Civil Unions

There is little coverage of this in the UK so could someone bring me up to speed on what is happening in Italy on this issue please?  Specifically:
1.  which political groupings support / oppose this
2.  why is it proving so difficult for Renzi to get this passed?
3.  what is this business about 'stepchild adoption'?

Grazie!

Here is a decent article from The Local explaining most of it. Basically PD and M5S (despite their not supporting the proposal to speed it up) support it, Lega and FI are against it.

The big, big stiking point is allowing gay couple to adopt the child of their partner. If that wasn't in the bill it would probably have passed by now. Opposers are arguing it paves the way for surrogacy arrangements (illegal in Italy) via the back door.

Just to be clear, we are referring to civil partnerships and not gay marriage.

Thank you for that link which clarifies the issues for me.  It just makes me despair about a country which seems hell-bent on remaining in thrall to a Dark Age, obscurantist institution which has a long and ignoble tradition of opposing the most basic of civil liberties - that's the Catholic Church, by the way, in case I'm being too oblique.

Although the Church has undoubtedly lobbied hard for a no vote, and its an evident case of being a good catholic can make you a bad christian,  its not entirely a religious argument.  Many of those opposing the law are just ignorant, such as the repellent thug Maurizio gasparri and the odious Daniela Santanche.  They dont even know the difference between stepchild adoption and  adoption by a same sex couple - and confuse the two perhaps on purpose to further muddy the waters.   I can understand, I suppose, people being against it, but what I can't get to grips with the is the intense lobbying for a secret vote on the proposal - as even in a undemocratic democracy such as Italy,  the deputies are meant to reflect the will of their voters - its isnt a conscience issue by any stretch of the imagination.   I hope that if the donkeys in parliament make this fail, there will be a boycott of Italy by millions of tourists, until the powers that be drag themselves into the 21st century.

Neil D wrote:Thank you for that link which clarifies the issues for me.  It just makes me despair about a country which seems hell-bent on remaining in thrall to a Dark Age, obscurantist institution which has a long and ignoble tradition of opposing the most basic of civil liberties - that's the Catholic Church, by the way, in case I'm being too oblique.

Thanks for the explanation of who you were referring to - I thought you were talking about the good old US of A

I do not think that it will be fair to blame the Catholic Church or the current Pope for the opposition.,this is a very good article on this topic https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/italy-could-finally-allow-civil-unions--but-what-will-the-pope-say/2016/01/27/731e7f6c-c42c-11e5-b933-31c93021392a_story.html
The Pope has asked bishops to keep away... But then, it is well known that some of them practice the old "essere più papista del Papà" and some civil politicians are happy to follow suit...for different reasons.
It is also surprising to see how the media has changed the meaning of what Pope Francis said concerning marriage and civil unions, that we should not confound the traditional,Catholic marriage, according to God's plans and other types of unions. But this does not necessarily mean that he is condemning civil unions. He is simply saying that there are differences between the two. It is also known that Pope Francis spoke with several Italian bishops and cardinals asking them not to side with demonstrators against the law.
Yes, the Catholic Church has traditionally been reluctant to moves and changes. But many things are and will be changing in the future.

To be blunt, I don't think the Pope is overly fussed about civil unions because all secular marriages, including heterosexual ones, are civil unions in his eyes i.e. not proper marriages because not conducted in a church according to Catholic ritual.  In that respect, the Italian state can call them what they want - they don't count, whatever you call them.

It seems to be that everywhere there has been this debate the word marriage has been the crux of the argument.  Religions claim the word as theirs, but it's a nonsense.  Marriage is merely a contract, either social or ritual and predates most religions but has appropriated by religion as 'holy wedlock'.  To get worked up about gay 'marriage' or not is like being furious that the word mouse could nowadays mean anything other than a rodent.

I think that this article gives a lot of enlightenment http://www.uscatholic.org/articles/201402/its-time-separate-church-and-state-marriages-28452

Alfano is so hatefully smug about his victory that he comes out with his 'against nature' argument.   In most other countries a minister would have to resign for such an odious comment.  And it just shows up his utter ignorance and hypocrisy.  Perhaps someone - with something sharp and pointy  - could explain to the ignorant reptile that against nature are: blood transfusions, dialysis, most medical cures, radiotherapy, adoption of any type, optical correction etc-  i await his law to ban these unnatural practises.

I do not think that he is qualified to teach anyone what is morally right or wrong http://www.rainews.it/dl/rainews/articoli/inchiesta-espresso-Angelino-Alfano-Tiziana-Miceli-9dff77a5-94b1-4fce-90b5-3ae26a562786.html