Japan Today
national

Japanese firms back same-sex partnership certificate campaign in gay rights push

18 Comments
By Beh Lih Yi

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Thomson Reuters Foundation

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

18 Comments
Login to comment

It is just baffling to me how the ruling party uses the word unconstitutional.

Lockdown and gay marriages are unconstitutional so they can’t be performed. BUT, Japan having an army is unconstitutional so constitution must be changed ( or so they say).

4 ( +10 / -6 )

Lockdown and gay marriages are unconstitutional so they can’t be performed. BUT, Japan having an army is unconstitutional so constitution must be changed ( or so they say).

Japan doesnt have an army! (lol!) And marriages here are not performed either, their registered! (sarcasm)

The problem is that its not a priority for Abe and the ultra-conservative (there's the problem) LDP. If the PM thought it "important" it would get more traction, but his desires come first, this is not an issue to him.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Totally gay Gokai wants to know what part of the Liberal Democratic Party is "liberal". Or for that matter, "democratic".

3 ( +5 / -2 )

As long as the Diet is full of Conservative geriatrics, nothing will change. Their antipathy towards same-sex marriage is just a symptom of a much deeper and very serious problem.

Japan is well behind most other advanced Western Democracies on a whole host of issues, as the coronavirus pandemic has shown; the whole issue of working online, for example and businesses still using faxes and hanko!! It's absurd!

If those dinosaurs in the Diet won't move their well-padded backsides (and by the way - I'm 63 myself, so I am in that demographic), then they need to be booted out and replaced with younger, more progressive and imaginative legislators.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

Totally gay Gokai wants to know what part of the Liberal Democratic Party is "liberal". Or for that matter, "democratic".

Rhetorical question right?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Totally gay Gokai wants to know what part of the Liberal Democratic Party is "liberal". Or for that matter, "democratic"

I'll tell you. Its the same part that's Democratic in the Democratic Republic of North Korea

2 ( +2 / -0 )

As long as the Diet is full of Conservative geriatrics, nothing will change. Their antipathy towards same-sex marriage is just a symptom of a much deeper and very serious problem.

> Japan is well behind most other advanced Western Democracies on a whole host of issues, as the coronavirus pandemic has shown; the whole issue of working online, for example and businesses still using faxes and hanko!! It's absurd!

> If those dinosaurs in the Diet won't move their well-padded backsides (and by the way - I'm 63 myself, so I am in that demographic), then they need to be booted out and replaced with younger, more progressive and imaginative legislators.

Love your post! Your years only show through your wisdom! Hat off to you sir!

1 ( +3 / -2 )

It never made sense to me all the stigma and hatred directed towards the LGBT community. Who cares? People are people. If two people love each other, why can’t they live in peace? People’s private lives is their business. Same sex couples should have the same rights as anyone else.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

As a very unhappily married man (married to a woman), I'd advice all men, gay or straight to stay SINGLE! Save yourself 40 years of stress and misery!

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Japan's ruling Liberal Democratic Party has said that same-sex marriage was "incompatible" with the constitution,

No, same sex marriage is just incompatible with being an old fuddy-duddy out of touch conservative politician.

As it stands, Japans constitution has never been amended, but that doesn't mean it can't be done. It requires a 2/3rds majority in both houses of the Diet and a simple majority in a national referendum. In many countries, this is then timed to coincide with national elections, as you'll already have people in polling boths.

However, I have no faith in the politicians even taking it to a vote.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The LDP can go to where the sun don't shine. Out-dated, fossilized relic from the mid 20th-century.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Does Abe (change constitution back to Meiji era) know that bumming was very common amount the ruling samurai classes?

3 ( +4 / -1 )

One partner or the other can adopt one or each other. Always done here anyway to pass on family names. It is legal. This way you can pass on inheritance etc. Done easily at the local shiyakusho

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@goodluckto you: I think he knows. Look at his smile.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Excellent news.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

If it's about measures to recognize certain rights of people sharing their lives outside of marriage, then that's understandable, but I don't think there should be any support at all for homosexuality itself.  If people want to act like that, it's not illegal, but why should it be recognized by society as something worthy of respect?

And when they talk about marriage, they try to to obtain the same social status as heterosexual relationships. But the reason heterosexual relationships have obtained a certain social status is because the relationship between man and woman is important for society, for our survival. It's like wanting the same medal without offering a similar contribution to society. This is a clear form of decadence introduced by Western culture and it certainly shouldn't be adopted by other cultures.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

the reason heterosexual relationships have obtained a certain social status is because the relationship between man and woman is important for society, for our survival. 

And living in a tolerant society where one does not pretend to not notice they are treating some citizens as lesser is important for humanity to get passed the ills we’ve perpetrated for so much of our history.

Maybe you prefer living with the persecuted amongst you. I’d prefer not to persecute for the sin of daring to love someone with whom they share a common genitalia.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Sure @dirk. All marriages not ending up in procreation should be considered void then. And after how many years should a heterosexual marriage without children be considered void? 2/3/10? Are women to be merely considered as means for procreation?

It would really be a lot better if people thought twice before opening their mouth and spit silly rants.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites