On Valentine's Day, LGBTQ+ activists in Japan call for right for same-sex couples to marry

Japan: behind the times.

Of course they should have the right to marry.

Straight Japanese couples don’t even have the right to use separate surnames so what hope do these people have?

On Valentine's Day, LGBTQ+ activists in Japan call for right for same-sex couples to marry

On Valentine's Day, 6 LGBTQ+ activists in Japan call for right for same-sex couples to marry.

Fixed

Some one has an agenda. Just proves the over attention this receives in the media attention is selfish propaganda, not news.

Just proves the over attention this receives in the media attention is selfish propaganda, not news.

Really? Did you wilfully not see this: "a majority of Japanese back legalizing same-sex marriage"? It would be news when the public's will is being denied in any country.

We’ve already lost our rainbow to the LGBTQ+. Now they’re after our Valentine’s Day.

The law is fair and clear.

The law is clear. It isn't fair.

We’ve already lost our rainbow to the LGBTQ+.

You can still use the rainbow whenever you want. And they can use it too.

Love whoever you want, but marriage is for the purpose of society recognizing a budding family.

So you're saying that a heterosexual couple that are unable to have children should also not be allowed to marry?

Amazing how the democratic will can be denied when it suits some people's prejudices but touted as good when it supports them. (In Japan, the death penalty, for example) It is simple hypocrisy.

While Japan's conservative government is seen stonewalling diversity, recent surveys show a majority of Japanese back legalizing same-sex marriage. Support among the business community has rapidly increased

Then they should utilize their support

Why should prejudicial hate triumph over the furtherance of love between two adult human beings? On what grounds can we be convinced to welcome that? What kind of a world will be established on such a stance?

Why should prejudicial hate triumph over the furtherance of love between two adult human beings? On what grounds can we be convinced to welcome that? What kind of a world will be established on such a stance?

Hi Moonraker. This is North America from 20 years ago.

We'd like to have a word with you about the current situation and the concept of "slippery slope"

We’ve already lost our rainbow to the LGBTQ+. Now they’re after our Valentine’s Day.

Who does Valentine’s Day belong to? I can’t imagine the idea of owing a rainbow unless perhaps it’s a particular copyrighted image of one.

Anyway, even if you take the strange view that you own these things, I was taught ‘sharing’ is a good thing when I was very young. In this case, it’s really easy as you don’t have to sacrifice anything.

It’s nice to be nice as my teacher taught me.

Lessens hatred and bitterness.

stan and ian.

Enlighten us. You can't posit your assertions without explanation. I'm always open to, as I asked, hear the grounds on which we can be convinced to welcome your stances.

If it is done between consenting adults then I fail to see why this is still an issue! Let them be happy and get married if it means that much to them.

Sad that some people are told to hate and be bitter. Twists them up.

They need better advice and guidance.

Look what happened in the west, it started as "we just want the right to marry" now it's graduated to gender ideology. Domino effect.

Activists and LGBTQ+ community members handed out colorful chocolate candy for Valentine’s Day in Tokyo on Wednesday, 

Thanks for the Chocolate, and No thanks to Gay marriage.

LGBTQ+ are most often high-earning professionals with huge economic clout.

I remember talking to someone working in tourism in Japan who said making a country LGBT friendly is just common sense - they tend to earn more.

I get the sense the types who get all hateful and bitter over this are much, much lower on the earnings scale. You aren’t going to lose much there.

I am 100% for, and completely in agreement with the idea that same sex couples should not be allowed to marry.

Sort out the societal problems in your own country

He is trying to sort out societal problems. As am I.

In order to do that, we need to change the Japanese constitution. And boy oh boy, do you really want to open that can?

I’d say same-sex marriage will be legal in Japan in the next 5 years.

Public opinion is only going one way.

Use this to promote tourism. Get the high-earners visiting the country. Good for the economy.

They already have a right to marry.

They have just as much of a right as anyone else, to enter into a union with a member of the opposite sex.

That's what marriage is.

the indoctrination started in earnest

Perhaps I missed that. Where is this indoctrination?

The only indoctrination I can see started in dysfunctional families generating distrust, lovelessness and ultimately nihilism. So many people have been traumatised by such an upbringing. It's badly affecting our future prospects for a beautiful, peaceful, harmonious world.

Why is Japan so fearful to allow same-sex couples to marry? Get over it. Nothing detrimental will happen to society.

The majority of the people support gay marriage. The conservative LDP doesn't and stonewalls. Isn't this a disconnect between those being governed and those governing? This is the definition of a dysfunctional democracy.

How about Japan allows same-sex marriage simply on the basis of it being the right, humane thing to do instead of searching for some sort of profit motive for it? It's 2024, if anyone is truly against same-sex marriage at this point there is no valid excuse for that sort of ignorance. If they really cared about tradition, they'd recognize that LGBTQ+ people have existed for as long as straight people have. It's such a stupid conversation to have at this point, human rights should not be this controversial.

Just let them marry and perhaps they will stop going on about this sort of thing all the time.

Just let them marry and perhaps they will stop going on about this sort of thing all the time.

As history tells us, it will only embolden them.

We are told it will stop if we just give an inch. But they keep asking for an inch.

After a number of years you look behind and realize you've been pushed back a mile.

It will never stop unless we are resolute.

stan: if two people that you don't know, and will never meet get married, what the hell difference does it make to you if they're the same sex or not?

Why are you so interested in other peoples lives, and more importantly, why are you so keen to make sure those people are unhappy?

LDP must adapt or perish. It’s elderly voting base won’t be around forever.

What would the next inch be? What do you fear same-sex couples would ask for next?

 if two people that you don't know, and will never meet get married, what the hell difference does it make to you if they're the same sex or not?

slippery slope fellas. Slippery slope

https://www.google.com/search?q=US+trans+in+government+dr+rachel+levine+and+sam&tbm=isch&ved=2ahUKEwj75KyYrqyEAxUBW_UHHcqvA6EQ2-cCegQIABAA&oq=US+trans+in+government+dr+rachel+levine+and+sam&gs_lp=EgNpbWciL1VTIHRyYW5zIGluIGdvdmVybm1lbnQgZHIgcmFjaGVsIGxldmluZSBhbmQgc2FtSLBoUOQIWOBgcAB4AJABAJgBggGgAbMTqgEEMTguOLgBA8gBAPgBAYoCC2d3cy13aXotaW1niAYB&sclient=img&ei=QX_NZbvANoG21e8Pyt-OiAo&bih=773&biw=1600&rlz=1C1GCEU_jaJP864JP864#imgrc=xuSho9jwBna4wM

This is one of the social dividing issues of our time

Is it really? The most vocal opponents of same-sex marriage are a minority and will continue to shrink in Japan.

The trend is going in one direction.

This is just a matter of time now. The first steps have already been taken.

Take a leaf out of the book of LGBT people honest and sincere about their sexuality despite some bigotry from morons.

They are worthwhile people. Much more valuable and useful to society.

that literally makes no sense.

Gay relationships have a history going back to Greek and Roman times, and probably before, very little thought was given to it back then, it was seen as normal. It is now, only in more enlightened (lol!) times, it has become an issue. I cannot for the life of me see what issues any person can have against it, it does not affect them personally. We are people just like the rest of society with very the same values and outlooks, we are no different than any other person you see in the street. This is 2024 being dominated by a few old regressive men.

Its scientifically proven

Any reference for this to apply without exception?

A scientific reference to the "madness" of respecting gender identification and sexual orientation would be necessary as well, when the medical consensus is against your personal belief on the topic evidence to support that belief (and the consensus wrong) is the minimum that

I cannot for the life of me see what issues any person can have against it, it does not affect them personally

I used to think the idea that the minority who get really upset over LGBT rights are hiding something was a cheap shot.

Too many cases of these types ( often religious preachers ) being caught in compromising positions with people of the same sex changed my mind.

It’s a possibility.

Equal rights and opportunities should be afforded to every citizen. Simple and not difficult. No Japanese church opposes same-sex marriages.

A woman is an adult human female.

LGB rights have nothing to do (or should have nothing to do) with the TQ crowd trying to invade women spaces.

Let LGB people marry who they want and keep men outside of women spaces.

Same-sex marriage should only be the business of the gay couple making their union and the business of no one else.

Marriage is a union of love and a contract between two people. Not difficult is it?

Let's say we all have our opinion and that democracy should win.

Just make a referendum.

The law is fair and clear. 

Any marriage will be recognized unless one of the following criteria voids it.

1: The other person is underage.

2: The other person is a blood relative closer than 2nd cousin.

3: The other person is the same gender.

4: The other person is already married.

Science supports these concepts too.

You can still use the rainbow whenever you want. And they can use it too.

Rainbow means heavy metal to me. One of my favourite bands when I was growing up.

Epic riffs, epic vocals, and epic lyrics like "there's no sun in the shadow of the wizard" earnestly belted out by Dio. What a band!

Laws are not set in stone and can be changed and amended to suit the times.

How does science support any type of marriage? Usually, more to do with religion than science.

Science supports these concepts too.

At least for point 3 this is not the case, people keep claiming science supports this distinction, but when asked for proof the only reply offered is to ask for guidance on what a woman is.

How about a professional and recognized institution of human health that actually supports this concept?

None?

Marriage in its many forms is only a contract, not a science paper.

The law is fair and clear. 

Any marriage will be recognized unless one of the following criteria voids it.

1: The other person is underage.

2: The other person is a blood relative closer than 2nd cousin.

3: The other person is the same gender.

4: The other person is already married.

Science supports these concepts too.

Not only Is the law clear, so is the science, particularly on point 3.

Male and male, man and man--marriage is not permitted. Female and female, woman and woman--not permitted. That's the law using science as the basis.

Not only Is the law clear, so is the science, particularly on point 3.

Yes, and it is clear it is an invalid distinction, science do not support point 3 being relevant.

You know how this is clearly evident? comment after comment saying science says the opposite but exactly zero references where a recognized institution dealing with human health actually says so.

There is very little that can prove a claim being false than this claim being repeated instead of supported.

In my opinion marriage in its current form is an outdated institution. It needs an overhaul to accommodate the fact that most people don't marry and 1/2 of marriages end in divorce. That being said, the more the merrier on this sinking ship.

Male and male, man and man--marriage is not permitted. Female and female, woman and woman--not permitted. That's the law using science as the basis.

What science?

Well as history has taught us over and over again, the most vocal opponents of same-sex marriage are usually religious self-hating closeted homosexuals themselves. Normal people don’t care and don’t get fired up over something so trivial.

If two people want a same-sex union I consider it none of my business just as if a heterosexual couple wants the same.

Anyone with any sexual preference can marry whomever they love depending on that person’s age, familial relationship, sex, marital status, required documentation, required presence, and willingness to swear under oath.

No one may marry a close blood relative, a child, a person who is already married, or a person of the same sex. These restrictions apply equally to everyone! Marriage equality already exists!

Jeremiah

No one may marry a close blood relative, a child, a person who is already married, or a person of the same sex. These restrictions apply equally to everyone! Marriage equality already exists!

A person of 16 years (child) may marry with their parent's permission. In some countries multiple partners in marriage. More countries are allowing same-sex marriages.

Yes, and it is clear it is an invalid distinction, science do not support point 3 being relevant.

No. Science supports it and is also the basis for the law.

You know how this is clearly evident? comment after comment saying science says the opposite but exactly zero references where a recognized institution dealing with human health actually says so.

If you start with a false premise and lead to false conclusion, then the only thing evident is the fallacious reasoning.

Again, the law in Japan is clear. It uses science as part of the foundation for its reasoning used in its law.

It doesn't matter what message an "institution" tries to promote. The law is the law. As science is science. As a male and a male, and a female and a female cannot marry in Japan.

No. Science supports it and is also the basis for the law.

It is easy to confirm this is not the case the moment you were asked for evidence for this claim and you could not bring any. That means it is a baseless claim not supported by science, in fact it is refuted by it.

If you start with a false premise and lead to false conclusion, then the only thing evident is the fallacious reasoning.

In this case the false premise is the claim you made about scientific evidence, which remains false precisely because you are unable to present any of the supposed evidence you claim exist.

Science does not support marriage. Millions of people have had unions and relationships for decades producing children without ever marrying.

My partner and I have been together since we were in junior high in the 90s. But we can't get married. We'd love to!

But we can't get married. We'd love to!

Would you be able to get married in the US or another country?

It is easy to confirm this is not the case the moment you were asked for evidence for this claim and you could not bring any. That means it is a baseless claim not supported by science, in fact it is refuted by it.

Wrong. Same-sex couples do not have the right to marry in Japan.

Disagree? Try and prove me wrong.

But see below first (helps to read the article):

Japan is the only member of the Group of Seven nations that still excludes same-sex couples from the right to legally marry and receive spousal benefits.