On March 5th, 2014, the Juridical Commission of Romania’s Chamber of Deputies unanimously rejected a bill proposing legal recognition for civil partnerships signed before a notary. The commission members agreed that existing laws were more than apt to protect the rights of the couple.
From the debate surrounding the issue it is worth mentioning a speech delivered in the Chamber of Deputies on February 11th, 2014 by MP Diana Tusha, Vicepresident of the Christian Democratic National Peasants’ Party. Mrs. Tusha expressed her support for traditional family values and revealed the foot-in-the-door tactic of the extreme left. Here is her full-length intervention on this occasion:
Intervention made by Mrs. Diana Tusha, Member of Parliament, in front of the Romanian Chamber of Deputies on February 11th, 2014, on the subject of the Civil Partnership Bill
My intervention today is entitled ‘Civil Partnership or the Salami Strategy’.
These days, we need to respond to one of the most important challenges we could face as lawmakers.
The Civil Partnership Bill introduced by our colleague Deputy Remus Cernea forces us to deal with our own limitations and really look into the core values we stand by.
Despite appearances, civil partnership is not about simple fiscal or housing benefits for unmarried heterosexual and homosexual couples, but about the very definition of family and therefore about its future.
For the first time in Romania’s history, somebody tries to shift the focus of this institution from monogamous heterosexual marriage to a simple – I quote: ‘non-discriminatory’; end of quotation – civil contract between two persons regardless of their sex.
The claimed necessity to recognize families based on partnership union, according to the author’s Preamble, only favors sexual minority lobby groups, since, after reading the bill it is clear that partnership wouldn’t bring anything to the table for heterosexual couples.
The requested rights have already been provided in the Civil Code we have debated and adopted in the previous legislative session and these are specifically the marriage rights, with the sole exception of the right to filiation.
We can therefore say that, by legislating for civil partnership, we make the first step towards legislating for same-sex marriage, under another name.
From this point of view, Deputy Cernea’s proposal perfectly illustrates the salami strategy: one cuts the first slice into the rich pray named family, through civil partnerships, then other slices will follow, cut either through legislation or judicial decisions, until it will be too late for us to see that there remains no difference between partnership and marriage and that the law protecting the natural family will have become superfluous.
We have the terrible example of countries like France, Spain and England, where this attack went so far that the government, after legislating for marriage, adoptive filiation and assisted reproduction for same-sex couples, also replaced the words ‘mother’ and ‘father’ in the civil status registries with the allegedly more neutral terms of ‘parent A’ or ‘parent B’.
It’s hard to imagine a graver aggression towards nature and ultimately also against citizens.
And since we’ve mentioned the citizens, we are here to represent the majority of Romanians, who believe that family based on marriage between [persons of opposite] sexes is the first and foremost centre of social life.
The family as such has proven the optimal environment to form the new generation and the essential role this institution has played and will play in the desired future of our country has been recognized in the new Civil Code of 2009.
Clearly mentioning the natural monogamous nuclear family as an exclusive value protected by law cannot be interpreted as an offence to anybody, as it is only the legal recognition of reality. It represents an absolutely necessary measure in the context of the actual family crisis, when more and more families break apart and children are raised by single parents.
Dear colleagues, we have the duty to make laws that respect the values and beliefs of our people.
We have no obligation to follow recommendations or examples alien to us, as it is erroneously claimed in the Preamble of the Civil Partnership Bill.
I think we had enough of the harmful 50-year experience of communism, when laws were forcefully imposed on us with no regard for Romanian specific.
There is no need to traumatize further generations in the name of some illusory progress made through alien recipes.
Such a recipe is cultural Marxism, represented by Mr. Cernea. It promotes the destruction of family, of myths and symbols and finally it deconstructs human conduct by completely removing the pillars which support it.
Of course, Christian democracy is opposed to discrimination, which is wrong and unjust treatment, because this political doctrine emphasizes the value of the human person. But the fact that man is valued as a person in any situation does not mean we should serenely accept all kinds of conducts and all kinds of requests, however legitimate they may seem, and especially it does not mean we should turn these conducts and requests into normality by legislating for them.
Trying to legislate for civil partnership is trying to prove that it suffices to adopt a set of laws in order to make people think and feel differently and that one can always redesign the ideals and values of humanity according to our own will. It is a revolutionary thesis specific to the radical left.
As responsible politicians, we categorically refuse the idea that reality is a simple ideological construct that can be modified by simply changing the language of the law. Especially as marriage, more than being a private contract, is a social norm whose definition and status directly affects us all.
For our children’s sake, let’s keep the family what it has always been: the foundation of society, based on union through marriage of a man and a woman. Not because we want it so and will impose it as such as majority supporters, but because it’s the law of nature.