Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Living in Switzerland > Swiss politics/news  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #221  
Old 27.09.2021, 11:15
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Geneva
Posts: 718
Groaned at 1 Time in 1 Post
Thanked 850 Times in 360 Posts
MajorGrubert has a reputation beyond reputeMajorGrubert has a reputation beyond reputeMajorGrubert has a reputation beyond reputeMajorGrubert has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
My point was not to argue on the pro/con. But there is a big difference between a polite debate on the adoption question and "homophobic hate speech".
The "adoption question" is a homophobic dog whistle.
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 27.09.2021, 11:17
Axa's Avatar
Axa Axa is offline
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Suhr, Aargau
Posts: 4,622
Groaned at 82 Times in 75 Posts
Thanked 6,519 Times in 3,086 Posts
Axa has a reputation beyond reputeAxa has a reputation beyond reputeAxa has a reputation beyond reputeAxa has a reputation beyond reputeAxa has a reputation beyond reputeAxa has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
My point was not to argue on the pro/con. But there is a big difference between a polite debate on the adoption question and "homophobic hate speech".
I guess there was no debate, there was a vote. 64% people voted in favor of marriage for everyone.

--------------------------

Also, news from Rüebliland. One of those few times where secondo/a is not used pejoratively......and the SVP lost harder

Quote:
A single ballot was enough, the attack on the city council has fizzled out: the Aarau city council is complete and again in the hands of women. With Silvia Dell’Aquila (SP), a left politicizing comrade, the first seconda and openly homosexual, was elected. The SVP failed even more clearly than in 2017
https://www.aargauerzeitung.ch/aarga...8?reduced=true
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank Axa for this useful post:
  #223  
Old 27.09.2021, 11:25
komsomolez's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SZ
Posts: 3,510
Groaned at 326 Times in 228 Posts
Thanked 7,182 Times in 3,058 Posts
komsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
I'm afraid not if any of the debate about adoption includes concerns that gay couples are somehow less than straight couples or that same-sex couples somehow have a negative impact on children. That's just appalling. And, indeed, hateful. The very idea that children should not be allowed to be adopted by gay couples is homophobic. I don't see how it can be anything else.

Anyway, it thankfully passed, yes?
I made clear what my views are on this earlier in this thread. So apparently I am a homophobic hater then.

It is this pattern of extreme partisanship that is making every intelligent debate difficult. No middle ground, and probably I have to be in favour if surrogate motherhood too now if I don't want to classify as homophobic.
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank komsomolez for this useful post:
  #224  
Old 27.09.2021, 11:33
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Cold Ghost
Posts: 282
Groaned at 46 Times in 42 Posts
Thanked 865 Times in 347 Posts
BritS has a reputation beyond reputeBritS has a reputation beyond reputeBritS has a reputation beyond reputeBritS has a reputation beyond reputeBritS has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
I made clear what my views are on this earlier in this thread. So apparently I am a homophobic hater then.

It is this pattern of extreme partisanship that is making every intelligent debate difficult. No middle ground, and probably I have to be in favour if surrogate motherhood too now if I don't want to classify as homophobic.
Not at all my good friend. You just have to not be against equal rights for homosexuals not to be homophobic.
Reply With Quote
The following 5 users would like to thank BritS for this useful post:
  #225  
Old 27.09.2021, 12:02
swissotter's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: ZH
Posts: 2,307
Groaned at 10 Times in 9 Posts
Thanked 3,439 Times in 1,412 Posts
swissotter has a reputation beyond reputeswissotter has a reputation beyond reputeswissotter has a reputation beyond reputeswissotter has a reputation beyond reputeswissotter has a reputation beyond reputeswissotter has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
Not at all my good friend. You just have to not be against equal rights for homosexuals not to be homophobic.
We can agree to disagree” is reserved for things like “I don’t like coffee”. Not racism. Not homophobia. Not sexism. Not basic human rights. Not basic common decency.
Reply With Quote
The following 7 users would like to thank swissotter for this useful post:
  #226  
Old 27.09.2021, 12:26
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Zurich
Posts: 66
Groaned at 14 Times in 9 Posts
Thanked 146 Times in 65 Posts
Pewpewpew has a reputation beyond reputePewpewpew has a reputation beyond reputePewpewpew has a reputation beyond reputePewpewpew has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
The "adoption question" is a homophobic dog whistle.
Yep. And St2lemans is hearing it loud and clear given his red rep and groan.

Reply With Quote
The following 3 users groan at Pewpewpew for this post:
  #227  
Old 27.09.2021, 12:33
st2lemans's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Lugano
Posts: 32,802
Groaned at 2,651 Times in 1,883 Posts
Thanked 39,940 Times in 18,845 Posts
st2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond reputest2lemans has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
Yep. And St2lemans is hearing it loud and clear given his red rep and groan.

Ummm, I voted yes on the matter actually, so you clealy have no clue.

Tom
Reply With Quote
The following 6 users would like to thank st2lemans for this useful post:
  #228  
Old 27.09.2021, 12:36
komsomolez's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SZ
Posts: 3,510
Groaned at 326 Times in 228 Posts
Thanked 7,182 Times in 3,058 Posts
komsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
Ummm, I voted yes on the matter actually, so you clealy have no clue.

Tom
Excellent. Shows how one can be skeptical on one point of the proposal and on balance still vote in favour.
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank komsomolez for this useful post:
  #229  
Old 27.09.2021, 12:42
Island Monkey's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Wallis
Posts: 6,747
Groaned at 118 Times in 82 Posts
Thanked 7,630 Times in 3,463 Posts
Island Monkey has a reputation beyond reputeIsland Monkey has a reputation beyond reputeIsland Monkey has a reputation beyond reputeIsland Monkey has a reputation beyond reputeIsland Monkey has a reputation beyond reputeIsland Monkey has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
and probably I have to be in favour if surrogate motherhood too now if I don't want to classify as homophobic.
No, you can be against surrogacy for all - that’s not homophobic. Possibly discriminatory against all with fertility issues, but not homophobic unless you’re only against it for same sex couples.
Reply With Quote
The following 6 users would like to thank Island Monkey for this useful post:
  #230  
Old 27.09.2021, 12:50
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Zurich
Posts: 69
Groaned at 9 Times in 3 Posts
Thanked 96 Times in 36 Posts
zookeeperash has earned the respect of manyzookeeperash has earned the respect of manyzookeeperash has earned the respect of many
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
No, you can be against surrogacy for all - that’s not homophobic. Possibly discriminatory against all with fertility issues, but not homophobic unless you’re only against it for same sex couples.
I don't see how people can't grasp this?
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank zookeeperash for this useful post:
  #231  
Old 27.09.2021, 13:06
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Cold Ghost
Posts: 282
Groaned at 46 Times in 42 Posts
Thanked 865 Times in 347 Posts
BritS has a reputation beyond reputeBritS has a reputation beyond reputeBritS has a reputation beyond reputeBritS has a reputation beyond reputeBritS has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
Excellent. Shows how one can be skeptical on one point of the proposal and on balance still vote in favour.
This is not really a valid argument for voting against the proposal though (as Tom has shown) - it is attempting to inject an artificial objection into the vote.

If you are against surrogacy, for whatever reason, then I'm sure you can find enough like-minded people to put that to the vote. Denying a group of people surrogacy as well as a host of other rights, when other have access to it is not reasonable, and I do not believe really the crux of your disagreement here.
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank BritS for this useful post:
  #232  
Old 27.09.2021, 13:33
Belgianmum's Avatar
Roastbeef & Yorkshire mod
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Neuchâtel
Posts: 14,242
Groaned at 281 Times in 238 Posts
Thanked 24,501 Times in 9,971 Posts
Belgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
This is not really a valid argument for voting against the proposal though (as Tom has shown) - it is attempting to inject an artificial objection into the vote.

