Gay marriage in Romania

Dar ce valuri a facut initiativa lui Remus Cernea privind legalizarea parteneriatului civil intre homosexuali! Puiu Hasoti si Radu Mazare fosti rivali la Primaria Constantei s-au intrecut sa-l injure, Romania Libera il susecteaza pe premierul Ponta ca l-a pus sa creeze scandalul si tot taraboiul obisnuit intr-una din situatiile astea.

Faza haioasa e ca PSD si PNL fac parte din familii politice europene care au promovat mariajul si recunoastere parteneriatelor civile pentru homosexuali la nivelul UE asa ca nu inteleg de ce se mai ataca Raducu si Puiu, atunci cand ai lor au votat clar in Europa pentru recunoasterea uniunilor/parteneriatelor civile incheiate intre persoane de acelasi sex ?

Daca nu ma credeti uitati aici rezolutia Catania a Parlamentului European din 2009 privind situatia drepturilor omului in UE care spune printre altele (am subliniat pasajele cele mai relevante)

Sexual orientation
72. Takes the view that discriminatory comments against homosexuals by social and political leaders fuel hatred and violence, and calls on the relevant governing bodies to condemn them;
73. Welcomes the publication of the first thematic report by the Agency, drawn up at Parliament’s request, on ‘homophobia and discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation in the EU Member States’ and asks to Member States and EU institutions to urgently follow the Agency’s recommendations or state their reasons for not doing so;
74. Reminds all Member States that, in line with European Court of Human Rights case-law, freedom of assembly may be exercised even if the opinions of those exercising that right go against the majority, and that, accordingly, a discriminatory ban on marches and any failure to meet the requirement to give appropriate protection to those taking part breach the principles guaranteed by the European Court of Human Rights, by Article 6 of the EU Treaty on common EU values and principles, and by the Charter;
75. Calls on those Member States who have adopted legislation on same-sex partnerships to recognise provisions with similar effects adopted by other Member States; calls on those Member States to propose guidelines for mutual recognition of existing legislation between Member States in order to guarantee that the right of free movement within the European Union for same-sex couples applies under conditions equal to those applicable to heterosexual couples;
76. Urges the Commission to submit proposals ensuring that Member States apply the principle of mutual recognition for homosexual couples, whether they are married or living in a registered civil partnership, in particular when they are exercising their right to free movement under EU law;
77. Calls on those Member States who have not yet done so, and in application of the principle of equality, to take legislative action to overcome the discrimination experienced by some couples on the grounds of their sexual orientation;
78. Calls on the Commission to make sure that Member States grant asylum to persons fleeing from persecution on the grounds of their sexual orientation in their country of origin, to take initiatives at the bilateral and multilateral level to stop the persecutions of persons on the basis of their sexual orientation, and to launch a study on the situation of trans-sexual people in the Member States and candidate countries, with regard inter alia to the risk of harassment and violence;

Uite aici pot sa vada Puiu si Raducu cum au votat nevestele sefilor lor, disciplinat raportul respectiv. Desigur pentru moment casatoria este domeniul statelor nu se reglementeaza (inca) la nivel unional, asa ca parteneriatul civil nu va fi adoptat prea curand.

http://www.ilga-europe.org/home/how_we_work/european_institutions/be_bothered/election_campaign/what_can_you_do/get_to_know_the_candidates_and_their_position_on_human_rights_and_lgbt_issues/summary_of_voting_records_of_members_of_the_european_parliament_recent_resolutions_relevant_to_the_rights_of_lgbt_people_2004_2009/catania_report_european_parliament_resolution_of_14_january_2009_on_the_situation_of_fundamental_rights_in_the_european_union_2004_2008.

In ce ma priveste consider ca lupta este una importata din alte culturi si adusa in Romania din diferite motive. In Romania familia nu are niciun beneficiu in ceea ce priveste impozitele, asigurarile, sau diverse inlesniri. Singurele « beneficii » pe care le au sotii sunt dreptul de mostenire legala al sotului supravietuitor in cazul in care unul dintre soti moare fara a lasa testament si dreptul la rezerva succesorala. Daca ajungi insa sa te casatoresti pentru asa ceva…

In alte tari, beneficiile cuplurilor casatorite sunt imense. Uitati de exemplu in America descrisa drept “ultraliberala” o lista (incompleta !) de beneficii care rezulta din statutul celor casatoriti

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rights_and_responsibilities_of_marriages_in_the_United_States

In conditiile astea nu ma mira ca, in SUA, comunitatea de homosexuali lupta pentru recunoasterea mariajului…

La noi s-a gasit Remus sa vorbeasca (de a reusit sa enerveze un gay adevarat ca Mircea Solcanu) dar miza nu prea exista. Daca Ionel vrea sa traiasca cu Vasilica nu cred ca au nevoie de o bucatica de hartie portocalie …

Personal m-am casatorit din motive religioase. Iar cum in Romania, de la Cuza incoace, e obligatoriu sa treci pe la primarie inainte de a te duce la biserica, am facut-o si pe asta.

Oricum “statul social” roman nu incurajeaza casatoria, am realizat acum cu scandalul starnit de Remusica…

Datoria istorica a Germaniei fata de Romania?

De vreo patru ani, apar periodic prin mass-media si prin cyber spatiu referiri la o datorie istorica de cateva miliarde de euro pe care Romania ar trebui sa o recupereze de la Germania. Autorul acestei teorii este dl Radu Golban roman stabilit initial in Elvetia si intors in Romania.

Dl Golban are urmatoarea teorie: prin acordul de plati dintre Romania si Germania din 1936 a aparut o datorie de 20 de miliarde de euro. Romania trebuie sa o recupereze. Asa spuse lucrurile sunt simple.

Daca ne uitam mai atent ele sunt nitelus mai complicate : tranzactiile se desfasurau in Reichmarks moneda germana. Singurul lucru pe care l-a descoperit dl Golban (sau cel putin singurul document public) este un document din octombrie 1944 prin care nemtii recunosteau ca au o datorie de 1,1 miliarde Reichmarks catre Romania. Nu stiu cat o fi asta in euro dar cred ca e mai putin. La asta se adauga dobanda calculata intr-un mod care-mi scapa si se ajunge la 20 de miliarde de euro. Dl Golban si altii acuza guvernantii, BNR si pe multa lume ce nu insista pe langa Berlin sa ne dea banii inapoi. Acuma la cat de slugarnici sunt guvernantii nostri fata de Inaltele Porti, nu m-as fi mirat ca dl Golban sa aiba dreptate.

E insa o mica problema: la finalul celui de-al doilea razboi mondial Romania a fost tara invinsa. Puterile invingatoare (URSS, SUA, Marea Britanie) au impus fostilor membri ai Axei (Bulgaria, Finlanda, Italia, Romania si Ungaria) tratate de pace care cuprind o clauza identica, renuntarea la orice pretentii patrimoniala fata de Germania. Articolul 28, alineatul 4 al Tratatului de pace semnat cu Romania spune clar :

4. Without prejudice to these and to any other dispositions in favour of Roumania and Roumanian nationals by the Powers occupying Germany, Roumania waives on its own behalf and on behalf of Roumanian nationals all claims against Germany and German nationals outstanding on 8 May 1945, except those arising out of contracts and other obligations entered into, and rights acquired, before 1 September 1939. This waiver shall be deemed to include debts, all inter-governmental claims in respect of arrangements entered into in the course of the war and all claims for loss or damage arising during the war.

Clauze similare se gasesc in toate celelalte tratate de pace. Uitati aici art 30 alineatul 4 al Tratatului de pace cu Ungaria :

4. Without prejudice to these and to any other dispositions in favour of Hungary and Hungarian nationals by the Powers occupying Germany, Hungary waives on its own behalf and on behalf of Hungarian nationals all claims against Germany and German nationals outstanding on 8 May 1945, except those arising out of contracts and other obligations entered into, and rights acquired, before 1 September 1939. This waiver shall be deemed to include debts, all inter-governmental claims in respect of arrangements entered into in the course of the war and all claims for loss or damage arising during the war.

Cu exceptia numelui tarii formularea este identica!

Prin urmare, pentru a solicita Germaniei restituirea eventualelor datorii ar trebui sa dovedim ca varful de clearing necompensat mentionat de dl Golban este anterior datei de 1 septembrie 1939. Ori asta nu am vazut in niciunul din materialele publicate pana in prezent…

Pentru cei care se intreaba de ce Aliatii protejau Germania, raspunsul e simplu: ca sa o poata jefui (in special URSS) mai bine fara sa mai aiba de rezolvat niste pretentii ale statelor invinse.

Textele tratatelor de pace cu toate cele cinci state invinse se gasesc aici

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/dfat/treaties/1948/2.html#fnB12