Do justice to homosexuals

Hamburg Auxiliary Bishop Hans-Jochen Jaschke speaks out in favor of equal rights for homosexual couples in society. There should be no discrimination of any kind against homosexuals. "On the other hand, you can't put everything on an equal footing," Jaschke told our site interview. Marriage is something all its own.

What do you think about the MPs' push for tax equality for gay marriages?

I am not a tax expert and can not comment on this at all. I see well that it is right that we discuss the ie. Homosexual couples have the right to appropriate treatment and equality in our society, but of course this must be well thought out and well balanced. I am not a friend of gay marriage, no, by no means. Marriage must remain something entirely its own. Marriage is the community of man and woman and sexuality in its actual form needs evenly also the togetherness of male and female sex and the children must belong to it. But we must be fair to homosexual couples. I am for the fact that here well considered and discussed, how that can look, but in detail I do not know myself here, that I can not judge.
The Family Minister welcomes the proposal and speaks of "conservative values", as homosexual men and women in partnerships also take on long-term responsibility for each other. You, Mr. auxiliary bishop, have recently expressed yourself in the "Hamburg pride magazine" similarly appreciative about love and fidelity in same-sex relationships. Do you still see this in harmony with the catholic moral and moral teachings?

Yes, our church has said very clearly in the Catechism of the Universal Church that there must be no discrimination against homosexuals, on the other hand, one must not put everything on an equal footing. Marriage is something very special, a way of life between men and women. The society would be badly advised, if it would equalize that. On the other hand, if homosexual couples come together in love, in fidelity, in readiness for each other, then this must also be legally appreciated accordingly and we must discuss what this looks like. In detail I can not and do not want to judge that at all.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says that homosexual people should be treated with respect. Article 2358 states: "Beware of setting them back unfairly in any way. At the same time, however, in the next article they are called upon to live celibate lives (Art. 2359). Can one represent that in the today's time at all still?

Well, that is of course a question for each individual. Every person is called from a Christian perspective to live responsibly and when it comes to sexuality, we must deal with our sexual predispositions properly, whether we are homo or hetero. This also includes abstinence. But I can't say to every homosexual: you have to achieve this goal of abstinence in any case. He has to see how he can live up to Christian responsibility. I think it is better in any case, if a person lives in a solid, stable relationship, in responsibility for others, than if he leaves there vagabond his sexuality run, but these are complex and very personal ies that each individual must then also decide for themselves.
Reject adoption rights for registered civil partnerships because same-sex relationship remains infertile. This is in the nature of things, but people have not chosen their predisposition themselves. Can the meaning and purpose of marriage be reduced to the procreation of offspring??

No, but it is part of it. That's why you can't equalize marriage and a gay partnership. Sexuality also includes fertility and 95 percent of mankind, since time immemorial, experience it that way and it is good for us to do so. There will certainly be exceptions that one can recommend also homosexual partners already once an adoption or make it possible, but the rule may not be it, in no case.

The interview was conducted by Tobias Fricke (our site)

In the debate about equal rights for homosexual partnerships, calls are growing louder for the complete abolition of marital splitting. "To me, the equality debate on spousal splitting simply seems outdated," said the chairwoman of the Family Committee in the Bundestag, Sibylle Laurischk (FDP), on SWR radio on Thursday. Politicians and interest groups support this proposal.

Meanwhile, the Family Federation of Catholics called for an intensive social discussion on the "amption of binding responsibility for one another" "in view of changed social realities and the diversity of family forms". In addition, those responsible would have to address how children can be supported and promoted in the future in a sustainable manner in terms of taxation, explained its president Elisabeth Bubmann. She spoke out in favor of retaining the marital splitting system. "Married couples ame a special legal responsibility for each other and thereby relieve society," Bubmann said. It is only correct that this is recognized also by an appropriate fiscal treatment.

In the debate about further legal equality for homosexual partnerships, the Catholic Church expresses reservations. "Because of the special significance of marriage, it makes sense and is beneficial to the state community itself if the state particularly protects and promotes marriage and the family," said the chairman of the Family Commission of the German Bishops' Conference, Franz-Peter Tebartz-van Elst, in Limburg on Wednesday. The current marital splitting should be maintained. This does not represent an unfair disadvantage for other life plans, said the Limburg bishop.

On the same day, the Federal Constitutional Court had again strengthened the position of homosexuals. After the Karlsruher judges already in the past week verpartnerten officials retroactively requirement on the family supplement granted, decided them now that homosexual partnerships with the land acquisition tax may not be disadvantaged.

The constitutional judges argued that married couples are "bound together in a long-term, legally solidified partnership". Life partnerships therefore justify "like marriage, a mutual obligation to support and provide for each other, so that the unequal treatment can also not be justified with a family principle fed by special legal ties.". This does not contradict the duty of the state to protect marriage and family.

The initiative of several Union politicians to equalize the tax treatment of homosexual life partners had previously met with broad approval from the opposition. In their own parliamentary group, however, the proposal met with a divided response. While Federal Family Minister Kristina Schroder (CDU) welcomed the initiative, it was met with reluctance to rejection from the CSU. Schroder told the "Suddeutsche Zeitung" that the initiative came at the right time, because in lesbian and gay partnerships, the partners ame long-term responsibility for each other and thus live "conservative values. Union faction deputy Michael Kretschmer stressed in the "Leipziger Volkszeitung" (Wednesday) that marriage remains something special for the Union even with equal tax treatment with other forms of life.

The First Parliamentary Secretary of the CSU parliamentary group in the Bundestag, Stefan Muller, rejected the proposal and ruled out a government initiative in the "Leipziger Volkszeitung" (Wednesday). CSU Secretary General Alexander Dobrindt, on the other hand, said in "Die Welt" that the party leadership first wanted to observe the debate in the CDU. CSU legal expert Norbert Geis warned of a loss of importance of marriage and family. "Marriage loses its special position guaranteed by the Basic Law," he told the "world.

A group of CDU/CSU deputies had previously called on their own parliamentary group to achieve equal tax treatment. According to information from Union circles, the parliamentary group leadership was informed in advance about the initiative. Accordingly, the ie will be discussed in the parliamentary group after the summer break.

The Ministry of Finance said the Federal Constitutional Court had invoked the special protection of marriage and family in its case law with regard to tax law. "One such reason for differentiation in the case of marital splitting is the promotion of the legal institution of marriage, especially in view of its lasting importance as the typical basis of the family with children," it continued.

Approval for the reform initiative came from the liberals. The FDP member of parliament Michael Kauch suggested a corresponding regulation within the framework of the Annual Tax Act 2013. Equality in income tax is in line with the stipulations of the coalition agreement and is "constitutionally required". Miriam Grub, family policy spokeswoman for the FDP parliamentary group, called for an end to "discrimination against homosexual couples in tax law, but also in adoption law".

The first parliamentary director of the Greens, Volker Beck, spoke of a long overdue step. It is time to "end the special way with the civil partnership and to open marriage for same-sex couples". SPD member of parliament Johannes Kahrs said that "after numerous supreme court rulings" the demand was "a big step in the right direction". "We reach out to all those who advocate equality and reason," said Kahrs.

With the call, the Union deputies reacted, among other things, to the recent decision of the Federal Constitutional Court, which last week had declared unequal treatment of registered civil partnerships and marriage in the family allowance for civil servants, judges and soldiers unconstitutional.

In 2010, according to the Federal Statistical Office, at least 63.000 couples together as same-sex unions. 23.000 of them had entered into a registered civil partnership. The Civil Partnership Act, in place since 2001, allows two people of the same sex to give their relationship a legal framework.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.