Mexico amends federal constitution to ban discrimination of gay people

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 5:57 AM GMT
    Without much notice from the world and the country, the constitutional amendment passed the Senate unanimously (not before a mini-battle over the exact wording, more on that later) a week ago; the same amendment already passed the lower chamber last year and it now heads to the states for the final ratification: it needs the nod of 17 state legislatures and I'm happy to say that my state is preparing to vote yes on it soon and that just by looking at the colors of the others state legislatures I see many paths to 17 and more, even around many traditionalist states.

    The amendment was part of a broad package of reforms that elevated various human rights issues already in federal law into the constitution, among them a prohibition on discrimination because of "sexual preferences" that will be inserted in Article 1 of the Federal constitution (No, we don't just append stuff at the end of the document like in the U.S., lawmakers just insert and delete text, thought they sometimes leave holes in lists of enumerated things).

    And no, the fact that it passed unanimously doesn't mean that it was a walk in the park. The Senate is currently more conservative that Chamber of Deputies and they voted unanimously only after a narrow majority refused to yank the "sexual preferences" part: rights for everyone except the gays. At the end the traditionalist minority relented and let the whole thing pass as sent by the other chamber of Congress to avoid more negative publicity.

    And just after the amendment was going to be left alone there was the other mini-battle I mentioned: Some senators (both liberal and conservative) wanted to change "sexual preferences" to "sexual orientation" which I think was something worthy of consideration: I do not exactly like the term "sexual preferences" which to me sounds to things like "I like to do it with the lights on/off, in the morning/night, etc." instead of referring to a pretty much immutable personal characteristic like sexual orientation. Yet other senators wanted to leave it just at "preferences" and any change could have gotten that part of the amendment off the package and potentially killed it, so it was good it passed as it was without any trip back to the Chamber of Deputies. I've read that in practice it would be the same that if it read sexual orientation.

    Weird things: National mainstream media a month ago was interested in a handful of senators that said embarrassing stuff against the the amendment (after all, congress or not congress they were still talking about sex!) but now that the amendment passed they have barely mentioned it while reporting on other more "shiny" parts of the amendment package and only the usual religious suspects are focusing in the "Gay Amendment" with the same arguments that that handful of senators had to apologize for... neat opposition, no?

    You American friends: imagine that the American constitution had a clause like this... same sex marriage would be a no-brainer for the courts then. Can a case be made out of this part of constitution (after the ratification process) for nationwide same sex marriage in Mexico.... who knows!? But I'm elated that this is going into the Constitution and cautiously optimistic about it ramifications.

    Clarification: Same sex marriages performed in Mexico City are recognized nationwide but no other jurisdiction performs them, and currently there are no signs that any state is obligated to recognize a same sex marriage from abroad.



    Sources (Everything in Spanish because no English media has covered it yet):

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/mundo/noticias/2011/03/110308_mexico_constitucion_gay_friendly_az.shtml

    http://www.eldiariopublico.com/senado-mexicano-aprob-reforma-constitucional-sobre-dd.hh-1459.html

    http://www.redcapital.com.mx/Metropoli/reforma-constitucional-protege-derecho-a-las-preferencias-sexuales.html

    http://beckgza.wordpress.com/2010/12/16/diputados-aprueban-dictamen-que-eleva-derechos-humanos-a-rango-constitucional/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 5:59 AM GMT
    w00t! go us! icon_biggrin.gif
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Mar 21, 2011 1:42 PM GMT
    Can you say Cabo San Lucas and Cancun as the new gay honeymoon destinations?!!! Go Mexico!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 2:13 PM GMT
    Although the majority of people in Mexico are probably equally or even more opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage in relation to the United States, this can happen on a federal level because most average Mexicans feel that they have little say in what actually happens politically and therefore don't bother to make a fuss (deeming the system too corrupt to be able to make a difference), whereas in America a lot of people get out and vote or stir up massive opposition which in turn pressures lawmakers. The Mexican elite is very progressive socially, however.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 2:18 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidAlthough the majority of people in Mexico are probably equally or even more opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage in relation to the United States, this can happen on a federal level because most average Mexicans feel that they have little say in what actually happens politically and therefore don't bother to make a fuss (deeming the system too corrupt to be able to make a difference), whereas in America a lot of people get out and vote or stir up massive opposition which in turn pressures lawmakers. The Mexican elite is very progressive.



