What impact will Argentina's legalising of gay marriage have? 1v84u

"What impact will this decision have?"

Gay people will be able to marry each other now, that's the impact, heaven won't come crashing down, at least that didn't happen in the 20 other countries and 6 U.S. states that previously legalized gay marriage.

"Should other countries in Latin America follow suit?"

The whole world should follow suit as there are no rational reasons to prohibit gay marriage and enforcing such a prohibition costs taxpayers' money. I would assume taxpayers don't want their money to be spent on costly legal battles between the state and civil rights activists when there is no rational reason to disagree with those activists.

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I think this is such wonderful news - not only for Argentina and Latin-America but also for the LGBT communities all over the world. Hopefully this decison will help further open peoples minds and liberate the way marriage and family is percived when it comes to homosexuality. I for one am very pleased and hope that the UK follows suit very quickly!

A step forward in humanity and understanding of those who are not the main but exist in society. We should accept people for who they are and not let any prejudice borne of extremism or religious bigotry. Gay people are born as gay people they are not a product of deviant aspect of upbringing or indoctrination.

Well done Argentina

I honestly dont care about marriage and I dont see how anyone can be under the illusion it has anything to do with god anymore, and if it did it would be of no use to athiests.

As for gay adoption I think it is a good move for the many children needing loving families. I can only hope the children wont be victimised by bigots justifying hatred with religion.

It will make gay marriage legal, obviously.

Legalising of gay marriage means that all Argentinean's can seek official confirmation of their love and live together as ed couples.

This has only good consequences, and should be an example all modern states should follow. This should after all be implemented in the UN human rights. Countries shouldn't be allow to maintain segregation rules, that limit peoples rights based on race, sex, sexual preferences and religion.

Unfortunately, we still see that people in many countries are middle-age-thinkers and oppose such a development. Especially fundamentalist and suspicious people (=religious) have problem to adapt to modern times. They have problems in regard to respecting other peoples choices and way of live.

What's the difference between considering yourself Catholic and being Catholic? Would someone who considers themselves to be Catholic cease to be one having voted in favour? Sometimes I have no idea what the wording on these HYS boards is getting at.

I don't care.

I wouldn't imagine it'll impact that much on my life, or those of my friends, except for any of my gay friends that have always wanted to get married in Argentina.

I'm not sure any have expressed this desire.

Good luck to them all the same

I doubt the pope is impressed lol and hands off the falklands!

A new gay paradise is established.
Good luck to them.

"How will the decision affect the country?" (BBC):

I would imagine that the majority will be asking the same questions that we ask in the UK:

Since the majority will not want this Ruling - why is it being imposed on their Country? Why is their Government over-riding their wishes?
This kind of 'over-ruling' the majority's wishes, simply makes me vote opposite to the Government that imposed it. I'd expect the next Election in Agentina to reflect the disgust of the majority - if not worse...

In my opinion:
Countries that 'impose' in this way canNOT be Democratic and impositions such as these will NOT be acceptable in hearts & minds - even if 'Laws' try to force them into acceptance - quite the OPPOSITE, in fact...

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I would like to remind that people are born homosexual, which means that such issues should be a human rights activists' concern too.

"The issue has divided a country where 91% consider themselves Catholic."

People that supply their opposition with argument based on religion only show how closed-minded they are.

Mexico (official name: Estados Unidos Mexicanos) is a Latin American country.
Mexico legalised gay marriage several months ago, so I believe Argentina is not "the first Latin American country to legalise gay marriage".

A step in the right direction. This decision illustrates the trend human societies have to eventually do the right thing, despite the loud objections of certain demographics. And there will always be objections. As hard as it is to believe today, many opposed the end of slavery, the Suffragette Movement, and the Civil Rights Movement. But today these are seen as common sence elements of society that can never be infringed. The same will be thought of same-sex marriage in the future. It is inevitable.

First of all it will break the stranglehold of the Catholic church to impose moral standards on people, society and countries. The next obvious difference will give many people gays and lesbians a voice in society, this practice is prevalent and should be legalized, there is no use in pretending that gays and lesbian do not exist in any society. There will be guarded acceptance for a while before people and society get comfortable dealing with issues that gays and lesbians face, they will be able to get legal help without being judged. Argentina has to be commended for allowing equal rights for all humans. Viva Argentina!

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Good luck.... I would imagine however Divorce lawyers rubbing their hands together for a bit more work in the future.

Donald Navarro,

Same-sex marriage was indeed legalised first in Mexico but only in Mexico City. Argentina will become the first Latin American country to legalise same-sex marriage nationwide.

#1: What are they going to do about kids? There haven't been any real sociology studies comparing how kids turn out from gay parents compared to heterosexual parents. The only one out there compares them to the children of single moms.

What kind of impact will that have on society?

Family truly is the foundation of society. The ability of any species to procreate and raise young according the process that they can achieve maximum fitness is the goal that brings survival. In some species maximum fitness is reached through promiscuity and fast weaning of young. The human race thrives on monogamy and long-term parental care, which is found in healthy families. Any reasonably intelligent person knows that a child is better off when raised by a mother and father, who can be examples of love to them, and can offer the best that both genders have to give.

The country of Mexico has not legalized same-sex marriage. Mexico City has. Argentina IS the first Latin-American country to do so. For the gentleman who commented that this was imposed the government's will on the majority and thus undemocratic, there are limits to everything. Do you realize the implications of your "rule by referendum" mentality? It means that any minority, no matter how valid their grievance, is always over-ruled. It's called the tyrrany of the majority. Majorities used to believe that all black people were created by God to act as slaves to whites and that women were lesser beings and were domestic slaves to their husbands. Should we have maintained those social inequities in perpetuity just because the majority held those views at one point in time? Democracies today are representational democracies, NOT direct democracies. of Parliament or Congressmen who represent us in democratic houses of assembly are NOT just megaphones for the majority. They also act as a limit and a guide. Governing is a two-way street.

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This is not and likely never was about ‘marriage equality’ as proponents of this legislation would like to suggest. Rather, it is a political statement regarding the legalization of the misnomer ‘gay marriage’. It is not about injustice. It is not about discrimination or any of the other emotive whose meanings have been reinterpreted over time. It is simply about voicing opposition to something which by its own internal logic must, for it own survival, remain the prerogative of a select few. In a created world wherein the union of two persons of the opposite sex is the ONLY natural means which leaves open the possibility for an authentic mutual fulfillment of either sex and of procreation in marriage, the notion of ‘gay marriage’ will always remain an anomaly. Hence, while the State may legalize and recognize this inappropriate designation, the Church is reminded that its authority is not derived from the State, or from popular culture, and is therefore not obligated to follow this tidal wave of misguided popular political opinion.

I would like christians, particularly catholics to read the perfect description of their all loving and all forgiving god by ANON-

20. At 2:48pm on 15 Jul 2010, ANON

It is ludicrous to argue that this ruling is not democratic because the majority of citizens in Argentina may be against this decision. Rational, modern democracies are not based solely on the whims of 51% of their populations. All great democratic statesmen know that sometimes the minority must be protected from the majority. Otherwise a government quickly devolves into fascism. , Hitler was legally elected.

Luskentyre its not for you to say what is posted. You are not a . And it is a topic with little relevance except to argentina.

24. At 3:03pm on 15 Jul 2010, Jason wrote:

#1: What are they going to do about kids? There haven't been any real sociology studies comparing how kids turn out from gay parents compared to heterosexual parents. The only one out there compares them to the children of single moms.

What kind of impact will that have on society?

Family truly is the foundation of society. The ability of any species to procreate and raise young according the process that they can achieve maximum fitness is the goal that brings survival. In some species maximum fitness is reached through promiscuity and fast weaning of young. The human race thrives on monogamy and long-term parental care, which is found in healthy families. Any reasonably intelligent person knows that a child is better off when raised by a mother and father, who can be examples of love to them, and can offer the best that both genders have to give.

----------------------------------------

Yet demonstrated much in nature that homosexuality in some of the adults does not damage their ability to care for children. Your concept of reasonable intelligence draws on no facts, proof or reality. It is an opinion based upon your preference only.

I would welcome studdies to see if there is an impact on the children and if it is positive or negative.

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

At the time I am writing this, none of the comments that have ed moderation have replied to Tez's assertion that this is against Argentines' wishes. Polls suggest that a large majority of Argentines are in favor of allowing homosexual marriage.

I do not like it when people claim that people are born homosexual. It smacks too much of racism and how racists argue that various non-physical traits are part of peoples genomes, and so there is nothing they can do to change or improve themselves. Even if there is some truth to this, such knowledge should be hidden because it serves no good purpose.

Just as with the racism analogy, there may be a genetic component for some homosexuals, but there is undoubtedly an environmental one as well. Homosexuals and their proponents should not feel that they have to claim that homosexuality is genetic in order to get acceptance of homosexuality. They should argue their case based on the fact that it is a private and personal matter and free societies should not discriminate against some of their .

Excellent news. Gay people should be able to confirm and celebrate their relationships in exactly the same way as heterosexual people.

I understand that this offends a lot of religious people but they need to understand that this is their problem - not that of gay people. If you want to believe in the supernatural, spirits, gods, faeries, etc, that's fine. It's even OK, I think, to live your life according to what you imagine to be the wishes of your god (and for most religions the bulk of what humans claim various gods want is quite sensible).

Where one has to draw the line is when you try to inflict your belief in the supernatural on other people: just because you have an imaginary friend doesn't mean we all have to do as he says.

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I just can't believe that gay marriage is legal in Argentina and not legal here in the UK!! Two people falling in love and wanting to commit to eachother is a wonderful thing, regardless of gender. Legalise gay marriage!

Some Argentinians will realise that Democracy is a joke, in fact of parliament never what the majority wants, but rather respond to:
1) what the "politically correct trend" suggests (so the MSM does not bash them)...i.e. gay marriage
2) what the "behind the scenes" western mafia (Anglo-American and Israeli financial gangs, IMF, World Bank) dictates.... i.e. wars against Iraq, Afghanistan and soon Iran.

NOTICE "the Majority" (the People) is agianst gay marriage and Iraq War etc.....the "people's representatives" are elected and then do the opposite of what their voters want...in every western "democratic" country.

BTW soon it will be illegal to criticise Gay marriage....oops maybe it is already....please don't delete my post...you asked for my opinion, didn't you?

ANON:

You are obviously using a version of the Bible with a pretty loose translation. The explicit word 'homosexuality' should not show up at all, and definitely not as much as in the verses you quoted.

Also, one could argue that the Old Testament onishments can be ignored in the same way eating formerly unclean animals is now by Christians. However, there are New Testament verses that do sure seem to speak out against homosexuality, though again not expressing the explicit term 'homosexuality'--so there is a sliver of leeway, although it is pretty obvious that the Bible states homosexuality is wrong.

"20. At 2:48pm on 15 Jul 2010, ANON wrote:

WHAT St. PAUL SAYS ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY?
Book of Romans1: 24 - 32 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. "

Laughing aloud - why do you tell us this? People who grow beards should be executed, the bible says. So what? Did you think we'd think: "Oh WELL, if Paul said that, that changes everything, doesn't it?" I'm serious - please tell us WHY you quoted this?

I don't think people have a right to tell others how to live their lives. Gay marriage harms no-one.

@ careful thinker

Your write

"In a created world wherein the union of two persons of the opposite sex is the ONLY natural means which leaves open the possibility for an authentic mutual fulfillment of either sex and of procreation in marriage, the notion of ‘gay marriage’ will always remain an anomaly."

Not really an example of careful thinking. There's no evidence to say the world was created by a God - only the assertions of people who believe in the supernatural. The union of two people of the opposite sex is demonstrably not the only 'natural' model since homosexuality exists throughout the natural world -do some research. Your assertion that same sex relationships are not authentically fulfilling is remarkably arrogant and extremely ignorant -how do you possibly suppport it with evidence?

If you're happy with your life as it is then that's great - but you don't have the right to devalue other people's lifestyles and natures soley on the authority of your imaginary friend.

God will descend to Earth and smite all the Argentina with fire and flood for its wickedness? I guess that 5 minutes after hitting the 'Post Comment' button, I shall have forgotten the question - what was it again?

Looks like my last comment will get pulled because I commented on the submission of ANON which itself got pulled cos I copied his submission and responded to it

Why should growing up in homosexual family affect the children at all? Growing up in a heterosexual environment doesn't stop the children being homosexual. In a family with only one parent, of either sex, do the children grow up sexually confused?

Most homosexuals don't go round dressed like "the only gay in the village" - they do normal jobs and dress like everyone else, eat the same food and watch TV.

I think it is indeed a huge step away from Church control of a secular state. The Pope can rule and declare what he likes within the confines of his churches, but that should only affect those who choose to enter and choose to obey.

For those who do not seek his guidance on moral matters, they will now have the freedom of choice conferred as a birthright, to marry or stay single and to love whomever they choose.

Now that Homosexuals are being given the same rights as Hetrosexuals does that mean they will stop the parades and banging on about "Gay pride".

13. At 2:01pm on 15 Jul 2010, Tez wrote:
"How will the decision affect the country?" (BBC):
I would imagine that the majority will be asking the same questions that we ask in the UK:
Since the majority will not want this Ruling - why is it being imposed on their Country? Why is their Government over-riding their wishes?
This kind of 'over-ruling' the majority's wishes, simply makes me vote opposite to the Government that imposed it. I'd expect the next Election in Agentina to reflect the disgust of the majority - if not worse...
In my opinion:
Countries that 'impose' in this way canNOT be Democratic and impositions such as these will NOT be acceptable in hearts & minds - even if 'Laws' try to force them into acceptance - quite the OPPOSITE, in fact... "

--------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe people won't always vote for change (even when it's to improve society generally)
The anti slave laws were opposed by majority in every country including the UK
The right of a woman to own property was opposed by the majority (including women.. "how would they cope"!!!)
The right of gay people to exist was opposed (even after it was law)
but really it was the change that frightened people
Change is scary up close but if you stand back, right away from your own prejudices, you can appreciate that a greater good is being enacted

I don't understand how anybody could object to gay marriage. Religeous people take note:-

ITS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS

Do you get it? Nobody cares if you dislike gay people or dissapprove of gay marriage, you are obviously more than entitled to do so but you have no right whatsoever to try and force people to adhere to your scewed moral system.

It will be one more small step to the guaranty of equal rights for all people. Arguments about the decay of society are absurd; how does it degrade society when a government allows people to formalize lifelong commitments over promiscuity?

Religion is irrelevant and anachronistic. Society has progressed so much further than 2000 years ago, that scripture is only relevant when cherry-picked to oblivion.

The new law will enable every union to be recognized. It is a civil rights issue and Argentine has done the right thing. I wish all freedom-loving countries would follow suit. It is unfortunate that the Catholic Church is opposing it. It is backing the wrong side of a civil issue.

To all religious bigots Welcome to the modern world. It is very good news to the equal rights movement.

“Tolin wrote:
It is ludicrous to argue that this ruling is not democratic because the majority of citizens in Argentina may be against this decision. Rational, modern democracies are not based solely on the whims of 51% of their populations”

DA DA, the majority must be protected from their “wrong” opinions, Comrade, “Otherwise a government quickly devolves into fascism” !!! Hail the (subtle) return of the unelected rulers, the ones who really know what we need, no need for votes any more….Hail the return of the Peoples (un)Democratic Republics!!!!

Or….votes are valid only until they confirm the agenda of the (hidden) elites, whether financial or philosophical…if not, byed because our opinions are “flawed”….lol

The impact of homosexuals having full marriage rights will be...well, homosexuals having full marriage rights. And that's it. Some people will be disgusted at that, but then there are people who are disgusted at women being allowed to wear tros. There will always be fundamentalists and you can't go round catering to them.

PLEASE PLEASE DONT MAKE IT COMPULSORY, WILL THE LAST REAL PERSON TURN THE LIGHTS OUT AND CLOSE THE DOOR THANKS.

The kids in Argentina WIN if both straight and same-sex couples can now adopt. First, let me point out that not one single independent study of note has proven anything in regard to children being raised by a same-sex couple is harmful. The only ones that have are funded by either prosecutors against gay adoption (as in the state of Florida) or religions/conservative (US Conservative) organizations and have been shown in courts to be extremely misguided. With that then, there are more opportunities for children to find a loving home now that they don't have wait on a straight couple.

Furthermore, to all the heterosexuals out there, do I, as a gay male, being able to marry, make you want to stop procreating as the Catholic church basically suggest? I don't think so. I am here whether they want to or not and I don't plan on natural procreation anytime soon haha.

Truth is, the Catholic Church, Mormons, and others of faith or no faith who are constantly against these measures are NOT acting for the great good of the community. In fact, their decline in numbers should be a red flag that they need to update their 'moral values' to 21st Century reality or continue to become irrelevant. Open your hearts ye of little, no, or full faith and your minds with it for the world is changing. At this point, especially for the hate mongering organized religions, it's time to evolve or become extinct. Cheers Argentina! Thanks for giving me hope after the recent blight with Hawaii. Hawaiian vacation cancelled, Argentina here we come!

Gay marriage why not
only the religous appear to condemm it
Religion - what is it - a collection of dreams rarely based on fact, easily disproven
Religion - a crutch for the human psyche, allowing a mind, tortured by circumstance, a little relief …. (like a couple of glasses of wine).
The core best of religion is based on natural human behaviour, helping others, being responsible for children, teaching.
The worst is interpreting what has been written in the past as a control for the present, ignoring increased knowledge and understanding on the basis that “god” can only be placated by rules written millennia or more ago.
Did god love the dinosaurs? (They lived a long long time.. but never built a church or temple, never knelt before a stone or wooden alter and never covered there heads out of respect)..
and before them and continuing today does god love Krill.. they’ve been around about 2 BILLION years make up 50% of the earths biomass God must love krill alot more than Dinosaurs… so where are Humans on this scale
“God” is a human creation, made to control humans and in many circumstances socialise humans… if there is a creator it doesn’t operate on a human scale.
when anyone says "God says" you should hear "some bloke along time ago said"

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

What impact will Argentina's legalising of gay marriage have?

Muchos Dollares Touristo.

Bueno!

It's all to do with Argentina beating at football next time they meet.

Isn't it ??

At 1:18pm on 15 Jul 2010, BluesBerry wrote:"No where in the Bible does Jesus condemn those who appear to be wayward."

But Jesus did say in Mark 10:6-9: In the ORIGINAL creation, God made male and female to be together...and in marriage he becomes one flesh with a woman...forming a new unity...God created this organic union of the two sexes, no one should desecrate his art by cutting them apart."

"Did jesus throw the first stone at the adultress?" No. Because in OT law it was for both the male and female to be stoned. Jesus knew it was a'trap' set for him, and not the woman. Anyway, how did the men 'know' where to find the woman caught "in the very act"?

Jesus knew those who committed adultery with her were present and ready to stone her. Anyway this and the 'thief' on the cross re not relevent to Jesus' view on marriage.

All this 's posts have been removed.Why?

For those making the argument that this new legislation is bad because homosexuals should not adopt, that a child is best raised by a heterosexual couple, why do you think that way?

I'm sorry to bring up the race/sexuality dichotomy again, especially since I believe racism and sexual discrimination are two separate issues, but this is pertinent:

Why not say that everyone with more than a certain number of IQ points (of all races) has a high IQ instead of saying 'this race is smart, this race is normal, and this race is stupid?'? Why not agree that good parents (of any sexual preference) make better parents than bad parents (of any sexual preference) instead of saying that heterosexual couples make better parents than homosexual couples? Why break things up monolithically by things like race and sexuality?

Surely these people are not arguing that every heterosexual couple is going to do a better job at rearing children than every homosexual couple. And I doubt there is going to be a ban from procreating for heterosexual couples who earn below the minimum wage or even have a history of domestic violence, at least in democratic societies. So given the fact that many homosexual couples who are willing to go through the effort necessary to adopt are likely to be better parents than many heterosexual couples, I would not consider the argument that a man and a woman make better parents than a man and a man or a woman and a woman in 100% of cases to be a valid one.

This stated, I would disapprove of homosexual, primarily male, couples having children via IVF unless only one ovum is fertilized at a time and implanted, or all (maximum two) embryos are implanted, and none are 'left over'. I'm more than fine with homosexual marriage, but am vehemently opposed to IVF and abortion for non-life-threatening illness, considering full human life to begin at conception.

I fail to see how you can claim this has divided Argentina. Every article I have read (other than this) says that 70% of the people agree with gay marriage. Just because the Catholic church is throwing another one of their hissy fits does not mean that their thoughts are shared by the lay people.

I don't agree with ANON's comment being pulled, even if I would consider his translations to be poor. The vast majority of Argentines profess to be Christian, especially of the Roman Catholic variety. Therefore, what the Bible says on the matter should have an effect on how the society sees this issue.

If there was error in ANON's Bible translation, then Brian Berlin's silly little assertion that the Bible demands the execution of bearded men is absurd. Off hand, I can't recall the Bible stating anywhere that a man must have or not have a beard. Please do not lie about what the Bible says, even if you are not fond of Christianity.

At the rate people are declaring they're gay,it won't be long before the whole world is gay. Good for planet earth, no more humans being born to mess it up.

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

On 15 Jul 2010, BluesBerry wrote:

"No where in the Bible does Jesus condemn those who appear to be wayward. Did jesus throw the first stone at the adultress? Did he tell the thirf on the cross to go to Hell?"
___________________________________________

You are right...no where in the Bible does Jesus 'condemn' those who appear to be wayward. In fact Jn 3:17 says that He was not sent into the world to condemn the world. If you read a little further though, you will see that condemnation comes in the fact that "..the light has come into the world, and people loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil...so in the end, people will stand self-condemned...

Regarding Jesus not throwing the first stone at the adultress..well, Jesus didn't throw ANY stone. What he did tell her was "Go on your way, and from now on do not sin again." (Jn. 8:11) Therefore, he did not condemn her, but he also did not condone her sinful behaviour...he left room for her to trun from darkness to light.

