[ad_1]
Photo 4Many people would come to express their will in a referendum on the definition of family. Photo by Stasys Žumbis
To date, the petition, developed by the Free Society Institute, has already been signed by more than 30,000 people. population. The petition is addressed to the President of the Republic of Lithuania, Gitan Nausėda, and to the Seimas. Citizens who have signed the petition remember how the Constitution defines the family.
“Legalizing a gender-neutral association is not a common law decision. Article 38 of the Constitution declares that the family is the basis of the State and society. Legitimizing a gender-neutral association would fundamentally change this framework, since it would include the same-sex couples in the legal concept of family.
Article 38 of the Constitution, which addresses the family, mentions only marriage, paternity, maternity and childhood, and does not mention other family reasons. Therefore, the legalization of a gender neutral society through a law approved by the Seimas would mean the denial of the will of the nation enshrined in the Constitution, creating new legal bases for the emergence of the family. Therefore, by legitimizing the basis for the formation of the family, the association between persons of the same sex, which has no support in society and is not provided for in the Constitution, the Seimas would greatly exceed its powers and the mandate given by the nation ”. the petition says.
It is also noted that same-sex couples can go against the interests of children: “The family of a man and a woman creates natural preconditions for children to be born and raised in the most favorable environment for them, along with His parents. Legitimizing a gender-neutral couple would ignore the child’s innate interest in having a father and a mother, as it would declare that, even at the family formation stage, this is not an aspiration. Such legal regulation would prioritize the interests of adults, not children.
By refusing to legitimize a gender neutral association, the state would not violate any international instruments or human rights, as there are no such universal human rights. Each state is free to define the family according to the provisions of its society. This was also recognized by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania in 2019. January 11 in the ruling: “The Convention does not impose a general obligation on States Parties to ensure in domestic law that persons of the same sex have the opportunity to marry or form a couple; States will exercise their discretion in this area.
“The decision not to legitimize a gender-neutral association is bound to respect objective human nature, the traditions of all nations living in Lithuania, the moral attitudes of the majority of citizens and, through it, the Fundamental Principle of Democracy: Representation of Citizens “Will,” petitioners say.
Therefore, the petition asks the president and the members of the Seimas to: vote against any project to legalize the association and veto those adopted; address the practical problems of same-sex couples and other non-family partners by adopting a draft coexistence agreement, which would regulate coexistence relationships through joint activities and not through a family institute;
And also to test the will of the Lithuanian people openly and honestly by holding a referendum on the definition of the concept of family directly in the Constitution.
Comment on the situation: Kristina Zamarytė-Sakavičienė, member of the board of the Institute of Free Society.
-Are you going to demand that the authorities hold a referendum on the definition of family?
– We believe that the drafters of the Constitution and the Nation that approved the Constitution clearly understood what a family is and that is seen in Article 38 of the Constitution. We believe that legitimizing a gender neutral association would expand the norm of the Constitution, but they cannot do so without consulting society. And polls show that the public does not support this form of association.
– Your survey shows that only 8% of people are in favor of such an association. population. Were you surprised by those results?
– I think you have just shown once again that our society is rational and certainly not homophobic, although sometimes you try to prove it. The vast majority of the population is not in favor of legitimizing a gender-neutral association, but more than half agree that the legal relationship between homosexuals should be resolved without distorting the concept of family.
I think these results show that, so to speak, we have acquired a certain propaganda immunity, because in Soviet times we have seen the implementation of ideologies and the methods used to persuade the public to believe what is not true.
– However, sometimes it seems that those who defend the natural family are a minority. Why?
– Because the public space is trying to create such an impression. The systemic media promotes the opinion of minorities and the majority is neither shown nor heard. This creates an impression, although it is misleading. Perhaps this is done intentionally so that decision makers, members of the Seimas, imagine that the public tends to support such initiatives. But is not. And the citizens, I believe, will certainly not forget the decisions of the members of the Seimas on these issues and will take them into account during the next elections.
– Why are traditional family caregivers immediately labeled in this debate and it seems that they no longer have a right to say? Do some politicians seem uncomfortable or even embarrassed to admit that they tend to defend the traditional family?
– Frankly, this is one of the propaganda methods. Opinion that needs to be silenced is marginalized, labels are hung on its defenders, and then it is as if there is no need to use any argument. And it is the arguments of the people who defend the natural family that are much stronger. After pasting the label, it seems that there is no need to discuss arguments with supporters of the traditional family.
– Are you facing censorship, an attack because you are defending a traditional family?
– Yes, this is our daily routine. We are already used to various negative comments in the social space or in the media. Also to outsourced fashion research against the values we defend. We feel all this, as well as some censorship in the media. It’s especially unpleasant when we feel this from the state-run national broadcaster: LRT.
[ad_2]