If you are against surrogacy, for whatever reason, then I'm sure you can find enough like-minded people to put that to the vote. Denying a group of people surrogacy as well as a host of other rights, when other have access to it is not reasonable, and I do not believe really the crux of your disagreement here.
As far as I’m aware surrogacy is still illegal in Switzerland (as is egg donation) so anybody who wants or needs to go down that route whatever their circumstances would have to go overseas. This vote hasn’t changed that.
Reply With Quote
The following 5 users would like to thank Belgianmum for this useful post:
  #233  
Old 27.09.2021, 13:39
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Cold Ghost
Posts: 282
Groaned at 46 Times in 42 Posts
Thanked 865 Times in 347 Posts
BritS has a reputation beyond reputeBritS has a reputation beyond reputeBritS has a reputation beyond reputeBritS has a reputation beyond reputeBritS has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
As far as I’m aware surrogacy is still illegal in Switzerland (as is egg donation) so anybody who wants or needs to go down that route whatever their circumstances would have to go overseas. This vote hasn’t changed that.
Sure, but this was just an example - for surrogacy swap in adoption, or other topics discussed above and the point remains.
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 27.09.2021, 14:49
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Here
Posts: 512
Groaned at 59 Times in 49 Posts
Thanked 1,477 Times in 524 Posts
RufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond reputeRufusB has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
I made clear what my views are on this earlier in this thread. So apparently I am a homophobic hater then.

It is this pattern of extreme partisanship that is making every intelligent debate difficult. No middle ground, and probably I have to be in favour if surrogate motherhood too now if I don't want to classify as homophobic.

That's hardly what I said, is it now? It's nothing to do with "intelligent debate". That ship sailed as soon as someone suggested kids are "better off" with hetero couples.

There is no middle ground, either same-sex couples have equal rights or they don't. That's it. Plus what BritS and Swissotter said.
Reply With Quote
The following 2 users would like to thank RufusB for this useful post:
  #235  
Old 27.09.2021, 14:55
robBob's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Zurich
Posts: 3,309
Groaned at 67 Times in 52 Posts
Thanked 3,314 Times in 1,759 Posts
robBob has a reputation beyond reputerobBob has a reputation beyond reputerobBob has a reputation beyond reputerobBob has a reputation beyond reputerobBob has a reputation beyond reputerobBob has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
Excellent. Shows how one can be skeptical on one point of the proposal and on balance still vote in favour.
Perhaps it's the Covid Vac!
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank robBob for this useful post:
  #236  
Old 27.09.2021, 15:06
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Swiss Confederation
Posts: 11,537
Groaned at 413 Times in 339 Posts
Thanked 17,764 Times in 8,987 Posts
greenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
Ummm, I voted yes on the matter actually, so you clealy have no clue.

Tom
Closet liberal?
Reply With Quote
The following 3 users would like to thank greenmount for this useful post:
  #237  
Old 27.09.2021, 16:04
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: ZH
Posts: 595
Groaned at 28 Times in 22 Posts
Thanked 734 Times in 368 Posts
LtSoftDrink has a reputation beyond reputeLtSoftDrink has a reputation beyond reputeLtSoftDrink has a reputation beyond reputeLtSoftDrink has a reputation beyond reputeLtSoftDrink has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Removing implicit accusation of pedophilia for beginners: homosexual couples are only allowed to adopt girls – lesbian couples can only raise boys. Heterosexual couples are locked up (separately, of course) as you never know just how kinky that lot can turn out.
For all those of diverse, in-between bent - we'll get you yet
Reply With Quote
This user would like to thank LtSoftDrink for this useful post:
  #238  
Old 27.09.2021, 16:39
Blueangel's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Küsnacht, Switzerland
Posts: 4,276
Groaned at 131 Times in 115 Posts
Thanked 11,524 Times in 5,022 Posts
Blueangel has a reputation beyond reputeBlueangel has a reputation beyond reputeBlueangel has a reputation beyond reputeBlueangel has a reputation beyond reputeBlueangel has a reputation beyond reputeBlueangel has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

I'm extremely glad that the same sex marriage vote passed. Spent some of yesterday talking it over with friends, and mentioned some of what has been written in this thread.

I was reminded that....

