Georgian parliament approves anti-LGBTQ legislation, echoing measures in Russia - "includes bans on same-sex marriages, adoptions by same-sex couples and public endorsement and depictions of LGBTQ+ relations and people in the media. It also bans gender-affirming care and changing gender designations in official documents."

Status
Not open for further replies.

Georgia’s parliament on Tuesday approved sweeping legislation that curtails LGBTQ+ rights, a measure that echoes laws adopted in neighboring Russia.

The bill, introduced by the ruling party Georgian Dream earlier this year, includes bans on same-sex marriages, adoptions by same-sex couples and public endorsement and depictions of LGBTQ+ relations and people in the media. It also bans gender-affirming care and changing gender designations in official documents.

The Orthodox Church wields great influence in Georgia, and demonstrations against the LGBTQ+ community are common. Last year, hundreds of opponents of gay rights stormed an LGBTQ+ festival in the Georgian capital, forcing the event’s cancellation. This year, tens of thousands marched in Tbilisi to promote “traditional family values.”

“Traditional family values” are also at the cornerstone of the Kremlin’s narrative in Russia, where authorities in the last decade banned public endorsement of “nontraditional sexual relations” as well as laws against gender-affirming care, among other measures. Its Supreme Court effectively outlawed LGBTQ+ activism by labeling what the authorities called the LGBTQ+ “movement” operating in Russia as an extremist organization and banning it.

The new initiative was announced by Georgian Dream after the country in June adopted the “foreign influence” law that critics also denounced as borrowed from Moscow’s playbook. The measure requires media and nongovernmental organizations to register as “pursuing the interests of a foreign power” if they receive more than 20% of their funding from abroad.

That measure ignited weeks of protests and was widely criticized as threatening democratic freedoms and jeopardizing Georgia’s chances of joining the European Union. The South Caucasus nation of 3.7 million formally applied to join in 2022, after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, but the bloc halted its accession in response to the “foreign influence” law and froze some of its financial support. The United States imposed sanctions on dozens of Georgian officials in response to the law.


The anti-LGBTQ+ bill was approved on its third and final reading, with 84 of 150 lawmakers voting for it. It now must be signed by President Salome Zourabichvili. Zourabichvili, who has been at odds with the ruling party. She can veto the bill, the same way she vetoed the foreign influence law, but the parliament, dominated by Georgian Dream, can override her and adopt the legislation regardless.


Georgia’s constitution states that “marriage is based on the legal equality and free will of the spouses” but does not explicitly ban same-sex marriage, and the country’s civil code clarifies that marriage is a “voluntary union between a man and a woman.” The new legislation by the ruling party, which does not have the votes to change the constitution, contains a more explicit ban and is seen as a populist step to win the support of marginal groups.

Georgia will hold a parliamentary election on Oct. 26, with the ruling party seeking to retain its dominance.

Georgian Dream was set up up by Bidzina Ivanishvili, a shadowy billionaire who made his fortune in Russia and served briefly as Georgia’s prime minister in 2012. It promised to restore civil rights and “reset” relations with Moscow, which fought a brief war with Georgia in 2008 over the breakaway province of South Ossetia. Russia then recognized the independence of South Ossetia and another breakaway Georgian province, Abkhazia, and established military bases there.

Many Georgians backed Ukraine as Kyiv battled Russia’s invasion in 2022. But the Georgian government abstained from joining sanctions against Moscow, barred dozens of Kremlin critics from entering the country, and accused the West of trying to drag Tbilisi into open conflict with Russia. The opposition has accused the ruling party of steering the country into Russia’s orbit at the detriment of its European aspirations.
 
This is just one part of the elephant. Georgia has been very slowly drifting toward Russia of late.

Remember the 2008 Russo-Georgian war? That started when Georgia attempted to capture South Ossetia by force and then Russia stepped in to prevent that?

Well, there is a peaceful reintegration plan in the works. Shepherded by Russia of all people. Will be interesting to see if it works.
 
Many Georgians backed Ukraine as Kyiv battled Russia’s invasion in 2022. But the Georgian government abstained from joining sanctions against Moscow, barred dozens of Kremlin critics from entering the country, and accused the West of trying to drag Tbilisi into open conflict with Russia. The opposition has accused the ruling party of steering the country into Russia’s orbit at the detriment of its European aspirations.
I think the Georgian government know since a long while then Zelensky was a big SOB.

Btw, imagine trolling Fani Willis with that headline, she might confuse the state of Georgia with the country of Georgia. :story:
 
Now to label anyone they don't like as something so vague as LGBTQ activists to keep the sheeple convinced traditional values means being poor and subservient to the bourgeois class a fucking billionaire lol can't make this shit up idiot clowns
It's really quite easy to avoid being labeled an LGBTQ activist, just make sure you don't try to convince kindergarteners that mutilating their bodies, padding out their allowance via prostitution or engaging in anal fisting during recess are acceptable practices and you'll be perfectly safe from accusations of LGBTQ-activism.
 
Bans depictions of homosexuality in media.
Bans public gatherings promoting homosexuality.

This is oppression. They're outlawing public assemblies and broadcasts that go against what the government wants.
Correct. Remember: almost all Europeans passionately support the criminalization of views that they dislike. You will be hard-pressed to find any left-wing Europeans who do not support the criminalization of homophobic speech, just as you will be hard-pressed to find any right-wing Europeans who do not support the criminalization of pro-gay speech. The idea of defending freedom of speech for views that you personally disapprove of flat-out does not exist in Europe. In Europe, defending freedom of speech means defending freedom of speech for views that you personally agree with and censoring views that you personally disagree with. In the '90s, leftists and "human rights activists" in Russia zealously lobbied the Russian government to enact all manner of restrictive laws against "hate speech", to supposedly protect the country from evil Nazis and commies. The laws were passed, of course; and, today, they are used primarily against leftists, LGBT rights activists, and Putin opponents - the exact same people who demanded that the laws be enacted in the first place. The exact same thing is now happening in other European countries, as far-right parties take power and begin using speech censorship laws pushed by leftists in order to silence anyone who opposes the far-right.

By the way, you retarded basement-dwelling neo-Nazis who worship Russia: Hitler considered Russians (and all Slavic people) to be inferior subhuman vermin fit for extermination. And, if Hitler had succeeded at wiping Russia off of the face of the earth before being defeated, the world would be a far better place today.

Finally, to the neo-Nazis cheering for the government censorship of views that they dislike: any sweeping government power to censor speech is inevitably going to be used to shut down your vile online swamps (like, for example, A&N). You reap what you sow. People who advocate drawing lines around freedom of speech always envision themselves as the ones holding the pen. They never even entertain the thought that someone else's definition of objectionable speech might differ from theirs.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back