Polish parliament refuses to consider shack-up draft between both traditional and same-sex couples

These are not "homophibic rants" of Bible Belt Evangelicals or some neo-fascist homo-bashing group but the findings of an official US health agency.

Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs) have been increasing among gay and bisexual men, with recent increases in syphilis being documented across the country. In 2012, men who have sex with men (MSM) accounted for 75% of primary and secondary syphilis cases in the United States. MSM often are diagnosed with other STDs, including chlamydia and gonorrhea infections. HPV (Human Papillomavirus), the most common STD in the United States, is also a concern for MSM. Some types of HPV can lead to the development of anal and oral cancer. Men who have sex with men are 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer than heterosexual men.

cdc.gov/msmhealth/STD.htm

Please stick to the topic

Yes, of course, not everyone has that attitude. What would your own view be Obiwandonnelly as to why Poland doesn't want to acknowledge co-habiting couples?

Good, no need for that kind of nonsense in Poland.

Atch t
In fact you are confused what is and what isn't normal.4

My guess is that the people in the sejm are well behind the population in their attitudes on these kind of things.

People vote on economic grounds and until a sufficiently large groundswell of people benefit from a change in the law it will not be a major issue for voters.

Poland is a predominantly Catholic country and the notion of "living in sin", whether adhered to or not, continues have a certain odium about it. In other words, it is regarded as less respectable than in Western countries.

On the practical (non-religious) side, other reasons could include the greater impermanence and instability of unwed liaisons as reflected by their generally shorter duration as well as more break-ups, desertions and resultant fatherless homes than amongst married couples.

Cohabitational arrangements are also the source of more domestic violence (ask any Polish policeman called to in-home fights and disturbances).

My personal definitiions of what is 'normal:

Heterosexuality is the norm because nature has created most people hetero.

Heterosexuality: Natural, normal
Heterosexuality with deviancy/fetishes: abnormal but acceptable between consenting adults
Homosexuality: Natural, abnormal (in that it deviates from the heterosexual norm)
Paedophilia: Unnatural, abnormal

Not in the least confused. Bob's your uncle, Fanny's your aunt.

Homosexual behaviour might be regarded as "normal" in the sense of being typical in prisons where contacts with the opposite sex are restricted or prohibted. The same holds true for the animal kingdom when captive animals are deprived access to mating opportunities.

Homosexual behaviour is found in more than 450 species; homophobia is is found in only one. So which is more normal?


Isn't it lucky you were never imprisoned for your work against the communist regime in Poland? Oh, sorry, have I got that the wrong way round?

More bullsh!t from a bullsh!tter.

About 10% of the animal population is homosexual. which is pretty much the rate of homosexuality in humans. Us being animals that really shouldn't surprise you.

Do some reading and you might accidentally learn something about your surroundings:

Bagemihl, Bruce (1999). Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity. St. Martin's Press. ISBN 978-0312253776.
Harrold, Max (1999-02-16). "Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity". The Advocate, reprinted in Highbeam Encyclopedia. Retrieved 2007-09-10.
"Same-sex Behavior Seen In Nearly All Animals, Review Finds", Science Daily
"Same-sex behavior seen in nearly all animals". Physorg.com. 2009-06-16. Retrieved 2010-11-17.

And in zoos, generally there's some poor dude tasked with the job of masturbating animals.
Or animals just wank themselves off.

It's strange, naw, not strange, pretty f!ckin dumb that you think that animals (which would include people, seeing as we are animal) when they can't find a sexual mate will 'turn' homosexual. Most people would just have a wank. What you're thinking of are called bisexuals and they tend to have sex with any willing partner, male or female.

Maybe you're bi man, and that's cool.
Go with it.

You know what else is relatively common for animal kingdom? Cannibalism and infanticide, including the eating of your own offspring.

We humans regard these things as pathologies - because they are. They are caused nearly always by overcrowding, food supply shortages and unbalanced populations versus carrying capacity. So is homosexuality throughout the animal kingdom amongst mammals and marsupials. Queer is nature's way of reducing population pressures by causing animals to go nuts.

In dire situations people (not only savages) have also engaged in cannibalism, e.g. Stalin's artificial fame in 1930s Ukraine. His NKVD thugs stripped the country of every last bushel of grain, head of livestock, etc., reducing the population death by starvation inb installments. Incidents of consuming a dead baby or deceased grandfather were not uncommon.

Everyone back to the topic please

Artem wrote that int he animal world cannibalism and infanticide, including the eating of your own offspring, were not iuncommon.
I merely added that it also happens amongst humans. Like in a normal conversation, people go off on tangents. Do you really like the idea of someone with a whip standing over you when you're chatting with someone ready to crack it over your head the minute you veer away form the official topic?

Well it's a long way from hetro couples to gay ones in politics so if poland has not resolved the hetro issue it tells me that it's a long way from the gay issue. First it would have to adress just two people living together which will undoubtably be hetro and once this is established move on to other things. You can't really have any further debate which hopes to achieve anything for those pro gay above my post and the countries making it ok for gays to marry have the basic law of two people long sorted. Than the gay quarter can attack that like they did everywhere, 2 ppl living together why cant they? But if this is not sorted legally you could only win if word marriage is defined as being by any sex mix not just man and woman which by the way is where australia is stuck. Gay movement in poland has a higher chance making progress backing equality between a man and woman out of marriage first. This will make gay relationship look more on par.

I am happy to say it seems to be a long way to travel from what I know anyway.

^^Do we also have to do drugs, abort kids and assist suicide to fit in?

Why should people pay more tax because they are not married? Un-married couples pay more tax than they would if they were married, in Poland. This is pure discrimination.

Yes it is discrimination but governments everywhere use the tax system to promote behavior that they think furthers the interests of the country - might be home ownership, might be tax breaks for military vets, tax breaks for students and obviously there are some lawmakers who think that marriage is generally something to be encouraged and should benefit from tax breaks. I don't have much of a problem with that.

The problem with this gay debate is that there seems to be no middle ground - I'm happy for them to get married but I'm much less sure about them adopting kids and I don't think there is enough history so far to decide that they are as good as straight couples in doing that. Walking out on my own flesh and blood would be a huge moral decision for me - I'm not sure I would feel as bad walking out on an adopted Malawi kid, in fact I might have a few drinks and decide the kid is probably still better off than he was in Malawi etc etc. Problem is that I'm a reasonable guy but having doubts about gays adopting kids is now almost seen as a position of extreme bigotry - if I was e.g. in educated company back in the US I would not necessarily own up to those views.

Not only that: children of unmarried couples can have to pay tax. For example, if a man who is living with but not married to a woman and pays the school or university fees for her children, those children have a tax liability resulting from that payment.

@Harry: Really?

I also know that in case of un-married couples, if one gets sick and hospitalized, the spouse shall not receive any info and also when one dies, the surviving spouse is entitled to nothing. In case a will is written, the dead partner's family has no difficulty to have the will cancelled legallly. I have had an example of such a case (people being together for 30 years). The widow got nothing as her late companion's son got will cancelled.

Sad but true and Poland is not any more open than ... Iran.

Yes, really, and this isn't just hypothetical stuff either. I know of a case up north where a woman had been trying to divorce her husband (for being a drunken loser who would regularly get drunk and beat her up, and the kids if they got in his way) for seven years but couldn't because he kept delaying and delaying and delaying the process. She had a new partner who she and the kids lived with and the son went to a semi-private school, as he hadn't been doing too well in state school (due to having rather challenging early years), which was paid for by the new man. The husband reported this to the tax office, which opened an investigation into the matter, which was closed after a tax office employee visited the family unofficially and explained to them exactly how to make the problem go away.

Poland has terrible problems with its family court system and the divorce element of that is no better than the child-related parts. I know another case where a woman was abandoned by her husband while on holiday in the USA (he'd basically used her to get a visa for the USA) and he simply disappeared. It took her six years to get a divorce finalised, during which time she met a very nice man and had a kid with him. No doubt the likes of Polonius would sneer at the child for being born out of wedlock and loudly decry the sins of the parents.

@Harry: thanks for your info. Like anybody living in Poland, I have also heard about a lot of "crazy" situations in Poland but what to expect in a fundamentalist country? Women are only good enough to cook, clean, raise kids and go to Church and no Wonder why so many Polish women prefer western men?

No need to bring religion into it. From a purely utilitarian and pragmatic point of view laws are enacted that best serve the interests of a given nation. Certain things are encouraged and others discoruaged .

Such things as normal married heterosexual families, home ownership, a low divorce rate, etc. are all things that strengthen society hence tax, divorce and other laws tend to encourage them. Other things such as informal cohabitation are tolerated but not encouraged, as they tend to destabilise society. It' as simpel as that. If someone finds Poland's laws in those areas oppressive, "droga wolna" (the road is open).

@Polonius: In any society, laws are dictated by religion or by lack thereof. Most religious countries have the most conversative laws whereas non religious countries have the most tolerant and liberal laws. It is like that everywhere.

@Polonius: just look at Europe! The most tolerant and liberal societies are those without religion or very little thereof and vice versa ;).

I'd love to see religion kept out of marriage.


Yes, forcing one's own morality down the throats of other people is very much to be discouraged, but you still try to do it.


Yes, they could go to your country, where it is perfectly legal to marry children.

@Polonius: re divorce, only societies in which women can be independent, can make decent money, can get help from State to raise their kids, have a high level of divorce. I know a lot of women in Poland who would love to divorce but as they are financially dépendent upon their husbands, and make peanuts when tjey work, as they cannot get State's help, they don't divorce and suffer at home...

To some it may be just that. Under communism many Poles compared the scraps of paper issued to couples by the registrar's office to the certificates issued by state pig-procurement stations (punkt skupu trzody chlewnej).

But to others it is a holy sacrament joining the heart, soul and body of the betrothed in eyes of God and the faithful. Maybe that's why married-by-a-registrar couplesw tend to break up more often. It's only a scrap of paper, innit?

Polonius, obwiandonnelly's attitude is very cynical but yours is very unkind and not worthy of a Christian. To dismiss the marriage vows taken by people in civil marriages as worthless is not right.

I have no problem with that people can view marriage exactly as they want, the state however, views marriage as a property contract. The same state that says that marriage is only between a man and a woman.

What an interesting viewpoint. I wonder if you could enlighten us about the rate at which couples who marry only before a registrar in Poland break up as compared to the rate for men who enter into a holy sacrament joining the heart, soul and body of the betrothed in eyes of God and the faithful with a child in your country? I mean, as far as the RCC are concerned, children can get married at the age of 14 (if they are female), so surely it's also OK with you for such a child to enter into a holy sacrament joining the heart, soul and body of the betrothed in eyes of God and the faithful, innit?

I thought that females are allowed to marry from age 16 on, and only with judicial approval. Can the RCC actually override Polish laws?

That is indeed what Polish law says; however, according to the RCC, if a girl is 14 years and one day old, she's good to go. Personally I find that to be a very unpleasant thought; 14-year children are simply not old enough to get married.


Fortunately in this case RCC law doesn't override Polish law, just as RCC law will not override Polish law when Polish law is changed to permit same-sex marriage. However, in Polonius' country (admittedly not all states of that country), it is perfectly legal for a man to marry a child of that age, to enter into a holy sacrament joining the heart, soul and body of the betrothed in eyes of God and the faithful with a child.

What State would that be Harry ?