• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Germany adopts Same-Sex Marriage

Andalublue

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,101
Reaction score
12,359
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
About time, but Glückwünsch Deutschland! Well done for joining us in the 21st century.

Germany gay marriage approved by MPs in snap vote - BBC News
By voting against it, Mrs Merkel has appealed to the more conservative members of her electorate but, by allowing it to happen, she's cemented her growing reputation as a defender of liberal values and, perhaps more importantly, seen off an issue which might have come to haunt her later on.
Click to expand...
I'm pleased to see the supporters of SSM in Germany outmanoeuvre Merkel and her old farts to get this measure through parliament before the summer recess. It's clear that now the thing has been passed, Merkel is trying to make it appear as if it was her idea, while assuring her homophobic core support that she's still opposed. That's very much wanting her cake and eating it, and I hope that the voters will take note and punish her hypocrisy on September 24th.
 
Andalublue said:
About time, but Glückwünsch Deutschland! Well done for joining us in the 21st century.

Germany gay marriage approved by MPs in snap vote - BBC News

I'm pleased to see the supporters of SSM in Germany outmanoeuvre Merkel and her old farts to get this measure through parliament before the summer recess. It's clear that now the thing has been passed, Merkel is trying to make it appear as if it was her idea, while assuring her homophobic core support that she's still opposed. That's very much wanting her cake and eating it, and I hope that the voters will take note and punish her hypocrisy on September 24th.
Click to expand...

Yep. I watched the debate this morning out of the corner of my eye. Actually, it was quite boring and was the natural result of Merkel's slip of tongue. The interesting thing about it is why it came about and that it is a tactical maneuver of positioning the parties before the election.
Independent of whether one likes homosexual marriage or not, the vote was not really, what one would call "well done". The law, as it is formulated is certainly unconstitutional by the standards of previous court decisions, which is why Merkel voted against it. Only a new interpretation of the language in the constitution will possibly be enough to save the law. This is not good under German legal thinking, as it would represent a de facto change in the Grundgesetz without the required 2/3 majority, which the Bundestag could probably have mustered, had it taken the time to make the effort. As it is, the law is not going to strengthen legitimacy, which it should have, given the opinions in the population, but will increase divisiveness as poorly made law often does. We are seeing the results of such legal finagling in the US right now. One gets divisions and blow back that can unravel the efforts or cause violence without any real reason other than pigheadedness.

PS: Here is a picture of the festivities of having won: Ehe für alle: Was bedeutet das Ergebnis der Abstimmung im Bundestag? - SPIEGEL ONLINE
Interestingly enough Beck (the man to the left of center) had to give up most political offices because of a sever drug problem and had earlier been at the center of the Green move to liberalize sex with children.
 
Last edited:
Clever move of Mrs. Merkel. 80% of the population Support that. She voted "no" to please her super conservative party members and all is gone before the election and will be no topic to hurt her...
 
Last edited:
joG said:
Yep. I watched the debate this morning out of the corner of my eye. Actually, it was quite boring and was the natural result of Merkel's slip of tongue. The interesting thing about it is why it came about and that it is a tactical maneuver of positioning the parties before the election.
Independent of whether one likes homosexual marriage or not, the vote was not really, what one would call "well done". The law, as it is formulated is certainly unconstitutional by the standards of previous court decisions, which is why Merkel voted against it. Only a new interpretation of the language in the constitution will possibly be enough to save the law. This is not good under German legal thinking, as it would represent a de facto change in the Grundgesetz without the required 2/3 majority, which the Bundestag could probably have mustered, had it taken the time to make the effort. As it is, the law is not going to strengthen legitimacy, which it should have, given the opinions in the population, but will increase divisiveness as poorly made law often does. We are seeing the results of such legal finagling in the US right now. One gets divisions and blow back that can unravel the efforts or cause violence without any real reason other than pigheadedness.

PS: Here is a picture of the festivities of having won: Ehe für alle: Was bedeutet das Ergebnis der Abstimmung im Bundestag? - SPIEGEL ONLINE
Interestingly enough Beck (the man to the left of center) had to give up most political offices because of a sever drug problem and had earlier been at the center of the Green move to liberalize sex with children.
Click to expand...

Not completely true. In the Grundgesetz nothing is written about the gender of the people getting married. That´s only interpretet from some court decissions of the past.
 
german hick said:
Clever move of Mrs. Merkel. 80% of the population Support that. She voted "no" to please her super conservative party members and all is gone before the election and will be no topic to hurt her...
Click to expand...

Clever? Or deeply cynical and hypocritical? German voters aren't stupid.
 
I'm so incredibly happy! Endlich!!! #ehefüralle
 
german hick said:
Not completely true. In the Grundgesetz nothing is written about the gender of the people getting married. That´s only interpretet from some court decissions of the past.
Click to expand...

Quite right. Artikel 6 does not explicitly state that marriage must be between man and woman. There was no reason the state it, as the definition of marriage meant man and woman. It was defined in 2002 by the Bundesverfassungsgericht in ruling that Mariage requires defining essence is the different sex of the partners ("als Wesensmerkmal die Verschiedengeschlechtlichkeit der der Partner") and could only be performed between partners of the other sex ("nur mit einem Partner des jeweils anderen Geschlechts geschlossen werden"). This is especially significant as the matter at issue was the law governing the Life Partnership ("Lebenspartnerschaftsgesetz") that granted almost identical rights as but withheld the name "marriage".

So, yes. The Constitution was written at a time, when homosexuality was a crime and the term marriage ("Ehe") had a firm meaning. But the High Court did interpret the word later as it was meant at the time of the writing of the constitution. So it would certainly be a change of the meaning of the constitution to redefine the word to conform with one's desires without having to change the constitution legally, because of the effort.

So you are absolutely wrong to say "That´s only interpretet from some court decissions of the past." It is a matter of constitutions being written in a language and that changing the definition of a word does, in fact, change the constitution. And changing the constitution requires 2/3 majority.
 
It´s a matter of Interpretation.

some say so other so - depends on their opinion of the whole matter ;)

but the words of the article needn´t be changed if it´s political will in my opinion. The high court can decide otherwise now. Times change.

and: Lebenspartnerschaft has quite similar rights, true. But in one detail not: Adoption - and that is a very important matter for gay couples who wanna have a family.
 
Andalublue said:
About time, but Glückwünsch Deutschland! Well done for joining us in the 21st century.

Germany gay marriage approved by MPs in snap vote - BBC News

I'm pleased to see the supporters of SSM in Germany outmanoeuvre Merkel and her old farts to get this measure through parliament before the summer recess. It's clear that now the thing has been passed, Merkel is trying to make it appear as if it was her idea, while assuring her homophobic core support that she's still opposed. That's very much wanting her cake and eating it, and I hope that the voters will take note and punish her hypocrisy on September 24th.
Click to expand...
There's actually little likelihood of that happening.

Merkel has declared today that she (personally) voted nay and that kind of trashes any accusations of hypocrisy. What actually transpired is and was that with the exception of the troglodyte far right AfD, every party of potential for entering into a coalition with after September has categorically declared that giving marriage status to SS unions would be a prime condition for negotiations on post-election coalitions to even start.

With the AfD being rejected by all anyway, even by the CDU's similarly troglodyte Bavarian sister CSU.

So by all I hear the whole thing is seen by the German voter as more of a formality, with kudos generally given to Merkel for having taken the whole thing off the table before it clutters up an election fight that needs to deal with matters more important to the constituency.

Merkel is currently at 39 pct anyway and her party's recently more belligerent stance towards the Ankara Sultan probably holds more sway than her move to address this particular inevitability.

What most voters may pay more attention to is the more apparent hypocrisy (as perceived) of the Social Democrats. Seeing how it is part of the (still) current government, nobody is forgetting that it has conveniently so far carried the objection to SSM (as it was bound to by the coalition agreement) and has now fallen over in pursuit of ulterior motives that always govern election campaigning.

