Gay Marriage


  • Admin

    Why should homosexuals not be allowed to enter into unions recognized by the state? Because in all fairness, that is all marriage is as far as government institutions are. Why is there this denial of rights? I would be very interested to here an answer that isn't based around "because God says it's bad".


  • Admin

    The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics opposes the term 'same-sex marriage' for it is a violation of the 1977 Constitution of our nation, as the definition of marriage is 'a union between a man and a woman.' We do, however, agree that homosexuals should be allowed to enter into unions recognised by the state.

    Concerning our constitution, the subject will be brought up for debate in the Congress of People's Deputies concerning a possible amendment in the wording to justify the usage of the term 'marriage' on a legal basis to call the union of two people of the same sex. As there is no official CPSU position on the subject though, however, with the principles of democratic centralism it can still take considerable debates.



  • Unlike the situation in the Soviet Union, there has not been any definition of the word marriage in our legal system. There is, however, a statement in the constitution clearly guarantees the right to marriage of all Aleutian citizens. Therefore, same-sex marriage is automatically legal and recognised in The Confederacy of Aleutia.

    Our government does not attempt to change the status quo, unless there is enough calls to adapt an admenment in the Constitution which will ban same sex marriage or at least add a definition of the word marriage to our highest laws. So far, there has not been enough signatures to even initiate the process.



  • The Koeuvek Socialist Republic is relatively undecided of its stance for same-sex marriage. Right now it is effectively illegal to marry the same gender since it never was mentioned on the Constitution in the first place. However the National People's Congress will take this into issue.



  • The Alikhi representative squirms on his seat, uncomfortable at what he is being forced to say:
    "Although our government has shown inclinations towards considering civil unions, the Council of Imams and the vast majority of our citizens are totally opposed to any such concessions. Although the honorable representative of Belarum has shown frankly offensive scorn towards religion being an appropriate motivation behind legislation, we maintain a firm stance against the legalization of Homosexuality or civil unions on cultural, religious and social reasons."


  • Admin

    I would greatly appreciate an explanation from the esteemed Alikhi representative as to why the marriage of homosexuals would be considered immoral or even wrong.



  • The Constitution pf the Holy Empire of Teriaban states that every citizen is entitled to marry whom evey he or she wants. A direct qoute is 'a union between two parties'

    Although our nation is strongly religious and some high members of the cleregy within our nation has condemned this view, Teriaban has no intention of changing its view on the subject.



  • The Constitution of the Imperium of Triera failed to include a definition of marriage but amandments have followed in the past years that allowed for the marriage of man and woman or homosexual couples.



  • QUOTE (Belarum @ Jan 7 2007, 01:38 AM)

    "because God says it's bad".

    The Sig. Verrina, a very, very devote catholic, can't help but stand up and yell out strongly and a bit too loudly:
    "You're damn right God says it's 'bad', and who the hell are you to mock my religion?!

    If a man and a man, or a woman and a woman were meant, in nature/God's plan, to marry, and have sex, then each pair, respectivly, would reproduce."

    _...realizing how loud he was shouting he sits down, not regretting what he said, rather just embarassed at his tone. _



  • Homosexual couples have long had the right in Peace-Loving States to marry with the same rights and responsibilities as heterosexual couples. This right is guaranteed in federal constitutional jurisprudence as a matter of basic human rights to liberty, dignity and equality. We support equality as a matter of policy throughout the region and, accordingly, believe that every nation should be obligated not to deny homosexuals the same protections under the law that heterosexuals possess.


  • Admin

    QUOTE (Nazione Italiana @ Jan 7 2007, 06:56 AM)

    QUOTE (Belarum @ Jan 7 2007, 01:38 AM)

    "because God says it's bad".

    "You're damn right God says it's 'bad', and who the hell are you to mock my religion?!

    If a man and a man, or a woman and a woman were meant, in nature/God's plan, to marry, and have sex, then each pair, respectivly, would reproduce."

    Why is it bad? Because they can't reproduce? What if a sterile heterosexual couple couldn't reproduce? Would that be a sign from God that their union is unholy? If we begin to use the Bible to set political agenda, when does it stop? Would we soon have mandatory prayers? Will we start stoning gays and burning witches next? These arcane laws stand in the way of human progress. I'm not insulting religion, because I feel it is a deeply personal matter. However, the entire political system would experience an upheaval if we allowed the few to shove their beliefs down the throats of others. No one's forcing you to marry a gay person, the option is left open to those who have traditionally been persecuted.

    But again, if you can clear up for me why two gay people marrying is "bad", I would be eternally grateful.



  • I would highly suggest that the representitive of the Nation that currently houses the EU Presidency stop pressing or questioning the views of others, trying to make their beliefs look foolish. My nation follows a sensible amount of Religious order, due to the MASS majority of Roman Catholics, almost 98 percent. We do not burn witches, we do not find sterile people evil, my point was that a man and a woman can, as a pair, have a child naturally; and stop putting words into our mouths. You are insulting religion, suggesting that my church or government burns witches or prosecute others due to the past actions of the church to gain control, which has, if I am not mistaken, has stopped long, long, long before you or I was born. Like I said, it is unnatural, and there is no proof that it is not a choice by the individual. I'm sure if your nation wishes to spend billions in research to prove otherwise, then our government might change it's mind.


  • Admin

    A question; why should homosexual couples in Nazione Italiana or any other nation suffer the fate of being unable to unite legally, if they do wish to? We recognise that your religion appears to be opposing this, however, a secular state should allow civil unions between people of the same sex, as it is a matter of freedom and human rights.



  • There lies your faulty assumption, Comrade Soviet. We are not a secular state, and we see no reason why this organization should challenge the sovereign rights of a state simply because it chooses to enforce laws and regulations based on concepts like "religion" and "morality" which are so alien to your nation.

    Regardless of wether the Europeans believe this to be right or not, the fact remains that our people believe such things to be sinful and should be outlawed. As such, we bow to the will of the people, aswell as to Allah's. Perhaps the Soviets should try listening to their people before they pass judgement on our submission to Allah.



  • Religion is a great part of everyday life in many countries, such as Italiana, Aleutia, and Alikhstan, and plays a unique role in the society of our countries. Forcing secular or athestic views upon our people is therefore also a gross violation of human rights. Other countries must respect our cultures and sovereignty. So we think it's best to leave this decision to the people of each country.



  • Same-sex civil partnerships were legalised in 1975 in Derbyshire and Fife by act of parliament. The 1997 Religious Tolerance Act (GR - 06) amended this to raise these civil unions into full-fledged marriages and remove the Church of England as the established church.

    On this matter, I agree with the right honourable representative of Belarum. I think religion (or as he puts it so well, 'because God said so') is a silly reason to deny rights. 'Because God said so,' is the same reason Christians used to justify slavery, racism and the supression of women's rights and feminism. I think most of us here would agree that there should be a clear separation of church and state and that one should play no part in the other. As former Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin (no, I am not a Canadian Liberal; just a Red Tory) said, "If we do not take a step forward, then we take a step back; if we do not protect a right, we deny it."



  • The sexual relations act of 1992 allows consenting adults of Dim Quai to be involved in whatever kind of habiting / relationship arrangements they feel most comfortable with. The state recognizes marriages and civil partnerships for all types of gender partnership, as it does not give any legal or financial privilages to either. Why discriminate against people who are happier being outside of a relationship?



  • Same-sex couples enjoy full recognition by the Traceynian Government.
    Put colloquially, all arguments against gay marriage are boiled down to "Gays are icky", and "God says so".

    QUOTE

    Like I said, it is unnatural, and there is no proof that it is not a choice by the individual. I'm sure if your nation wishes to spend billions in research to prove otherwise, then our government might change it's mind.

    I would like to ask the representative of Nazione Italiana, when did you choose to become a heterosexual?

    Though we applaud Belarum for attempting to find a rational reason for opposition to gay marriage, we feel it is a lost cause.



  • QUOTE (Traceynia @ Jan 9 2007, 03:16 AM)

    I would like to ask the representative of Nazione Italiana, when did you choose to become a heterosexual?

    Though we applaud Belarum for attempting to find a rational reason for opposition to gay marriage, we feel it is a lost cause.

    "What?!? Are we honestly going to let this Parliament turn into a game of "gay or straight"? I am hetrosexual for your information," replied Verrina, "but I refuse to answer the rest of the question. When I, so called, "chose" to be a hetrosexual is irrelevant, and improper. That is outragous and immature. Grow up."



  • "Ladies and gentlemen, please. We must find some middle ground." The Meritocrat chimed in, hoping that someone soon would see sense.

    "We seem to be descending into school yard politics. Quite frankly, I did not think that this would be the thorny issue it has become. Would not the simple answer be to allow this to be a matter of national sovereignty? Besides, there are currently more important issues in the region that need my attention. However, I do not want to come back to this esteemed institution to find that you have made my marriage illegal around the EU!"

    The Meritocrat rose to his feet to make his final plea to the President.

    "Mr President, I strongly urge you to adjust your position on this matter. It is quite clear that it is potentially damaging to EU relations."

    With that, Alexei left Incindus Pyraxis to guard the civil rights of the citizens Dim Quai.