Archive for same-sex marriage

a most promising choice for higher education minister

Posted in Kids, pictures, University life with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 4, 2024 by xi'an


The newly installed (and presumably short lived) French government led by Michel Barnier only includes centre-right and right-right ministers, several of whom voted against reproductive rights and inclusion advances like same-sex marriage in the past. This is in particular the case for Patrick Hetzel, the Ministry of Higher Education (in charge of the French universities!), a former professor of marketing, a current member of Parliament, & an arch-conservative attacking the French Planned Parenthood for its “ideology”, who also took anti-scientific and conspiracy positions during the COVID pandemic, as a Raoult supporter and anti-vax. As illustrated by this quote:

«Très souvent, au moment où elles émergent, les ruptures de paradigme permises par les avancées scientifiques sont le fait d’individus qui, au sein de la communauté scientifique, sont minoritaires. Nous devons donc être très attentifs à éviter le développement d’un dogme qui serait celui d’une science officielle : ce serait tout à fait dangereux.»¹ Patrick Hetzel, November 2023


¹Very often, when they emerge, paradigm breaks made possible by scientific advances are the work of individuals who, within the scientific community, are the minority. We must therefore be very careful to avoid endorsing a dogma that would correspond to official science: this would be most dangerous.

moral [dis]order

Posted in Kids, Travel with tags , , , , , , on October 3, 2015 by xi'an

“For example, a religiously affiliated college that receives federal grants could fire a professor simply for being gay and still receive those grants. Or federal workers could refuse to process the tax returns of same-sex couples simply because of bigotry against their marriages. It doesn’t stop there. As critics of the bill quickly pointed out, the measure’s broad language — which also protects those who believe that “sexual relations are properly reserved to” heterosexual marriages alone — would permit discrimination against anyone who has sexual relations outside such a marriage. That would appear to include women who have children outside of marriage, a class generally protected by federal law.” The New York Time

An excerpt from this week New York Time Sunday Review editorial about what it qualifies as “a nasty bit of business congressional Republicans call the First Amendment Defense Act.” A bill which first line states to be intended to “prevent discriminatory treatment of any person on the basis of views held with respect to marriage” and which in essence would allow for discriminatory treatment of homosexual and unmarried couples not to be prosecuted. A fine example of Newspeak if any! (Maybe they could also borrow Orwell‘s notion of a Ministry of Love.) Another excerpt of the bill that similarly competes for Newspeak of the Year:

(5) Laws that protect the free exercise of religious beliefs and moral convictions about marriage will encourage private citizens and institutions to demonstrate tolerance for those beliefs and convictions and therefore contribute to a more respectful, diverse, and peaceful society.

This reminded me of a story I was recently told me about a friend of a friend who is currently employed by a Catholic school in Australia and is afraid of being fired if found being pregnant outside of marriage. Which kind of “freedom” is to be defended in such “tolerant” behaviours?!