Argentina legalised SSM today.

The_Minister

I'm not sure how I completely missed this, but there you go:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/15/argentina-gay-marriage-la_n_647129.html

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina — Argentina became the first Latin American nation to legalize gay marriage Thursday, granting same-sex couples all the legal rights, responsibilities and protections that marriage brings to heterosexuals.

The law's passage – a priority for President Cristina Fernandez's government – has inspired activists to push for similar laws in other countries, and a wave of gay weddings are expected in Buenos Aires. Some gay business leaders are predicting an economic ripple effect from an increase in tourism among gays and lesbians who will see Argentina as an even more attractive destination.

But it also carries political risks for Fernandez and her husband, former President Nestor Kirchner. The vote divided their governing coalition, and while gay rights have strong support in the capital, anti-gay feelings still run strong in much of Argentine society, where the vast majority of people are Roman Catholic.

"From today onward, Argentina is a more just and democratic country," said Maria Rachid, president of the Argentine Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender federation. The law "not only recognizes the rights of our families, but also the possibility of having access to health care, to leave a pension, to leave our assets to the people with whom we have shared many years of life, including our children," she said.

The 33-27 Senate vote was tallied shortly before dawn, after a marathon debate that touched on religion, ethics, the legacy of Argentina's dictatorship and the challenges of raising children. There were three abstentions. Since the lower house already approved it, the law takes effect within days.

Gays and lesbians who have already found Buenos Aires to be a welcoming place to live will likely rush to the altar, but same-sex couples from other countries will need to live in Argentina before becoming eligible, and the necessary residency documents can take months to obtain.

The approval came despite a concerted campaign by the Roman Catholic Church and evangelical groups, which drew 60,000 people to march on Congress and urged parents in churches and schools to work against passage. Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio led the campaign, saying "children need to have the right to be raised and educated by a father and a mother."

Opponents of gay marriage proposed a civil-union law instead that would have barred gays from adopting or undergoing in-vitro fertilization to have children, and enabled any civil servant to "conscientiously object" to register gay couples. In the end, parliamentary maneuvers kept the Senate from voting on civil unions as the government bet all or nothing on the more politically difficult option of marriage.

"I'm proud that we never tried for civil unions, always for complete equality," said Esteban Paulon, the LGBT federation's general secretary. He credits "an enormous conviction that equality means the same rights with the same names."
Story continues below

The final vote split both the governing coalition and the opposition, with lawmakers on both sides saying they went with their convictions.

Sen. Juan Perez Alsina, usually a loyal supporter of the president, called marriage between a man and a woman "essential for the preservation of the species."

But others compared the discrimination closeted gays face to the oppression millions suffered under Argentina's dictatorship years ago, and urged their fellow senators to show the world how much Argentina has matured. "Society has grown up. We aren't the same as we were before," Sen. Daniel Filmus said.

Same-sex civil unions have been legalized in Uruguay and some states in Mexico and Brazil, and the Colombian Constitutional Court has granted same-sex couples inheritance rights and allowed them to add their partners to health insurance plans.

Mexico City went even further, not only legalizing gay marriage but launching a tourism campaign to encourage foreigners to come and wed. On Thursday, Mexico City officials offered a free honeymoon in Mexico to the first gay couple to wed under the new Argentine law.

Argentina doesn't allow non-resident foreigners to tie the knot, but it is likely to draw more gay tourists who already spend millions in the country's economy, said Pablo De Luca, founder of the Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce in Buenos Aires.

"The fact that we are the first country in Latin America that respects the rights of the gay community by law sends a solid message that makes Argentina even more attractive," said De Luca, who estimates that 18 percent of the tourists who come to Argentina are gay or lesbian.

Argentina now sets a new standard for other countries in the hemisphere.

"Today's historic vote shows how far Catholic Argentina has come, from dictatorship to true democratic values, and how far the freedom-to-marry movement has come, as 12 countries on four continents now embrace marriage equality," said Evan Wolfson, who runs the U.S. Freedom to Marry lobby.

