Second EU Nation Moves To Ban Gay Marriage

(Vilnius) Lithuania could become the second member of the European Union to ban same-sex marriage.

Irena Degutiene, a member of the conservative Homeland Union Party announced Monday she will begin collecting signatures in January to force the issue to a vote.

Lithuanian law already defines marriage as as union between a man and woman but Degutiene said that isn't enough. She said that Latvia did the right thing last week when it amended its constitution to bar gay marriage.

Degutiene's move has raised concerns by liberal members of Parliament who say it would only alienate the country from the rest of Europe.

Gay activists in Lithuania say they will fight the proposal.

Earlier this month Latvia's Parliament passed a constitutional amendment making the country the only member of the European Union to ban gay marriage in its constitution. (story) The measure was signed last week by President Vaira Vike-Freiberga. (story)

The actions in Latvia and Lithuania are part of a growing divide between former Communist states and the rest of Europe.

The EU has moved to rein-in Poland. In October the European Commission warned Poland that if it continues to oppose gay rights the country risks losing its voting rights in the EU. (story)

Last month Polish gays and lesbians demonstrated in several cities demanding that the government abide by European civil rights laws.

The marchers denounced the mass arrest of gays in the city of Poznan, (story) where riot police detailed 65 gays and lesbians who refused to disband when they attempted to hold a gay pride march.

©365Gay.com 2005

Your avatar seems gay Whirly 😉 but seriously,it makes more sense in these less socially progressive nations than in America

Originally posted by Black Rob
Your avatar seems gay Whirly 😉 but seriously,it makes more sense in these less socially progressive nations than in America

Chuck Norris is not gay Rob 😖hifty: He is awesome.

Just proves that intolerant, prejudice idiot bigots are in countries other then the US. No big surprise.

This anti-gay stuff makes me so angry! They dont have the f*cking rights to rule other peoples lives!! ranting bann rifle

It doesn't piss me off one bit. Why? I'm not gay, and I'm uncaring for other human beings. In fact, I have no soul.

Originally posted by §noopbert
It doesn't piss me off one bit. Why? I'm not gay, and I'm uncaring for other human beings. In fact, I have no soul.

ME neither, for the exact same reasons.

Changes concerning same sex relationships have been slower in predominantly Roman Catholic countries.

marriage is a religious piece

unions recognized by the state now there is that......

Originally posted by soleran30
marriage is a religious piece

unions recognized by the state now there is that......

Marriage is not necessarily a Religious "piece"...except if you accept eversy religion to have the right, not only christianity.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Marriage is not necessarily a Religious "piece"...except if you accept eversy religion to have the right, not only christianity.

well at the end of the day I would hope that gays would be given the ability to form unions recognized by the state.............however when I think about the rules that would have to be placed on top of so called unions ugh tedious............

once civil unions become recognized at least in the USA a TON of changes will have to occur to make them effective.

Originally posted by soleran30
well at the end of the day I would hope that gays would be given the ability to form unions recognized by the state.............however when I think about the rules that would have to be placed on top of so called unions ugh tedious............

once civil unions become recognized at least in the USA a TON of changes will have to occur to make them effective.

Why? Same Sex couples should have the exact same rights hetero couples have. What's the problem?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Why? Same Sex couples should have the exact same rights hetero couples have. What's the problem?

for one we cannot really go and say same sex couples because that is biased against hetero couples so a new definition of couple needs to be defined.

Whats the time period for it to take affect or are there any? What tax pieces do they get compared to hetero couples...............who is then to tell me I don't have a civil union with my dog and he is entitled to my estates and I claim him as a dependant. I realize some of that is corny however its these same types of things that will get brought into play.............lawyers love to play semantics and lawyers write the laws.

How is that biased against hetero couples.
What time period? They should just be allowed right away. The same as hetero Couples. Now beside me not seeing a problem with you marrying a dog, that'S not what would be allowed...it should just be allowed for every adult human to marry the adult human they wish to marry (if they consent)

But that'S all just made harder than it needs to be...Gay people should have the same rights as heterosexual people...that'S all...and why shouldn't they? It's easy, it worked in most of europe, it will work in the US...it just isn't done there...

Originally posted by Bardock42
How is that biased against hetero couples.
What time period? They should just be allowed right away. The same as hetero Couples. Now beside me not seeing a problem with you marrying a dog, that'S not what would be allowed...it should just be allowed for every adult human to marry the adult human they wish to marry (if they consent)

But that'S all just made harder than it needs to be...Gay people should have the same rights as heterosexual people...that'S all...and why shouldn't they? It's easy, it worked in most of europe, it will work in the US...it just isn't done there...

Well I am not saying that it wouldn't work in USA however I was making lame comments on my dog and such because that does come into play for tax laws and such. Clearly the dog piece is just an illustration........even visitation rights don't work for same sex unions in the USA for hospitals and such. So thats what I mean by interpretation and making clearly defined rules ACROSS the board...........then to make sure same sex unions recognized by the state don't receive laws that will violate hetero marriage/couples rights.

How would they violate hetero rights?

And wouldn't visitation rights work the second that homo marriages were allowed? I really, really don't see your point.

Originally posted by Bardock42
How would they violate hetero rights?

And wouldn't visitation rights work the second that homo marriages were allowed? I really, really don't see your point.

ok once again its about making the laws work and coincide and not contradict current laws.

Originally posted by BackFire
Just proves that intolerant, prejudice idiot bigots are in countries other then the US. No big surprise.

Marriage is a human right not a heterosexual privilege.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Marriage is a human right not a heterosexual privilege.

who says its a human right anyway? Is it recogonition of a union of 2 people or is it the associated priveleges in a marriage?