Similarly, the thief on the cross was not 'condemned' either because he not only acknowledged that he was being punished deservedly, but he also recognized that he was crucified next to the ONLY one who could save his soul.

In short read your Bible carefully and in context if you are going to quote from it. Do not equate your idea of 'no condemnation' with 'acceptance' and 'love'. God's love is seen in the fact that He will not force Himself into your life, but rather, gives you grace to see His light, turn away from evil and toward Him. It is always His will that NONE should perish.

I'm Argentine.
I'm Catholic.
I'm married.
I'm proud.

And I'm also scared. I've read/heard so many things these days. Friends of mine asking me why I care about this issue, even wondering if I'm going become a lesbian now. People complaining and justifying 200 years of mistakes by this simple law. Some ladies pointing that now we'll be allowed to marry a horse. They are so scared, that they can't even see that love and equal rights are major steps to a better society. And God knows (at least the God I believe in) that my country needs it desperately.

I think this is fantastic news & a significant move in the right direction for gay rights in South America.
As a 30 year old gay man living in rural North East Scotland I know all too well the prejudice and challenges faced for acceptance over the years.
But slowly things are improving especially in the last 10 years with significant milestones made with changes in British law (such as lowering the legal age of consent, scrapping section 28 in schools and the recognition of civil partnerships).
Recognizing gay rights at government level is having a positive trickle down effect on the general population and will continue to do so as time goes by with each new generation being more tolerant and accepting.
The same will happen in South American countries over time once they improve their equality laws and treat all citizens the same.
Being gay is NOT a choice but it IS a Right.
Good luck to South America & well done Argentina.

I think the main issue is that an aggressive section of the gay community have an issue with self-acceptance and hence feel the need to use the 'law' (for what it's worth) to impose their lifestyle[forced conformity] upon the majority heteorosexual religious and non-religious population.

What's even more fascinating is that they try to use 'Jesus' as their justification. If this 'book' [bible] is outdated or out of touch with 21st Century 'modern' life, why the need to refer to it's main character for 'approval'?

I thoroughly agree with gay marriage......just so long as it is between a lesbian woman and a homosexual man!!!

15. At 2:11pm on 15 Jul 2010, Andrius wrote:
I would like to remind that people are born homosexual, which means that such issues should be a human rights activists' concern too.


No, I was born a hetrosexual. But i cannot fathom what relevance or point the remainder of your sentence has?

HOORAY!!!

Yet another Catholic country bites the religious dust and goes against its theological dictate as dictated by the Pope in Rome.

If Argentina was really predominantly Catholic, then this just would not have materialised.

The fact is, much of the world is moving away from religion.

Thank heavens for that !!!

None - as it will be legal in Argentina but Nowhere else!

The impact will be liberating for the gay community in Argentina. Hopefully similar nations will follow suit.

Living in Britain ordinary people tend to think that the gay rights movement is over, but it is not the case. There is still a long way to go until gay couples can show affection in public without fear of verbal or physical abuse.

Every single straight person will know a handful of people who are gay, even if they are not 'out'. They could be family, friends, colleagues and yet live in fear of being who they really are. They have no choice over the matter.

People around the world are still killed because of their diverse sexuality. This IS important.

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Marriage is a word for a union between a man and a woman. If Gays want to have a relationship, they can call it what they like but it's not marriage.

If they need to 'piggyback' on another word to legitamise their sort of union there seems to be something wrong with the union.

Now they must be a creative bunch, perhaps they can come up with their own word.

Bravo Argentina! You finally let the snake out of the Cage, let it bite whosoever it chooses to.

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

12. At 1:56pm on 15 Jul 2010, Tibor wrote:
"A new gay paradise is established.
Good luck to them."

Fine with me too, as long as this "gay paradise" of legal marriage also includes legal divorce, alimony, and child .

70. At 4:48pm on 15 Jul 2010, LordP wrote:

I think the main issue is that an aggressive section of the gay community have an issue with self-acceptance and hence feel the need to use the 'law' (for what it's worth) to impose their lifestyle[forced conformity] upon the majority heteorosexual religious and non-religious population.

What's even more fascinating is that they try to use 'Jesus' as their justification. If this 'book' [bible] is outdated or out of touch with 21st Century 'modern' life, why the need to refer to it's main character for 'approval'?