Something the others (Greens, Free Democrats and Left) are having a ball with in their frenzy to clamour for positions.

September will give Germany a Conservative win, with only the form of subsequent government remaining something as yet to still be seen.

The Social Dems have consistently fallen in polls from their April 32 pct to currently 25 pct and this issue here is hardly designed to improve the figure. To govern 50 pct (at current poll count) they'd have to get Greens, Left and Free Dems aboard and the last of those will never enter such a coalition after September. Most insurmountable obstacle for the Free Dems being the Left.

I predict either that the Social Dems will continue the current coalition or, if they're actually wise enough to see how that will probably kill them altogether within the coming 4 years, choose the opposition role to a Conservative-Green government with the Free Dems probably thrown in.

And even where Free Dems and Greens are naturally at its others' throats to the point of the Free Dems perhaps wanting nothing to do with Conservative-Green constellation, the Conservatives can form a minority government with either just Greens or just Free Dems that in either case would leave them with 47 pct (current count). What remains in opposition being so at odds with each other that "opposition" would be something of a misnomer

Current polls showing

CDU/SU (Merkel) = 39 pct
SPD = 25 pct
Left = 9 pct
Free Dems = 8 pct
Greens = 8 pct
Troglodytes = 7 pct

and the last bunch being what nobody wants to be seen hanging dead over a fence with.

Next Chancellor(esse) is Merkel.
 
Chagos said:
There's actually little likelihood of that happening.

Merkel has declared today that she (personally) voted nay and that kind of trashes any accusations of hypocrisy. What actually transpired is and was that with the exception of the troglodyte far right AfD, every party of potential for entering into a coalition with after September has categorically declared that giving marriage status to SS unions would be a prime condition for negotiations on post-election coalitions to even start.

With the AfD being rejected by all anyway, even by the CDU's similarly troglodyte Bavarian sister CSU.

So by all I hear the whole thing is seen by the German voter as more of a formality, with kudos generally given to Merkel for having taken the whole thing off the table before it clutters up an election fight that needs to deal with matters more important to the constituency.

Merkel is currently at 39 pct anyway and her party's recently more belligerent stance towards the Ankara Sultan probably holds more sway than her move to address this particular inevitability.

What most voters may pay more attention to is the more apparent hypocrisy (as perceived) of the Social Democrats. Seeing how it is part of the (still) current government, nobody is forgetting that it has conveniently so far carried the objection to SSM (as it was bound to by the coalition agreement) and has now fallen over in pursuit of ulterior motives that always govern election campaigning.

Something the others (Greens, Free Democrats and Left) are having a ball with in their frenzy to clamour for positions.

September will give Germany a Conservative win, with only the form of subsequent government remaining something as yet to still be seen.

The Social Dems have consistently fallen in polls from their April 32 pct to currently 25 pct and this issue here is hardly designed to improve the figure. To govern 50 pct (at current poll count) they'd have to get Greens, Left and Free Dems aboard and the last of those will never enter such a coalition after September. Most insurmountable obstacle for the Free Dems being the Left.

I predict either that the Social Dems will continue the current coalition or, if they're actually wise enough to see how that will probably kill them altogether within the coming 4 years, choose the opposition role to a Conservative-Green government with the Free Dems probably thrown in.

And even where Free Dems and Greens are naturally at its others' throats to the point of the Free Dems perhaps wanting nothing to do with Conservative-Green constellation, the Conservatives can form a minority government with either just Greens or just Free Dems that in either case would leave them with 47 pct (current count). What remains in opposition being so at odds with each other that "opposition" would be something of a misnomer

Current polls showing

CDU/SU (Merkel) = 39 pct
SPD = 25 pct
Left = 9 pct
Free Dems = 8 pct
Greens = 8 pct
Troglodytes = 7 pct

and the last bunch being what nobody wants to be seen hanging dead over a fence with.

