The first and main reason for the KKE's refusal to extend civil marriage to same-sex couples, which enshrines shared parental responsibility, is the commercialization of procreation and adoption. A second, equally important and related reason is that, in practice, the articles of the bill bypass the social right of a child to the motherhood-fatherhood relation as an evolving biosocial relationship. Our Party considers that parenthood is the relationship between a parent and child, which at the individual level reflects existing social relations. The KKE's position is based on the rights of the child, i.e. the child's social need to have ties with its mother and father. This need has an objective basis: the interrelated motherhood-fatherhood relation, resulting from the complementary function of man and woman in the process of procreation. The laws that are enacted must defend this right, not undermine it.
The preachers of “individual rights” have rushed to label the KKE as “homophobic”. They 'll do the same for this article.
bypass the social right of a child to the motherhood-fatherhood relation as an evolving biosocial relationship
the interrelated motherhood-fatherhood relation, resulting from the complementary function of man and woman in the process of procreation
So they are fighting for protecting a social construct that marxists historically want to abolish? This kind of arguments are strange to hear from the communist party of a country. I doubt that this can be considered a truly scientific or dialectical stance.
Don't know enough about Greek politics, but the arguments all seem pretty homophobic. The appeals to nature seem like rank idealism and "a child needs a mother and father" is the standard line for 'polite' homophobes.
We talk a lot about the benefits of democratic centralism and the problems of parties where individual members can do whatever they want, but this strikes me as a significant shortcoming of democratic centralism: what happens when your party comes down on the wrong side of an important issue? This would put members who opposed this internally in a tough spot of upholding the party line.
This is the short coming for all true democracy. If majority of the people are against it, we're forced to accept it as a reality. We've to go further by campaigning for the vulnerable for the message to be heard. But then democratic centralism come in. For party discipline, it's fine, but nation-wide? No, I think there are more suitable alternatives.
They're pushing against the commercialization of parenthood... but only in the case of gay people? Not homophobic at all.
Also certainly not on 4 or 5 layers of essentialism.
okay they make two points and neither make any sense:
- a child needs two parents, one woman and one man for healthy development
this is argument is shit because its wrong. like, objectivley wrong. See here.
- Adoption by same sex couples causes commercialisation of reproduction
which uhhh what are you talking about?
For point two, there are some anti-adoption advocates out there which are worth listening to. They tend to be adoptees themselves and they speak out about the fact that the adoption industry is basically the soft end of a legitimised human trafficking operation.
But this argument assumes that gay couples will adopt and that they will participate in the adoption industry as consumers rather than choosing to be childless, accessing sperm donation and surrogacy etc. so it's pretty bogus.
adoption industry
oh great, another man made horror
imma read up on whatever distopian shit this is, but holy shit just that combination of words sounds bad
Gotta be honest with you, it's really grim and I don't have the strength to engage with it much because there's little that I can do about it and my mental health can't afford to passively consume all the horrors and injustices of the world but Karpoozy seems to be a good anti-adoption/adoptee advocate to start with.
There are people who advertise the children they are carrying with regards to their genetic "stock" and they basically sell the child off to the highest bidder. There's really horrific racism embedded into the industry (of course 🙄) and this is only just scratching the surface of what it's like today without digging into the history or anything.
It's really heartbreaking.
This need has an objective basis: the interrelated motherhood-fatherhood relation, resulting from the complementary function of man and woman in the process of procreation
what?
KKE is really bad at communicating the points they try to make, one of their CC members started out pretty strong here :
When asked about same-sex marriage and childbearing, Luisa Razou pointed out that the KKE leads the defense of the rights of same-sex people and does not make the sexual orientation of individuals, whether women or men, a reason for discrimination in their social life.
I agree, the issue is that basically nobody who isn't already wealthy can afford to live or even think about raising a family in the current situation.
... there is a certain disconnection of man from his objective determination and this creates greater and deeper distinctions and irrationalities with theories of gender construction.
I agree, the issue is that basically nobody who isn't already wealthy can afford to live or even think about raising a family in the current situation.
Do rich people have more kids than poor people in Greece? It's the opposite in my country.
Tbh it's anecdotal, but
mostall of my relatives who would be of age to have children aren't or are delaying, simply because they're already living in a tiny ass apartment with not very much money coming in.