When people talk about Switzerland being a little 'late to the party', technically, same sex marriage has only been legal right across the UK since 13 January 2020. OK...it was legal in England and Wales since 2014, but even that was late to the party.

I remember my OH first meeting my family en masse at my aunt's 80th birthday party in 2011. He was shocked when my cousin and her wife said they were considering remarrying when same sex marriage becomes legal in the UK, so that all the family could attend. He was gobsmacked because my cousin married in 2007 in Cape Town, my OH's home country, and he'd just assumed that the UK had the same already in place.

I was also reminded by a 62yr old gay friend that the push to legally recognise same sex marriage was initially, nothing whatsoever to do with reproductive rights, and he always sees this as a smoke screen to raise "dubious viable objections". For him, and many others, particularly older couples who were out in the 1980s, it's about the legal rights that are enshrined in legally recognised marriage, particularly when it comes to financial issues, insurance, property, pensions, palliative care and the right to be legally recognised as a person's next of kin.
That's what really matters! That's what people spent decades fighting for!

My friend won't be having kids when he marries for the first time next year. My cousin and her wife chose to not have kids. Amongst all the same sex couples I know, married or not, whilst a few have kids from previous heterosexual relationships, none have embarked on surrogacy and only one went down the very simple agency sperm donor route. They now have two beautiful teenage daughters and a younger son, all by the same donor. Those children all have the same biological parents, they're full siblings, and when they're older, they'll meet their biological father as his expressed wish and the wish of their parents. The parents and donor are already in regular contact, but he has his own young family to consider for now, though his wife has always been fully aware of the situation. I find that all incredibly civilised.
Reply With Quote
The following 8 users would like to thank Blueangel for this useful post:
  #239  
Old 27.09.2021, 18:51
ennui's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Kt Zurich
Posts: 1,189
Groaned at 36 Times in 28 Posts
Thanked 3,670 Times in 1,284 Posts
ennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post

I was also reminded by a 62yr old gay friend that the push to legally recognise same sex marriage was initially, nothing whatsoever to do with reproductive rights, and he always sees this as a smoke screen to raise "dubious viable objections". For him, and many others, particularly older couples who were out in the 1980s, it's about the legal rights that are enshrined in legally recognised marriage, particularly when it comes to financial issues, insurance, property, pensions, palliative care and the right to be legally recognised as a person's next of kin.
That's what really matters! That's what people spent decades fighting for!
.
I’m so glad you mentioned this. This is the important issue.
Reply With Quote
The following 7 users would like to thank ennui for this useful post:
  #240  
Old 27.09.2021, 19:02
komsomolez's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SZ
Posts: 3,510
Groaned at 326 Times in 228 Posts
Thanked 7,182 Times in 3,058 Posts
komsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond reputekomsomolez has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Vote September 26th

Quote:
View Post
I was also reminded by a 62yr old gay friend that the push to legally recognise same sex marriage was initially, nothing whatsoever to do with reproductive rights, and he always sees this as a smoke screen to raise "dubious viable objections". For him, and many others, particularly older couples who were out in the 1980s, it's about the legal rights that are enshrined in legally recognised marriage, particularly when it comes to financial issues, insurance, property, pensions, palliative care and the right to be legally recognised as a person's next of kin.
That's what really matters! That's what people spent decades fighting for!
And for this you would have seen 80% support on Sunday.
Reply With Quote
The following 5 users would like to thank komsomolez for this useful post:
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
22nd September 2013: Ticino and the Burka ban vote Sean Connery Swiss politics/news 738 07.07.2014 13:05
Vote in September for new epidemie laws omtatsat Daily life 128 21.08.2013 17:17
Anybody travelling from Zurich to Geneva/Lyone tomorrow - 26th September samofsydney Transportation/driving 0 25.09.2009 15:01
Anyone fany going for a Doggy outing on Saturday 26th September [ZH] Guest Pet corner 1 24.09.2009 12:12
Canton Zurich: Smoking Vote September 28 AbFab Swiss politics/news 246 07.10.2008 23:22


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:03.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0