Next Chancellor(esse) is Merkel.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that, Chagos. Great summary.
 
german hick said:
It´s a matter of Interpretation.

some say so other so - depends on their opinion of the whole matter ;)

but the words of the article needn´t be changed if it´s political will in my opinion. The high court can decide otherwise now. Times change.

and: Lebenspartnerschaft has quite similar rights, true. But in one detail not: Adoption - and that is a very important matter for gay couples who wanna have a family.
Click to expand...

Quite right. But to allow adoption a less controversial law would have surficed. There was no valid reason they could not have been above board and taken the constitutional path. The majorities were so close even in this week's haste that it is close to certain that a constitutionally required 2/3 majority would have been reached. But that would have been after the elections and the SPD needed it before the vote.
 
Andalublue said:
About time, but Glückwünsch Deutschland! Well done for joining us in the 21st century.

Germany gay marriage approved by MPs in snap vote - BBC News

I'm pleased to see the supporters of SSM in Germany outmanoeuvre Merkel and her old farts to get this measure through parliament before the summer recess. It's clear that now the thing has been passed, Merkel is trying to make it appear as if it was her idea, while assuring her homophobic core support that she's still opposed. That's very much wanting her cake and eating it, and I hope that the voters will take note and punish her hypocrisy on September 24th.
Click to expand...

They passed an online censorship/hate speech bill on the same day.
1 step forward, 2 steps back.
 
german hick said:
It´s a matter of Interpretation.

some say so other so - depends on their opinion of the whole matter ;)

but the words of the article needn´t be changed if it´s political will in my opinion. The high court can decide otherwise now. Times change.

and: Lebenspartnerschaft has quite similar rights, true. But in one detail not: Adoption - and that is a very important matter for gay couples who wanna have a family.
Click to expand...
Whatever anybody interprets, if the conservative powers deem to sue before the constitutional court, that's where the final interpretation will be made.

In that sense I agree that the matter could have been settled once and for all if the whole issue had been handled by addressing the constitution in the first place. This way the German taxpayer can wind up paying for lengthy proceedings and there'll be strife even in one party (nearly a quarter of conservatives voted "yay" as well), all for the sake of everybody clambering over everybody else in a frenzied dash to make points in time for the upcoming elections.

What irks me most of all here though

is that somebody appears to find it necessary in this thread to link the issue of SSM and homosexuality to drug addition and paedophilia, by slandering a well respected German politician who was neither convicted on any drug charges, nor has ever been evidenced as suffering a severe drug problem, did not have to give up all political offices and whose role in the Green's move for liberalisation of laws on sexual offences was one of sweeping out any demands to legalize sex with children in the greater picture of battling for greater freedoms of the LBGT community within society.

I hope one can assume that this is just another case of fact distortion born from the usual incomprehension of issues that we've all by no become accustomed to from this source, but it sure as hell smacks of bigotry and misrepresentation in service of the very same.
 
Chagos said:
What irks me most of all here though

is that somebody appears to find it necessary in this thread to link the issue of SSM and homosexuality to drug addition and paedophilia, by slandering a well respected German politician who was neither convicted on any drug charges, nor has ever been evidenced as suffering a severe drug problem, did not have to give up all political offices and whose role in the Green's move for liberalisation of laws on sexual offences was one of sweeping out any demands to legalize sex with children in the greater picture of battling for greater freedoms of the LBGT community within society.

I hope one can assume that this is just another case of fact distortion born from the usual incomprehension of issues that we've all by no become accustomed to from this source, but it sure as hell smacks of bigotry and misrepresentation in service of the very same.
Click to expand...

ooh - I got so used with his writing that I overread it...
may be if I would be archconservative and not fit with the nuances of the language I would come to this conclusion too. There was a lot dirty smearing in the newspapers in connection to that topic. But nevertheless, it has nothing to do with this topic (and is bull**** anyway)
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Why is that good?
Click to expand...
forward is always good.

Beyond which I'm not going to argue your particular issue any further, seeing how it has nothing to do with the topic here.

Which, just to remind you, is SSM in Germany.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom