The homosexual civil union: a social, cultural and legal challenge
Summary
At present, new changes in the social context are presented, typical of the contemporary era, which have an impact on the legal or legal level and give the right to be in constant evolutionary process. An example of this is the issue of the homosexual civil union, which breaks the traditional schemes and stereotypes of conservative and religious society. Therefore, it is valid to ask the following: the homosexual civil union should be accepted by the Peruvian legal system or should it be considered, dishonorable and contrary according to the moral principles of the Catholic Church? This article will answer the question asked and, therefore, a position will be adopted regarding the subject.
One of the ends, among many others, of human life is happiness, at least from the cultural vision of the meaning of life, which is always a concept that is constructed socially; For this, the realization of the human being is required, either as being free and/or as being in power. It is known that the union between two people is given by affection, a love, a sentimental link that makes them need to be together, live together and therefore be carried out from the subjective plane. Therefore, no human being can be denied or ban. Because of this, the debate for the request of homosexuals to which a violated right is granted, this being the right to equality before the law, without any discrimination, without any discrimination, without any discrimination, without any discrimination. This petition is called in the legal level as a homosexual civil union, which is essential similar to marriage.
Meanwhile, accepting the homosexual civil union is to prioritize the right to equality of all human beings. Equality is a right considered as a democratic legal system. In turn, equality implies recognition of difference and guaranteeing rights to vulnerable populations. In reference to this principle related to the subject, Gonzales (2015) states that equality requires assessing the reasons that allow categorizing individuals in a particular way. Therefore, the duty of a democratic state of law is to ensure that all its citizens enjoy identical living conditions, according to their nature of human beings with the same dignity of rights (Ombudsman’s Office, 2014).
In the same way, it can be argued in favor, in defending that there is no unique model of a constitutionally protected family, that is, the family does not have a designated structural model. This argument was given by the Inter -American Court of Human Rights, who spoke in favor of this affective union in the Atala Riffo and Daughters vs. Chili; In this ruling, the Honorable Inter -American Court of Human Rights affirms that there may be a new family model consisting of people of the same sex.
Also, it is necessary to emphasize that in past times homosexuality was considered a psychological disorder, however, medical science has been dedicated to studying the nature of sexual orientation, for this reason the international scientific community concluded in 1973 that homosexuality does not It is a disease and the World Health Organization of the United Nations Organization decided in 1990 to exclude homosexuality from the international statistical classification of diseases (Rodríguez, R. 2013). Then, since this is a disease, and be considered a neutral impulse, inherent in the human being, these people must be granted the possibility of living in total development as being free.
In any case, from the social point of view, recognizing the union of two people of the same sex would be the reflection of a culture of respect for fundamental rights, democracy, freedom, good living and realization of the life project of Every human being, a situation that is a construction construction.
However, a broad look of the sociological context reflects that Peru is a country with inhabitants, mostly conservatives; In other words, they are reluctant to accept the changes and/or new life forms that occur in society. This conservative character is due to religious influence, precisely to the Catholic Church, which has been impregnated in Peruvian society since very remote times, in which we would have to see the era of the conquest of the Inca Empire by the Spaniards. However, this social characteristic of our country was very marked in terms of disapproval in the subject of the homosexual civil union.
It is necessary to specify that religious influence is mentioned, because the present issue we are dealing with is against the principles of the Catholic Church, which has been mentioned, that the family is established by the union of a couple between a male and A woman, which would be the marriage. For this reason, we notice that the patterns and stereotypes of Peruvian society are closed to the commandments arranged by Catholicism. Peru, historically, has adopted the Catholic norms, therefore, the established laws do not try to go against their principles; In fact, in the constitutions prior to that of 1979 it was had as a supreme norm that the only official religion of the country was the Catholic and that the State defended it, guaranteed and promoted. Something that has constitutionally changed since then, but that standard pattern has been recorded in the social context. In addition, it is appropriate to highlight, that there are powerful Catholic pressure groups in the Peruvian nation, which influence society, the representatives and organs of the State who are responsible for emanating the laws.
All this analysis of the religious plane is confirmed if we review statistical figures and data; For example, in the study of the most religious nations and more atheists published by the Win-Gallup International (2012) network it is observed that Peru is the ninth most religious country in the world, since 86% of its population is a believer, In addition, the INEI (National Institute of Statistics and Informatics of Peru) in its August 2012 report ensures that 80% of Peruvians are Catholics. In sum, the Public Opinion Study on Religion published by the Peruvian Company for Market and Public Opinion Studies S.A.C. ([CPI], 2014) indicates that 60.4% of the urban population of Peru affirms that the Catholic Church should issue opinions on the bill of the civil union between people of the same sex [Footnoteref same time 56.9% of the population believes that the Catholic and Evangelical Church must oppose and prevent the bill mentioned above being approved (developed in point 1 of the page). [2: In reference to bill No. 2647/2013 that establishes the non -marriage civil union for same -sex people in Peru. This project was rejected by vote in the Justice Commission of the Congress of the Republic of Peru in 2015 and is currently archived. Since then, a new legislative initiative has been raised in 2016 on the same topic, very similar to the project rejected above, the initiative was from official congressmen at that time (Peruvians for the Kambio), one of them was the one that proposed the project indicated At the beginning of the paragraph. In sum, in 2017 a new bill was presented, by the leftist bench at the time (Frente Amplio), but no longer based on the creation of a legal figure, but on the modification of a civil institution as marriage; Thus, it was called equal marriage project. ]
But, in addition to the religious plane already contextualized, there is another important factor that we should not set aside, and in Peru a large part of its population rejects or discriminates to members of the LGTBIQ community. Therefore, when reviewing the report on the perception of the general population towards the trans and Gay/HSH population, in the regions of Lima, Callao, Ica, La Libertad, Lambayeque, Loreto, Ucayali and San Martín published by the Opinion Institute Public from the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru ([IAP-PUCP], 2012) is found that 25.6% of respondents would not like to have homosexuals as neighbors and the same report indicates that 74.8% of the population surveyed agrees to marginalize the homosexuals of the basic education profession. Likewise, the Research Report State of Violence: Diagnosis of the situation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, tansgénero, intersex and queer (LGTBIQ) in Metropolitan Lima carried out by the Ministry of Women and Vulnerable Populations ([MIMP], 2015) indicates that “90% of the LGTBIQ population of Metropolitan Lima has been a victim of violence. 35% of the aggressions occurred in homes; 32% in public spaces and 24.6% in educational institutions, "to add, it is said that" 35.4% of the aggressors were in homes and were a family member or relatives of the couple; 28.1% were third; 18.8% were agents of order; 12.7% were educators; 6% oneself and 2.3% the couple or former partner ".
Added to all this, the main arguments of those who are against the homosexual civil union are the following: protect the natural law, that is, marriage between male and women, since the end of the marriage union is the procreation and therefore the conservation of the human species; It is also believed that the legalization of this union between people of the same sex would be the entrance door for the adoption of sons and daughters, therefore, they are based on defending the innocence of boys and girls, and thus avoid psychological damage in the same.
To conclude, we will quote Gonzales (2012) that states the following:
“To ignore the rights for reasons attributed to sexual orientation, even worse if motivation is based on an ideal plan of natural values, configures a discrimination assumption. Nothing new among us, because discrimination is a reflection of the argument of superiority/inferiority by nature, which has justified exclusion and structural inequality throughout our republican life."
That is the route that follow the ideas that defend the detractors of the Civil Union when they disqualify or invisible for “natural” reasons the rights of the homosexual community or, on the less serious scenario, when a marginal space of the right is recognized so that They can carry out their lives whenever the "natural institutions" are not altered. It’s like saving legal order at the expense of ignoring or overwhelming minorities’ rights. Nor is it novelty in the history of discrimination that is said, added to all of the above, that the immutable model of values that marriage and family represent, responds to the opinion of the majorities. It is with this last argument that the meaning of democracy is called into question as a system that also guarantees the rights of minorities. The consequence of this idea would end up submitting any fundamental right to beliefs, tastes or the simple discretion of those who form the majority at a certain time. This majority would end up supplanting the rights and freedoms to turn them into names without content. The State would not maintain its legitimacy in the obligation to carry out the rights and rather would find justification in the abstract will of who claims to represent the majorities, the power of the day or the factual powers. For all this, the recognition of the non -matrimonial civil union is a challenge that must contribute to the historical process that the conquest of rights implies and in that direction, to the consolidation of constitutional democracy.
Then, you can finish, saying that the social landscape that homosexuals have in Peru, to achieve acceptance of their support for union, is very unfavorable due to various factors. However, legally, the request of these people is valid from the perspective of fundamental rights. In addition, from the interrelation of politics, law and culture, non -discrimination must be counteracted and guarantee the true democracy that implies the inclusion of vulnerable populations within a society.
Bibliographic references
- Peruvian Company of Market Studies and Public Opinion. (June 12 to 17, 2014). Public Opinion Study on Religion. Lima: CPI.
- Inter -American Court of Human Rights. ATALA RIFFO Y GIRLS VS CHILE. Fund judgment, repairs and coasts. Judgment of February 24, 2012.
- Ombudsman. (March 2014). ATTACHING REPORT No. 003-2014-DP/ADHPD. Lima: Eduardo Vega Luna.
- Gonzales, g. (March 31, 2015). The non -marriage civil union as a challenge of constitutional democracy. Point-Pucp, Lima.
- PUCP Public Opinion Institute. (June 2012). "Perception of the general population towards the trans population and gay/hsh, in the regions of Lima, Callao, Ica, La Libertad, Lambayeque, Loreto, Ucayali and San Martín". Lima: IOP-PUCP. Recovered from http: // www.INPPARES.org/sites/default/files/summary%20ExecutiveXrondaoCT2012.PDF
- Ministry of Women and Vulnerable Populations ([MIMP], 2015). State of violence: Diagnosis of the situation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGTBIQ) people in Metropolitan Lima. Lima: Mimp.
- Pontifical Catholic University of Peru. (October 9, 2013). Report: The non -marriage civil union from a legal perspective. Lima: Puntoedu-Pucp.
- RODRIGUEZ, R. (November 2013). 20 short issues to meditate on the civil union between people of the same sex. BULLETIN BUYING JUSTICE-PROSE: FACULTY OF LAW-PUCP. Recovered from http: // blog.PUCP.Edu.PE/BLOG/WP-CONTENT/UPLOADS/SITES/352/2014/02/201207-BABLETIN_PROSODE.PDF
- Win-Gallup International. (2012). Study of the most religious and more atheas in the world. Recovered from http: // Elcomercio.PE/Mundo/Actualidad/PERU-NOVENO-PAIS-MAS-RIIGIOSE-MONDO-NOTICIA-1453498
Leave feedback