PSL one more time plays against the coalition on October 15, this time sabotaging work on the law on partnerships. The subject appeared as a origin breaking up the discussion about a sovereign manifesto, loudly called migration strategy. The government knows that the chaos in the media can be exploited by distracting the audience. This is indicated by the minute of publication – on Friday, after a hot week – of a task which, although far from the expectations of voters and voters, was to be compromise on the retrospective PSL.
It didn't work. Even specified a truncated project, talking about a tiny care (which would let partners to choice up children from kindergarten), but no longer about adoption or adoption, did not contribute to the PSL. PSL would like the partnership not to be in nothing like marriageto be included not in the USC, but in front of a notary who will then bring the information to the USC, and in advance to check in the USC whether unrepentant unmarriagers are engaged in any another relationship. How much will the notary want for specified a service? So much for a concordat wedding? What grace? We'll find out erstwhile the PSL presents its proposals.
For now, we know only the planned title of the Act – “about the position of the nearest person” – due to the fact that 1 year after the coalition took over power on October 15, the PSL believes that the rush is unjustified. PSL Members, like Ireneusz Raś, did not even want to read specified a zealously criticized project.
Nothing that people are waiting, nothing that the judgement of ETPC Polska is obliged to introduce a legal solution to halt discriminating single-sex couples, which it does, in violation of Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, which reads: “Everybody has the right to respect his private and household life, his flat and his correspondence”.
PSL problem
Urszula Pasławska in TVN 24 argued that she is herself a Liberal, and PSL a "party of freedom", where everyone can have the views they want. The problem is that the PSL has little than 2% of support, and it limits the freedom of the vast majority of society, including voters, through which it was placed in the Sejm. Let us remind that the PSL entered the village building on the back of a much more popular Poland 2050 and on the girded voices of voters who did not want to Third Road It fell under the electoral threshold, but they wanted it to enter the Sejm and let for the creation of a coalition to take over governments.
Now the PSL plays the function of the 5th column and consistently sabotages the coalition's work, destroying the assurance of voters and voters. That was the case at the vote. decriminalisation of abortion assistance, that's the way it is now, under the Partnerships Act.
However, the blame for the break-up of the PSL coalition does not want to bear. This is why he is so powerfully convinced that the draft law on partnerships is not government. If he were and did not pass, due to the fact that the voices of the PSL would be lacking, it would give the opposition an excuse to put a vote of distrust towards the government. However, the PSL is simply a minority. The task is government, Minister Kotula conducted talks and negotiations for months, resulting in a heavy truncated bill being supported by Lewica, Civic Coalition and Poland 2050.
So what's the problem with PSL? He may not be reading polls that say that at least 2 thirds of Poles, including many conservatives, want partnerships. Or perhaps, with this micry of support, he simply wants to show that it matters and that he will charge himself dearly for draining 17 Members needed to vote on the government project. Exchangeable goods can, for example, be privileges for hunters or detach from the Church Fund?
Or possibly the explanation is simpler. Urszula Pasławska inadvertently exposed the homophobia of PSL in an interview. She tried to justify the request for clear differences between partnerships and marriages, recalling France's example. Only in France, regardless of sexual orientation, everyone can choose between marriages and unions. In Poland, it is PSL that does not want to let equality. Partnerships are by definition to be something far worse than marriages, specified a mediocre union, for a safety pin, for LGBT people, so that they do not forget where they belong.
In this situation, the Left should halt seeking consensus, seeking a tiny care alternatively of average care or agreeing to a notary and giving up the ceremony. She should benefit from the insolence and nerve of the PSL and request marriages for all and partnerships for all – to choose. Why should the law be written under a tiny, homophobic, anti-female organization that already sees matrimony as the dominance of a man over a woman?
Why do we request marriage?
Michał Szuldrzyński's text in the “Republic”, in which he proposed that partnerships should be exclusively for homosexuals, made me realize that marriages are in fact obsolete due to the fact that they are scattered with social needs. In thought, as Szuldrzyński writes, they were expected to defend a female and her children from force and hunger, imposing on their husband the work of protection and maintenance. The payment was to be her virginity, which was to guarantee that a man knew he was feeding his children.
Now women simply request equality. They request reproductive rights, equal pay, equal parental leave and maintenance pursued by the taxation office.
Marriages and partnerships are important, but for a somewhat different reason. It is no longer a necessity to survive, but a desire to be close to someone. Regardless of the sex of individuals, whether they have procreation plans or not, a relation that gives closeness, satisfaction that makes people not alone, feel better, can support each another and accompany each another throughout their lives or at different stages of their lives. And that already deserves the protection of the state. Everyone, not only those who can pay you in future soldiers or workers, has the right to a successful private life. The state should not interfere with their life, which would let them to start families with people who are friends but have no sexual relationship.
In an ageing society, driven by depression and loneliness, the state should advance the thought of being together.
Values and interests
This is the same week, 1 proposal from the government undermines human rights by providing for a "suspension" of the right to asylum, and the another justifies the bill's proposal with the request to adapt Polish law to the conventions signed by Poland.
I would like the Democrats to stand so firmly for human rights, which are the foundation of democracy, as the PSL for matrimony as a union of female and man, sustaining binary, patriarchal and hierarchical order.
Because there's a dog buried here. The PSL is not only about 10% of the population, of which only any will want to marry or partner, but about maintaining the principles of the patriarchy, where the highest position in society is simply a heterosexual male, serving the male of any orientation in the collar, but besides having a woman, a right to another women outside of marriage, and holding parental power.
In this order, of course, the Church has business. Although the interest is described (and is followed by the PSL) by words specified as ‘traditional’, ‘culture’, ‘eternal order’, ‘God's law’ or ‘natural law’, but, there is nothing to be cheated about – you can see who benefits from these traditions.
When will the Democrats admit their interest in protecting human rights and learn to talk so convincingly that the order built on this foundation can last thousands of years?