Wolfson urged U.S. lawmakers to follow suit: "America should lead, not lag, when it comes to treating everyone equally under the law."

Gay activists in neighboring Chile hope Argentina's milestone will improve chances for a gay-marriage law currently in committee in their own Congress.

"Argentina's political class has provided a lesson to the rest of Latin America," said Rolando Jimenez in the Chilean capital, Santiago. "We hope our own countries and political parties will learn that the human rights of sexual minorities are undeniable."

Activists in Paraguay plan to propose a similar law in October, said Martin Viveros of the group Somosgay. And in Uruguay, gays unsatisfied with the partial civil-union rights are preparing legislation to replace "man and woman" with references to "spouse" throughout the civil code.

Still, many Argentines, especially outside the capital, remain firmly opposed to gay marriage, and while the president's confrontation with the Roman Catholic Church may play well in the socially liberal Buenos Aires, the vote may encourage fissures in her ruling coalition.

Some opposition leaders accused Fernandez and Kirchner of trying to gain votes in next year's presidential elections, when Kirchner is expected to run again.

It's the first South American country to legalise this, and protests have broken out across the country both for and against it.

EDIT: Also allowed gay adoption.

Scuid Mhór

good stuff argentina.

caseyann

Kinda not surprised about Argentina.

caseyann

I just had an awful thought how will they know the pedophiles wont go into this to get hands on kids.

Canard

theyd marry women to get them anyway?

UrbanSea

Fail

MidlandsM

I knew Maradonna was a poof.

caseyann

Patchy~ wrote: »

theyd marry women to get them anyway?

So we just opened more avenues for them,and they are in it together,where as a woman,wouldnt in majority of cases allow it happen when she found out.

Just a thought they use religion and authority etc... to get to them.Now that to.

The_Minister

caseyann wrote: »

I just had an awful thought how will they know the pedophiles wont go into this to get hands on kids.

You mean two older guys adopt a teenager and then pull a Woody Allen?

Or two pedophiles conspire to adopt a young boy and 'share'?

You can't.

But with adequate background checks it will be a once-in-a-generation occurrence.

Einhard

caseyann wrote: »

I just had an awful thought how will they know the pedophiles wont go into this to get hands on kids.

Eh, no offence, but this really is one of the more dumb posts I've ever seen on AH. One doesn't have to marry one's partner in order to get access to his/her kids!! Unless you're under the impression that only married couples live with one another?

Sir Gallagher

caseyann wrote: »

I just had an awful thought how will they know the pedophiles wont go into this to get hands on kids.

Would ya get a grip ffs. So only men can be peados?

caseyann

The_Minister wrote: »

You mean two older guys adopt a teenager and then pull a Woody Allen?

Or two pedophiles conspire to adopt a young boy and 'share'?

You can't.

But with adequate background checks it will be a once-in-a-generation occurrence.

The second one
I hope you are right!

southsiderosie

caseyann wrote: »

I just had an awful thought how will they know the pedophiles wont go into this to get hands on kids.

I'm getting really tired of reading articles about gays that are then followed by comments about pedophiles.

GAY =/= PEDO

NoHornJan

There's an other one in the eye for Iran.

rainbow kirby

caseyann wrote: »

I just had an awful thought how will they know the pedophiles wont go into this to get hands on kids.

^There are no words to express how mindbogglingly stupid the above statement is.

This is fantastic news - if a staunchly Catholic country like Argentina can legalize gay marriage, what the hell is holding things up here?

caseyann

southsiderosie wrote: »

I'm getting really tired of reading articles about gays that are then followed by comments about pedophiles.

GAY =/= PEDO

You said that not me :rolleyes:

southsiderosie

caseyann wrote: »

You said that not me :rolleyes:

If you saw an article that was about making adoptions easier for heterosexual couples, would your first thought be pedophilia?

caseyann

rainbow kirby wrote: »

^There are no words to express how mindbogglingly stupid the above statement is.

