Argentina legalizes gay marriage in historic vote

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Associated Press

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina - Argentina legalized same-sex marriage Thursday, becoming the first country in Latin America to grant gays and lesbians all the legal rights, responsibilities and protections that marriage brings to heterosexual couples.

After a marathon debate, 33 lawmakers voted in favor, 27 were against it and 3 abstained in Argentina's Senate in a vote that ended after 4 a.m. Since the lower house already approved it, and President Cristina Fernandez is a strong supporter, it now becomes law as soon as it is published in the official bulletin.

The law is sure to bring a wave of marriages by gays and lesbians who have increasingly found Buenos Aires to be more accepting than many other places in the region.

The approval came despite a concerted campaign by the Roman Catholic Church and evangelical groups, which drew 60,000 people to march on Congress and urged parents in churches and schools to work against passage.

Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio said "everyone loses" with gay marriage, and "children need to have the right to be raised and educated by a father and a mother."

Read more: http://www.azcentral...l#ixzz0tlfojFq5

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Best news of the day so far.

[Nagishkaw 510]

BFD.

[^_^ 5,021]

BFD.

I agree, it is a big fu##ing deal

[LaL 418]

I agree, it is a big fu##ing deal

yup

[spookyturtle 9,466]

I agree, it is a big fu##ing deal

Or a butt fu##ing deal?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

[Peikko 1,575]

Mourning the loss of yet more "magic" Paul?

[peejay 327]

...33 lawmakers voted in favor, 27 were against it and 3 abstained in Argentina's Senate in a vote that ended after 4 a.m.

Maybe opponents can get the vote overturned in the courts. Isn't that how it's done here in the USA when you get outvoted?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Popular vote shouldn't decide something like that. It should be a question solely for the courts.

[peejay 327]

Popular vote shouldn't decide something like that. It should be a question solely for the courts.

I don't buy that. Society gets to deem what societal norms, tradition, and customs are. Marriage has been between one man and one woman in our society for hundreds of years. People will not just throw that out the window because of what one judge or a handful of judges decree.

Homosexuality is and never has been equal to heterosexuality in terms of humanity's advancement. I could personally care less if homosexuality exists, but it is not equal to or in parity with heterosexuality in the context of human advancement. It is a dead end biologically. Probably a good reason most of the peoples of the world don't hold it in the same esteem as heterosexuality. It is far from vindication.

If a society elevates homosexuality to the societal norm equal to heterosexuality then it had just as soon open the gate to polygamy on an equal level to monogamy as well. We can then define marriage as an undetermined amount of people of either sex.

Americans traditionally don't want an anything goes definition of marriage and won't have it imposed on them quietly. Jump for joy all you want about homosexual victories in the news.

Edited July 15, 2010 by peejay

[Darnell 8,478]

This is a great news !!!! Now the TS's can marry, get some status - I'm excited !!!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't buy that. Society gets to deem what societal norms, tradition, and customs are. Marriage has been between one man and one woman in our society for hundreds of years. People will not just throw that out the window because of what one judge or a handful of judges decree.

Homosexuality is and never has been equal to heterosexuality in terms of humanity's advancement. I could personally care less if homosexuality exists, but it is not equal to or in parity with heterosexuality in the context of human advancement. It is a dead end biologically. Probably a good reason most of the peoples of the world don't hold it in the same esteem as heterosexuality. It is far from vindication.

If a society elevates homosexuality to the societal norm equal to heterosexuality then it had just as soon open the gate to polygamy on an equal level to monogamy as well. We can then define marriage as an undetermined amount of people of either sex.

Americans traditionally don't want an anything goes definition of marriage and won't have it imposed on them quietly. Jump for joy all you want about homosexual victories in the news.

Ah the "biological dead end" chestnut. People don't always get married to have children. It's no big deal.

Society changes, it's never been static. As far as that goes, legalising gay marriage isn't a fundamental shift.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

As discussed ad nauseam the other day, many of us straights have chosen not to procreate. Should we not be allowed to marry?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The whole well if we legalise gay marriage we must legalise polygamy bogus. Heard it all many times before.