----------------------------

The law is used because bigotry, re-enforced by the church, makes life difficult for people because they are different. Overcoming evil by law makes the world a better place for all.

Since the only real opposition are the bigotted religious people, talking in their language is the only way to communicate. Science disproved a lot of the bible and yet religious people wont listen.

There is not rational reason to withhold marriage and adoption from same sex couples. Both should be legal in every country on the planet.

At 4:57pm on 15 Jul 2010, MrWonderfulReality wrote:HOORAY!!!
Yet another Catholic country bites the religious dust and goes against its theological dictate as dictated by the Pope in Rome.
If Argentina was really predominantly Catholic, then this just would not have materialised.
The fact is, much of the world is moving away from religion.
Thank heavens for that !!!

NO. The fact it is the minority elites who are dictating and calling the shots. This is happening worldwide but only for a short time.

Tez wrote:
"How will the decision affect the country?" (BBC):
I would imagine that the majority will be asking the same questions that we ask in the UK:
Since the majority will not want this Ruling - why is it being imposed on their Country? Why is their Government over-riding their wishes?
This kind of 'over-ruling' the majority's wishes, simply makes me vote opposite to the Government that imposed it. I'd expect the next Election in Agentina to reflect the disgust of the majority - if not worse...
In my opinion:
Countries that 'impose' in this way canNOT be Democratic and impositions such as these will NOT be acceptable in hearts & minds - even if 'Laws' try to force them into acceptance - quite the OPPOSITE, in fact...
-------------------
I'm afraid, Tez, that you have not understood the meaning of 'liberal democracy'. It does not mean 'majority rule'. In fact, if it did, it would be a pretty unpleasant place to live. Your comment pretty much demonstrates my point. Imagine the kinds of oppressive things which "the majority" would vote for! What a frightening prospect. After all, what right do the majority have to inflict their lifestyle on others?
The idea of a 'liberal democracy' is that the rights and freedoms of ALL minorities are protected in law from being trampled on by the will of the illiberal majority. That's true democracy. Argentina should be saluted for taking this step, and what an embarrassment that the UK will lag behind in granting this right to a minority which has been oppressed for too long.

If marriage remained what it was originally the lifetime partnership then most heterosecuals and homosexuals would not want to be married as there is now divorce most can enter into a marriage that can be ended if it couldn't be ended then there may be more consideration about getting married in the first place.
As far as getting married for homosexuals goes good luck to them marriage is a hard thing to do and a hard thing to live with, if they can manage it they as i am divorced ar obviously better at it than I and my ex wife were and in her case more so as she has been married three times to my knowledge.

I am currently living in Argentina and last night waited up to hear the news until 4am when it was delivered. It took about 14 hours of debate in the senate in which I was surprised to see how misinformed and how prejudicial some senators were, all in the name of religious beliefs and in the defense of the "natural family". I was appalled to hear such a term considering we live in a world where the "natural" conformation of a family is now a minority. The growing rate of single parents, divorces, second or third marriages (if not more), only goes to show that what was once known as the traditional formula of a family, and what the religious groups defended the night before in a very large manifestation against the law outside of the congress building: mother+father+children= family, is no longer what we see in out society. In addition, in the previously mentioned religiously promoted event fliers were handed out as "information" about homosexuality. In such fliers homosexuality was defined as an illness that could be cured through prayer and psychotherapy, homosexuals were said to have over 300 sexual parters in one year, and there was a list of sexually transmitted diseases that were limited to the gay community. The church promoted this event for weeks through the different religious organizations but specially through religious schools, many of which are public. Children were even allowed to miss the first periods of class the following day so they could attend the event with their parents or other family .
I was glad to hear some senators remind the public that we once lived in a time when women couldn't vote or take part in government, people of other races and religions couldn't participate legally in society or government and marriage was also denied to such minorities. As a woman of mixed race, I was very happy to have the senators acknowledge the struggle that many went through so that I can live in a free society and have the same rights as any other person of a different sex, race, or religious belief.

I attended the gay pride parade last year for the first time, in of close friends who have struggled to live a normal life as gays and lesbians in more conservative societies in other countries in Latin America, and was touched to see young men and women marching proudly surrounded by family which was somewhat rare in my experience in other countries with more conservative and discriminatory societies. Buenos Aires was declared a couple years back as the "gay friendliest" city in Latin America, and I can testify to that, people don't stare or comment if they see a gay couple displaying affection or holding hands in public.
So in this context, I am very proud to live in a country that s rights for EVERYONE, that is able to change and adapt concepts to new contexts, that defends love over religious beliefs, and that is not afraid to move forward and set precedent in such an important matter.
I can only hope that other countries follow.

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

81. At 5:06pm on 15 Jul 2010, in_the_uk wrote:"The law is used because bigotry, re-enforced by the church, makes life difficult for people because they are different. Overcoming evil by law makes the world a better place for all."

, 'religious' people do vote for 'unreligious' politicians. The church does not enforce it's views into the homes or minds of the majority without their say. Unlike the government i.e.political correctness hasbeen destructive socially and politically in the UK.

"Since the only real opposition are the bigotted religious people, talking in their language is the only way to communicate. Science disproved a lot of the bible and yet religious people wont listen."

The Bible is not a scientific compendium (though atheists continually base part of their argument on the assumption that it purports to be).

How often do you come across a cutting-edge science book, which also has a message of good and evil? Not often.

The point about the Bible is that its message is the same now as when it was written and will be the same in 10,000 years (salvation through Jesus Christ).

If the Bible was a scientific treatise on the beginning of the universe and life on Earth then it would have had to be continually 're-written' to keep up with scientific advances.

You will argue, "ah, but according to you Christians, isn't it supposed to be inspired by God, and doesn't he know all the answers?"

Well that goes back to the first point - which is that the Bible has 'never' been intended as a scientific compendium.

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Some silly concepts about "family", out there. This is about Gay and Actually all Human rights. A brave descion by Argentina, one I hope will catch the attention of other nations.

However, children have rights too and deserve two (and occasionally, but I mean only occasionally, two sets of) equally loving parents, no matter what the sex of those parents.

What they don't need is selfish adults who reproduce, or adopt for the sake of their own identity, or need to accessorise. Something Hetrosexuals (as we refer to ourselves with increasing regularity, when discussing "family values"!) would do well to first recognise.

Incidently we are all homophobic, to some degree, no matter what our sexual preference, and it is understanding that which will make us all better human beings.

Idiology is like B.O. people just don´t smell their own!

Hip heteros of the "but why would anyone want marriage these days" view; should know that, why some gay people may not abide by the same societal rules as the dwindling majority; evidently many others care for the same sense of affirmation, protection and sets of rights and obligations. The possibility of EQUALITY in marriage, adoption and life in general is a right for all humans, GLBTQ or hetero.

Mexico CITY was 1st in Latin America to legalize gay marriage, many wish BBC's reporter had been more accurate by mentioning that:
https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8425269.stm

Argentina, first COUNTRY to do that, no doubt.

But then, WHO CARES WHICH PART OF THE CONTINENT WAS FIRST, this is not an ego-ridden Soccer match! What matters is the hope for same-gender equality to make a ripple effect in many other cities, states/provinces or countries... in spite of the Church's decreasing power, huge hypocrisy, and manipulation scope. Fortunately there's been plenty of, "other belief systems" and views spreading around the continent in the past few decades. Viva el progreso social!

USA, take notes....

technoir.info

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

It is good news for civilisation and freedom. I pay my respects to the Argentinians. I do think it is time the Catholics and others who use their religion and their books as a justification for bigotry might well consider whether their point of view is helpful or relevant to the world today.

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

@ David Traynier (both posts)

Does anyone still believe for a moment that ‘evidence’ and ‘research’ are not tools used by the (imaginary?) Science-god to ‘inflict’ its (objective?) beliefs on others?? We only need to troll the historical depths of the kind of ‘evidence’ you allude to in order to recognize that people often find precisely the ‘evidence’ they’re looking for. Indeed, if we did some research we will soon discover that there are no credible scientific studies that establish that people are 'born homosexual'…..though given enough time I am certain that a few will be contrived. So, perhaps the appropriate question is: Which “imaginary friend’s” authority will we govern our lives by?

To believe that we live in an ‘individualistic’ world where one’s beliefs and lifestyles do not impinge upon or have implications for one’s neighbor – a world of moral self-governance – is truly “arrogant and extremely ignorant”. It is a fallacy. Otherwise, why are we even having this dialogue?

The real issue is eternal spiritual destruction, and world leaders know this, hence, the reason why they 'collectively' approve of such 'arrangements'.

This is nothing new as such existed in 'high society' Genesis 19, and subsequent empires.

Thing is, they eventually fall.

What impact will Argentina's legalising of gay marriage have?

That it's okay to be gay!

(Isn't everyone merry and gay at some point in their lives?)
:)

Gay Marriage should not be encouraged,for very purpose of family will be defeated

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the s found it broke the house rules. Explain.