>>21461>>21460>>1733674my party is the ripe fruit of the labor movement in my country and it did not surrender the banners of our ideology after the counter-revolution, on the contrary, during that difficult period it went through a militant process of critically reviewing the experience of the international communist movement and its own and took out new revolutionary conclusions until he ended up in his current revolutionary program. it plays a pioneering role in the international communist movement and is a beacon of revolutionary strategy. for reasons of hesitation, ambiguity and insufficient study, however, it has an inconsistent position
on the LGBT question.
It is not idpol to say that it is a key issue given the circumstances in which the specific bill for gay marriage is being tabled. It is a matter that affects the youth a lot and another bill that hits their rights to education is passed at the same time. Τhe reactionary neoliberal goverment does this purpusfuly calculating the power of the party's influence on the students but also its unclear, under-formation position.
my party is saying no to the bill of homosexual marriage because it says it opens up the road for homosexual adoption. in this direction, our main line at the moment is based on irrational opinions that the child needs to be properly raised by the example of the father and mother, as some kind of cultural archetype without which he does not integrate smoothly into society.
Communists should defend the self-evident right of everyone to access basic rights that also concern human relationships, including marriage/adoption, against the erroneous and unscientific exclusion of any of them based on sexual orientation or other criteria.
The exclusion of specific people from such rights, while it applies to all others, does not strengthen but weakens the necessary struggle against institutions of bourgeois society such as marriage.
Because, objectively, not only does it not strengthen the strategic discussion about the role of such institutions, but it also ends up presenting them as a "privilege" that concerns some and not others.
There are no illusions that discrimination in capitalism will be solved by civil rights, but this is not an argument for excluding any of them.
It is sad that in 2024, the exclusion of any person from formal civil rights, because they have, for example, a different sexual orientation, enters into "dialogue".
Even sadder are any pretexts, which, objectively, lead to unscientific positions.
For example, for conservatives, the Church, etc., there is no pretext that will not be found to support the homophobic exclusion of people with a different sexual orientation from formal civil rights.
From unscientific theories about supposed "laws of nature" that are being violated, to false theories about "children at risk", the "social composition" (!) that will "change" and other improbable pretexts. And all this for a standard issue. For a formal and self-evident civil right, scientifically resolved for many years.
It is known that there is no correlation between the process of natural, biological procreation and parenting. Child rearing is related to other, social, factors.
Nor, of course, is the sexual orientation of the parents (heterosexual or same-sex couples) a factor that determines the development and upbringing of children. Child rearing is not a biological but a social issue.
All these have been proven for decades by scientific research and major scientific associations and are considered solved. Theories that argue that the biological process of procreation determines or decisively influences upbringing and thus, for example, justify the exclusion of people with a different sexual orientation from formal civil rights such as marriage and adoption are deeply unscientific.
All colleagues, male and female employees, regardless of sexual orientation or anything else, must have the same rights as everyone else
All colleagues are human, regardless of sexual orientation, gender, ethnicity
They are all our colleagues.
Communism never and nowhere divides workers by nationality/gender/sexual orientation but unites them on the basis of class interests
It is also judged from today, since communism is the "movement that abolishes the existing order of things"