Romanians to vote on constitutional ban on same sex marriage

[rooster59]

Romanians to vote on constitutional ban on same sex marriage

By Luiza Ilie

 

 

BUCHAREST (Reuters) - Romanians will vote at the weekend on whether to enshrine in their constitution that marriage must only be between a man and a woman in a referendum that has seen campaigners direct slurs at LGBT people and which activists said is open to fraud.

 

The conservative eastern European state already does not allow marriage or civil partnerships for same sex couples, nor does it recognise those performed abroad.

 

Regardless, Romanians will vote on whether to narrow the constitutional definition of marriage from a union of "spouses" at the initiative of a civil society group called the Coalition for the Family, which said the gender-neutral term could see gay couples win the right to marry in the future.

 

The vote needs a turnout rate of 30 percent, or more than 5 million people, to be valid.

 

Dozens of human rights groups, which are encouraging people to boycott the ballot, have warned approval would embolden further attempts to chip away at the rights of minority groups and push the European Union state onto a populist, authoritarian track.

 

Days before the vote, the government relaxed anti-fraud monitoring and limited the options for challenging the result in contrast with regular elections, while the country's broadcasting regulator eliminated a cut-off date for campaigning.

 

"There are ... no efficient, applicable mechanisms to verify fraud for this referendum," independent think tank Expert Forum (EFOR) said, adding the conditions have created "a climate of distrust in the fairness of the process."

 

The vote is backed by the Orthodox Church and other religions and won support from all but one political party in parliament.

 

Some campaign posters and adverts urged people to vote "Yes" to defend family values or run the risk of gay couples stealing or adopting their children. One advert said a "No" vote would enable a man to marry a tree.

 

"Many fear that what has happened in other countries, such as legalizing marriage between a man and an animal, could happen here," the leader of Romania's ruling Social Democrat Party Liviu Dragnea told private television station Romania TV.

 

Romania decriminalized homosexuality in 2001, decades after neighbouring countries. It ranks 25th out of 28 EU states based on legislation, hate speech and discrimination against LGBT people, an annual study by ILGA-Europe, an umbrella organisation advocating equality, showed.

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-10-06

 

[wirat69]

Until they make it compulsory, I don't care too much!!!

[blazes]

The US used to cosy up to Romania in the days of Ceaucescu.  I think Nixon even made a state visit there.  Just to p!ss off the Russkies, who are next door neighbors.

OK, ok, off topic and waiting for the usual consequences.....

[Rigby40]

Not real marriage unless it's a man and a woman. But hey, if they want to play pretend that's fine, just don't do it in my living room(or bakery)!

[RuamRudy]

18 minutes ago, Rigby40 said:

Not real marriage unless it's a man and a woman. But hey, if they want to play pretend that's fine, just don't do it in my living room(or bakery)!

Somehow I suspect that you won't be troubled by a queue of same sex couples seeking to share their special day with you.

[bert bloggs]

While i could not care less what two men want to get up to as long as i dont have to watch or join in(i would make an exeption for two women) i do not believe in same sex marriage or adoption .

[attrayant]

2 minutes ago, bert bloggs said:

i do not believe in same sex marriage

 

To "not believe in" something means you don't think it exists, as in "I don't believe in leprechauns".  Is that really what you wanted to say?

[bert bloggs]

3 minutes ago, attrayant said:

 

To "not believe in" something means you don't think it exists, as in "I don't believe in leprechauns".  Is that really what you wanted to say?

I don,t believe you wrote this ,unless it was as a joke.

[CharlieH]

Post removed - Off topic

 

Dont get personal in your remarks please.

[bristolboy]

3 hours ago, Rigby40 said:

Not real marriage unless it's a man and a woman. But hey, if they want to play pretend that's fine, just don't do it in my living room(or bakery)!

Because God disapproves?

[bristolboy]

4 hours ago, lanista said:

Two men should never be allowed to marry. If they want to live together thats fine ,who cares what they do so long as i dont have to watch it.

Eventually gay men  will be able to adopt children which is despicable. Imagine some poor kid growing up with Adam and Steve instead of a normal mother and father upbringing.

I hope Romania bucks the trend that weve seen in the immoral west in recent times.

You are really out of touch. You don't have to imagine it. It happens all the time and az studies repearedly have shown the kids turn out just az well as if they'd been raised by straivht parents.

[Sir Dude]

Lol...seeing the lefty sh!t-fit hissy episode if they vote against it will be funny.

[bristolboy]

4 hours ago, Sir Dude said:

Lol...seeing the lefty sh!t-fit hissy episode if they vote against it will be funny.

But probably not nearly as funny as the one trglodytes in the USA threw when it was declared legal.

[bristolboy]

4 hours ago, Rigby40 said:

There was a specific poll on whether or not people believe it's real marriage?

So you're contending that it's a serious possibility that a majority of Americans support the legalization of something they consider a sham? And that this huge reversal in American public opinion was just superficial? There's a saying common amongst rational people: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You've got  nothing.

[bristolboy]

4 hours ago, Rigby40 said:

Having a live and let live attitude doesn't equate belief. Plenty of atheists will tell you the same thing about religion. Looks like you've got nothing ????

Invoking a self serving explanation about a huge change in public opinion and arguing that the public supports laws based on ashan is ridiculous. Anybody could invoke that argument about public support on any issue. Such nonsense.

 

[pegman]

These polls indicate that advanced countries approve and less-civilized don't. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage

[blazes]

28 minutes ago, pegman said:

These polls indicate that advanced countries approve and less-civilized don't. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage

 

"Advanced"?  and "less-civilized"??  Now, I wonder who qualifies under those two labels?  

Advanced = Nigeria, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, Turkey????

Less-civilized = USA (only one runner in that race)

 

No, but I mean: how is one to classify the advanced against the morons?

 

[ubonjoe]

A inflammatory post and replies to it have been removed.

[Becker]

3 minutes ago, Rigby40 said:

Good, because that would be a bogus claim to make.

Yes, and I didn't make it. You, OTOH, claimed that "nobody actually believes it's real marriage." I'm happy that you now agree this is a bogus claim.

You're making progress!

[jak2002003]

Ironic that the few posters on here who are against gay marriage, due to their concern for children's minds, are probably married to some Thai hooker old enough to be their own daughter.

 

These people are probably against black African / white people and other mixed raced marriages, and all the rest of the bigoty and stupidity.

 

They need to look around them at some of their fellow straight married couples and see how well they are taking care of their children, and living the values of Christian married life.

 

Their is no reason why any two people of any colour, religion, race, sexuality, legal age, who love each other and want to make a life long commitment to each other. should be allowed to marry.  Only people who seem to have a problem with it are fanatical religious people and racists / homophobic bigots.   

[KKr]

as I am told, the vote was for allowing UNSPECIFIED changes to the constitution.

the marriage issue, (that the PM supported in 2015 by the way  -- http://business-review.eu/news/pm-dancila-endorsed-a-report-encouraging-legalization-of-same-sex-marriage-while-a-member-of-the-european-parliament-186755),
was a ploy to get people to vote and got the media coverage to sway the vote in favor of changes in the constitution.

then, political developments seem to be going in a direction that is not generally appreciated, and a right to change the constitution would only aggravate the concerns.
http://business-review.eu/news/european-commission-asks-romanian-pm-dancila-to-answer-18-questions-as-follow-up-to-european-parliament-hearing-186823
“The independence of Romania’s judicial system and its capacity to fight corruption effectively are essential cornerstones of a strong Romania in the European Union. We have seen substantial progress in the past but things are now moving backwards in a way that would be damaging for the place that Romania has built as an EU Member State in recent years,” the EC VP told the Parliament

[Jingthing]

Ban fails. 

https://www.advocate.com/marriage-equality/2018/10/08/romanian-anti-marriage-equality-measure-fails-spectacularly

[Scott]

49 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Ban fails. 

https://www.advocate.com/marriage-equality/2018/10/08/romanian-anti-marriage-equality-measure-fails-spectacularly

I am pleasantly surprised.   I spent quite a bit of time in Romania quite a few years ago.   I had a good friend who lived there and stayed with him and his family.   At the time, it was pretty openly and anti-gay.   It was more a situation of not hating gays, but just no understanding of it.  

 

I suspect the low voter turn out was because like a lot of places, people just aren't all the fussed about what it anymore.   They may not be for it, but they can't be fussed to go to a poll and vote against it.   That is a positive sign.  

 

 

[pegman]

25 minutes ago, Scott said:

I am pleasantly surprised.   I spent quite a bit of time in Romania quite a few years ago.   I had a good friend who lived there and stayed with him and his family.   At the time, it was pretty openly and anti-gay.   It was more a situation of not hating gays, but just no understanding of it.  

 

I suspect the low voter turn out was because like a lot of places, people just aren't all the fussed about what it anymore.   They may not be for it, but they can't be fussed to go to a poll and vote against it.   That is a positive sign.  

 

 

I fall into the group who could care less one way or the other about gays. Don't think I even know any just other than one second cousin I haven't seen in decades. What does concern me greatly is when the usual suspects try to take away rights from a particular group. At some point I know they're going to come after mine and my familie's. It really is amazing how quickly public opinion has changed in so many countries. Just a decade ago Obama thought he needed to lie about his position on same sex marriage to get elected. He wouldn't feel the need to today. Equal Rights for ALL!!