South Africa OKs Same-Sex Marriage

First Bill In Continent Recognizing Gay Marriages Overwhelmingly Passes

(AP)  South African lawmakers passed legislation recognizing gay marriages on Tuesday despite criticism from both traditionalists and gay activists.

The bill, unprecedented on a continent where homosexuality is taboo, was decried by gay activists for not going far enough and by opponents who warned it "was provoking God's anger."

Veterans of the governing African National Congress praised the Civil Union Bill for extending basic freedoms to everyone under the spirit of the country's first post-apartheid constitution, adopted a decade ago by framers determined to make discrimination a thing of the past.

"When we attained our democracy, we sought to distinguish ourselves from an unjust painful past by declaring that never again shall it be that any South African will be discriminated against on the basis of color, creed, culture and sex," Home Affairs Minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula declared.

South Africa's constitution was the first in the world to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, providing a powerful legal tool to gay rights activists even though South Africa remains conservative on such issues.

A Christian lawmaker, Kenneth Meshoe, said Tuesday was the "saddest day in our 12 years of democracy" and warned that South Africa "was provoking God's anger."

His comments reflected the majority view on a deeply conservative continent.

Homosexuality is illegal in Zimbabwe, Kenya, Uganda, Nigeria, Tanzania, Ghana and most other sub-Saharan countries. Some countries also are debating constitutional amendments to ban same-sex marriages. Even in South Africa, gays and lesbians are often attacked because of their sexual orientation.

One church leader in Nigeria, Apostle Abraham Umoh of the Mount of Victory Mission, denounced the vote as "satanic," while Bishop Joseph Ojo of Calvary Kingdom Church in Lagos said it was recognition of "animal rights" rather than human rights.

The Roman Catholic Church and many traditionalist leaders in South Africa said the measure denigrated the sanctity of marriages between men and women.

To ease some of these concerns, the bill allowed both religious and civil officers to refuse to marry same-sex couples on moral grounds.

Gay rights groups criticized this "opt-out" clause, saying they should be treated the same as heterosexual couples, but in general, they praised the new measure.

"It demonstrates powerfully the commitment of our lawmakers to ensuring that all human beings are treated with dignity," said Fikile Vilakazi of the Joint Working Group, a national network of 17 gay and lesbian organizations.

Activists in Europe, where several countries have gay union provisions, said South Africa was a shining example for gay rights. "It's a beautiful thing for South Africa today," said Guillermo Rodriguez, a member of a French gay and lesbian association who said he hoped France would follow suit.

Gay couples in South Africa started making wedding plans.

"For some people marriage means nothing, it is just a piece of paper. But we want that symbolism of having a legally binding document of our love," said Lindiwe Radebe, who wants to marry her partner Bathini Dambuza.

The bill provides for the "voluntary union of two persons, which is solemnized and registered by either a marriage or civil union," without specifying whether they are heterosexual or homosexual partnerships.

The National Assembly passed the bill 230-41 with three abstentions. The measure now goes to the National Council of Provinces, which is expected to be a formality, before being signed into law by President Thabo Mbeki.

The bill was drafted to comply with a Constitutional Court ruling last December that said existing marriage legislation was unconstitutional because it discriminated against same-sex couples. The court set a Dec. 1 deadline for parliament to change the law.

Rather than change existing marriage laws, the government introduced the additional civil union bill in the hopes that this would be the speediest option.

Given the ANC's huge majority, the government can push through almost any legislation it wants. But it had to order lawmakers to respect the party line and wheeled out stalwarts of the anti-apartheid movement to convince reluctant traditionalists.

"The roots of this bill lie in many years of struggle," said Defense Minister Mosuia Lekota, noting that many homosexuals went into exile and prison with ANC members during white racist rule.

"This country cannot afford to be a prison of timeworn prejudices which have no basis in modern society. Let us bequeath to future generations a society which is more democratic and tolerant than the one that was handed down to us," Lekota said.

Emotions were charged during the two-hour debate.

"This bill has been a headache and a heartache for many South Africans," said the small Inkatha Freedom Party, which opposed the measure.

Beth Goldblatt, a senior researcher at the Center of Applied Legal Studies at the University of the Witswatersrand in Johannesburg, predicted the bill would be challenged because of the opt-out clause.

"I don't see why people should present themselves before a marriage officer and be refused just because the marriage officer has different moral views," Goldblatt said.

Denmark in 1989 became the first country to legislate for same-sex partnerships and several other European Union members have followed suit. In the United States, only Massachusetts allows gay marriage. Vermont and Connecticut permit civil unions, California grants similar status through a domestic-partner registration law, and more than a dozen states give gay couples some legal rights.

[phlipster]

I think it is a very sad day when a 12-year old democracy such as South Africa recognized the legitimate civil rights of all of its citizens before the Unites States. It is time for us to once again take the lead in recognizing the changing face of the world and emplore our lawmakers to prohibit ANY discrimination.

[cbgb31]

Maybe we can talk Rosie O'donnell to start a TV show in S.Africa.

[squiz2]

"But it also says marriage officers need not perform a ceremony between same-*** couples if doing so would conflict with his or her "conscience, religion and belief."

Why can't we follow this example? Legalize same-*** marriage, and leave it up to the church or the officiant whether or not to perform the ceremony. If it is against their beliefs, then they can opt not to marry the couple. There are PLENTY of officiants who would be willing to marry same-*** couples, and to me it sounds like a great win-win situation. No one has to go against their beliefs, and everyone can marry who they love. Makes a sh*t-ton of sense to me. Too bad no one in America wants to compromise, it seems.

[phlipster]

squiz2... I completely agree that it is an acceptable compromise. I like the opt-out clause because it requires no-one to compromise their moral beliefs. The government recongizes the civil rights and does not push any moral judgement onto any official.

[squiz2]

Maybe then there wouldn't be cries of discrimination, since it would simply be a religious rule, like how Catholic priests will only perform indoor wedding ceremonies. Catholic priests can already choose whether or not they will marry a couple, simply based on how they feel about the relationship of the couple and their relationship to God. I don't see why it should be different for homosexuals. Legalize it, and if the officiant won't marry you, find one that will.

[agnim]

South Africa has become a disgrace in deviance for the whole continent. And this is another of the many evil scourges that the europeans have brought to Africa to help undermine the African way of life.

Nowhere within any part of African culture is their any support this societally-worthless behavior.

Only lost and sick souls who are mentally and sexually confused will even think about mating with the same gender.
Even the pigs and dogs know the gender with whom they should mate.

Mandela and the ANC must have picked up this deviant european practice while they were lost in the white apartheid prisons of South Africa.

[vatikaki]

Indeed a sad day. The main problem is that the new so-called 'democratic' government is completely unqualified and unable to make any rational decisions, and this will remain the case until they have a majority European influence again (i.e. sorry to say, but the European descendants did do a better job of ruling the country and so-called 'apartheid' was a mistake that could have been rectified without replacing the entire government). Thanks, therefore, to the rest of the world who forced this to happen.

[cbgb31]

gayathiest, It occurred to me the other day that gay marriage, gay rights, gay HIV funding, gay adoption rights, etc etc. makes your entire existence GAY. gay activists can't see past their gayness so in a sense you isolate yourself and become fundametalist ***. IT's the only thing that matters and exists in your life. That's my observation.

[cooltalk]

Gayism and Lesbianism is a social vice that has traumatized cultures over centuries. Historically, it's a practice that has been kept underground but is widely accepted in communities where virtues, values are cheap. Now with largely the world's governments replaced by "democracy" (freedom to choose what you want)and the demise of theocracy and monarchial of governments, we are faced with an avalanche of demands that run contrary to nature and God given sense of right judgement. Democracy is good but it appears it's taking away from us what makes us beings created in the image of God.

[phlipster]

So, are you saying that a democracy is a bad thing? Watch out... President Bush will arrest you, detain you, and not allow you access to the courts.

You speak of a "God given sense" of good judgement... but what people don't understand is that not all people believe in God. For those of us Americans who do believe in God, we practice a set of beliefs and knowledge that comes from Christian teachings. Not all Americans are Christians and not all of them even believe in any religion or God.

Just as vatikaki said that the Europeans brought to S. Africa the tolerance for homosexuality, we took over a country belonging to a people who practiced multi-theism under the expressed principle of spreading Christianity.

All people must start living their own moral guides and stop trying to force moral beliefs on others.

[agnim]

vatikaki

The european influence in South Africa has been the worse evil.

Invading murderers, thieves and rapists can't be expected to evolve anything good. Hence the mixed up state of the present S African leadership on THIS ONE ISSUE of homosexual deviance, the spread of AIDS, and other biological and social and economic ills are placed squarely at the feet of the evil invaders from europe.

The indigenous population should be thinking of throwing out the invaders and reclaim indigenous African land and wealth; instead they continue to foolishly entertain the destructiveness of the invaders.

[phlipster]

It isn't about extremism. However, as a gay man, I can tell you that I believe I am doing right. Everything in me tells me that I am homosexual and that it is ok. It is a proven fact that in nature, homosexuality exists. Even the Catholic church teaches that homosexuals do not choose their sexuality!

As for the need for a man to have a woman to copulate... my argument would be that maybe homosexuality is nature's way of controlling overpopulation. I have no desire to produce children. I have a desire to take care of a child, by adoption. There are millions of children out there that don't have families or homes or food. However, the other day, I saw a man and a woman with 4 kids and the woman was pregnant. I think the world is populated enough. I do not see that as a valid argument.

It is not a choice. Science has proven that!

[phlipster]

Oh, and why not let people walk around naked? What is so wrong with the human body that we enact laws preventing it from being seen? Why do we fire teachers for bringing art students to a museum where they see naked bodies (in Plano, TX)? It is because the puritan view of sexuality that still exists in this country continues to push its views onto society as a whole.

[phlipster]

Oh, and why not let people walk around naked? What is so wrong with the human body that we enact laws preventing it from being seen? Why do we fire teachers for bringing art students to a museum where they see naked bodies (in Plano, TX)? It is because the puritan view of sexuality that still exists in this country continues to push its views onto society as a whole.

[agnim]

"It is not a choice. Science has proven that!"

If you have no 'choice' with whom you try to mate,phlipster, then you are like a beast.

And I might even be insulting the beasts with that statement; since even the beasts CHOOSE the CORRECT GENDER when they are about to mate.

And,
the catholic church of child sodomy has no credibility on the subject!

The catholic church of child sodomy is GREATLY responsible for the spread of homosexual deviance in western/christian societies on the planet, compared to other societies!

Here it from someone with more credibility.
You are a sick and mentally mixed up about mating.

Do the society a favor; remain in your closet until there is a cure for your filth-stirring deviance.

In a society that would be health, your type would have been confined the moment you venture out of your closet.

Better dead than gay!

[rayner8]

I must admit that I am absolutely horrified by the inanity of Agnim's statements, especially this one: "If you have no 'choice' with whom you try to mate,phlipster, then you are like a beast."

This argument is totally without foundation as does it not then also apply to a straight person who will only mate with a certain gender too? The dichotomy of this argument should be apparent even to him (and I'm pretty certain it is a 'him'). (By the way, homosexuality is not unknown in the animal kingdom - go and look it up.)

Quite frankly, I feel embarrassed to be a straight person if this is who we have to represent us. The issue here is not whether it's a choice or not. More shocking to me is the lack of tolerance and empathy - Hitler would've been proud to have you amongst his ranks - whatever happened to "Live and let live"??

[squiz2]

Go to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15750604/

Scientific proof that homosexuality IS NATURAL! 51 species showing homosexual behavior. When will people just accept it and find something more important to worry about?!

[agnim]

"This argument is totally without foundation as does it not then also apply to a straight person who will only mate with a certain gender too?"

Why should argument apply, Rayner8?

Normal people ARE NOT claiming that they have "no choice" about their mating. That filth-stirring deviant is the one claiming that he's like unto a beast -- without choice, without free will.

And even if the normal person should claim that he has no choice in mating with the opposite gender, it would be ALRIGHT; since even in his ignorance, he's doing the RIGHT THING -- fitting p.enis with va.gina as ALL creatures are supposed to do, and does in a natural way, for mating.

BTW, "Live and let live" doesn't mean and couldn't mean 'let live' societally-worthless behaviors that undermine the health and fabric of the society.

Allowing destructive behaviors to 'let live' is to support danger to self and even suicide.