"The debate that erupted across the Atlantic after the U.S. Supreme Court's decision is quite instructive. There is no shortage there of extreme opinions. If we fail to listen intently, it isn't hard to imagine what might soon await us. There are, for instance, calls to legalize unions among more than two people being quite seriously suggested. Once the traditional definition of marriage is rejected, these arguments become difficult to rebuke. If marriage is not exclusively between a man and a woman, then why not triangles, quadrangles and whatever one wishes … Don't say we didn't warn you. We have."
Friends of mine have just returned from London. They've seen a lot in their lives, but this time they were shocked by their short visit to Soho and the obscene spectacle that greeted them during the weekend gay parade.
I'll refrain from citing details, but it was not a favorable impression. British gays had, of course, a reason to celebrate: the U.S. Supreme Court decision on gay marriage was greeted with euphoria across the entire rainbow world. Yet on Friday there was a terrorist attack in Tunisia during which dozens of British tourists were killed. Yes the parade, in its characteristic, decency-flouting fashion, took place anyway. I want to believe would not have been impossible in Poland.
I think gay activist Krystian Legierski, with his declarations about voting for Andrzej Duda [presidential candidate for the right-wing Law and Justice Party] has done more for the cause of gay equality than with all of his previous activities. In doing so he crossed a barrier that to some seemed impassable. This is also worth noting. Let's be frank: what's "under the covers" are not the critical issues, but whether we are able to agree on questions that are fundamental for the country and nation. If the gay community, taking care of its rights, can avoid losing sight of the issues that are important to others, the chances of compromise are greatly improved.
If in Poland this autumn there is indeed a change of power, which is what everything is pointing toward, the problems of homosexuals will not likely be regarded as the most important. Nonetheless, I don't believe any new government should seek to avoid debating them. If both sides show willingness to compromise, a lot can be achieved – on gay partnerships as well. The word "compromise" is most important here, meaning both parties will have to give something up. The Catholic majority will seek to ignore these issues and at best, marginalize them; the gay minority will tend to magnify and blow problems out of all proportion in keeping with the principle of moving the goal posts (first gay unions, then gay marriage, then adoption of children, then …).
Conservative fears about the consequences of the rainbow revolution are not as simple as "no … because no." However strange it may sound within liberal circles, there is plenty of genuine concern about the fate of the family, what informs family roles, and pressure being exerted on all sides, both economic and moral. Any weakening of the institution of the family, which the actions of the global homo-lobby are clearly leading, is in fact harmful to us all. This is something most of us, apart perhaps from the most ardent proponents of progress for the progress's sake, are able to recognize.
I'll refrain from citing details, but it was not a favorable impression. British gays had, of course, a reason to celebrate: the U.S. Supreme Court decision on gay marriage was greeted with euphoria across the entire rainbow world. Yet on Friday there was a terrorist attack in Tunisia during which dozens of British tourists were killed. Yes the parade, in its characteristic, decency-flouting fashion, took place anyway. I want to believe would not have been impossible in Poland.
I base the belief that in our country sensitivity would prevail on the impression that homosexual communities in Poland are for the most part rather conservative. Yes - the group which wants to change the world is indeed visible here, but it dominates only in the media. This can be seen in heated domestic discussions, both on the limits of acceptable behavior during parades calling for the same equality, and on whether the ethos of freedom at any price for the Polish LGBT movement should dominate normal life. It is worthwhile paying attention to these discussions, even if the subject is entirely foreign to the average person's everyday concerns.
Contrary to the oft-repeated slogan insisted on about "someone peeping under the covers," conservatively minded Poles have no appetite for peeping. Rather, it's the homosexuals who keep waving bed covers and, more or less provocatively, asking whether others have a problem with that.Most still do. Moreover – they have a right to have one. For now at least, we still have the freedom of thought. It is the culture of the individual that dictates if - and if so, how - we express these doubts, and what they lead to. I prefer the culture of the individual and not of political correctness to remain the determining factor here - and the culture of the person should hopefully be of the highest quality.
Contrary to the oft-repeated slogan insisted on about "someone peeping under the covers," conservatively minded Poles have no appetite for peeping. Rather, it's the homosexuals who keep waving bed covers and, more or less provocatively, asking whether others have a problem with that.Most still do. Moreover – they have a right to have one. For now at least, we still have the freedom of thought. It is the culture of the individual that dictates if - and if so, how - we express these doubts, and what they lead to. I prefer the culture of the individual and not of political correctness to remain the determining factor here - and the culture of the person should hopefully be of the highest quality.