    The bigot has spoken, and pissed on Engineer's happiness. Ignore him.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 2:19 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    mocktwinkie saidAlthough the majority of people in Mexico are probably equally or even more opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage in relation to the United States, this can happen on a federal level because most average Mexicans feel that they have little say in what actually happens politically and therefore don't bother to make a fuss (deeming the system too corrupt to be able to make a difference), whereas in America a lot of people get out and vote or stir up massive opposition which in turn pressures lawmakers. The Mexican elite is very progressive.



    The bigot has spoken, and pissed on Engineer's happiness. Ignore him.


    lol. Please. No one is happier about the news than I am. It's fantastic. I'm just bringing things back down to earth in terms of reality and how accepting people really are.

    Oh, and using "bigot" doesn't even make any sense. If you're going to make a comment at least have it make sense.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Mar 21, 2011 2:21 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidAlthough the majority of people in Mexico are probably equally or even more opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage in relation to the United States, this can happen on a federal level because most average Mexicans feel that they have little say in what actually happens politically and therefore don't bother to make a fuss (deeming the system too corrupt to be able to make a difference), whereas in America a lot of people get out and vote or stir up massive opposition which in turn pressures lawmakers. The Mexican elite is very progressive, however.



    So you're saying that progressives seek out equality more than conservatives. Way to go, dud! light-bulb.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 2:22 PM GMT
    coolarmydude said
    mocktwinkie saidAlthough the majority of people in Mexico are probably equally or even more opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage in relation to the United States, this can happen on a federal level because most average Mexicans feel that they have little say in what actually happens politically and therefore don't bother to make a fuss (deeming the system too corrupt to be able to make a difference), whereas in America a lot of people get out and vote or stir up massive opposition which in turn pressures lawmakers. The Mexican elite is very progressive, however.



    So you're saying that progressives seek out equality more than conservatives. Way to go, dud!


    Depends on what you mean by "progressive" and "conservative". I'm speaking about progressive in social terms. The vast majority of the American elite is socially progressive as well. I could have probably said "socially accepting on sexual matters".
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Mar 21, 2011 2:28 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    mocktwinkie saidAlthough the majority of people in Mexico are probably equally or even more opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage in relation to the United States, this can happen on a federal level because most average Mexicans feel that they have little say in what actually happens politically and therefore don't bother to make a fuss (deeming the system too corrupt to be able to make a difference), whereas in America a lot of people get out and vote or stir up massive opposition which in turn pressures lawmakers. The Mexican elite is very progressive, however.



    Depends on what you mean by "progressive" and "conservative". I'm speaking about progressive in social terms. The vast majority of the American elite is socially progressive as well. I could have probably said "socially accepting on sexual matters".


    No, there is no hashing of words. You implied that the only reason why this is happening in Mexico is because of "Mexican elites [being] very progressive" and that ordinary Mexican citizens "are probably equally or even more opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage." So in an attempt at back-handing (by equating progressivism with corruption) progressivism of any rate, you actually promoted its success and complimented it. Way to go, dud!

    light-bulb.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 2:31 PM GMT
    You're diggin your hole deeper and deeper mock..
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 2:38 PM GMT
    Within the next decade or so the US must give full equal rights to gay people just because they'll be embarrassed by both their neighbours.

    If it weren't so sad I'd chuckle a little at this.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 2:42 PM GMT
    coolarmydude said
    mocktwinkie said
    mocktwinkie saidAlthough the majority of people in Mexico are probably equally or even more opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage in relation to the United States, this can happen on a federal level because most average Mexicans feel that they have little say in what actually happens politically and therefore don't bother to make a fuss (deeming the system too corrupt to be able to make a difference), whereas in America a lot of people get out and vote or stir up massive opposition which in turn pressures lawmakers. The Mexican elite is very progressive, however.



    Depends on what you mean by "progressive" and "conservative". I'm speaking about progressive in social terms. The vast majority of the American elite is socially progressive as well. I could have probably said "socially accepting on sexual matters".


    No, there is no hashing of words. You implied that the only reason why this is happening in Mexico is because of "Mexican elites [being] very progressive" and that ordinary Mexican citizens "are probably equally or even more opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage." So in an attempt at back-handing (by equating progressivism with corruption) progressivism of any rate, you actually promoted its success and complimented it. Way to go, dud!

    light-bulb.gif


    Actually, that's just a fantasy that you conjured up in your own mind. I used progressive in a positive way, as in socially accepting (yes, you invented the "corruption" thing). So whatever you think you're "pinning" me on is just a bunch of empty semantic subterfuge. And yes, in layman's terms, it's really stupid.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 2:47 PM GMT

    Actually coolarmydude, Mockbigot said this nasty thing about Mexico:

    "Although the majority of people in Mexico are probably equally or even more opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage in relation to the United States,"


    which he can't prove. Then he called them apathetic with this statement:

    "most average Mexicans feel that they have little say in what actually happens politically and therefore don't bother to make a fuss (deeming the system too corrupt to be able to make a difference)"



    Then gives a compliment to legalized bigotry in the US

    "whereas in America a lot of people get out and vote or stir up massive opposition which in turn pressures lawmakers."

    Now watch him come back and rehash saying he was talking about things in general and not gay marriage or gay discrimination. icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 2:49 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    Actually coolarmydude, Mockbigot said this nasty thing about Mexico:

    "Although the majority of people in Mexico are probably equally or even more opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage in relation to the United States,"


    which he can't prove.

    Then gives a compliment to legalized bigotry in the US

    "whereas in America a lot of people get out and vote or stir up massive opposition which in turn pressures lawmakers."

    Now watch him come back and rehash saying he was talking about things in general and not gay marriage or gay discrimination. icon_lol.gif


    Who said that was a compliment? Are you going senile? BTW, nothing nasty was said about Mexico, your fertile imagination, notwithstanding. I was making a straightforward comment about how an overwhelmingly catholic country can come to accept equal gay rights on a federal level. Quit trying to infuse your own hate into it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 2:56 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    meninlove said
    Actually coolarmydude, Mockbigot said this nasty thing about Mexico:

    "Although the majority of people in Mexico are probably equally or even more opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage in relation to the United States,"


    which he can't prove.

    Then gives a compliment to legalized bigotry in the US

    "whereas in America a lot of people get out and vote or stir up massive opposition which in turn pressures lawmakers."

    Now watch him come back and rehash saying he was talking about things in general and not gay marriage or gay discrimination. icon_lol.gif


    Who said that was a compliment? Are you going senile? BTW, nothing nasty was said about Mexico. I was making a straightforward comment about how an overwhelmingly catholic country can come to accept equal gay rights on a federal level. Quit trying to infuse your own hate into it.



    Oh go eat something. You sound hungry.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 2:57 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    mocktwinkie said
    meninlove said
    Actually coolarmydude, Mockbigot said this nasty thing about Mexico:

    "Although the majority of people in Mexico are probably equally or even more opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage in relation to the United States,"


    which he can't prove.

    Then gives a compliment to legalized bigotry in the US

    "whereas in America a lot of people get out and vote or stir up massive opposition which in turn pressures lawmakers."

    Now watch him come back and rehash saying he was talking about things in general and not gay marriage or gay discrimination. icon_lol.gif


    Who said that was a compliment? Are you going senile? BTW, nothing nasty was said about Mexico. I was making a straightforward comment about how an overwhelmingly catholic country can come to accept equal gay rights on a federal level. Quit trying to infuse your own hate into it.



    Oh go eat something. You sound hungry.


    I'm not into threesomes, but thankyou.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 3:00 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidDepends on what you mean by "progressive" and "conservative". I'm speaking about progressive in social terms. The vast majority of the American elite is socially progressive as well. I could have probably said "socially accepting on sexual matters".

    Please define "American elite" in a democracy. Oh, wait, I forgot. Texas right-wingers declared last year that the US can't be called a democracy anymore, and now their schoolbooks can't say that in the future. I wonder why?

    As for the "elite" being socially progressive, you really should attend social functions in Florida places like Boca Raton, Palm Beach & West Palm. Mostly Republican, those millionaires are, I suppose, what you'd call elite, and they're the most racist & bigoted crowd I've known since I lived in the Deep South.

    Very socially progressive in letting money, rather than family and antiquated concepts of "breeding" determine who may join their social set. They have little choice, most of them coming from nothing. But highly prejudicial & hostile to gays, minorities and those not as rich as themselves. Trust me, I know these people, and you are seriously wrong.

    I've had some epic battles with them over these issues. But my mission is to "infiltrate" them and win them over, with a better understanding of them than many other gays would have. I've made a few converts, by dealing with them on their own terms. They are seduced by class, the one thing most of them lack, these "elite." A thin veneer of manners is all they have, and you watch them walking on thin ice as they try to tread their way through social situations.

    And if you mean political elite, I know them, too, and they are little better. I call them elected used-car salesmen. Slick-talking frauds in many cases, with no real credentials except their mouths. If those are your definition of elite, then the country is indeed in trouble.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 3:09 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    mocktwinkie saidDepends on what you mean by "progressive" and "conservative". I'm speaking about progressive in social terms. The vast majority of the American elite is socially progressive as well. I could have probably said "socially accepting on sexual matters".

    Please define "American elite" in a democracy. Oh, wait, I forgot. Texas right-wingers declared last year that the US can't be called a democracy anymore, and now their schoolbooks can't say that in the future. I wonder why?

    As for the "elite" being socially progressive, you really should attend social functions in Florida places like Boca Raton, Palm Beach & West Palm. Mostly Republican, those millionaires are, I suppose, what you'd call elite, and they're the most racist & bigoted crowd I've known since I lived in the Deep South.

    Very socially progressive in letting money, rather than family and antiquated concepts of "breeding" determine who may join their social set. They have little choice, most of them coming from nothing. But highly prejudicial & hostile to gays, minorities and those not as rich as themselves. Trust me, I know these people, and you are seriously wrong.

    I've had some epic battles with them over these issues. But my mission is to "infiltrate" them and win them over, with a better understanding of them than many other gays would have. I've made a few converts, by dealing with them on their own terms. They are seduced by class, the one thing most of them lack, these "elite." A thin veneer of manners they have, and you watch them walking on thin ice as they try to tread their way through social situations.

    And if you mean political elite, I know them, too, and they are little better. I call them elected used-car salesmen. Slick-talking frauds in many cases, with no real credentials except their mouths. If those are your definition of elite, then the country is indeed in trouble.


    I know plenty of republican "millionaires" and they are all gay friendly, especially the women. Some times they just don't understand it but it doesn't mean they hate you. I don't know what planet you live on. Maybe you just find out they vote republican and therefore must automatically be anti-gay.

    Maybe if you would stop trying to preach to them about how your preferences are the "right" preferences when it comes to breeding and personal decisions they wouldn't have such a problem with you.

    Oh and I love your subconscious racism in automatically insinuating that elite = white people and non-elite = non-whites (they are "majorities" among Florida schools and in the current new generation across the US btw, the term "minorities" is very antiquated).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 3:13 PM GMT
    I have to say that one would really have to be bending Mock's words and giving it a logical arm-twist here:

    I read "socially progressive" as in placing priority on things like social freedoms (freedom to marry regardless of race, gender, gender identity, or sexual orientation, etc.)

    As opposed to the broader sense of the term "progressive", which in US politics is often used interchangeably with the term "liberal" and generally conflates with left wing politics.

    That aside, Mock is right regarding the relative greater degree of involvement of common American citizens in the political process.

    Our political system also gives much favor to the two-party system which allows a greater likelihood of one side playing wedge issues against the other; whereas Canada's multi-party system seems to allow (if not force) a far greater amount of compromise among its many parties.

    From what little I know of the Mexican political process, there are a number of parties, and most of them skew considerably left of the centre of the US political mainstream (yes, a bit apples and oranges here).

    The PRI and the PRD would probably be colored as somewhat socialist or Social Democratic by our pundits; the PAN seems to be of the Christian Democrat flavor (we have no direct parallel to this in the US) but of the three would probably be closest to the US Democratic Party).

    So in most respects, Mock is probably correct in observing that the Mexican political elite ARE more likely to be socially progressive i.e. more likely to embrace marriage equality than common Mexican citizens.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 3:19 PM GMT
    alphatrigger saidI have to say that one would really have to be bending Mock's words and giving it a logical arm-twist here:

    I read "socially progressive" as in placing priority on things like social freedoms (freedom to marry regardless of race, gender, gender identity, or sexual orientation, etc.)

    As opposed to the broader sense of the term "progressive", which in US politics is often used interchangeably with the term "liberal" and generally conflates with left wing politics.

    That aside, Mock is right regarding the relative greater degree of involvement of common American citizens in the political process.

