Comments on: European court rules Poland discriminated against gay man

By: steveMD2

steveMD2 — Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:08:52 +0000

Law and justice party……..

Reminds me of the old Psalm…..”Everyword they say is a lie, their mouths are like open graves ……etc”

And how hitler threw the inmates of the asylum into the ovens with the Jews, gays, etc etc.

The craziest man in history was running the asylum.

that party is just another one of those “christian love” groups. Words so twisted in their true meaning that they could have taught the Islamic madmen of 9/11, the subway bombings etc a few new phrases of justification for their insanity

By: Jean-Paul Bentham

Jean-Paul Bentham — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 23:51:58 +0000

A step in the right direction for Europe as well.

By: Brian

Brian — Thu, 04 Mar 2010 08:46:29 +0000

Thanks for the clarification Tim – so basically the Pink’s reporting is entirely unreliable!

By: SimonM

SimonM — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 23:49:47 +0000

No 9: Vulpus Rex: you say:

“Your ridiculous contrivance to link a story about Poland to a smear of the Tories is as sad as it is desperate.”

No it isn’t.

This is an important ruling for gay rights in Poland.

The Law and Justice Party are the Tories’ allies in Europe.

The Law and Justice Party are the most viciously homophobic party in Poland.

If they speak out against this important ruling, then the VERY least I expect from the Tories (who these days allegedly support equality) is a call from the LGBTory group, to break up the alliance between the Tories and the Law & Justice Party. COULD the Tory Party countenance such homophobic bigotry among their allies?

Well let’s wait and see…

By: Tim Hopkins

Tim Hopkins — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 19:44:36 +0000

Brian is right, by the way – the principle here is that if rights are provided to unmarried mixed-sex couples (ie cohabiting mixed-sex couples) the same rights must be provided to cohabiting same-sex couples – at least in all matters that are covered by Euro Convention rights.

The argument that if more rights are provided to married couples than cohabiting couples (which is usually the case), then there should be a way (eg registered partnership) for same-sex couples to access the same rights, has not yet been accepted by the European Court of Human Rights, but it is one of the issues raised by the Schalk & Kopf v Austria case that was heard last week.

By: Dromio

Dromio — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 19:14:42 +0000

Protecting the family?

And gay people don’t have families??? Or do their families not deserve protection?

By: Tim Hopkins

Tim Hopkins — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 18:46:05 +0000

Most of the important Euro court cases for LGBT equality have been at the Court of Human Rights – starting with Dudgeon v UK in 1981 which led to the decriminalisation of gay sex in Northern Ireland. Most recently, last week the court heard its first case claiming the right to same-sex marriage, Schalk & Kopf v Austria.

There have been fewer important LGBT cases at the European Court of Justice, most notably P v S & Cornwall County Council, in, if I remember rightly, 1996, which established that gender reassignment discrimination is banned by EU sex discrimination laws.

By: Lucius

Lucius — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 18:25:57 +0000

@ SimonM:

“So it was the European Court of Justice that forced Britain to allow openly gay soldiers to serve in the army?”

No, it was the same court as in the article: ECtHR, which has 47 judges for 47 countries, signatories of the Convention.

The European Court of Justice is used only by the European Commission against the (27!) member states or member states against each other whenever there is a breach of contracts.

By: vulpus_rex

vulpus_rex — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 17:15:16 +0000

@2 I am curious to know what the lady who served me in a bar in Warsaw thinks about this – she once sat next to a german on a bus who’s second cousin twice removed breathed oxygen in the same room as a puppy that might have come from litter sired by a dog stroked by Hitler – she’s clearly a monster and we can’t believe a word she says!

Your ridiculous contrivance to link a story about Poland to a smear of the Tories is as sad as it is desperate – grow up.

By: andy

andy — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:57:32 +0000

I think you will find that it’s the discrimination against a straight couple, marriage being immaterial. That has been the case also in the UK since 2002, when the Court of Appeal here, nudged by Brussels, allowed a gay couple the same rights as a straight couple in a similar context case. Lord Justice Buxton in our Court of Appeal came up with this memorable use of words “As far as protection for the family is concerned it is quite unclear how heterosexual family life (which includes unmarried partnerships) is promoted by handicapping persons who are constitutionally unable to enter into family relationship so defined … Parliament having swallowed the camel of including unmarried partners within the protection given to married couples it is not for the Court to strain at the gnat of including such partners who are of the same sex as each other”. Our House of Lords agreed.

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:36:14 +0000

Not sure that this is correct –
“The European Court of Human Rights ruled yesterday that Poland discriminated against a gay man for refusing to treat him and his partner in the same way as a straight married couple.” – but the story itself indicates that the court held that the discrimination was in not treating them in the same way as an _UN_married couple. Both can’t be right – typical crap reporting.

By: SimonM

SimonM — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:09:33 +0000

So it was the European Court of Justice that forced Britain to allow openly gay soldiers to serve in the army?

By: Tim Hopkins

Tim Hopkins — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 14:57:53 +0000

Just for info: the European Court of Human Rights is the court of the Council of Europe, not of the EU. The Council of Europe comprises 47 countries including Russia, Turkey and other East European states (and including all the 27 EU countries) who are signatories to the European Convention on Human Rights.

The court of the EU is the European Court of Justice by the way.

By: Mike

Mike — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 14:38:40 +0000

Nice to see the EU working properley!!!!

By: RobN

RobN — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 14:21:50 +0000

With any luck, this might be the tip of the iceberg. The EU *HAS* to set some kind of minimum standards the all EU members have to abide by. And if they think they will have problems with Catholic Poles, they ain’t seen nothing yet if the Turkish Muslims are brought into the fray.

By: SimonM

SimonM — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 14:19:54 +0000

I am curious about the reaction to this ruling by the Law and Justice Party in Poland. This party is described by Polish gay groups as the most viciously homophopbic in Poland.

It is also the partner of the Tories in the European Parliament.

If anyone from the L&J Party speaks out about this ruling can we expect a breakup in the unholy alliance between the Tories and the Polish homophobes.

‘Call me Dave’ Cameron says after all that he would not be in an alliance with a group whose views he finds ‘unacceptable’

Or was he lying like he usually does I wonder?

What do the Law and Justice Party make of this ruling. This is important as it will prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the Tories are telling barefaced likes when they pretend to support equality.

By: zefrog

zefrog — Wed, 03 Mar 2010 14:12:23 +0000

“protecting the family”?!?!?! seriously!?