Hungarian gay civil rights groups will hold a demonstration in Budapest on April 15 against the new constitution draft’s passages on marriage and equal rights for gay people, the organisers said on Wednesday.
Daniel Kaderjak, the chairman of one of the groups, said the draft defines marriage in a way which causes segregation.
The gay groups have started an online petition on this subject, signed by 700 so far, including some famous public figures, said Kaderjak.
The petitioners have started to operate a Coalition for Gay Equality (MEGYEK), which will organise the demonstration on the square in front of parliament.
Tamas Dombos, a representative of another gay rights organisation, said the constitution draft discriminates against the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community and it goes against its key principle of promoting social cohesion. He added that the governing Fidesz party had earlier emphasised that the new constitution would be based on the European Union’s Charter of Fundamental Rights, yet it does not ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
“This is unlike anywhere in western Europe,” he said.
Adrian Balaci, of the LGBT unit of Amnesty International Hungary, said the Constitutional Court’s earlier practice of talking about the rights of “men and women” to marry, instead of considering heterosexual and homosexual people, was unacceptable. This is the practice the government follows, too, he said.
marraige is between a man and woman!! Not that sick and unnatrual western europian view of gay marriage!!
If they want to get married, move to a western europian country! Don’t try to change Hungary in a sick nation too!
Everything these days is called discrimination, everybody wants to be free to do what they want, it doesn’t matter how immoral it is…!
@Géza: “marraige is between a man and woman” is a
tautology
“move to a western europian country” – so Hungary is
an eastern country outside Europe?
“immoral” – what’s the reference point here
(society, religion, tradition etc..)?
Congratulations, Géza!
You’re the first of the assholes here to comment, well, probably the usual bunch of idiots will be next …
Even if you don’t like it: “A poll by Szonda Ipsos in September 2009 found that the majority, 58% supports the newly introduced registered partnership for same sex couples.”
Maybe you should move to some country which is more to your liking – like Iran …
If they want to get married, move to a western europian country! Don’t try to change Hungary in a sick nation too!
Géza at March 31, 2011 12:58 PM
—
You forgot to mention/grasp, that Hungary is already part of the “western europian” countries by being a full member of the EU
If the rest of the 500 million EU-citizens like same-sex marriages, the less than 10 million Hungarians that disapprove, have to live with it, meaning have no laws that restricts it
You know what ‘leto’ states:
“majority rulez, accept that”,
or you leave the EU, which Hungary is a very far way from doing
Géza,
Van agrees with you, although he may not know it. He says that your expression ‘marriage is between a man and woman!’ is a tautology. He is utterly wrong, of course, for ‘between a man and a woman’ does not entail ‘marriage’ (All sorts of relations can hold between a man and a woman, not only marriage.) The question is one of word function: the word ‘marriage’ names a particular contract between a man and a woman. (That, I think, is what Van had in his fuzzy mind.) So your expression is perfectly in order.
But what matters more is your viewpoint. You are quite right to insist that Hungarians will not pervert the meaning of marriage, either linguistically or spiritually, for the sake of sexual deviants’ imagined ‘rights’. Thank goodness the draft constitution is not inclined to compromise here.
And no matter how homosexuals and their friends fulminate, it is still far from obligatory, even in Western Europe, to recognise homosexual ‘marriages’. In the UK, for instance, these contracts are called ‘civil unions’. The same legal conditions pertain to civil unions as to marriages. But at least the meaning of ‘marriage’ has not been perverted. No doubt, the EU will try to lean on Hungary to recognise civil unions. But at least the word ‘marriage’ will be constitutionally protected from debasement, so its spiritual connotation will survive unsullied.
Never mind the stupid taunts of the foregoing unsavoury foreigners of dubious origin. If they don’t like the Hungarian constitution or Hungarian attitudes to marriage, they can go home or to hell. You are at home in Hungary: you have every right to comment on the constitution, and to demand the preservation of the Hungarian marriage. They do not get a say. (Brace your self for the filth they are about to exude.)
Poor Elle and Geezar, both suffer from the affliction of seeing those that are different from them as “others”. http://www.hatter.hu/
@Pete H,
Whats wrong with being of the opinion that a marriage should be between a man and a woman? Why do I have to be accused of having some kind of ‘affliction’?
Yes, I believe that gays should have the same rights as a married couple, I don’t care what people do behind closed doors (as long as it is consensual and no minor children are involved).
I want to see the word ‘marriage’ be used exclusively for the union between a man and a woman. Use another word and leave the word ‘marriage’ alone.
@ JA
Re: “I want to see the word ‘marriage’ be used exclusively for the union between a man and a woman. Use another word and leave the word ‘marriage’ alone.”
Why?
My more “Catholic than the Pope” neighbour expressed identical sentiments as you, which means she must be a Zionist Bolshevik MSZP supporter at heart since she is so tolerant considering her devotion to the Church; her answer was :
“I don’t know, the word marriage just doesn’t seem right” Huh?
Hopefully you can elaborate a bit more – I don’t care and they want to change my “marriage” to a “union” that’s fine too as long as everyone is treated the same and that’s what’s using the same word is all about
@Olga,
“Why?”
Because some things, I feel, need to be preserved, protected and stupid as this may sound, honoured.
Similar to people wanting to be called African Americans and not just Americans.
JA, it’s the use of terms like “sexual deviant” and “perversion” that reveal their affliction. Modern science and psychology has dispelled any such notions as having any merit when applied to homosexual relationships. Your moral viewpoints are yours, that fine I don’t see it as an affliction. But why impose them on others? If you don’t believe in gay marriage marry someone of the opposite sex. Do you also believe divorce should be illegal? A far greater treat to marriage than allowing more people to get married.
@ Pete H,
“But why impose them on others?”
I don’t know about you; but, couldn’t both sides be asked this same question?
—————
“If you don’t believe in gay marriage marry someone of the opposite sex”
I said I don’t agree with calling it a marriage. I didn’t say that gays should not be united and have the same rights and freedoms as a man and a woman union.
—————–
“Do you also believe divorce should be illegal?”
This is my second marriage…what do you think?
JA, but in one case the imposition is preventing a group from enjoying the institution of marriage. I do not believe that gay marriage prevents you from enjoying your marriage. I mean really on a day-to-day basis are you going look at your spouse and your relationship differently just because gays can marry too? Are you going to file for divorce because the institution of marriage has been tainted? (That would be ironic) If gay marriage were made legal where you live, you might huff and puff for a bit, but after a few months it will barely cross your mind. Where I live it was legal several years ago, nobody really pays it any mind, that is except for the shop merchants who are glad for the extra revenue. Most end up not caring, that is unless you are Geezar or Elle, and then it will become your overwhelming obsession, your affliction.
@Pete H,
“I do not believe that gay marriage prevents you from enjoying your marriage. I mean really on a day-to-day basis are you going look at your spouse and your relationship differently just because gays can marry too? ”
Are you even reading what I write or are you in ‘ auto-Prof’ mode and just lecturing away?
@ JA
Re: “Because some things, I feel, need to be preserved, protected and stupid as this may sound, honoured. ”
No, it doesn’t sound “stupid” – not coming from you because you only get hung up on a word rather than legal rights and hating gays.
My Mom worked with a woman maybe 40 years ago who
was interviewed on TV because she was living “common law” and I remember watching the programme with my Mom. I am yet to go to a wedding these days when the couple did not live together before they decided to make it legal, so I am pretty certain that “gay marriage” will be accepted and it’s just a matter of time.
I know a young woman who gave the excuse for avoiding the altar because “she did not respect or be part of an institution that denied gays the same rights as she had” but after gays were allowed to marry in our city, she ran out of excuses. It used to be men who had “cold feet” – but not any more because society and norms change and in some countries quicker than in others. My crystal ball told me Hungary will accept legal gay marriages slightly before countries in the Arab world.
Whilst i’m living here not over my dead body!!
@Gabriel the arch-idiot:
I know a lot of people who would like to walk over your dead body – actually they’d probably be more happy if they could walk over you while you’re alive (barely …)
Have a nice evening – it might be your last!
@wolfi
You seem to be very much into this gay marriage. Are you planning to divorce your beautiful Hungarian wife to marry Guido? [Can he make as good palacsinta as she does?]
Or maybe you just want to set up your own ‘visconti triplets’ – Guido, his lover and you.
The usual mix. Good people who realize that gay marriage will not hurt str8 marriage.
And it might even help the institution where str8 marriages fail at a 50% rate.
Fairly good people who seem hung up on the word marriage, prob because it has connections to the church, even though most gay marriages are civil ceremonies devoid, thank God, of religious leaders.
And the ugly ones who call gays perverted etc. It always seem to me that those who are too interested in other peoples bedroom antics are what are called PERVERTS.
It appears that hungary is basically a catholic country – mostly Roman, some E. orthodox.
The catholics should look at what they worship in the following web sites.
And they may just begin to understand with whom they are praying.
the meansest and worst people in the world of the 1930s and 1940s
The two websites I missed were the following:
http://www.catholicarrogance.org, from a Priest who had 24 years of catholic education and devoted his life to exposing the hates and horrors of the catholic church.
I don’t know how badly Hungary was hurt during WWII, but in this next website you will see what the catholic Hierarchy did to fight the Nazis.
BTW so many of the negative comments use the same words. People parrotting the churchs who seem to need someone to demonize to sell their brand of corrupt love.
Western Europe……..
norway, Sweden, iceland, Belgium, HOlland, spain portugal with gay marriage
England, Ireland, Finalnd , Germany, France, switzerland, Denmark with marriage via another name.
Missing from the list – only italy, home of the horrible catholic church.
And Greece where just recemtly the patriarch of the church said that as long as the church isn’t forced into doing gay marriages he is fine with it.
Finland in process of changing from CUs to marriage
Ireland just got civil unions in Jan, and already the people of this country, totally sick of the endlesss vicious abuse of the children by the church, are 74% for gay marriage.
Denmark just filled in the missing piecess- gays can adopt and both parners become legal guardians of the child. Marriage is next
England where the parties are trying to race each otehr to see who can get credit for chaning C*s ot marriage.
And my 3 children who have all sworn not to get married until gays can get married here.
Whoops! A pileup of cretins just happened: one, a second, a third. Frightful cacophony.
Billy, I admire your parenting. You have raised kids with deep humanitarian values. Our local Episcopalian church stopped doing weddings until the state legalized gay marriage. They are now happily marrying both straight and gay couples.
Let’s protest something.
Blind people are not allowed to drive. A clear case of discrimination.
Midgets are underrepresented in major league basketball. Why?
Homosexuals don’t fit into a heterosexual institution.
The list goes on and on.
I guess you can’t always get what you want…
@Olga,
“No, it doesn’t sound “stupid” – not coming from you because you only get hung up on a word rather than legal rights and hating gays”
I don’t about that…I’m only ‘fairly good’ person, as opposed to you, who is considered a ‘good’ person.
If I were you, I’d avoid me at all costs…I would hate to drag you down to my level.
Whoops….should read ‘I don’t know about that’
@Pete H,
“Billy, I admire your parenting. You have raised kids with deep humanitarian values”
I wonder if you really ‘meant’ what you just said, or agreed with what ‘Billy’ posted because you ‘liked’ what you heard?
This ‘Billy’ character, posted:
“And my 3 children who have all sworn not to get married until gays can get married here”
You don’t think it odd that all 3 kids felt the same way? Not one or 2…but all 3?
This could mean 2 things…either ‘Billy’ is in a gay relationship, or know a very close friend/family member, in this situation and these children have had a firsthand exposure to whoever’s plight. OR…’Billy’, is a controlling type parent and we should be thankful that he never suggested that these children stop eating until ‘ gays can get married here’.
Either way, matters not to me….but personally? I would not be throwing out such ‘love and admiration’ until I knew all of the facts and not just go by a few words thrown together by a complete stranger on a website.
Unless you’re very familiar with this poster on a personal level/aka, know him/her off this site…well then I apologise.
To all people “protecting” the institution of marriage from homosexual couples:
Marriage is just a social construct, which evolves over the time. Centuries ago people couldn’t marry someone from other caste, or another faith, let alone another skin colour.
When you’re saying that marriage is between a man and a woman and that’s it, you’re just repeating the arguments of those who didn’t want to allow mixed-religion/race/etc weddings.
And please don’t come with the Bible: this is a secular country, not governed by it. (And if it were, there are plenty of laws in there that you’re breaking constantly.)
@roth: I agree absolutely!
I am the child of a “mixed marriage” myself – my father was a protestant from Northern Germany, my mother a catholic Schwab. My grandmother told me several times how angry she got when the local catholic priest visited her to get her to tell her daughter that she shouldn’t marry that infidel/heretic.
She never went to church again after that and I was lucky to be raised without too much religious crap. And this happened just 70 years ago …
Gays enjoy the same rights as everyone else. They are free to marry members of the opposite sex.
What’s the problem then?
Secular liberalism have always been governed by groups who are out to destroy marriage and pervert the meaning of this important Christian sacrament.
Secular liberalism have always been governed by groups who are out to destroy marriage and pervert the meaning of this important Christian sacrament.
Naphimnusz at April 1, 2011 2:54 PM
—
Given the fact that same-sex ‘marriages’ were not uncommon in pre-Christian Rome and Greece, well then “Secular liberalism” has a lot of history…
-
On added note:
Mahatma Gandi was gay and with a Jew:
-
http://www.jpost.com/ArtsAndCulture/Books/Article.aspx?id=214133
-
“A new biography of Mahatma Gandhi suggests that the Indian leader was a cruel racist with a Jewish gay lover”
Always thought that pacifistic thing was a bit sissy
@ Justasking
Re: “You don’t think it odd that all 3 kids felt the same way? Not one or 2…but all 3?”
No, it’s not odd. Take a look at the news coverage of Toronto’s gay pride parade and it’s full of kids you children’s age – they are the ones growing up with the “odd” attitudes.
Re: “If I were you, I’d avoid me at all costs…I would hate to drag you down to my level.”
Actually I was hoping to elevate you to my level and since we figured out I was a couple of inches taller than you, we won’t have to worry about your hitting your head on my halo
@Olga,
DDD
“I was a couple of inches taller than you, we won’t have to worry about your hitting your head on my halo”
JA, you are so much wiser than I. I think of you as a virtual life-coach. I am just so foolhardy with my easy compliments. I’ll try to be more like you. A better Hungarian and more analytical towards other posters parenting skills. You must be really fun at parties.
@Pete H,
)
)
“you are so much wiser than I”
Well, I wasn’t going to say anything…but since you did, I know
————————–
” I am just so foolhardy with my easy compliments”
Compliments are one thing, I would just step back a little with the admiration bit…
—————————–
“I’ll try to be more like you.”
Dear sweet Peti, be yourself…just every-once in awhile, jump off that bleeding heart Liberal soapbox and join us mere mortals
——————————
“You must be really fun at parties”
Define ‘fun’?
If fun to you, is everybody walking around, agreeing with each other, patting each other on the backs and convincing themselves how morally superior they are to others…well than you might consider me quite boring at them
Rocky, “Homosexuals don’t fit into a heterosexual institution.” In my state of Massachusetts tens of thousands of gay couples are fitting just fine into the human institution of marriage.
Napi, “groups who are out to destroy marriage and pervert the meaning of this important Christian sacrament” I was not aware that Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, etc. were not allowed to marry in Hungary. Or perhaps when they do, you feel they are perverting it? I thought marriage as defined by the state was a legal institution conferring rights and privileges to the couple by the secular state. Aren’t Hungarians free to marry in any church or outside of a church if they wish? Christianity is not central to the institution of marriage. Churches shouldn’t be forced to marry gays in their denominations, but churches should not force their beliefs on non-church members.
“In my state of Massachusetts”
Figures…
Zsuzsa: Re: justasking at April 1, 2011 4:37 PM
well written. Hope you’re well.
-
Very amusing.
JA, here in the US I am just an ordinary member of the crowd. The majority now support gay marriage. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot/20100812/pl_yblog_upshot/poll-majority-of-americans-support-gay-marriage) You’d be the weird lady spouting 19 century morals from a soapbox. Come on down and join us mere mortals.
“here in the US …the majority now support gay marriage.”
Good for you. Now you can gay-marry all you want.
We prefer not to take any more of your “culture”.
Reality shows, hip-hop, graffiti, moral decay, etc., we’ve just about had enough.
@Stumpy (honest, that’s how she described you) – At least Pete was born there, and didn’t have a choice. You, on the other hand, took an enthusiastic high dive into “his” culture. You could have so easily “hung around” & defended the country from hip-hop & reality shows. Say, you ever notice the decline in America only started after you went there.
You gay couples are so cute, defending each other and all. Why do you even care about Europe? Most of you could not locate it on the map.
Stay in the US, and make babies to each other. Can you? Do I hear a “yes we can”? No?
@Pete H,
Congratulations Peti, for getting an ‘F’ in listening.
—————
“here in the US I am just an ordinary member of the crowd….You’d be the weird lady spouting 19 century morals from a soapbox”
I’ll take ‘weird’ over ‘ordinary’, any old day of the week.
@Cin,
All is good here…snowing like a bastard though!
Zsuzsa: oh how I miss snow. It never snows here…it
just gets cold, wet, polluted and miserable. Today
was a rare beautiful warm fine day though, so we
relocated our ‘virtual office’ outside and worked at
the tables behind the Starbucks at the university.
Have been working like crazy for the last few days,
but have been very productive. Hope we can catch up
soon.
If other people have rights, too, will you have less rights? Is your marriage to become less sacred or harmonic if others can marry too? Are your children going to love you less if gays are allowed to adopt kids? Until it doesn’t negatively affect my life, but it makes others life better I support equal rights. It will be better for gays, it will be the same for straight people.
This is a post a friend put on facebook I think it fits here:
So, let’s get this straight… Charlie Sheen can make a ‘porn family’, Kelsey Grammer can end a 15 year marriage over the phone, Larry King is on divorce #9, Britney Spears had a 55 hour marriage, Jesse James and Tiger Woods, while married to others, were having sex with EVERYONE. Yet, the idea of same-sex marriage is going to destroy the “institution” of marriage? Re-post if you are proud to support equal rights.
@Cin,
)
“oh how I miss snow”
Well, just the word and I’ll ship it all to you
The problem with activists is that they alway go too far. Quit it already, you’re just annoying.
Find another hobby. Marriage is not for you. Never mind the crap you read about the lifestyle of spoiled celebrities in stupid tabloids, it has nothing to do with the essence of marriage as a protected institution.
I’m not married, because I don’t like kids and get bored with the same woman after a while. So I recognized that marriage is not for me, and I can live with it. Why can’t you?
Merry go round: Well, I guess it’s just a lucky
thing for you then that it is not against the law to
be a selfish, misogynistic bastard.
Ouch!!! That ones gotta hurt!
Cat’s Meow hates single people. Poor, illiterate bastard prefers gay marriage to no marriage.
Sad little bag of inferiority complex you are.
I don’t hate women, on the contrary. They can be fun to be with, but not with the same one forever. What’s wrong with that?
@Man of Mystery,
)
“Poor, illiterate bastard prefers gay marriage to no marriage”
Huh-hm…the ‘poor illiterate bastard’ is in the midst of getting his PhD in Sociology and standing by his side and cheering him on, (from a disatnce Olga and I)…is his wife
Go team!!!
You can protest as much as you like. The new constitution reaffirms and codifies the Constitutional Court’s earlier practice of talking about the rights of “men and women” to marry indeed. And this is what is acceptable. End of story, fags.
@Catherine
I support gay marriage 100 percent but I think Merry-go-around/ Man of Mystery (or not) deserves some credit. (Till death do apart gives heterosexual marriages a different meaning when considering domestic abuse and the number of women being killed by their husbands)
Re: “I’m not married, because I don’t like kids and get bored with the same woman after a while. So I recognized that marriage is not for me, and I can live with it. ”
This guys deserves a medal but only for this specific attitude – If more men were as honest as he was, millions of woman and children would be saved from utter misery, divorce, living in poverty due to failure to collect court ordered support payments etc
There is also a tremendous pressure for women to marry and have kids and some people, regardless of gender are simply not meant to be parents. Just because I think the best thing that happened to us are our children, does not follow that others should have kids they really don’t want but feel they must reproduce because of society’s expectations. In fact, maybe one of the reasons the Hungarian birth rate is declining because Hungarians refuse to be pressured or made to feel guilty
We were at a party last December and met a gay couple planning a huge elaborate wedding this October and one of our married male friends remarked that he fully supported gay marriage because he felt gays should not be exempt from misery; so there you go, one more solid reason for equality.
“It always seem to me that those who are too interested in other peoples bedroom antics are what are called PERVERTS.”
@Stan – nice one!
@Geza
@ Ella
@ JA
@ anyone else who seems to be so scandalized by the notion of gay marriage:
Stop spending so much time and energy on riling up hate and let people love each other in peace. I don’t see how anyone would be made any happier by you or any government preventing love from living freely.
And please quit all this self-glorifying talk about your concern for the nation’s morality. This debate does not have, and has never had, anything to do with morality. It’s all about your fear of losing the ground beneath your feet, and any change, positive or negative, instills fear in people. Please work on overcoming those childish fears because your fears are costing innocent people their lives and their families.
There is nothing honorable in hate and nothing honorable in what you’re trying to do here.
“There is nothing honorable in hate and nothing honorable in what you’re trying to do here.”
Are you trying to say something, or just parroting liberal clichés?
Hate has its place, just like love. Do you love everyone and everything, including war criminals like Hitler, Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt?
Do you love corrupt politicians and needy minorities always asking for more power and special privileges? I don’t.
I refrain from doing a lot of things that are legal but may disturb others. Gay extremist are just too full of themselves, they don’t care about the rest of society. They deserve to be treated that way.
Olga: I take your point. Some people are doing the
world a favour by not marrying or procreating.
-
When Pope John Paul died, I was sharing a house
with a lesbian.She was really hoping that the new
pope would have a different position on gay
marriage. (pun only partially intended) I actually
tend to think that marriage as an institution is
over-rated anyway, so I asked her why she felt it
was so important to be involved in two
institutions that didn’t really have her interests
at heart.In effect, she responded that it wasn’t
about the institutions themselves or the people
who either were appointed, or felt compelled to
speak on their behalf, but rather that it had to
do with how she saw herself and how she felt about
her partner.I do understand what she meant, though
still I ponder the desire of some to join a club
where many of the members really hate you.I guess
my feelings about recognising ‘civil unions’ isn’t
so much about accommodating intolerance as much as
it is about creating an institution where people
can be recognised as worthy and equal regardless
of their identity.
“Hate has its place, just like love. Do you love everyone and everything, including war criminals like Hitler, Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt?”
@Roberto: I absolutely do not love everybody and I especially, extremely dislike You. However, I do not find that hating fascist pigs like yourself has any place in my life or anyone else’s because my hate wouldn’t make either you or me any happier or more constructive to society. So no, I do not agree that there is ever a place for hate as there is for love. While that conservative, fascist rhetoric you people spew left and right is nothing but destructive, I have found that if those “liberal cliches” you seem to have heard before have any impact at all, it is a constructive one. You know why? ‘Cause no one ever created anything with hate. Creation comes from love, life comes with love, even if millions of fascist idiots with sticks keep coming back to try to break it.
“getting his PhD”
You’re blissfully unaware of the real value of PhDs. Any dimwit can get one if he/she/it has too much time and paper to waste. It’s a vanity issue, a desperate attempt to hide your insecurities.
Mental midgets need that.
@Man of Mystery,
Whatever….
@Bobby,
Would you just shut-up your moron…If your only intent is to hear yourself talk, because it’s obvious, not only do not know what your talking about; but, of whom…get a mirror.
“You’re blissfully unaware of the real value of
PhDs. Any dimwit can get one if he/she/it has too
much time and paper to waste. It’s a vanity issue, a
desperate attempt to hide your insecurities.
Mental midgets need that.”
-
Given that Elle claims to be doing/has done a PhD,
I’m inclined to agree with you.
@ Bobby
Unless you take JA off your list of “haters” you dilute your argument; she is anything but
@JA – Whaaaaaaatever, dude.
@Bobby,
Did you think of that comeback all on your own?
@Olga,
))
“you dilute your argument”
No, leave the guy/gal alone…he/she is obviously ‘diluted’ so it would seem appropriate his/her rant is as well
@olga:
I’m actually offended slightly that Bobby forgot to include me on his “list of haters”.
@Catherine the Awesome:
Yup, that’s basically what this is in for “marriage” for homosexuals. Having their way, and only their way, like spoiled children would do. They won’t push through in Hungary and the more aggressive they’d become, the more backlash they can expect.
@ Leto
Maybe we can do and exchange for you and JA like in hostage situations.
I honestly don’t think Hungary is “ready” for same sex marriage and I would also question the decision to have a gay pride parade in BP ,while I think it’s a fun event in Toronto – as far as I am concerned, in your neck of the woods, it does more harm than good and just creates more hostility so it’s counter productive.
As far North American standards are concerned, I don’t believe in using the word “union” as opposed to “marriage” because it’s like saying we agree that everyone should be able to get on the bus, except Black people should sit in the back.
Leto: I’ve said before on this topic that I think
both sides need to compromise…and for me that
means that homosexual commitment needs to be
recognised as equal to heterosexual commitment.As
I said before, I personally think that a lot of
the justifications on the anti-gay marriage side
are a bit ‘precious’, but then, I don’t like
militant activism either.What matters to me in the
end is that I think homosexual partners should
have the same rights and responsibilities as
heterosexual partners, and whether you call that
marriage, or civil union, or whatever, I don’t
really care…I’m pragmatic enough to think that
the name is less important than the act of
commitment and personal responsibility, and if it
means that it is easier for others to accept
homosexual partnership and allow them the same
effective level of legal representation, then the
name is irrelevant.
@Catherine
)
Re: ….”and if it
means that it is easier for others to accept
homosexual partnership and allow them the same
effective level of legal representation, then the
name is irrelevant.”
I suspect when you scratch the surface you are nothing but a read neck neo-Con
@ Catherine -
I meant “red neck” – but you are certain “well read” so maybe “read-neck” was appropriate after all
@olga:
It’s just great to be “in the back of the woods” when it comes to such “progress” like the so-called “gay marriage” or “gay rights” in general…
@Catherine the Awesome:
That’s fine then. I wouldn’t agree to “allowing them the same effective level of legal representation” though but that’s another question.
Leto: when I talk about legal stuff, I’m referring
to things like being recognised as ‘next of kin’, or
as dependent spouse, or as equal partners in
property rights etc. I have seen a lot of people
post on this site words to the effect that “I don’t
care what people do in their own homes”, well, I
think this is an area where it shouldn’t matter to
anyone else that same-sex partners have the same
practical rights as heterosexual partners. What does
it matter to anyone else?
-
olga: umm, thanks…I think.
@Catherine the Awesome:
That’s all right. What absolutely isn’t is, for example, things like rights to adopt and raise children, etc.
on the topic of children, I think that is more a
responsibility than a right anyway. I tend to
think that no one should have the automatic
‘right’ to reproduce or to adopt a child,
especially when I think about the number of really
crap hetero parents out there. I personally am not
philosophically opposed to gay partners raising
children, but I do recognise that this means a lot
more than having partnership rights. Ultimately,
the right to a safe and healthy environment for
the child is what is most important, and I don’t
think that being straight or gay is a guarantee
either way.
-
you do realise though that the image of homosexual
people as being sex-crazed bondage fiends is a
stereotype right? I mean, you’d be surprised at
how ‘normal’ homosexual people can be.
@Leto,
)
Hi! Olga wanted me to ask you, if you would like to join us for a drink when we’re in Budapest.
@Olga,
Ask and you shall receive
The right to a safe and healthy environment for
the child is what is most important indeed and certainly being a straight couple isn’t a guarantee for anything. So far no dispute here. However being a gay couple is definitely a guarantee for a sick, that is not healthy, environment since homosexuality is a sexual perversion. (It doesn’t matter from this point of view that it’s a genetic or psychological defect.) So homosexual couples are ab ovo unfit for raising children, no matter how “normal” you think homosexual people can be.
@justasking:
Thanks, that’s really very nice of you.
When would that be? No hard promises because I have to travel sometimes at unexpected times.. (Ah, and I definitely wouldn’t want to meet that Scandinavian.)
@Leto,
We would have to work around Olga’s schedule, for she will only be in Budapest for less than 2 weeks.
I would say probably June 7th or 8th would be best, if you could swing it.
Too bad you feel that way about Viking; he’s actually quite nice and funny.
JA: “This is my second marriage…what do you
DD
think?”
That your first husband didn’t like you too much?
Nark, nark, nark!
Hey look at me, I’m trying on your sense of humor
for size!
But seriously (rimshot), kudos to JA for being
supportive of the idea of “unions” regardless of
what we call them… Personally I think the naming
is less important than the
benefits/responsibilities/etc.
Watch out JA, soon they’ll be calling you a
ZioBolshie Lib fruitcake!
@justasking:
Good. A two week period seems to be safe enough, I rarely travel so much, most of the time it’s less than a week. (As for the Swede, he has utterly disqualified himself by some of his posts concerning my child.)
@Bystander,
“That your first husband didn’t like you too much?”
Actually, you’re not too far off. He came home one time with a case of crotch crickets, so I left.
I guess he just wasn’t that into me.
@Leto,
Do you want to go through ‘face-book’ to exchange info?
I’ll be taking a laptop with me this year and we could either exchange e-mails or I do have a Hungarian phone number I could give you.
You decide how to go about it.
As for being safe…you will be. Olga really is the same as she is on this site, only a hell of allot funnier in ‘real life’.
@justasking:
“There can be only one”… and that’s iwiw.
Will tell you an e-mail later on here. I don’t do FB.
@Orbán’s kutya:
You’ll never get it that “some” people think differently from your small minded idiot.
“As of 22 October 2009, the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany has ruled that all the rights and obligations of marriage be extended to same-sex registered partners.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recognition_of_same-sex_unions_in_Germany
@Leto,
)
What the hell is ‘iwiw’?
Was that a typo or do you have a stutter?
PS: I’m not into face-book either…I just joined to show my support to this website…fool that I am, I like it here…for the most part that is
@justasking:
Ah, iwiw was *the* social networking site in Hungary until about half a year ago when it was dethroned by FB.
“On Dec 24, 2008 the number of registered users on iWiW 4 million, covering almost all internet users in Hungary.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IWiW
@Leto,
)
Okay, now I remember…that was the site that my older site snuggled up too, to keep in touch with our family in Hungary. I used Skype
oops…meant to say ‘sister’ and not site
@ Leto
)
All these “social arrangements”
It would be nice to meet you and I am looking forward to meeting “the Swede” but definitely not when you are around and I plan to be meeting CG the Narnian, but not when JA is around.
btw I never met Zsuzsa, (you may have read her real name here) but we talk on the phone frequently and it’s mostly about just boring day to day family stuff.
We have an election coming up but Canadian politics is nowhere as exciting as Hungarian politics so not much to talk about because most people I know could “live with” either the Liberal or the Conservative party so I for one can’t get overly excited one way or the other especially now when I can’t stand the Liberal party leader. (he does have good taste in women and married a “Zsuzsa” )
About iwiw – I don’t know why but I keep getting
messages that I delete without reading from people’s whose names I never heard of “wanting to meet” me but I have no idea how I got my name on that site. I vaguely remember my girlfriend referring me to it so I must have agreed.
About Gay or MG protests – I thought “protests” were the “in thing” in Hungary this spring until I found out there was a SLUT protest in Toronto yesterday that actually had to do with feminist issues. Jaj!
@ Olga,
DDD
” until I found out there was a SLUT protest in Toronto yesterday that actually had to do with feminist issues”
I heard that on the news yesterday and thought…”of course, only in TO”!
Oh, did I forget to mention? Elections Canada, called me back and wanted to know if I was interested in ‘working’ this election.
I’ll be in charge of counting ballots…’Now lookie here…not a single vote for the Liberals, NDP’s or the Greens…
I keep wandering ever since this kind of minority-rights questions surfaced: are our society really is so incapable to guarantee “human rights” in general?
I mean, if the human rights fully, equally and universally granted, anything else exceeding this, should be called “privilege” – or I mistaken.
At the moment we start to “give” rights to another fellow human being, we inevitably interfere with the whole principle of “universal human rights”.
Or:
“Everyone is equal, but some of us are more equal than the others…”
- Just joking!
- Am I?
@spectator,
“I keep wandering ever since this kind of minority-rights questions surfaced: are our society really is so incapable to guarantee “human rights” in general?”
If there is ‘human rights’ in general…you would not need minority rights.
So, God save me…I agree with you.
————–
“Everyone is equal, but some of us are more equal than the others…”
- Just joking!
- Am I?”
You tell us….
As for the Swede, he has utterly disqualified himself by some of his posts concerning my child
Leto at April 4, 2011 9:40 PM
—
Good, that just confirms the reason why I wrote what I did
You have several times claimed that Pinter’s statement that under-aged prostitutes do it ‘voluntarily and willingly’ are correct
That is of course easy when you have not an ounce of empathy and think of children with problems as “others children”
Not in your deepest mind would you ever contemplate that your own children, or another child which you have known for several years, suddenly you would discover doing “under-aged prostitution”
* Would you then really, really think “Ahh, he/she do it voluntarily and willingly, so I do not need to bother”?
* If you asked that child why it did it, who forced it, and the child answered “I do it willingly and voluntarily!” – Would you really, really believe that child *if* you knew that child?
-
Given your starch support for Pinter and his statement (which has rendered international condemnation), one must either mark you down as some one with the same empathy-level as paedophiles, or just a simple hypocrite, who would say/write anything for political profit/reasons
.
You decide what you are, for me that is of rather peripheral interest
He came home one time with a case of crotch crickets,…..I guess he just wasn’t that into me.
)
justasking at April 4, 2011 9:47 PM
Higher standards, perhaps?
@Olga – “All these “social arrangements”
…….and I plan to be meeting CG the Narnian, but not when JA is around.”
Sure thing, so long as you don’t reveal where Narnia is to JA or Leto. But, maybe you could pass her one of my spare bones. She could also stick it thru her nose, or wherever else she likes (I’m thinking her ex-husband), and wouldn’t even need to go thru any interview to get her hands on one
@Curious George:
You don’t need to worry at all about my knowing where Narnia is. You’ve given enough tidbits of info for me to find out. Yeah, I’m a smart bastard.
Who cares where this jerk comes from, all i know he or it supports zionazism..
@Leto – yes, I always knew you were a smart one. Now, if you’ll keep it under your hat….
@ Curious George, Leto, JA and the “Swede”
“C’mon people now,
Smile on your brother
Ev’rybody get together
Try and love one another right now ”
It’s a shame no one in the early 60′s thought of putting “my thoughts” to music and record it.:))
@George,
“Higher standards, perhaps?”
What??? You just figured that out? What happened to your ‘above average IQ’?
I thought my standards were ‘obvious’ (or lack there of) when it was established that I was a ‘Lying fucking Fruitcake ribanc’ by Law and Lopott
What??? You just figured that out? What happened to your ‘above average IQ’?
) Your recent admission about the crickets now leads us to believe it was a really case of him wanting higher standards 
D
I thought my standards were ‘obvious’ (or lack there of) when it was established that I was a ‘Lying fucking Fruitcake ribanc’ by Law and Lopott
justasking at April 5, 2011 5:24 PM
You forgot racist.
Anyway, the above average IQ is fine. Being the fair person that I am, I didn’t want to jump to any conclusions. I had also considered the possibility that maybe he wasn’t a desserts person (fruitcakes), but perhaps more into crabs &/or other seafoods.
“Your recent admission about the crickets now leads us to believe it was a really case of him wanting higher standards
D
—————
You obviously misread my post, that is what I meant….again, some much for your imaginary ‘above average IQ’
PS: Lopott and Law never called me a racist. Just FYI
@JA – No, I know what you meant. You misread my post about not jumping to conclusions.
)
“PS: Lopott and Law never called me a racist”. Yes, but that was also firmly established by 3 others who have more credibility than your two friends
@George,
“You misread my post about not jumping to conclusions”
No, I read you post the way you wanted me to read it and we both know that.
“who have more credibility than your two friends ”
As established by who…you? I know, you like to think you’re better than them…but, really you’re no different. Their just more up front and obvious about their convictions than you.
They go through the front door and you go through the window…still get into the house.
As established by who…you?
justasking at April 5, 2011 7:32 PM
Bystander & Plumcrazy too, before I did.
“but, really you’re no different”.
I’m sure Law & Lopott would disagree with you (along with just about everyone else here). In fact, I’m just curious as to who would agree with you.
“In fact, I’m just curious as to who would agree with you.”
Do you really think it matters to me if others agree with me or not?
@JA – I don’t know, but it would show how idiotic that comment was.
“I don’t know, but it would show how idiotic that comment was”
No, it matters not to me…my opinions are just that…mine. Now, I might be wrong…but I do believe it might be considered a birthright. I’ll have to research that.
I’m not the one who needs to have people rallying around me, patting me on the shoulder and feeding my ego by saying ‘yeah….I agree with everything she says’, you are.
So, by all means…rally away..
@JA – My sentence would be clearer if I wrote “I don’t know, but it would show you how idiotic that comment was”
I already knew that. Don’t need rallying.
“My sentence would be clearer if I wrote “I don’t know, but it would show you how idiotic that comment was”
I already knew that. Don’t need rallying.”
Curious George at April 5, 2011 9:27 PM
“In fact, I’m just curious as to who would agree with you.
Curious George at April 5, 2011 7:46 PM
————–
I’m sorry, you were saying?
“He came home one time with a case of crotch
crickets, so I left.”
OUCH.
So, tell me, I’ve always been curious… do those
crickets *bite* or what? I mean I’ve heard the
crotch-cricket noises at night (my neighbors must be
filthy sluts), but luckily was never ‘infested’!
@Bystander,
“So, tell me, I’ve always been curious… do those crickets *bite* or what?”
I wouldn’t know…I didn’t stick around long enough too find out…but, hey…why don’t you Google it?
“my neighbors must be filthy sluts”
Not necessarily…Brian told me he got it from the toilet seat at a ‘Sports Bar’ he attended.
See, you *are* funny when you stick to specifics and
don’t go for the person’s race! Not bad!
(70s music swells)
“You’re gonna make it after allllll!”
@Bystander,
)
“See, you *are* funny when you stick to specifics and don’t go for the person’s race!”
I always stick to specifics and you know that. As for attacking a persons ‘race’…don’t do that, nor their religion either…I mock the person.
Agreed, some people might not be able to separate the two…
Just a quick note of caution…you better not find me anything other than repulsive…George is trying to make a point.
Besides, I’m always funny…just ask me
@JA – Awwwww. Still flapping about & twisting to find a redeeming angle.
I already made the definitive statement that no one would agree with you, and that your comment was idiotic. Being curious doesn’t mean I need rallying. It just means I wondered if there were other idiots like you.
I’ve got nothing more to add to this – you can carry on if you wish.
