Tendance Coatesy

Left Socialist Blog

Greek Communist Party “Explains” Homosexuality and “Bourgeois Human Rights”.

with 15 comments

https://i0.wp.com/inter.kke.gr/export/system/modules/gr.kke.inter.v8.template/resources/images/banner/banner_en.jpg

“I am free to experiment and then choose my sexual identity” – Bourgeois Human Rights says KKE.

This has been signaled on the Marxism List and is so extraordinary that it merits a wide readership particularity amongst those who consider the Greek Communist Party ‘progressive’ for its opposition to Syriza.

On the Cohabitation agreement.

Kommounistiki Epitheorisi, the political-theoretical journal of the CC of KKE (Issue 1, 2016).

“On December 22, 2015 the bill “Cohabitation Agreement, exercising of rights, criminal and other provisions” was passed in parliament by the procedure of a roll call vote. In total, 193 MPs voted in favour and 56 against. The parliamentary groups of SYRIZA, PASOK, POTAMI and the Union of Centrists (Enosi Kentron) voted in favour of the law. Differing positions of MPs were observed in NEW DEMOCRACY and the Independent Greeks (ANEL).

This legislative initiative had been widely publicized throughout the previous period both through the electronic and print media and by various homosexual organizations as “a step forward for modern Greece”, “with the principle of equality as a starting point and with an eye on Europe ‘.

Theoretical background:

The institutional recognition of homosexual cohabitation is pursued in the name of human rights, with a focus on ensuring individual rights, including sexual. The legal recognition of cohabitation by individuals with homosexual orientation is viewed as safeguarding minority rights. It is an aspect of the bourgeois concept of individual rights, pluralism, and the right to diversity, to self-determination of the body. It is expressed slogan “I am free to experiment and then choose my sexual identity.”

Homosexual orientation or alternating between homosexual and heterosexual orientation is presented by sections of intellectuals and artists, especially to the youth as an unconventional, dissident, and radical form of behaviour, as a “way” to overcome outdated perceptions of women’s position in society, about sexuality, as a “form of conflict with authority, based on the male-dominated society.” It projects the concept that “sexual identity is something fluid”, socially and linguistically constructed. This is the philosophical current of postmodernism and postmodernity that ultimately denies the objectivity of biological sex which is the basis for a predominantly heterosexual sexual orientation. It argues that “gender is not what we are, but what we do.”

It ignores or conceals the class factors that led to the different positions of the two sexes and the ruling classes in the evolution of society, from the primitive community household in the first class society onwards. In the passage from one socioeconomic formation to another, surplus products appear, produced to meet community needs. Some products were produced in excess due to the development of the means of production and work implements, the cultivation of land, herds, which came under the ownership of men who appropriated the surplus, the surplus product. The owner of the surplus began to distance himself from the need to work for survival, exploiting the work of prisoners of war, slaves. The woman could not overcome the inherent biological differences she had with her husband that render her more vulnerable in nature. To protect the need for the reproduction of the species, she could not stray far from the community household that lost its social character with the onset of the first class division of society, with the exploitation of man by man. Moreover, the need for wealth to be inherited by the “legitimate” offspring of the man was established. In this way, the domination of the man over the woman was institutionalized at both an individual and social level.

By bypassing the social causes which imposed overwhelmingly different social behaviours between the sexes, these theories lead to the denial of the biological differences between men and women, ultimately denying the objectivity of biological gender identity.

The Communist Party from 2008 onwards had expressed reservations and concerns about the fact that the enactment of the CA for heterosexual couples was in essence a first step towards the enactment – through its expansion – of a corresponding agreement for same-sex couples. For this reason, KKE had voted “present.” In any case, if Greece had not enacted a CA for heterosexual couples, it would not have been accused of discrimination. There is the possibility, however, of Greece being accused of discrimination with the same logic because it makes no legal provision for marriage between same-sex couples with the respective rights and obligations arising from it (adoption etc.).

This is the key section:

The biological origin of humankind is the result of a male-female sexual relationship, which as such, is of interest to and is regulated by society. Objectively a child that is raised by a same-sex couple, from the first determinative years of its life, acquires a distorted perception of the biological relationship between the sexes. A correct perception of this relationship is an essential ingredient for its smooth psychosomatic and social development.

Which is not mitigated by this:

In summary, the KKE considers that sexual orientation is a private matter, like cohabitation. Sexual orientation, sexual relationships or sexual satisfaction does not produce social rights. The institutionalization of the cohabitation agreement for same-sex couples is essentially an extension of the family institution to these couples. Experience from other countries shows that when a cohabitation agreement or gay marriage was legislated, it paved the way for the adoption of children.

It is important to note that the KKE condemns and is absolutely opposed to any behaviour or practice that is targets people on the basis of their sexual orientation. It considers attacks unacceptable, but also any other related abuse. For this reason, in Parliament it voted in favour of an amendment that makes provisions for the severe punishment for any such behaviour.

Written by Andrew Coates

March 7, 2016 at 6:33 pm

15 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I think the KKE is right. i agree with their position.
    what is wrong with it?
    you haven’t said.

    Dean

    March 8, 2016 at 12:32 am

  2. why are you acting like Peter Tatchell, a shit stirrer (no pun intended) trying to break up a working left unity over some minor points?

    Dean

    March 8, 2016 at 12:35 am

  3. Let’s all be kind to the unfortunate Dean. One struggles to think in what other forums Dean’s utterances would not be deleted, nay mocked? Where they could be spoken out loud? Certainly in one of the churches, or possibly some regional branch of UKIP. Most definitely not in the presence of the idol he obviously worships (quite possibly with a literal shrine) – I speak of course of Mr Galloway.

    No! Let’s feel sorry for this evidently lonely soul and feel grateful for the provision by Mr Coates of a space in which such witherings are allowed. All Hail Coatsey!

  4. Reblogged this on Redvince's Weblog.

    vincenzo

    March 8, 2016 at 11:12 am

  5. One assumes the KKE are also hard on single-parent families and would not like to see legislation supporting them,

    Andrew Coates

    March 8, 2016 at 12:33 pm

  6. They’re an odd bunch the KKE. I met up with an old girlfriend from Greece recently…since we last saw each other she’d married someone high up in the party with a portfolio of properties in Glyfada (not a very proletarian district!!). She’s since got divorced (within a year) and got herself a nice flat in the process!!

    alex ross

    March 8, 2016 at 1:02 pm

  7. Paul C – so you are asking for my comments to be deleted because it is not possible to disagree with gay marriage equality? it is outside of the pale?

    it you you and others like you who are the real stalinists. censor everything you disagree with.
    at least Coastesy respects free speech. all hail Tendance Coatesy!

    the KKE position is not ‘hate speech’. it is only common sense.

    The KKE are right, i agree with everybody being able to live in peace, including LGBT people. there should be no persecution.

    however, that doesn’t mean that gay people should marry and adopt children.

    the KKE is right, and it is not homophobic, and neither am i

    i simply don’t accept gay marriage and adoption of kids.
    I think that lgbt should be able to live in safety and peace, but it is not ‘normal’.
    I don’t agree with transgender agenda either. but transgender should also be able to live in peace without forcing people to people a he is a she. 2+2 =4 not 5. Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner is a man. He should be allowed to live in peace but should not be promoted as an example of ‘courage’ etc.

    this is bourgeois postmodern tendency.

    Peter Tatchell is a shit stirrer. which is why his own ultras have called him a ‘racist’ and ‘transphobe’.
    Coatesey defends Tatchell, and I do as well. he also shouldn’t be shouted out, even if he is a trouble maker.

    Dean

    March 8, 2016 at 2:58 pm

  8. I (reluctantly) accept that poor, crazed Dean is entitled to his deranged opinions: but he should at least try to be honest by his own blinkered lights: “the KKE is right, and it is not homophobic, and neither am I”: come on Dean: in your heart you know that isn’t and can’t be true. Come to terms with your own backwardness, man!

    Jim Denham

    March 8, 2016 at 5:57 pm

  9. I think you should be honest by your own blinkeredness and dogmatic views. the weakness of your argument is clear with ‘ in your heart you know that isn’t and can’t be true’. How the hell do you have any idea about what is in my heart?

    I am not homophobic, but at the same time, i don’t agree with gay marriage with rights to have kids, or adopt. Not a good idea. there is nothing ‘homophobic’ in that.

    It is you who are deranged, with you pathetic bust up with John T.

    Long live the KKE!
    The KKE also support leaving the EU unlike those Syriza traitors.
    Grassroots Out!

    Dean

    March 8, 2016 at 10:08 pm

  10. Mentioning KKE and left unity in the same sentene takes something

    Martie Michaels

    March 9, 2016 at 12:40 am

  11. Dean: I’m not anti-Stalinist: I just think all Stalinists should be executed (and I *do* mean that, really). There’s nothing anti-Stalinist in that is there, Dean?

    Jim Denham

    March 10, 2016 at 12:46 am

  12. Alright then, I’ll bite … Dean, why exactly are you of the opinion that same sex couples should not be allowed fo adopt/have children? I’m sure we’re all fascinated to hear the reasons.

    redkorat☭ (@red_korat)

    March 10, 2016 at 7:46 am

  13. Redkorat – Oh, its in the KKE piece. We can’t adopt kids cos no ‘mother/father’ figure. That this insults single parents and ignores that the vast majority of kids are raised by extended families (including friends, neighbors, even colleagues) just goes to show how it’s cover for homophobia – the singling out of gays for special treatment.

    Paul Canning

    March 10, 2016 at 3:57 pm

  14. I think we all know that shite piss-weak ‘justification’ is just code for something entirely more unpleasant.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: