First French gay marriage.

The Nomad · Post by **The Nomad** » 2004-06-07 02:16pm

Apparently no one gives a clue, but there it is : on the 5th of June, in the town of Bègles, the ecologist-affiliated Mayor Noel Mamère, taking advantage of a loophole in the Code Civil regarding the definition of marriage, celebrated the wedding of two men : http://www.rte.ie/news/2004/0605/gay.html

Mr Mamère may now face sanctions from French state, up to and including definitive removal. The wedding itself may be declared "null and void".

It should be noticed that such a wedding takes place 1 week before European Elections. Some view this as an attempt to collect the so-called "gay voting", while others fear that it might as well benefit the most vocal opponents of gay marriage like Philippe de Villiers ( a fundie asshole, who stated that he viewed such marriage as a "charade" ( "mascarade" ) ).

some links :

http://us.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/06/ ... edding.ap/
http://www.q.co.za/news/2000/01/000124-frenchmarry.htm
http://www.gaywired.com/article.cfm?section=9&id=2958
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3752603.stm

Trytostaydead · Post by **Trytostaydead** » 2004-06-07 02:27pm

It took this long? I thought the French would've already had a gazillion gay marriages.. like Chirac to Shroeder (sp).

CrimsonRaine · Post by **CrimsonRaine** » 2004-06-07 03:54pm

Trytostaydead wrote:It took this long? I thought the French would've already had a gazillion gay marriages.. like Chirac to Shroeder (sp).

Yeah. I thought this country would be the first. Ha.

'Raine

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2004-06-07 04:27pm

Wow, we're not the most repressed Western state. Hooray for us.

beyond hope · Post by **beyond hope** » 2004-06-07 04:40pm

I can see this as a new argument in favor of gay marriage: "The French oppose it... are you saying you want to make our country more like France?!"

Trytostaydead · Post by **Trytostaydead** » 2004-06-07 05:41pm

beyond hope wrote:I can see this as a new argument in favor of gay marriage: "The French oppose it... are you saying you want to make our country more like France?!"

Well, now it's going to be for those who oppose it.. "France does it, wanna be more like France?" Either way, it's a good argument

Plekhanov · Post by **Plekhanov** » 2004-06-07 05:54pm

beyond hope wrote:I can see this as a new argument in favor of gay marriage: "The French oppose it... are you saying you want to make our country more like France?!"

Unfortunately for your argument according to the poll by Elle magazine

Some two thirds of French people are in favour of same-sex weddings, a recent poll by Elle magazine showed

you could tweak your argument slightly and instead say “Chirac opposes it are you going to do what Chirac tells you?”

jaeger115 · Post by **jaeger115** » 2004-06-07 07:52pm

I hope more Bible Belt fundies see that. It'll make them realize that the sky's not going to fall once gay marriage is legalized.

Ma Deuce · Post by **Ma Deuce** » 2004-06-07 08:15pm

jaeger115 wrote:I hope more Bible Belt fundies see that. It'll make them realize that the sky's not going to fall once gay marriage is legalized.

A more effective method would be to point them to countries that have had legal gay marriages for years, like the Netherlands.

jaeger115 · Post by **jaeger115** » 2004-06-07 08:25pm

Ma Deuce wrote:
jaeger115 wrote:I hope more Bible Belt fundies see that. It'll make them realize that the sky's not going to fall once gay marriage is legalized.
A more effective method would be to point them to countries that have had legal gay marriages for years, like the Netherlands.

Yup. Thanks for reminding me. I heard Pat Robertson the other day on his moronic 700 Club freakshow ranting at the Netherlands about precisely that.

beyond hope · Post by **beyond hope** » 2004-06-07 08:41pm

Plekhanov wrote:
beyond hope wrote:I can see this as a new argument in favor of gay marriage: "The French oppose it... are you saying you want to make our country more like France?!"
Unfortunately for your argument according to the poll by Elle magazine
Some two thirds of French people are in favour of same-sex weddings, a recent poll by Elle magazine showed
you could tweak your argument slightly and instead say “Chirac opposes it are you going to do what Chirac tells you?”

What exactly is the official rationale over there for opposing it, anyway?

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2004-06-07 09:32pm

beyond hope wrote:
What exactly is the official rationale over there for opposing it, anyway?

God says it's bad.

beyond hope · Post by **beyond hope** » 2004-06-07 09:54pm

Xenophobe3691 wrote:
beyond hope wrote:
What exactly is the official rationale over there for opposing it, anyway?
God says it's bad.

Wow... some things really are constants.

Plekhanov · Post by **Plekhanov** » 2004-06-07 09:56pm

beyond hope wrote:What exactly is the official rationale over there for opposing it, anyway?

I can’t testify to Chirac’s personal feelings on the issue but I think the French Gov is really just looking not to piss off it’s core supporters by letting gay marriage through on it’s watch so to speak.

They seem to be attacking this particular marriage on the grounds that it is an

Bertrand de Loze, Bordeaux public prosecutor wrote: initiative designed to undermine the application of the law

I think the implication is that this mayors creative use of an ambiguity in the law will bring the whole structure of the French society crashing down if it isn’t stopped immediately.

The Nomad · Post by **The Nomad** » 2004-06-08 07:50am

beyond hope wrote:What exactly is the official rationale over there for opposing it, anyway?

A few clues :

* hardcore religious assholes say it will undermine the basis our society, is a hateful sin, and it is against Nature blah blah blah, you're more familiar with this shit that I am. Mr Philippe de Villiers is one of them ( amusingly, Mr de Villiers is a representative of a region that, led by Christian fanatics, long fought the Revolution and the abolition of Monarchy : the Vendée ). Bible-bashers and homophobic retards are everywhere.

* others claim that the purpose of a marriage is to perpetuate a bloodline and have children of your own. Obviously, they tend to forget that society changed and is not the same as it was a couple centuries ago, and that this reasoning would invalidate each and every heterosexual marriage in which either of the spouses is sterile.

* some claim that such a marriage is illegal. Obviously they need to read more of the Code Civil ( they nitpick on a procedural formula while the core of the prerequisites are met by gay and straight marriages alike ). IIRC, one of the Ministers ( can't recall which ) even said that such a marriage would cause four offences, two of which don't even exist !
And they somehow manage to side-step the issue of simply changing the law. This is the official Governmental stance AFAIK.

* some cretins say that they're okay for an upgrade of the PACS ( a civil union that give some tax-related advantages ) or similar measures in order to give homos an union that would provide the same rights as marriage ( taxes, inheritance, organ donation between the spouses... even, in some cases, adoption - see below ), but that the term "marriage" is coined for heteros and that adopting childs is for straights only ! The stupidity of such a mindlessly discriminative stance speaks for iself.

* the last two are a small minority AFAIK, but the main problem here seems to be adoption : most concerns are that children raised in same-sex parental structures would be traumatized. No solid evidence has been provided to support this stance, while studies on the very few known cases of homosexuals adopting children tend to show that such children, albeit a bit shier that usual, are not notably less stable that children from heterosexual families.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-06-08 08:06am

wow, an to think that i was under the belief that only the evil yankee capatalist running dogs in Washington opressed people like that. Surely this is not true so that the enlighted Europhiles may continue to lecture the barbaric Americans on matters of European superiority.

SecondStorm · Post by **SecondStorm** » 2004-06-08 08:16am

Col. Crackpot wrote:wow, an to think that i was under the belief that only the evil yankee capatalist running dogs in Washington opressed people like that. Surely this is not true so that the enlighted Europhiles may continue to lecture the barbaric Americans on matters of European superiority.

France have had civil unions since 2000.
Try again.

Post by **Colonel Olrik** » 2004-06-08 08:25am

SecondStorm wrote:
Col. Crackpot wrote:wow, an to think that i was under the belief that only the evil yankee capatalist running dogs in Washington opressed people like that. Surely this is not true so that the enlighted Europhiles may continue to lecture the barbaric Americans on matters of European superiority.
France have had civil unions since 2000.
Try again.

And 2/3 of the population support gay marriage, so its legalization will most likely come with the next change in office.

Now, Crackpot, what are the stats for the US again?

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2004-06-08 08:33am

Col. Crackpot wrote:wow, an to think that i was under the belief that only the evil yankee capatalist running dogs in Washington opressed people like that. Surely this is not true so that the enlighted Europhiles may continue to lecture the barbaric Americans on matters of European superiority.

I see you're still lugging around that massive persecution complex. Feeling inferior today?

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-06-08 08:47am

Colonel Olrik wrote: Now, Crackpot, what are the stats for the US again?

civil unions in some states, marriage in Massachusetts. my point is we're not the only ones still trying to hammer out the final outcome for this issue. People here talk like Gay Marriage is already freely accepted in the eyes of the law around the world, and that we in the US are backwards fundies lagging behind everywhere else.

SecondStorm · Post by **SecondStorm** » 2004-06-08 08:59am

Col. Crackpot wrote:People here talk like Gay Marriage is already freely accepted in the eyes of the law around the world, and that we in the US are backwards fundies lagging behind everywhere else.

Only in your mind. Or do you fail to recognise the distinction between civil unions and same-sex marriage?

And considering that the U.S. have legalized gay marriage in one state(Mass. 2004) and civil union(Vermont 2000) in one other and that Europe as a whole have adopted civil unions. And one (Denmark) as early as 1989.

Europe is far more along that road than the U.S. is. Or are you going to claim otherwise?

I can hear you back-pedalling already.

Plekhanov · Post by **Plekhanov** » 2004-06-08 10:15am

Col. Crackpot wrote:
Colonel Olrik wrote:Now, Crackpot, what are the stats for the US again?
civil unions in some states, marriage in Massachusetts. my point is we're not the only ones still trying to hammer out the final outcome for this issue. People here talk like Gay Marriage is already freely accepted in the eyes of the law around the world, and that we in the US are backwards fundies lagging behind everywhere else.

The US isn’t lagging behind everywhere else as regards fundies it’s more that Europe is on the whole exceptionally irreligious compared to the rest of the world, that doesn’t mean we don’t have our fair share of intolerant jerks though see the Pope, Le Pen in France, Haider in Austria and the potential success of the BNP in Thursdays elections in the UK it’s just that our reactionaries tend not to be particularly religious.

I don’t think anyone here is claiming that Europe (which is after all a large and varied place) is more socially progressive than the US in every country and in every regard it’s just that on the issue of gay marriage/civil union the US overall seems to be moving in the wrong direction whereas in most of Europe it is much less of an issue and we are making quite slow progress on the issue and it doesn’t get a significant proportion of the population frothing at the mouth.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-06-08 10:55am

Col. Crackpot wrote:wow, an to think that i was under the belief that only the evil yankee capatalist running dogs in Washington opressed people like that. Surely this is not true so that the enlighted Europhiles may continue to lecture the barbaric Americans on matters of European superiority.

Oh would you please cut this knee-jerking "Poor, persecuted America" crap? Excuse me while I play the world's smallest violin for the only remaining superpower on the planet.

You right-wingers love to blast the lefties for being a bunch of whiny, complaining pussies when it comes to minority rights, but you do the same damn thing whenever you smell any indication of someone bad-mouthing America. How ironic.