“I’ve got nothing more to add to this – you can carry on if you wish”
Too bad…I was hoping to carry on until a vessel burst in your brain.
@wolfi
Drunk fag porno King, do you see anywhere in your link from Wiki that marriages of your kind is allowed in Germany?
@ Double
After your charming posting to Wolfi, I was curious about Germany’s laws.
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,6017460,00.html
Looks like German laws are in line with the type of legal union that ja, Catherine and most Liberal Catholics support.
@Olga,
D
“Looks like German laws are in line with the type of legal union that ja, Catherine and most Liberal Catholics support”
Are…are…are, YOU suggesting, that what Pete H said about me “You’d be the weird lady spouting 19 century morals ” could in-fact be WRONG?
And that MY views on this topic are more in line with the majority??
So now, I can cut up that long dress with puffy sleeves, and the crinoline I had ran out and bought in honour of him.
I thought ELLE was the weird lady (or man) trapped
in the 19th century… Her manner of speaking
surely sounds like it. Not to mention her thought
process (I mean what *resembles* thinking in a sort
of proto-cognition type o’ way).
Bystander: your post reminded me of Vandorlo’s
mention of the Chinese Room argument.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_room
In short:”It addresses the question: if a machine
can convincingly simulate an intelligent
conversation, does it necessarily understand?”
The problem is, you can’t even use this as an
insult for ‘she who’s name must not be spoken’
because of her failure to fulfil the basic
requirement of ‘intelligent conversation’.The last
post I saw of hers on another thread was just a
manic rant of profanity.So there is nothing so new
in that, as this has been the case with her little
constellation of asteroids for a long time.She
rarely says anything of substance…except for
gems like ‘Russia is not corrupt’, or that thing
about some great genetic research…OH, and WHO
COULD FORGET the great Israeli business jet
invasion/’money changer’ murder conspiracy?
…perhaps she should try the meaningless Chinese
characters.Maybe she could do a better job with
that.
ok, ok. I know…Don’t provoke the inmates.
ThePowersThatBe, or those controlled (possessed)
humans who think themselves ‘lord and master’ of
this planet, are dependent on the weak willed,
easily corrupted, small minded, gullible human
minions, like Katie, bystander, olga, JA, wolfie,
viking, CC, LMP MSZP and mislead Fidesz.
well, it wouldn’t be the first time I was told I was
possessed.Perhaps the pointy heads were right after
all.That’s ok, at least my demons have a sense of
humour.
@ Catherine
I am getting good at this – I can recognize Law’s cut and paste rantings immediately just the way I recognize some people’s writings (not everyone’s)
So before Satan comes to join you for dinner, copy this into a google search: “The Powers That Be, or those controlled (possessed)humans who think themselves ‘lord and master’ of this planet, are dependent on the weak willed, easily corrupted, small minded, gullible human minions”
I never opened the actual websites, just wanted to check how many times the paragraph appeared ;
Nazi woman must be busy because she hasn’t come forward to congratulate him on his brilliant insight like the last time he posted some cut and paste crap that made no sense but maybe it was a good day and she remembered she said good-by.
A shame that Dostoevsky was not around to read this deep thoughts, might have helped him with research on “The Possessed” a novel that has always been on my must read list but never got around to it – I bet you read it
Hope you are sleeping – 4 a.m. over there
I agree Katherine on your comments… Forgot about
the Chinese room thing but I think I still have a
Searle book on my shelf (from undergrad Philosophy
of Mind class, barely remember taking that one,
musta been Freshman beer, I mean YEAR)…
The ‘Chinese room’ was sounding a lot like the
“Turing Test” to me, but we all know Elle would fail
any attempt to distinguish herself from a computer-
imitating-an-Evil-Mary-Poppins.
@olga After your charming posting to Wolfi, I was curious about Germany’s laws.
Did you find out that ‘köcsögök’ [a new Hungarian word for you] could get married there?
Because, Leto and JA (I think) were defending the institution of marriage as being between a man and a woman, when wolfi butted in.
@Catherine/Zyklon B/Black Swan “She rarely says anything of substance…”
Just like you did in this post, eh?
@Double,
“Because, Leto and JA (I think) were defending the institution of marriage as being between a man and a woman”
No need to think…that is what I believe….that being said, I do support gays entering into a ‘civil union’ or a ‘partnership’ etc and that they be given the same rights and freedoms as ‘married’ couples.
I will also go one step further and say that I do support gays adopting children.
Homosexuality is a sexual preference. To deny them the right to adopt is just as ridiculous as somebody saying that because I happen to be a heterosexual woman, I should not be raising my son.
There are too many kids out there, who need loving, caring and attentive homes. If these people can and will provide one, why not.
Sorry to disappoint; but, that’s how I feel.
http://www.theonion.com/video/small-town-throws-pride-parade-for-only-gay-reside,19431/
I am surprised some of this bunch after reading the sad news about the Hungarian birth rate don’t propose a Constitutional amendment which would require all Hungarians (who can prove they are actually Magyars and not some dreadful foreign mix, or, GASP!!! Jewish or Roma) MUST swear to have at least ten children or no marriage license would be issued.
Can we have a law against pedophiles (priests) performing marriages, while we are at it. For after all if marriage is a sacred institution we can’t possibly have unsacred persons conducting the ceremonies. (Oops, I forgot we have to NOT SAY ANYTHING BAD ABOUT PRIESTS for they are all self sacrificing angels keeping us away from evil.
ARRRRGGGGGHHHHHH! Does anybody have any sense anymore?????
@budapeter “Does anybody have any sense anymore?????”
I don’t know, maybe not. You don’t seem to have any. But you kajmán [new word for olga] – unlike the Catholics – got your Wailing Wall.