Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rob_G
Obviously I meant the narrow minded religious way people thought in the 1950's... :meh:
Buttiglione was supposed to protect EU citizens from discrimination. Most people in the EU (at least in the EU before the 10 eastern-European countries joined) believe everybody should be regarded equal, and should enjoy the same rights. Women, men, heterosexuals and homosexuals. How can you thrust someone who sees homosexuality as a sin to protect the rights of gay people? How can you let a man who believes a woman should stay at home and raise the children protect and further emancipation?Extreme conservatives like Buttiglione, who might even be considered more conservative then Bush when you look at social issues, have no place in EU positions which come with a lot of power and responsibility. Simply because there aren't enough people in the EU supporting such believes (=Democracy).
Buttiglione is a puppet from the Vatican, protected by the deeply corrupt rightwinger Berlusconi...
|
I believe in him because as you said it is good that he thinks they should. This does not mean a law against them. But they are not equal. Damned those who think you have the same equal natural and moral right to make children and live with opposite sex, than to be gay and raise other people children. This is simply insane. What the guy said are basic and fundamental laws for some good society.
It is pure speculation to understand what he privately said as some kind of moral law he wanted to promote. The guy, if he likes freedom as he promotes freedom for economy, would be even more happy not to rule over anything but to make some promotion, through education and those basic things a government uses to make things go naturally better.
So yes, homosexuality is a sin. Wife living home to raise children is better if one can afford. Much to say though about any help from the taxpayer regarding this. And much to say either about anything done against homosexuals. However, I do understand the problem in the Army. This is simply too dirty to explain, but anybody with some logic would. So there are definetly situations where homosexual attitude may be disqualifying.
About the 50s, I would be glad to knwo from which country. I suppose you mean Italy, because I am not sure I had such principles in my family at that time, nobody tied to them I mean.
And about Vatican, I would consider some influence from the Vatican better if it could replace some influence from the Mekka in Europe. I enjoyed better to bash some popists than I would some turbanned islamist. These are way too stupid.