NationStates

Minzerland II wrote:

Kannap wrote:
I like the idea you've been championing that citizens that don't fit a nation's stereotype for a perfect citizen aren't true citizens and don't deserve rights.

Mm, no. You don’t need to be a ‘perfect’ citizen to be a citizen, gays are still evidently citizens, and I would only stop them from marriages (and possibly adoption, though I am unsure and uneasy about it). I simply stated that non-Christian citizens in Romania ‘culturally and politically’ deviate from Romanian culture, we all do, but they almost completely removed themselves.

There's no need to stop gays from marrying. I mean, action needs to be taken to stop the semblance of marriage between two men and two women, but no need to stop the gays from lawfully marrying the opposite sex. Dunno how many actually would, but you know.

Diopolis wrote:

Minzerland II wrote:Mm, no. You don’t need to be a ‘perfect’ citizen to be a citizen, gays are still evidently citizens, and I would only stop them from marriages (and possibly adoption, though I am unsure and uneasy about it). I simply stated that non-Christian citizens in Romania ‘culturally and politically’ deviate from Romanian culture, we all do, but they almost completely removed themselves.

There's no need to stop gays from marrying. I mean, action needs to be taken to stop the semblance of marriage between two men and two women, but no need to stop the gays from lawfully marrying the opposite sex. Dunno how many actually would, but you know.

Stopping gays from marrying each other, I mean.

Mardla wrote:

Kannap wrote:
I like the idea you've been championing that citizens that don't fit a nation's stereotype for a perfect citizen aren't true citizens and don't deserve rights.

Extending citizenship to every resident of a state really doesn't make any sense.

Don't need to extend citizenship to people who are already citizens.

Minzerland II wrote:

Kannap wrote:
I like the idea you've been championing that citizens that don't fit a nation's stereotype for a perfect citizen aren't true citizens and don't deserve rights.

Mm, no. You don’t need to be a ‘perfect’ citizen to be a citizen, gays are still evidently citizens, and I would only stop them from marrying each other (and possibly adoption, though I am unsure and uneasy about it). I simply stated that non-Christian citizens in Romania ‘culturally and politically’ deviate from Romanian culture, we all do, but they almost completely removed themselves.

There's no good reason for the government to stop homosexuals from marrying each other.

Diopolis wrote:

Minzerland II wrote:Mm, no. You don’t need to be a ‘perfect’ citizen to be a citizen, gays are still evidently citizens, and I would only stop them from marriages (and possibly adoption, though I am unsure and uneasy about it). I simply stated that non-Christian citizens in Romania ‘culturally and politically’ deviate from Romanian culture, we all do, but they almost completely removed themselves.

There's no need to stop gays from marrying. I mean, action needs to be taken to stop the semblance of marriage between two men and two women, but no need to stop the gays from lawfully marrying the opposite sex. Dunno how many actually would, but you know.

There's no need to stop straights from marrying. I mean, action needs to be taken to legalize same sex marriage, but no need to stop the straights from lawfully marrying the same sex. Dunno how many actually world, but you know.

Personally, while it is good that the measure did not pass (because of low turnout), I am still concerned that most of those who did bother to turn out and vote voted in favor of an action that would harm Romania's LGBT community.

Even though I don't have a stake in this (by virtue of being on the other side of the world), just because the measure did not pass does not necessarily mean that LGBT people will be accepted in most of Romania anytime soon.

Mardla wrote:All humans are people, and a human life begins at conception.

Corpses are humans but don't have personhood.

Page wrote:

Mardla wrote:All humans are people, and a human life begins at conception.

Corpses are humans but don't have personhood.

They do if we reanimate them.

Luziyca wrote:

Page wrote:
Corpses are humans but don't have personhood.

They do if we reanimate them.

Tie some strings to their arms and legs and have a puppeteer in the rafters.

Page wrote:

Mardla wrote:All humans are people, and a human life begins at conception.

Corpses are humans but don't have personhood.

They lack a human life.

Mardla wrote:

Page wrote:
Corpses are humans but don't have personhood.

They lack a human life.

What is a human life then? Is it living, organic matter with human DNA? Because in that case, a kidney in a cooler fresh from a car accident on its way to a recipient has a human life, given that it is human DNA and not dead.

I can't help but think this thread got off track here.

The Holy Therns wrote:I can't help but think this thread got off track here.

How quaint. Such a thing normally never happens in NationStates General.

Luziyca wrote:Personally, while it is good that the measure did not pass (because of low turnout), I am still concerned that most of those who did bother to turn out and vote voted in favor of an action that would harm Romania's LGBT community.

Even though I don't have a stake in this (by virtue of being on the other side of the world), just because the measure did not pass does not necessarily mean that LGBT people will be accepted in most of Romania anytime soon.

The second sentence is evidently true.

But as to the first, well, obviously when the opposition called for a boycott (which most Romanians didn't follow; they just couldn't be bothered and didn't care), then the results for those who did turn out is going to be heavily in favor.

Anyway, I find it unfortunate that the Social-Democrats were responsible for this. I wish they'd clean up their act, and actually work on building a base larger than their old and rural People's Republic survivors.

But this is Romania, after all. And Eastern Europe really (Slovakia is another example)... And we can't really give out lessons, considering the combined might of the PS and German SPD wouldn't amount to 25% in any election... So...

Olerand wrote:

Luziyca wrote:Personally, while it is good that the measure did not pass (because of low turnout), I am still concerned that most of those who did bother to turn out and vote voted in favor of an action that would harm Romania's LGBT community.

Even though I don't have a stake in this (by virtue of being on the other side of the world), just because the measure did not pass does not necessarily mean that LGBT people will be accepted in most of Romania anytime soon.

The second sentence is evidently true.

But as to the first, well, obviously when the opposition called for a boycott (which most Romanians didn't follow; they just couldn't be bothered and didn't care), then the results for those who did turn out is going to be heavily in favor.

Anyway, I find it unfortunate that the Social-Democrats were responsible for this. I wish they'd clean up their act, and actually work on building a base larger than their old and rural People's Republic survivors.

I know, you wouldn't expect the SD to introduce such a backwards policy!

Agarntrop wrote:

Olerand wrote:The second sentence is evidently true.

But as to the first, well, obviously when the opposition called for a boycott (which most Romanians didn't follow; they just couldn't be bothered and didn't care), then the results for those who did turn out is going to be heavily in favor.

Anyway, I find it unfortunate that the Social-Democrats were responsible for this. I wish they'd clean up their act, and actually work on building a base larger than their old and rural People's Republic survivors.

I know, you wouldn't expect the SD to introduce such a backwards policy!

Well I mean... You sort of would, the left in the East is different. In Romania and Slovakia particularly so (Slovakia's SMER is responsible for the recent constitutionalization of the ban on same-sex marriage even), but in general, Lithuania's SDs, Latvia's etc. aren't like the left in the West.

The demographics and dynamics are different. Which is fine, they don't have to support LGBT rights if their countries aren't willing (it's not our job to ask them to commit the electoral suicide we've committed ourselves to, EDIT: which for us is not due to LGBT rights), but they can't institutionalize their discrimination either. And they certainly can't try to join the anti-Western pro-Putin sphere, which the Romanian SDs are somewhat leaning towards.