Does democratic Poland guarantee it's LGBT citizens respect for human and civil rights?

There is a law against violating the dignity of Christians and other believers. Violating people's religious sentiment is a punishable offence in Poland.
Art. 196. Obraza uczuć religijnych
Dz.U.1997.88.553 - Ustawa z dnia 6 czerwca 1997 r. - Kodeks karny
Kto obraża uczucia religijne innych osób, znieważając publicznie przedmiot czci religijnej lub miejsce przeznaczone do publicznego wykonywania obrzędów religijnych,

podlega grzywnie, karze ograniczenia wolności albo pozbawienia wolności do lat 2.


Hitler's coming to power was also widely supported. So what? Throughout history the rabble has often been swayed by charismatic leaders and clever propaganda. That doesn't make it right.

@Pol3: concretely, what does the law consist of? I know quite a few Poles who say "terrible" things re the catholic Church and they are still around.

Also, are homophobia, racism, antisemitism illegal in Poland? For info, such behaviors can lead to .... 3 years in jail and 75,000 euro fine in France so it "calms down" ;).

It all depends how one defines these term. Sometimes people expressing disapproval of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians are called anti-Semites. Those saying marriage is reserved for a man and woman have been daubed with the homophobic brush. Some claim the word "murzyn" is racist. There is a Polish cake called "murzynek" (little Negro boy). Is that racist?

Everything can be subejct to overinterpretation.

No. Polonius you are daubed with that brush on this forum not because you oppose same sex unions, but because of the extremely insulting, personal comments you make, designed to shame and ridicule homosexual men. You often use the term LGBT but most of your comments involve homosexual males. You have even discussed the smell of a man's anus, the amount of hair and warts to be found therein and speculated on whether they take turns being penetrated.

The law states in the typical style of Polish penal codification: Whosoever offends the religious sensibilties of others by publicly insulting an object of religious worship or a place intended for the performance of religious rituals is subject to a fine, restriction of freedom or up to two years in prison.

A landmark case involved pop singer Doda who publicly insulted Christian symbols and beliefs.


No, they were only designed to offset the flood of glamourised, sugar-coated, ultra-rightsy codswallop that dominates the forum.
Your only real objection is that someone dares express a subjective opinion that runs counter to your subjective opinion. That someone does not wnat to engage in pro-LGBTQ PR or propaganda.

You have never questioned any factual data provided nor proved that such practices do not occur. Instead you prefer to hurl insults and suppress free speech.

That doesn't have anything to do with this thread. In any case, people can pretend that almost anything violates their 'religious sentiment' if they so choose. Having one's 'religious sentiments' uncriticised and unchallenged is not a human right. Living without arrest or persecution or without receiving different treatment or access to public services or particular professions if one is LGBT (or anything else) however is...


Looks that way.

Discussing the smell of a person's anus is not an 'opinion'. If you were opposed to per-marital sex would you bring up the smell of a woman's vagina as a topic for discussion in order to debate the rights and wrongs of sex between unmarried couples?


No Polonius. I don't hurl insults. I am not a rude person but I despise dishonesty and I will challenge it. You claim that you are not homophobic but your very personal insults to the gay community demonstrate clearly that you are.


Speaking with respect to and about other human beings is not sugar coating. It's basic manners and common courtesy, something which is sadly disappearing from society and not excusable in a man of your age.


As a heterosexual female in a monogamous relationship I am not interested in the sexual practices of male homosexuals.

@Polonius3;

Homosexual people are people, not experiments for you or anyone else to study.

Why can't you talk about same-sex marriage without being insulting towards Poland LGBT citizens?
Anyway, same-sex marriages are already legal and legally binding in Poland. Polish officials are already being sued by a same-sex couple for refusing to acknowledge that couple's legal rights; the Polish officials will lose. It's only a matter of time until Poland allows legally binding same-sex marriages to be performed in Poland.

In a couple of decades people in Poland will look back at the likes of you and laugh as much as we all laugh at the racist bigots in the photo below:




It's a real pity that he doesn't write about this topic on websites that more Polish people read. When people read the kind of disgusting posts that he writes, they think to themselves 'I can either side with this kind of person or I can side with the likes of that Robert Biedron bloke. Hmm, that Biedron bloke sure seems a lot nicer. I guess I know which side I'm on.'

And how do you envisage the bureaucratic mechanics of your long-awaited decision when marriage in Poland is protected by the constitution? The Palikots, White & Reds, SLD and other leftie loons would have to improve their showing at the polls and team up with the Flatfeet (PO) and even that would not be a 2/3 majority. So far into the foreseeable future Poland is safe!

Simple mechanism. ECHR rules, Polish state obeys and pays. No second guessing that one. Just like they paid the two guys that ended up in Guantanamo 100k euros each for their treatment in Poland, they will have to pay every time the court rules against them.

The Polish constitution says nothing about marriage being exclusively between people of different sexes. The Polish constitution explicitly states that marriage is only one possible union between a man and a woman and states that such union is placed under the protection and care of the Republic of Poland. Nowhere does it say that marriage cannot be a union between two men or a union between two women.

Anyway, the Polish constitution isn't even a couple decades old, it's not like it couldn't be changed even if it did forbid same-sex marriage.

And even if the Polish constitution did forbid same-sex marriage, it would still be illegal under a higher law, meaning that Poland would be faced with a choice: maintain the ban on same-sex marriage (which doesn't exist) or remain in the EU. Poles very much like the EU and would most certainly choose to remain in it. If you don't like the EU, you are more than welcome to return to your own country.

Nowhere does the constitution say that dogs and toads cannot vote. Saying that marriage is between a man and a woman is sufficient protection. It does not have to elaborate that marriage cannot be between two males, two females, a man and his sheep; a woman and her Great Dane, a transgender type and a kangaroo...

Now that's interesting. Should be easy enough to ratify. I can imagine the Ciemnogrod brigade foaming at the mouth in frustration over that one.


Fairly straightforward.

Homos can pretend that almost anything violates their alleged "rights", even someone not willing to repeat and promote LGBTQ propaganda.

That's just paranoia. Like most of the stuff you've spewed out here.

Good to know that the Polish Constitution does not exclude equal marriage.

The Polish constitution says that "Marriage, being a union of a man and a woman, ... shall be placed under the protection and care of the Republic of Poland." Nowhere does it say that marriage which is a union between two people of the same sex cannot also be placed under the protection and care of the Republic of Poland, so there is no need to change the constitution.

And even if it did say "Marriage, being a union of a man and a man, ... shall never be placed under the protection and care of the Republic of Poland.", that's fine: people's human rights in the EU are protected at a higher level than the Polish constitution.

Although, don't you yourself advocate for the constitution of Poland to be changed? It does talk about "the Third Republic" and you seem to think that there should be a fourth republic.

This is the key part. Nor does the "being a union of a man and woman" exclude any other interpretation.

That's because it is very self explainitory so need to except for someone like you who insists white is black.
quote by jon


Oh the glee and joy in your tone jon !
Now can you see why jon ?
Just what you wanted to promote your immoral brainwashing to the European youth.
The gays in a near by town where I live in the summers tried to do the same there.
They bought and ran a sandwhich shop where all the LGBTQ's hung out demmanding respect like the gays are doing in Poland by recruiting the kids by promoting homosexuality as being cool.

The young boys who were mostly mama boys and didn't mingle with the young men playing high school sports so hung out there even though they were not really gay and just pretended to be for the attention they got.

Then one of the workers who made the sandwhiches was diognosed with hepatitis and HIV.
The place closed do to lack of patronage overnight.
I think it is only fair that the consequences that come from practicing homosexuality like Polonious has posted be allowed as well so the youth on this forum can realize that while respecting a gay person and being brainwashed that it is normal and cool is not one in the same as being a natural or moral thing.

What ever happened to having self control, morality and quietly keeping private matters private.
If a gay person didn't flaunt it no one would know and they would be treated the same.
When they flaunt it, then expect to be treated different.
You can bet if Harry walked down the street wearing a shirt that says, "I love to masterbate" and expected
not to be treated differently....well you get my point.
Again, and for the last time, giving gays preferential treatment is not about respect and rights, it is a direct attack to destroy Christainity by the Liberals.

I don't dislike jon because he is gay, I dislike what he stands for by trying to promote his private life on me
demmanding that I respect it as his right. (God's word first, then mortal mans word)
It just ain't gonna happen in my life time so let's close this thread once and for all.

Never say never - and individual lifetimes, no matter whose, are not the basis for human rights legislation within the EU. Already the framework exists in Poland to respect civil rights - there is protection already for all citizens, residents and travellers.


What 'preferential treatment' are you imagining?

The only basis for man-made legislated "rights" is the Constitution -- the supreme law of the land. If that ever changes in the perfidious direction you're hoping for, MAY GOD HAVE MERCY ON POLAND'S SOUL!

Yep. I mean, if they had wanted the Polish constitution to make it impossible for same-sex couples to get married, they would have need to have written something along the lines of "Marriage, being exclusively a union of a man and a woman, ... shall be placed under the protection and care of the Republic of Poland and all no uniion other than that between a a man and a woman shall be permitted in the Republic of Poland."

However, the Polish constitution does not say that, which is lucky, given that if it did, Poland would simply have to change it or leave the European Union.

Before that occurs a backlash and rollback may occur. The Germans were also said to be unstoppable, victory after victory, country after country, the 1000-year Reich and all that rot. It lasted a mere 12 years!

EU level law trumps the Polish constitution, not only in the area of the human and civil rights of Poland's LGBT citizens but also in all other areas. Deal with that fact or go home: the facts will still remain the same.


The only person here arguing in favour of changes to the Polish constitution is you.

And of course they didn't. Looks like the current trickle of lawsuits will become a flood.

The Third Republic was fun while it lasted, but soon things will be kicked up a notch and the IV RP will re-emerge. It will surely beef up constitutional guarantees with back-up legislation outlawing non-man/woman marriage for all time.


The EU will soon have bigger problems with staying alive than to stick its nose into other nations' business. It is a seasonal formation which will fade away probably sooner than anyone thinks.


Dream away...there's no law against it and it doesn't cost a złamany szeląg!
The flood is coming but don't hold your breath! LOL

I'm not sure that even Radio Maryja listeners would support a constitution which specifically and blatantly discriminatory. Having a constitution which said "Marriage, being exclusively a union of a man and a woman, ... shall be placed under the protection and care of the Republic of Poland and all no uniion other than that between a a man and a woman shall be permitted in the Republic of Poland." would be as bigotted as having a constitution which said "Polish citizens must be white and male and no non-males or non-white people shall be permitted to be Polish citizens."


I really hope not: it's my taxes that will pay for all the lawsuits which are lost.


Things which have never existed cannot re-emerge. And even if a bunch of bigots are stupid enough to pass laws attempting to legalise bigotry, the the human and civil rights of Poland's LGBT citizens (and all of Poland's other citizens) are protected at a higher level than Polish law.

When the ocnstituion was promulgated (you can that word up in Google translate) in 1997 nobody in their wildest dreams could imagine blokes getting married even in the more debauched countries of the world. It would be like enshrining in the Constitution the provision that dogs nad cats cannot serve as Speaker of the Sejm even if their name was Radek. The homo marriage thing was just about that preposterous, hence the somewhat non-assertive formulation. But IV RP back-up legislation should solve the problem once and for all.

In reality, same-sex marriage has been legal in Europe since the time that Jaruzelski was leader of Poland.


Google translate can't translate the word 'ocnstituion'.

Err ah.......the definition of "Marriage" IS EXCLUSIVELY between a man and a woman in any dictionary that I
have seen it in.
You now have to change the definition of words in the dictionary to be correct on that one Harry.
And being the brilliant English teacher that you are you know that isn't likely to happen.
You will have to invent a new word like "immoral unification".