This is fantastic news - if a staunchly Catholic country like Argentina can legalize gay marriage, what the hell is holding things up here?

Bury your head in sand nothing in this world surprises me what pedo rings would go to lenght of to get hands on kids.

fontanalis

caseyann wrote: »

I just had an awful thought how will they know the pedophiles wont go into this to get hands on kids.

Or a satanic cult? Frightening stuff.

caseyann

southsiderosie wrote: »

If you saw an article that was about making adoptions easier for heterosexual couples, would your first thought be pedophilia?

I think that already friend of mine was raped repeatedly for 4 years by her parents best friends who were married.

pickarooney

rainbow kirby wrote: »

^There are no words to express how mindbogglingly stupid the above statement is.

This is fantastic news - if a staunchly Catholic country like Argentina can legalize gay marriage, what the hell is holding things up here?

Stauncher Catholicism?

plein de force

caseyann wrote: »

Bury your head in sand nothing in this world surprises me what pedo rings would go to lenght of to get hands on kids.

you could say the same about heterosexual couples

gay doesn't mean paedophile, we're just like everyone else, we don't want to abuse kids, cop on woman

Catari Jaguar

\o/ Yay!

steel_spine

caseyann wrote: »

I just had an awful thought how will they know the pedophiles wont go into this to get hands on kids.

As opposed to all the kids of either gender who get abused by stepparents or partners of their parents already? Or single people who are already allowed to adopt?
Adoptions generally have a strict screening process. Abuse is more likely to be happening down the road in what seems to be a 'normal' household (or church) from the outside, than it is an Argentinian gay marriage. I hardly think this ruling is going to lead to a spate of paedophiles of either gender looking to 'buddy up' and adopt.
Both partners in a heterosexual marriage/relationship can be abusers also - look at Fred/Rosemary West, and Ian Brady/Myra Hindley to name two infamous examples. This is exceedingly rare, fortunately.

Sir Gallagher

caseyann wrote: »

Bury your head in sand nothing in this world surprises me what pedo rings would go to lenght of to get hands on kids.

Why not ban adoption completely in case those pesky peado's get their hands on the kids.

Einhard

caseyann wrote: »

I think that already friend of mine was raped repeatedly for 4 years by her parents best friends who were married.

Using your logic then, parents shouldn't be allowed have friends...

Einhard

rainbow kirby wrote: »

This is fantastic news - if a staunchly Catholic country like Argentina can legalize gay marriage, what the hell is holding things up here?

The Constitution.

caseyann

plein de force wrote: »

you could say the same about heterosexual couples

gay doesn't mean paedophile, we're just like everyone else, we don't want to abuse kids, cop on woman

Did i say gay people? I said i hope the pedos dont take advantage of it and pretend to be gay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! jeez




high horse climbed for any excuse to have a go at someone and feel superior.

rainbow kirby

Einhard wrote: »

The Constitution.

Which doesn't explicitly state that marriage is strictly between a man and a woman? :pac:

Catari Jaguar

caseyann wrote: »

Did i say gay people? I said i hope the pedos dont take advantage of it and pretend to be gay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! jeez

Why the **** would they go through the trouble of pretending to be a gay couple?!

It would make you wonder how paedophilia ever existed befre gay marriage?!

The_Minister

southsiderosie wrote: »

I'm getting really tired of reading articles about gays that are then followed by comments about pedophiles.

GAY =/= PEDO

In fairness, she has said nothing of the sort.

Peadophiles co-operate with each other frequently in order to get to children (child porn rings / institutional abuse).
Paedophiles tend to be male.

Allowing gay marriage and adoption raises the realistic scenario that two paedophiles will pose as a gay couple in order to adopt a child and abuse it.

The correct response is not "that is ridiculous" because it is a real possibility, the correct response is "it probably won't happen, we will have, as now, extensive background checks in place, as well as follow-up visits".

Create a system and someone will seek to exploit it.
Someone who worries about the system being exploited does not necessarily disagree with the system itself, so long as it can be demonstrated that the system can be made safe or near safe from exploitation.

MikeC101

Sir Gallagher wrote: »

Why not ban adoption completely in case those pesky peado's get their hands on the kids.

We should just ban children. The evil paedophile gangs would probably find some sort of way around that too though :mad:

But seriously - aren't adopted kids far less likely to be abused due to the stricter controls and checks on who is allowed to adopt, as opposed to people who can make children, for which the only qualification is that there be two people of opposite sex, one of whom has a womb, and the other a penis. Criminal records, past history of bad parenting, inability to support children or not.

southsiderosie

caseyann wrote: »

I just had an awful thought how will they know the pedophiles wont go into this to get hands on kids.

caseyann wrote: »

Did i say gay people? I said i hope the pedos dont take advantage of it and pretend to be gay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! jeez


high horse climbed for any excuse to have a go at someone and feel superior.

Considering this is a thread about GAY MARRIAGE, unless "go into this" refers to some other topic that appeared between the OP and your ridiculous comment, then YES you referred to gay people.

sdanseo

Don't mind any of the above, except the last line of the OP.

Dunno how anyone can think gay adoption isn't in some way detrimental to the kid(s). Even if the kids manage not to turn out like their fathers, the abuse stand to get from society makes this just plain wrong.

southsiderosie

The_Minister wrote: »

In fairness, she has said nothing of the sort.

Peadophiles co-operate with each other frequently in order to get to children (child porn rings / institutional abuse).
Paedophiles tend to be male.

Allowing gay marriage and adoption raises the realistic scenario that two paedophiles will pose as a gay couple in order to adopt a child and abuse it.

The correct response is not "that is ridiculous" because it is a real possibility, the correct response is "it probably won't happen, we will have, as now, extensive background checks in place, as well as follow-up visits".

Create a system and someone will seek to exploit it.
Someone who worries about the system being exploited does not necessarily disagree with the system itself, so long as it can be demonstrated that the system can be made safe or near safe from exploitation.

My point is, whenever there is some kind of public debate about gays or gay rights, people immediately bring pedophilia into it. Like I said in my previous post, would pedophilia have been an issue if this were about heterosexual adoption? I highly doubt it.

caseyann

southsiderosie wrote: »

Considering this is a thread about GAY MARRIAGE, unless "go into this" refers to some other topic that appeared between the OP and your ridiculous comment, then YES you referred to gay people.

WHATEVERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR:rolleyes:

The_Minister

southsiderosie wrote: »

My point is, whenever there is some kind of public debate about gays or gay rights, people immediately bring pedophilia into it. Like I said in my previous post, would pedophilia have been an issue if this were about heterosexual adoption? I highly doubt it.

It's far less likely to happen with a heterosexual couple since women tend to be far less likely to sexually abuse a child than males.
If the scheme posited by Caseyann were to be carried out, it would most likely be carried out by two males.

Again, it is only a concern to people who are not aware of how rigourous the adoption system is.

The_Minister

caseyann wrote: »

WHATEVERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR:rolleyes:

Should I even bother to defend you anymore?

That has to be the most childish reply since we banned Your ma.

Rented Mule

Good ...now they can be miserable like the rest of us.

sligopark

Paedophuilia is linked with homosexuality - just look at NAMBLA - although this is not to say all homosexuals are paedophiles nor near it - sure this would be like claiming all roman catholic priests are paedophiles.

Why would gays want to try and claim marriage whe it is a union between men and women for the institution of having children.

Whilst I am all for equal rights - when I see a bloke give birth then perhaps it might be a logical claim until then why?

Einhard

sdonn wrote: »

Dunno how anyone can think gay adoption isn't in some way detrimental to the kid(s). Even if the kids manage not to turn out like their fathers, the abuse stand to get from society makes this just plain wrong.

I have red hair. Got abuse for it all my life. My parents were ginger mingers too. I s'pose they shouldn't have been allowed to marry either? For my sake and all...

southsiderosie

The_Minister wrote: »

It's far less likely to happen with a heterosexual couple since women tend to be far less likely to sexually abuse a child than males.
If the scheme posited by Caseyann were to be carried out, it would most likely be carried out by two males.

Again, it is only a concern to people who are not aware of how rigourous the adoption system is.

There have been plenty of threads on boards about how men are emerging in society as bogeymen for everything - there was outrage when a man was asked to switch his seat on a plane so he would not be next to a child. The implicit assumption behind jumping to these kinds of conclusions - gay rights make things easier for pedophiles or unaccompanied men are out to attack children - are dangerous, and they are particularly prevalent when it comes to pretty much any conversation about gay people. So when someone's immediate reaction to a story about gay marriage is "oh no, an opening for pedo's!", I'm calling bull****.

EDIT: Maybe I would be less annoyed if there was any kind of thought put into the original comment I replied to, but caseyann is not exactly covering herself in glory...

caseyann

The_Minister wrote: »

Should I even bother to defend you anymore?

That has to be the most childish reply since we banned Your ma.

Sorry to you,just sick if the stupid assumptions.Thanks to you who can see past their own nose.

sligopark

Einhard wrote: »

I have red hair. Got abuse for it all my life. My parents were ginger mingers too. I s'pose they shouldn't have been allowed to marry either? For my sake and all...

ah now hear then we might never have been blessed with Chris Evans ....

Pace2008

caseyann wrote: »

WHATEVERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR:rolleyes:

The old adage "when you're in a hole, stop digging" comes to the fore of my mind.

southsiderosie

caseyann wrote: »

Sorry to you,just sick if the stupid assumptions.Thanks to you who can see past their own nose.

SO what does "go into this" mean then?

Originally Posted by caseyann
I just had an awful thought how will they know the pedophiles wont go into this to get hands on kids.

plein de force

sdonn wrote: »

Don't mind any of the above, except the last line of the OP.

Dunno how anyone can think gay adoption isn't in some way detrimental to the kid(s). Even if the kids manage not to turn out like their fathers, the abuse stand to get from society makes this just plain wrong.

you don't turn out gay because of having gay parents, it's kind of there in you

using that assumption i should have turned out straight because of my straight parents

and i think southsiderosie said everything i was going to say back to caseyann

KnifeWRENCH

sdonn wrote: »

Dunno how anyone can think gay adoption isn't in some way detrimental to the kid(s).

Why is that? I'm more surprised by the number of people who think gay adoption would be detrimental to children and have no evidence to back up their opinions other than their own prejudices.

the abuse stand to get from society makes this just plain wrong.

The abuse is wrong and the people doling out the abuse are wrong but that does not make adoption by same sex couples wrong.

On topic: Well done Argentina. Hopefully other countries will follow your example and one day Ireland will no longer have to compromise with civil partnerships and instead have full civil marriage that LGBT couples deserve.

caseyann

southsiderosie wrote: »

SO what does "go into this" mean then?

Meaning seeing an opening for another cover for them and use it to their advantage,and another system disheveled at hands of pedophiles.Ever seen the reports on heterosexual couples who have adopted kids and abused them.Now as pedophiles apparently travel in groups and also network together,whats stopping them from cutting out the woman now and having no one who can rat on them.

Witcher

caseyann wrote: »

cutting out the woman now and having no one who can rat on them.

So only women report paedophilia?:rolleyes:

Sensationalism gone mad

sligopark

plein de force wrote: »

you don't turn out gay because of having gay parents, it's kind of there in you

eh gay parents giving birth LOL

genetically gay LOL