    Our political system also gives much favor to the two-party system which allows a greater likelihood of one side playing wedge issues against the other; whereas Canada's multi-party system seems to allow (if not force) a far greater amount of compromise among its many parties.

    From what little I know of the Mexican political process, there are a number of parties, and most of them skew considerably left of the centre of the US political mainstream (yes, a bit apples and oranges here).

    The PRI and the PRD would probably be colored as somewhat socialist or Social Democratic by our pundits; the PAN seems to be of the Christian Democrat flavor (we have no direct parallel to this in the US) but of the three would probably be closest to the US Democratic Party).

    So in most respects, Mock is probably correct in observing that the Mexican political elite ARE more likely to be socially progressive i.e. more likely to embrace marriage equality than common Mexican citizens.


    I'm glad you could see that I was in no way disparaging Mexico. But meninlove is only interested in looking for an opportunity to twist what I say and call me a bigot for no reason whatsoever other than slander.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 3:23 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie saidI know plenty of republican "millionaires" and they are all gay friendly, especially the women. Some times they just don't understand it but it doesn't mean they hate you. I don't know what planet you live on. Maybe you just find out they vote republican and therefore must automatically be anti-gay.

    "ALL"? Really??? And especially the women, meaning the men are what -- HALF gay-friendly? And in Wisconsin, after what we've just witnessed there from the State Republican Party? Now this IS news!

    As for them voting Republican, I often comment here on those who say: "I'm not anti-gay, I just vote for those who are and who pass anti-gay legislation. I'd never vote for a pro-gay politician, but I'm really pro-gay myself -- trust me!" Yeah, right. Cause if you are, you sure have an odd way of showing it. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 3:27 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said...Please define "American elite" in a democracy. Oh, wait, I forgot. Texas right-wingers declared last year that the US can't be called a democracy anymore, and now their schoolbooks can't say that in the future. I wonder why?


    The United States of America are not a democracy.

    We are representative, comstitutional republic.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Mar 21, 2011 3:28 PM GMT
    Wow! How is it that alphatrigger and mocktwinkie justify conclusions on assumptions of what the majority of Mexican citizens and the "Mexican progressive elite" views are on gay rights when that is not even mentioned in this thread opening, nor is the assertion substantiated???

    Nevertheless, you both somehow twist the notion that progressivism is alive and well in the US conservative political spectrum, when it truly is not! Ever heard of RINO? Republican In Name Only. These would be the so-called progressives of the Republican Party. And do you see how they are treated by conservatives? The Tea Party fascinations amongst you two, and probably others, has you believing that political moderates are somehow progressive and that the original progressives and liberals are still the socialists and communists! You are the exact example of what the Tea Party movement is trying to achieve. A political skew further to the right!


    And you cannot achieve social progress without economic parity! It is a two-part function of progressivism. Conservatives will never get that and that is how the Tea Party will fail!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 21, 2011 3:28 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    mocktwinkie saidI know plenty of republican "millionaires" and they are all gay friendly, especially the women. Some times they just don't understand it but it doesn't mean they hate you. I don't know what planet you live on. Maybe you just find out they vote republican and therefore must automatically be anti-gay.

    "ALL"? Really??? And especially the women, meaning the men are what -- HALF gay-friendly? And in Wisconsin, after what we've just witnessed there from the State Republican Party? Now this IS news!

    As for them voting Republican, I often comment here on those who say: "I'm not anti-gay, I just vote for those who are and who pass anti-gay legislation. I'd never vote for a pro-gay politician, but I'm really pro-gay myself -- trust me!" Yeah, right. Cause if you are, you sure have an odd way of showing it. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Actually yes, personally all of the millionaires I know are pro-gay rights to some extent even if they aren't all pro-gay marriage. For instance, some have told me that they think it should just be called civil unions and that gays should have the same equal rights and they don't understand the whole "separate but equal" thing not working.

    Winning the battle is a matter of winning peoples' hearts, not arguing.

  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Mar 21, 2011 3:32 PM GMT
    alphatrigger said
    The United States of America are not a democracy.

    We are representative, comstitutional republic.



    The United States of America IS not a democracy. It is a singular country.

    According to the CIA World Fact book: We are a "Constitution-based federal republic; strong democratic tradition"

    https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html

    Be sure to quote it correctly, otherwise, you're just showing political bias.