Pride Month charity stream is coming!

+
Status
Not open for further replies.

Guest 3847602

Guest

Jokes aside, some of the developers at CDPR would benefit from this campaign. Hell, not even a month ago one of them had left the company and half the Internet was declaring CDPR dead because of his departure.
 
There are registered Polish charitable organisations which lobby on the exact opposite side of LGBT issues.
Would it be okay if CDPR raised money to those conservative organisations since everyone can decide himself whether to donate?
Maybe if you had to go through this sort of thing if you were just homosexual, you might change your mind (or not).
For the last time, You don't want give, don't give............. ;)
Then be thankfull for living in a country that actually respect it's citizens. In Poland we can't marry or register any other form of civil relationship, which basically means that we can live together for years and our country still treats us as if we are strangers to each other, which means no inheritence, no right to burial of a close one (family have the priority and have to resign it's right for life partner to even be able to volunteer to take burial responsibilities on themselves). We can't adopt children, even a biological children of partner, which basically means that if partner, who is a biological parent of a child dies, then even though we have acted as a second parent for said child for years, the authorities are treathing us as strangers and the child goes to the closest relative (e.g. grandparents) or to the orphanage. Even simple holding partner's hand on the street ends in best case with slurs, in worst - heavy beating (which can result even with death).
 
Maybe if you had to go through this sort of thing if you were just homosexual, you might change your mind (or not).
For the last time, You don't want give, don't give............. ;)
Pretty much everyone in Europe agrees sexual minorities have the right to live their lives safe from violence... Poland in 2021 guarantees them that right. Violence is condemned against anybody.
Just when talking about gay marriage, right to adopt and such things disagreements arise. Your rights end when others' rights begin.

I can't adopt children as a single man though I'm not sure single men would be categorically any worse parents than single women or same-sex couples.

Nobody lives in such a social bubble that they don't know gay marriage opponents who are upstanding, normal people.
Can we agree to respect both sides of this debate?
 
Just when talking about gay marriage, right to adopt and such things disagreements arise. Your rights end when others' rights begin.
That's the thing - no one's rights will cease to exist nor be limited with introduction of same-sex marriages. It's exactly the opposite - opposing same-sex marriages limits homosexual people rights.
I can't adopt children as a single man though I'm not sure single men would be categorically any worse parents than single women or same-sex couples.
Of course you can, it's just less preferable by social institutions to give right to adopt to a single parent, than to a couple.
 
Pretty much everyone in Europe agrees sexual minorities have the right to live their lives safe from violence... Poland in 2021 guarantees them that right. Violence is condemned against anybody.
Just when talking about gay marriage, right to adopt and such things disagreements arise. Your rights end when others' rights begin.
You are (maliciously) downplaying this, it is absolutely not as easy as you think it is.
To think so many counties in Poland have these exclusion zones written in law, should already have been indication enough that Poland in 2021 is doing NOT okay on this issue.
Can we agree to respect both sides of this debate?
Respect both sides of the debate? Like respect the side that forbids the other from being who they are, from prohibiting them marriage, from stopping them to show affection, just for who they are? You want me to respect that side?

How about they start showing respect for the individuals right to be as they are. They are not harming anyone ffs. I've had it with this respect both sides argument.

You can be cynical all you want about companies pandering to the cultural zeitgeist (Look at beteshda Middle East logo vs Europe or America eg.) but a polish company doing this actually takes some balls.

Rant mode off; have a good weekend.
 
That's the thing - no one's rights will cease to exist nor be limited with introduction of same-sex marriages. It's exactly the opposite - opposing same-sex marriages limits homosexual people rights.
A marriage involves children. Since children can't look after their own interests, the state must act as a surrogate parent for them.
I agree with a broad principle of "equality" for gay people but disagree with the details.

Married same-sex partners who adopt usually attain the same rights as a child's biological parents in Western countries. This policy which is supported by Pride movement, fails to respect the rights of the child and others. A biological parent should be treated as a biological parent and a stepparent as a stepparent.

LGBT people are parties in lawsuits all over Europe concerning their rights for example in divorce situations. There are lesbian biological parents who want sole custody of the child after a same-sex marriage broke down. A big group in the future will be children who grew up in same-sex households and go after the inheritance of their biological parent.

Of course you can, it's just less preferable by social institutions to give right to adopt to a single parent, than to a couple.
Nope. In my "progressive) country (Finland) single women and same-sex couples can adopt. Single men don't have that right.
 
Last edited:
A marriage involves children.
No, marriage involves two adult people. There are tons of childless marriages.
Since children can't look after their own interests, the state must act as a surrogate parent for them.
I agree with a broad principle of "equality" for gay people but disagree with the details.

Married same-sex partners who adopt usually attain the same rights as a child's biological parents in Western countries. This policy which is supported by Pride movement, fails to respect the rights of the child and others.
Fails to respect their rights how? If anything same-sex marriages and adoptions actually take care of children right to be guarded by both parents. Thanks to that if the biological parent dies the child stays with the second parent in it's family home (which is completely in the best interest of the child) instead of being taken to relatives or orphanage.
LGBT people are parties in lawsuits all over Europe concerning their rights for example in divorce situations. There are lesbian biological parents who want sole custody of the child after a same-sex marriage broke down.
And? This isn't something same-sex marriages exclusive. Divorces and battling for the custody over children is as much if not more present withing mixed-sex marriages, but somehow no one is calling for mixed-sex marriages to be outlawed .
A big group in the future will be children who grew up in same-sex households and go after the inheritance of their biological parent.
Not if a proper same-sex adoptions laws are introduced, where both adults in same-sex couple are treated as biological parents.
Nope. In my "progressive) country (Finland) single women and same-sex couples can adopt. Single men don't have that right.
Any source for that? Because on the site of Finnish Adoption Board it is stated that
individual persons may apply for adoption
without any differentiation between males and females.
Source: Adoption process - valvira englanti - Valvira
 
No, marriage involves two adult people. There are tons of childless marriages.
As a political matter gay marriage goes along with the right of same-sex couples to adopt children.
Fails to respect their rights how? If anything same-sex marriages and adoptions actually take care of children right to be guarded by both parents. Thanks to that if the biological parent dies the child stays with the second parent in it's family home (which is completely in the best interest of the child) instead of being taken to relatives or orphanage.

And? This isn't something same-sex marriages exclusive. Divorces and battling for the custody over children is as much if not more present withing mixed-sex marriages, but somehow no one is calling for mixed-sex marriages to be outlawed .
In the case of a same-sex couple, only one of the spouses or neither of them is the biological parent.
In custody cases in courts, it matters whether the husband or ex-partner was a biological parent or not. "Social parents" don't have the same rights as biological parents, even if the guy was present in the child's life since birth.
Usually in divorce cases, a joint custody for both biological parents is in the best interest of the child. Conversely, equal custody for the biological parent and a social parent would not be the best option.

Logically, the same principle should be followed in the divorces of same-sex couples. The same-sex ex-spouse should not have the same rights as the child's biological mother. Rather, the same-sex ex-spouse should be equated with the divorced ex-stepfather.

Not if a proper same-sex adoptions laws are introduced, where both adults in same-sex couple are treated as biological parents.
[/QUOTE]
Laws can be overturned as societal attitudes change. Traditionally, a child's right to his biological father is a strong human right. Since considerable sums of money are involved with inheritances, there will be people fighting this in courts.
Decades ago the law was that out-of-wedlock children didn't inherit. The law was overturned long after the children were born so the kids ended up inheriting.

Any source for that? Because on the site of Finnish Adoption Board it is stated that

without any differentiation between males and females.
Source: Adoption process - valvira englanti - Valvira
Hmm.. indeed it's correct that a single man is theoretically able to adopt.
If I may take another example, only married couples are able to adopt. Co-habiting couples cannot adopt jointly though a large percentage of kids grow up in such households. The rationale is that since co-habiting couples are much more likely to divorce than married couples, the adoption is not in child's interest. Well, according to statistics also same-sex couples are much more likely to break up than heterosexual married couples. So the same rationale would apply to denying adoption rights to same-sex couples as well.
 
As a political matter gay marriage goes along with the right of same-sex couples to adopt children.
Then adoption involves children, not marriage.
In the case of a same-sex couple, only one of the spouses or neither of them is the biological parent.
In custody cases in courts, it matters whether the husband or ex-partner was a biological parent or not. "Social parents" don't have the same rights as biological parents, even if the guy was present in the child's life since birth.
Usually in divorce cases, a joint custody for both biological parents is in the best interest of the child. Conversely, equal custody for the biological parent and a social parent would not be the best option.

Logically, the same principle should be followed in the divorces of same-sex couples. The same-sex ex-spouse should not have the same rights as the child's biological mother. Rather, the same-sex ex-spouse should be equated with the divorced ex-stepfather.
Which is a mistake, because social bonds can be much stronger then biological ones, so each case should be considered individually with the best interest of the child as priority. If biological father isn't present in child life, biological mother is socialy unfit to act as a parent and same-sex partner of the mother can provide good care and have already fomed strong bonds with the child then for me it's obvious that even though biologically the child has nothing in common with second parent, it may be the best option for providing a continuous care for a child.
Laws can be overturned as societal attitudes change.
So what? In the same vein a mixed-sex marriages may hypothetically one day ceased to exist, but this isn't an argument for getting rid of it right now.
Traditionally, a child's right to his biological father is a strong human right. Since considerable sums of money are involved with inheritances, there will be people fighting this in courts.
Decades ago the law was that out-of-wedlock children didn't inherit. The law was overturned long after the children were born so the kids ended up inheriting.
If anyone is taking away the right of a child for biological parent those are the biological parents themself when they are giving child away for adoption or are so unfit to act as legal guardians that the social institutions must step in and take the child away. If proper laws are introduced that will stop glorifing biological bounds over the social one, then there will be no such problem.
Hmm.. indeed it's correct that a single man is theoretically able to adopt.
If I may take another example, only married couples are able to adopt. Co-habiting couples cannot adopt jointly though a large percentage of kids grow up in such households. The rationale is that since co-habiting couples are much more likely to divorce than married couples, the adoption is not in child's interest. Well, according to statistics also same-sex couples are much more likely to break up than heterosexual married couples. So the same rationale would apply to denying adoption rights to same-sex couples as well.
Actually recent research published by Statistics Netherlands (CBS) on 20th anniversary of introduction of same-sex marriages shows that same-sex male couples are less likely to divorce (14%) then both mixed-sex marriages (16%) and female same-sex marriages (26%), so it seems as if male same-sex marriages are safest for the child to be adopt by.
Source: 20 years of gay marriage in the Netherlands: 20 thousand couples (cbs.nl)
 
Last edited:
For who is to give or not because of CDPR, honestly for me, it's like for celebrities. Maybe it's to give yourself a better view, to be more known/loved, to restore a tarnished reputation or by simple goodness of soul... Who know ? As long as the cause is justified, that the money goes where it should go and benefits those who really need it, frankly I don't care about the real reason...

Finally, it must be simple enough to verify that CDPR has indeed donated the money received... so it would be the "coup de grâce*" (even suicidal) if they offered a fundraiser and kept the money to themselves... Honestly, you would have to be more than crazy to do that...

*Final blow ?
 
Then adoption involves children, not marriage.

Which is a mistake, because social bonds can be much stronger then biological ones, so each case should be considered individually with the best interest of the child as priority. If biological father isn't present in child life, biological mother is socialy unfit to act as a parent and same-sex partner of the mother can provide good care and have already fomed strong bonds with the child then for me it's obvious that even though biologically the child has nothing in common with second parent, it may be the best option for providing a continuous care for a child.
Sexual minorities should have the same rights as heterosexual people. Not more rights.
The non-biological same-sex parent is the child's stepparent. Thus, should be compared to the heterosexual stepparent. Stepparents legally aren't guardians of the child necessarily. It may be a stepparent gains custody of the child in some circumstances but the same-sex orientation shouldn't be considered a factor in these cases.
So what? In the same vein a mixed-sex marriages may hypothetically one day ceased to exist, but this isn't an argument for getting rid of it right now.
Laws which conflict with the constitution or human rights norms are bad laws. I see laws about same-sex marriage and assorted legislation as bad laws precisely for that reason. The law shouldn't allow for annulling the child's bond with his biological parents by means other than the legal adoption process.

If anyone is taking away the right of a child for biological parent those are the biological parents themself when they are giving child away for adoption or are so unfit to act as legal guardians that the social institutions must step in and take the child away. If proper laws are introduced that will stop glorifing biological bounds over the social one, then there will be no such problem.
Glorifying biological bonds? There are human rights norms about respecting biological bonds. So do the human rights matter to you or not?

The number of children given up to adoption in EU countries is so small that there are more than enough heterosexual married couples waiting to adopt them.

In the case of artificial insemination by a same-sex couple, the child will be born will be born without a legal mother and a legal father at all. That's not the best situation in the child's interest, so the society shouldn't allow this option.

Actually recent research published by Statistics Netherlands (CBS) on 20th anniversary of introduction of same-sex marriages shows that same-sex male couples are less likely to divorce (14%) then both mixed-sex marriages (16%) and female same-sex marriages (26%), so it seems as if male same-sex marriages are safest for the child to be adopt by.
Source: 20 years of gay marriage in the Netherlands: 20 thousand couples (cbs.nl)
A meaningless point since same-sex couples are much more less likely to marry than heterosexual couples. The only reason why female same-sex couples do worse in that statistic than male couples is that marrying are more popular among lesbians than gays.

If for whatever reason marrying becomes culturally more popular among sexual minorities, also the statistic about break-ups is going to change to the worse.
 
Being from the UK June 2021 they now allow gay and bisexual men to finally donate blood without waiting 3 months. This angered me as this country up until that point must of thought HIV is only a gay disease. I have always found games and films pushed the boundaries to the forefront and educated people of different lifestyles, whether that's the lgbt scene, gangsters, women, especially women Tombraider being a great example creating a strong incontrol woman instead of some blonde bimbo. I think it is a big step of a games developer to take the risk especially in country that still has a lot of prejudices. Unlike EA and other games developers who always like to play it safe.
 
Last edited:
Being from the UK June 2021 they now allow gay and bisexual men to finally donate blood without waiting 3 months. This angered me as this country up until that point must of thought HIV is only a gay disease. I have always found games and films pushed the boundaries to the forefront and educated people of different lifestyles, whether that's the lgbt scene, gangsters, women, especially women Tombraider being a great example creating a strong incontrol woman instead of some blonde bimbo. I think it is a big step of a games developer to take the risk especially in country that still has a lot of prejudices. Unlike EA and other games developers who always like to play it safe.
Ellen Ripley, Vasquez, Sarah Connor and Trinity ;)
 
Thank you for your generous donations during our Pride Charity Stream last Friday!

In 14 hours we gathered over 12,5K PLN! We promised to match your donations, but instead, we decided to donate the full 50.000 PLN to Kampania Przeciw Homofobii (Campaign Against Homophobia).

Love is beautiful!

16-9EN_.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom