If there is something that clearly can be deduced from last month’s national elections in Austria, it is that the electorate didn’t consider the introduction of sodo-“marriage” a great priority. The parties with the greatest increase in votes were those who clearly stated that marriage is – and should remain – a union between one man and one woman: the conservative “Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP) and the national conservative “Freedomite Party” (FPÖ). Having increased their share of votes by aggregated 13%, these two groups now dispose of a solid majority in the National Assembly and look set to form the next government. By stark contrast, the group that – already by picking lesbian activist Ulrike Lunacek as their lead candidate – most aggressively turned sodo-“marriage” into a core part of their electoral program lost more than two thirds of its votes and all of the parliamentary seats it had previously held.
As a result, a parliamentary majority for introducing sodo-“marriage” seems completely out of reach within the next five years. But despite this, it could nevertheless become a reality within the next few weeks.
The reason is that the Constitutional Court (Verfassungsgerichtshof) has, in a surprising about-face, announced that it has doubts regarding the constitutionality of the legal definition of marriage set out in Article 44 of the Civil Code, and intends to subject that definition to an examination ex officio, with the likely outcome that the part of it stating that the two spouses must be “of different sex” will be removed. Continue reading “Austrians don’t want sodo-“marriage”. But their Constitutional Court does.”
The ECtHR has today delivered its decision in the case of Ratzenböck and Seydl v. Austria, concerning a man-woman couple who wanted to conclude a “registered partnership”, because it considered the less committing terms of such a partnership more appealing than those of a normal marriage. The Court decided that the non-availability of such a “registered partnership” for different-sex couples does not constitute discrimination on the grounds of “sexual orientation”. Continue reading “ECtHR: heterosexual couple not allowed to contract sodo-“marriage””
Grave scandal in Malta, a small country not so long ago considered a bulwark of Christianity, in which the slaughtering of babies was (and still is) strictly forbidden, and divorce didn’t exist (it has been introduced just a few years ago). But the country’s two bishops, Charles Scicluna of Malta and Mario Grech of Gozo, seem determined to change this.
As LifeSiteNews reports, Archbishop Scicluna has come out with a surprising – and clearly heterodox – statement according which the introduction of same-sex “civil unions”, which would give legal status and privilege to those consistently engaging is sodomy, should be supported by the Church as it would be a “service to the dignity of these people.” Really? The service that a true pastor should offer his flock to lead them away, and protect them, from sin.
The Socialist-led Maltese Government, which was re-elected this week despite a series of scandals, is preparingto introduce within weeks homosexual “marriage” legislation.
Same-sex civil partnerships (and not, as Politico and other media falsely report, “marriages”) between sodomites have become legal in Slovenia, with a law coming into effect today that gives the mock “marriages” of sodomites largely the same status as to the future-ensuring genuine marriages, which are those between one man and one woman.
This law was adopted by the Slovenian Parliament in a truly provocative show of arrogance against the will of citizens, who in a referendum held in December 2015 had, with a clear majority of 63% v. 37% rejected this indecent “reform” project. The 2015 referendum was already the second popular vote on the subject, with a referendum held in 2012 leading to the same outcome. Continue reading “In contempt of democracy, new law on sodo-“partnerships” is forced upon Slovenia”
In the judgement it delivered today in the case of David L. Parris v. Trinity College Dublin, the CJEU has (once more) confirmed that:
‘The Member States are … free to provide or not provide for marriage for persons of the same sex, or an alternative form of legal recognition of their relationship, and, if they do so provide, to lay down the date from which such a marriage or alternative form is to have effect.“
As a matter of consequence, it found that the fact that Dublin’s Trinity College does not provide for a widower’s pension for the surviving part of a same-sex couple living in a registered “civil partnership” concluded in the UK is not a “discrimination” on the grounds of sexual orientation and/or age.
With 372 against 51 votes (and 99 abstentions) the Italian Parliament has adopted a law creating the possibility for same-sex couples with perverse sexual inclinations to conclude so-called “civil unions” that are assimilated, albeit not equal, to marriage.
Italy was until now the last major country in Western Europe not to have caved in, in some way or the other, to the demands of the fashionable homo-lobby that society should recognize their sexual perversions as worthy of celebration, legal protection, and possibly fiscal privilege. Continue reading “Italy caves in to homo-ideology”
There is apparently no level of hypocrisy that homo-activists are going to shirk away from when it comes to find new arguments for their so-called “marriage equality”.
Helmut Graupner, a homosexual attorney from Austria who has in recent years been particularly successful in bringing complaints to the European Human Rights Court that provided the pretext for the ECtHR’s absurd and legally unfounded judicial activism on new homo-rights, is at it again. This time he has filed a complaint to the Regional Administrative Court of Upper Austria on the grounds that a female same-sex couple he represents have not received a marriage licence. He hopes that the Administrative Court will use this as a pretext to request the Constitutional Court to declare unconstitutional the law according which only a man and a woman can marry. Continue reading “Homo activist pretends he is fighting for children’s rights”