei has adopted a new penal code that calls for death by stoning for same-sex relations.

DUUUUUUUMB.

Seriously? What the absolute fuck is wrong with some people?

[Geilinor]

In other news, Brunei has adopted a new penal code that calls for death by stoning for same-sex relations.

Seriously? What the absolute fuck is wrong with some people?

In the case of Brunei, Sharia law is what's wrong. I have no idea why their government is suddenly going all Saudi Arabia.

[Othelos]

I'm not kidding.

It's like half the world is progressing, while the other is going backwards.

Well, what I do see last times is that indeed this world starts to be broken in half. When more and more countries accepting LGBT people and rights, more and more nation take dramatic bad, awful choices and (re)criminalize non-straight people and feelings.

Like Brunei does now.

Its awful, and makes us all aware how it all can go sadly also.

Yeah. People think social issues are in the past, but things can happen to reverse progress. Like in Russia or Brunei, not that the latter was that progressive to begin with...

[Oneracon]

I'm not kidding.

It's like half the world is progressing, while the other is going backwards.

As some people progress, others get even more reactionary in return.

All one needs to do is look at the list of countries that signed a draft General Assembly resolution explicitly opposing the recognition of LGBT rights by the United Nations.

[Othelos]

As some people progress, others get even more reactionary in return.

All one needs to do is look at the list of countries that signed a draft General Assembly resolution explicitly opposing the recognition of LGBT rights by the United Nations.

At least the number has declined since 2008.

[Grenartia]

So why is it that when I defend LGBTs and LGBT rights, people think I'm gay?
I live in the bible belt, so that might have something to do with it.

But it seems that people think I am gay when I get into a conversation over gay rights.
It upsets me that, at least in my area, those who defend gays are considered to be gay.

Also, a question:
What can an ally do in this area to help get some progress?
I live next to a major city, Louisville.
Lots of progressive thinking here, but still quite a few homophobes and whatnot.

Ask them if you have to be a racial minority to believe in racial equality. And then ask them if you being LGBT inherently diminishes your words.

Yay! It's done!

Cast your bets on when we'll get a response!

I call sometime in May, probably the 22nd.

[Wolfmanne]

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/vi ... ons.514992
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/ ... 685135882/

The controversial law on civil unions was approved by Parliament this evening amid loud cheers and celebrations by about 1,000 people who gathered on Palace Square.

The Opposition abstained.

The bill puts gay partnerships on a par with marriage.

Opposition leader Simon Busuttil said before the final vote that although the Opposition agreed with civil unions, it had reservations regarding child adoptions by gay couples and felt this issue deserved more study.

Gay people were an integral part of society and the time had therefore come to legalise civil unions or civil partnerships. Indeed, he regretted this step was not taken earlier, he said.

Had the bill been solely on civil unions, the opposition would have voted in favour. But for political ends, the government had included child adoptions by gay people. Adoptions were not a right of couples, heterosexual or otherwise. Children's rights came first and this issue should have been addressed in the law on adoptions and not in the civil unions bill. That was what was done abroad.

The opposition was not saying that gay people could not be good parents, but the government had not prepared the country for such a step.

The government preferred division to unity.

Indeed, 80 per cent of respondents had declared in a survey that they were concerned about gay adoptions. It was not wise to proceed before it was guaranteed that the interests of children were guaranteed.
It was a shame that the government never spoke with the opposition on the possibility of consensus and ignored its amendments So much for the claim that this was a government that listens. The government had delayed the final vote only because it feared that President George Abela would not sign it into law, Dr Busuttil said.

In a reaction to Dr Busuttil's comments, Prime Minister Joseph Muscat said today separated the past from the future. It also separated words from deeds. He too would have wished to see this law enacted earlier. But it was not Labour which was in government in the past few years. This was not about political gain once it had been claimed that 80 per cent of the people were against this law.

The government had moved this bill because it believed in it. It was doing it for the minority, but also for the majority, which would live in a country which was more equal, liberal and European. The opposition's amendments would have reduced equality, not strengthened it. One could not compromise with principles, and this law was about the basic principle of equality.

He disputed that society was not ready for this step, but said that if this was the case, then it needed to be explained, he said. But one should not wash his hands like Pilate.

All government MPs voted in favour of the Bill except Foreign Minister George Vella, who is abroad on government business.

GAY COMMUNITY CELEBRATES

There was an explosion of cheers in Palace Square as the vote was taken - 37 in favour and 30 abstentions. The façade of the palace was lit in the rainbow colours.

Earlier Dr Muscat was greeted with applause as he arrived at Palace Square on his way to Parliament. Other Labour MPs arrived wearing the colours of the gay community on their lapels.

Some of those present set up a big wedding cake on the square. Others said they were already preparing their union, now that the bill was becoming law. Sparklers and wedding veils were handed out.

CHEERS AND BOOS - PM ADDRESSES THE CROWD

There were cheers and cries of 'Joseph, Joseph' when Dr Muscat emerged from the Palace after the vote, and loud boos and cries of 'shame on you' for the Opposition MPs.

Dr Muscat addressed the crowd from a stage on one side of the square. This, he said, was a historic day and he was proud to be one of those 20 per cent in favour of civil unions. He then repeated parts of the speech he made earlier in Parliament.

One of those present, a young man, said: "I am feeling privileged to be witnessing history and experiencing equality this early in my lifetime when so many others were forced to wait their entire lives in vain. Tonight's party in Valletta is not for people like me but for all those who fought their whole lives to be able to celebrate their love without distinction but did not live to see this day."

University lecturer Carmen Sammut called it a historic day, saying she did not think it would happen in her lifetime.

TV personality Ray Calleja said that when he was younger, he did not think that civil unions would be legal in his lifetime, but as he grew older, he did expect it to become legal. Today would hopefully pave the way for a time when gay relationships were not an issue any more.

Gabi Calleja, who heads the MGRM said she still did not understand those who were concerned about the bill giving gay couples the opportunity to adopt. Today, she said, was a historic day which had movement had long worked for.

Many of those present listened to radios or their mobile phones to follow proceedings in parliament.

US AMBASSADOR AT CELEBRATIONS
Among those present in the square was the US Ambassador, Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley. She said this was a historic decision and a change for Malta. "We absolutely support inclusiveness," she said. "Congratulations."
British High Commissioner Rob Luke in a tweet said: "A historic day for Malta as Parliament passes the Civil Unions Bill."

Celebrations are expected to continue well into the night. A programme will feature entertainers Ray Calleja, Chunky, Glen Vella, Claudia Faniello, Amber, Davinia, Daniel Testa, Muxu and Renato.

Earlier today, former Nationalist MP Karl Gouder, a senior official within the party, said in a tweet: "Today is an important Day for Malta, just wish that the party I love so much could have done more to get to this day."

Edward Demicoli, a former PN candidate for the Europeran Parliament elections agreed with Mr Gouder. He said on Facebook: "Agree wholeheartedly. On social issues our party is on the wrong side of history."

Tenor Joseph Calleja welcomed the legislation. He tweeted: 'About bloody time too! Congratulations to all my gay friends in Malta.'

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT APPROVED

Parliament this evening also approved a constitutional amendment moved by the opposition for gay people to be protected from discrimination. The amendment was approved by all present.
AD welcomes the introduction of civil union legislation; hopes this leads to full equality.

EUROPEAN SOCIALISTS CONGRATULATE MUSCAT

The Party of European Socialists - the socialist group in the European Parliament, congratulated Joseph Muscat. In a trweet, the PES said:

“Congrats Joseph Muscat and PL Malta for such positive record on LGBTİ rights. PES family strong on equality for all”

AD WELCOMES CIVIL UNIONS

Alternattiva Demokratika welcomed approval of the Civil Unions Bill.

Prof. Arnold Cassola, AD Chairperson, said: "Alternattiva Demokratika believes that there should not be any discrimination on any basis in Maltese society, including sexual orientation, as stated in the Maltese Constitution and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union citizen, which has been signed and ratified by the Maltese Government.

"Today is a historical day for Malta and we are proud to have given our contribution to enhance awareness about equality and social justice. As members of the European Greens, who have been promoting equality for gay couples for many years, we adhere to the same political ideals. We hope that this law will lead to the legal protection of other couples, such as those in cohabiting relationships, as was promised by the political parties.

And to think only 3 years ago I was in Malta, trying to convince my Great Aunt Polly to vote yes in the divorce referendum. Malta has come a long way. With my family being very strong Partit Laburista supporters, as am I, including members actively involved in the legislation phase, I am very happy this has passed. I'm also surprised that the shitting Partit Nazzjonalista didn't vote against it (their only reason for their abstention were the gay adoption clauses). Anyway, Malta is nothing like the US, so we won't see the social conservative demanding that civil unions in Malta become illegalised in the next 4 years. Hopefully within the next 50 or so years true gay marriage will be legal. I also find it quite remarkable that the first civil unions will be held in three months, in comparisons to the LGBT community in the UK waiting a long period of time for their first gay marriages. So, what say ye NS? Is this a step forward for one of the most conservative (but still the best) nations in Europe? And isn't Malta just so amazing ?