I think gay activist Krystian Legierski, with his declarations about voting for Andrzej Duda [presidential candidate for the right-wing Law and Justice Party] has done more for the cause of gay equality than with all of his previous activities. In doing so he crossed a barrier that to some seemed impassable. This is also worth noting. Let's be frank: what's "under the covers" are not the critical issues, but whether we are able to agree on questions that are fundamental for the country and nation. If the gay community, taking care of its rights, can avoid losing sight of the issues that are important to others, the chances of compromise are greatly improved.
If in Poland this autumn there is indeed a change of power, which is what everything is pointing toward, the problems of homosexuals will not likely be regarded as the most important. Nonetheless, I don't believe any new government should seek to avoid debating them. If both sides show willingness to compromise, a lot can be achieved – on gay partnerships as well. The word "compromise" is most important here, meaning both parties will have to give something up. The Catholic majority will seek to ignore these issues and at best, marginalize them; the gay minority will tend to magnify and blow problems out of all proportion in keeping with the principle of moving the goal posts (first gay unions, then gay marriage, then adoption of children, then …).
Conservative fears about the consequences of the rainbow revolution are not as simple as "no … because no." However strange it may sound within liberal circles, there is plenty of genuine concern about the fate of the family, what informs family roles, and pressure being exerted on all sides, both economic and moral. Any weakening of the institution of the family, which the actions of the global homo-lobby are clearly leading, is in fact harmful to us all. This is something most of us, apart perhaps from the most ardent proponents of progress for the progress's sake, are able to recognize.
Unlike the U.S. or Britain - countries that are eager to teach the rest of us tolerance – in contemporary Poland homosexuality was never criminalized. Not only have we no obligation to explain anything to anyone, but we can calmly consider what we have to offer. Perhaps that could be some kind of reasonable compromise. Where this really about resolving life's basic problems and not using them as a pretext for fighting the Church, civil partnerships for gays could be a solution - if the LGBT community were willing to confine itself to this …
The debate that erupted across the Atlantic after the U.S. Supreme Court's decision is quite instructive. There is no shortage there of extreme opinions. If we fail to listen intently, it isn't hard to imagine what might soon await us. There are, for instance, calls to legalize unions among more than two people being quite seriously suggested. Once the traditional definition of marriage is rejected, these arguments become difficult to rebuke. If marriage is not exclusively between a man and a woman, then why not triangles, quadrangles and whatever one wishes … Don't say we didn't warn you. We have.
The LGBT community in the United States immediately declared, furthermore, that this is just the beginning of the battle. Now there is the question of a total ban on discrimination, for instance, at the workplace. Here, the Supreme Court has somewhat complicated the situation because this is a group that cannot be directly equated with racial minorities. Even if there are indications that a predisposition to homosexuality is innate, ultimate decisions about life are affected by many factors. This, however, is unlikely to hinder anti-discrimination advocates. No less interesting are the comments from the conservative side. Christians feel marginalized, not only because the Supreme Court found in the Constitution something that, in their opinion, isn't there. They, too, admit that such an interpretation of human rights has begun to dominate public opinion. This suggests that the pressure will continue to grow.
In the comments below, please share your opinion!!!
The debate that erupted across the Atlantic after the U.S. Supreme Court's decision is quite instructive. There is no shortage there of extreme opinions. If we fail to listen intently, it isn't hard to imagine what might soon await us. There are, for instance, calls to legalize unions among more than two people being quite seriously suggested. Once the traditional definition of marriage is rejected, these arguments become difficult to rebuke. If marriage is not exclusively between a man and a woman, then why not triangles, quadrangles and whatever one wishes … Don't say we didn't warn you. We have.
The LGBT community in the United States immediately declared, furthermore, that this is just the beginning of the battle. Now there is the question of a total ban on discrimination, for instance, at the workplace. Here, the Supreme Court has somewhat complicated the situation because this is a group that cannot be directly equated with racial minorities. Even if there are indications that a predisposition to homosexuality is innate, ultimate decisions about life are affected by many factors. This, however, is unlikely to hinder anti-discrimination advocates. No less interesting are the comments from the conservative side. Christians feel marginalized, not only because the Supreme Court found in the Constitution something that, in their opinion, isn't there. They, too, admit that such an interpretation of human rights has begun to dominate public opinion. This suggests that the pressure will continue to grow.
In the comments below, please share your opinion!!!
0 Comments