Croatian Parliament votes on
same-sex life partnership law
Photo: Cropix
Homophobia was the social norm in communist Yugoslavia
The significant levels of homophobia that regrettably still exist in Croatia (as it does in other countries) are not solely the product of Catholic indoctrination over the years as many, including the current communist-nostalgic government, would like to claim but rather the product of complex historical circumstances in which harsh opposition to gay sexual orientation had also been a communist party driven oppressive social norm for more than half of the communist Yugoslavia’s existence. While one can come across many media articles and reporting that tend to spin the politically coloured story that Croatia’s government officials recently challenged the Catholic Church opposition to gay marriage and passed the “life partnership” law to create greater rights for same-sex unions, the truth on the ground is evidently far more complex than that.
Same-sex sexual activity was illegal in Croatia/all of the communist Yugoslavia between 1951 and 1977 and the Catholic Church had nothing to do with these laws. The 26 years of such oppression of gay people by the communist regime has undoubtedly made significant inroads into the psyche of a largely Catholic (Christian) society whose religion had no tolerance for homosexuality in the first place. The communists did not accept the Church, did not attend the church, were not and are not “believers” and yet, when it came to homosexuality, they acted the same and even worse than the Church itself (for the Church had no powers to pass legislation). The communists poisoned a whole generation – the parents and grandparents of today’s young – against homosexuality. And while the current left and centre-left government and citizens’ associations supporting them point the finger against the Croatian Catholic Church as being discriminatory against the gay population the fact is that vast numbers of citizens in Croatia who do not practice religion, but were poisoned by communist laws and social norms, were also among those who voted in the referendum of 2013, which amended the Constitution to define marriage as a union exclusively ”between a man and woman”, thus preventing same-sex marriages from being legalized even in the future.
Anti-discrimination legislation reflecting the democratic course Croatia had embarked on with its secession from Yugoslavia movement in the early 1990’s had been passed from the very beginning and amended as democracy gradually made its stronger steps into everyday life. Discrimination based on sexual orientation has been banned in Croatia since 2003. Additionally, in January 2013, a new Penal Code was introduced, protecting against hate crimes related to gender identity.
A step forward for democracy
On Tuesday 15 July Croatia joined the large number of European countries that recognise civil partnerships for same-sex couples. Thus making another step forward towards equality of homosexual citizens with the rest, albeit not complete equality because gay people desire marriage just as much as non-gay people do.
A civil partnership law was passed by the Croatian parliament, recognising same-sex unions and granting them the same rights as those in traditional/heterosexual marriages with the exception of the right to adopt children. It’s reported that this law in Croatia has been drafted along the lines of its German counterpart, with 89 votes in favour mostly from centre-left and liberal parties in the government coalition. Voting against the measure were 16 right-wing and centre-right parties, which are not against the recognition of same-sex couples but object that the law is too liberal. Furthermore, the Catholic Church and the conservative citizens’ association who work towards protecting the “traditional family values” have expressed their opposition to the law, but as such matters also stand everywhere else in the world this opposition is not crucial in the passing of legislation.
One of the complications, which the community had faced since 2013 “family” referendum, was a Constitutional requirement that the State ‘protect the family’. Lawmakers got around that problem by defining life partnerships to be a form of family life.
Gay and lesbian couples in Croatia will thus from August 2014 enjoy all the same rights and duties as married couples, such as inheritance rights, social benefits and tax deductions. Their unions will be called ”life partnerships” and not ”marriage”, but are defined as a form of family and as such protected by the Constitution. The official ceremonies will be held in town councils/ local Registries. Despite not including the right to adopt, which is disappointing just as it is disappointing for the other European countries with similar life partnership laws, Croatia has made progress in the area of same-sex couples’ rights under the law. Although adoption of children by same-sex couples is not permitted under this or any other law in Croatia the law nevertheless recognises the fact that there are same-sex partnerships where children do exist. And so, if a child does not have a second, officially recognised parent – or their other parent is dead – the same-sex partner of their biological parent will be able to become the legal guardian of the child, if they live with the couple. If the second biological parent is known and alive, then the partner of the homosexual parent will have the rights granted to stepparents. Decisions of this nature will be the matter for the Courts to rule on.
The gay community in Croatia has hailed the new life partnership legislation with strong applauses all around. And why wouldn’t they! Non-gay community should also applaud this legislative move and many of its members surely have. It’s a matter of human rights practices as translated through a life of democracy. After all, almost all gay people in Croatia are a part of and stem from traditional families; they are someone’s sons, daughters, brother, sisters, parents, grandparents…The life partnership legislation is also surely to contribute to a decrease and eventual minimisation of homophobia that exists in Croatia, as it does elsewhere and, hence a greater acceptance of gay people as a part that contributes valuably to the general society. Ina Vukic, Prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Syd)
RSS - Posts
This clearly evidences progress. Baby steps are still indicative of forward movement — on any social issue!
Yes, Eric, I agree and small steps have large significance here particularly when one looks at the history of social norms in societies, young democracies have particularly hard work to get moving ahead.
You’re probably going to get some flack for this article and maybe even lose the odd follower, but GOOD FOR YOU for writing it! Simply put, people are afraid of things they know little or nothing about, particularly if they haven’t ventured outside of their domains – physical and mental. And with homosexuality being illegal for that long, how were people supposed to develop an understanding of the issue during that time?
What’s kind of funny and a little ironic is that we who have lived outside of Croatia for any length of time have always been branded ‘rightists’, ‘fascists’, ‘Ustase’ etc., and yet we know a fair bit about not only tolerance but also acceptance, having lived in societies where the prevailing motto is ‘to each his own’ and ‘live and let live’, we have learned to accept people for what they are. In fact, I remember that in Canada we had a Bingo manager and HOP member that was openly gay and even the harshest WWII vets that were on the Croatian side wouldn’t even blink an eye at his orientation. It helped that he was a good sport and sometimes even joked about his place among that “harsh” right wing Croatian emigrant population. 🙂
Thanks, Brankec. As I wrote this post similar thoughts went through my mind, realising what a difference to life it makes for having lived in a developed democracy, having seen the examination of politicians’ conscience through decades as issues of equality and acceptance of homosexuality in societies were being addressed. I may lose followers because of this but also matters of social justice must be spoken of openly otherwise we bury ourselves in delusions while parts of our society suffer. So, perhaps there will be new followers as well, those who previously may have believed that people in Croatia still live in “dark” ages. Croatia is a modern nation created not only on spilled blood of heterosexuals but also I believe on spilled blood of gay people. The love for one’s country does not recognise sexual orientation, neither should we. Why should anyone in their fair mind begrudge happiness to another human being who does no harm to others. When it comes to Catholicism I am, as a fair minded citizen who is well aware of uneasy issues of social justice religion can impose upon a conscience, reminded of Pope Francis’ words: “Who am I to judge?” when recently asked about his opinion of gay people. He did reiterate that Catholic teaching about marriage is that it is a union between a man and a woman but also in his May 2014 interview in the Italian daily Corriere della Sera, when asked about civil same-sex unions he did not protest, he said that states seek “to regularize different situations of living together” in order to ensure health care and other economic benefits and that “We have to look at the different cases and evaluate them in their variety.”
Very well put, Ina!
🙂
The Pope’s words have been parsed and used to promote a certain agenda. He was also not asked for his opinion on gays but on a gay lobby, which is obvious when one watches the entire video of the interview on the plane with journalists. His response is a gentle, pastoral one of course, he is the Pope.
What Francis said was, “If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?” The difference between what he is quoted as saying, and what he actually said, is not minor. Those who parse his words agree, which is why they parse them. It is important to note that the pope did not offer two sentences: his one sentence was chopped to alter his message. The willingness of Pope Francis to reach out to gays who are searching for the Lord is commendable. But attempts to parse his words are dangerous.
I see your point, somewhat, in posting this as the extreme left-wingers (read Commis) in Croatia have attempted to paint a historical picture of Croatia that is false. It was not the Church ‘going after gays’ but rather the Communist regime being brutal in its treatment of people with this inclination (as you wrote). People have short memories and the current Church-hating Communist regime in Croatia is attempting to paint itself as some ‘saviour of gays,’ which is totally duplicitous. The Party’s own history is the complete opposite of this. It is not that the Communists are worried about the rights of gays in Croatia. It is that they hate the Croatian Catholic Church so much, they will grab on to any cause to discredit the Church.
My beef as stated in an earlier post to Sunman is that this brings on a slippery slope of forced recognition in sex ed. classes in Catholic schools, adoption by gays, etc. I see it in North America. Here, we already have hundreds of situations where gay couples have sued Christian photographers and Christian venues for not taking their photos or allowing them to hold ‘weddings’ in their privately-run businesses. These people have been bullied and sued by gay couples and many have been forced into bankruptcy.
Pretty ironic eh? Where the bullied become the bullies. Furthermore, we see in some Catholic churches in the US where gay couples are demanding that their children be baptized. What is the Church to do?
As we know, in baptism one promises to raise the children in the Catholic faith. How can one do that if one is conjugally living with a member of the same-sex, something not recognized by the Church?
I think people fail to see the horrible pandora’s box this has opened and that this is about a lot more than being ‘free to love whoever one chooses.’
I guess Veronika the point about Pope Francis’ statement for me was that it did not contain negativity towards the gay community. The lawsuits regarding photos being taken or not allowed to take them or hold a reception has all to do with public access to facilities and business owners should know that otherwise if they refuse it would be the same as refusing a person of a different culture ethnicity etc to use the facilities. If you’re in business where your customer base comes from the public then you must honour the fact that the public is made up of all kinds of people etc – I know what you mean as such things happen everywhere but still at the end of the day it’s all about rights and if they do not exist then it’s about processes and attempts to achieve those rights, which of course does not mean one will achieve them in every case. I think communities are well self-regulated when it comes to accepted moral and social norms and the law ideally follows that what occurs or develops in community.
Kudos on a great post 🙂
Thank you, Notes To Ponder
Regardless of whom we choose to sleep with we are first and foremost human beings. This is a good step for Croatia. Very good post Ina. I was not aware that homosexuality was outlawed in Yugoslavia – and the communists had the bloody hide to criticize Hitler, or church for that matter!
Hypocrisy seems to run easy in many places, Varosh, but I do my best to see it and reject it. Thank you on your comment.
People can hold whatever view or opinion about homosexuality they want, but that does not give them the right to deny others’ their opinions or views. And to me it seems that anti-gay activists seem to think they own life. Well they do not, no one does. Together a society can only become richer in its diversity because human nature produces diversification and we must accept the good diversity just as we condemn the bad one (crimes etc.). If this law produces foul sentiments in Croatia these should be looked down upon as if looking down a plague – a plague that destroys freedom.
An interesting point, Wilkinson. I do agree that no one should be judged or shunned because of their sexual orientation. Sexuality is a very personal matter and a personal freedom that bears no threat to anyone else’s personal freedom, democracy is about personal freedom, within the boundaries of the laws of the country and I believe this life partnership law just passed in Croatia does add to that personal freedom.
Very disappointed with this blog entry, I’m done with this site.
Fare well, MelbCro, if truth on all matters of life causes you to withdraw that is your choice and I acknowledge that. Good luck
Seriously? People are people and should be judged by character, not by sexual orientation which they have no choice – it’s all about the genetic lottery. Croatians need to stick together and accept that we all have different opinions, and not ‘bolt’ out the door when someone says something you disagree with.
Sorry Sunman I don’t agree. FIrst off, let me be clear, I don’t think anyone who has this orientation should be harmed or jailed, but I also think recognizing these types of ‘unions’ leads to a dangerous slippery slope. Next it’s pushing for the legalization of adoption by gay couples, marriage, teaching this type of behaviour in sex ed. programs in schools, etc.
We already see this with the addition of letters to the Lesbian and Gay acronym: “L”esbian “G”ay “B”isexual “T”ransgender “T”ranssexual ”T”wo-spirited “Q”ueer “ Q”uestioning “I”ntersex “A”sexual “A”lly…
Are you kidding me? Sheer nonsense.
Furthermore it leads to the recognition of all types of so-called ‘love’…..polygamy and man-boy ‘love’ relations… two types of examples….. truly revolting ones. We have movements in North America and elsewhere which are strongly pushing to recognize these disordered relations as ‘normal’ as well and simply another type of ‘orientation.’
Is this normal? Since we are recognizing gay unions, why not recognize the two I mention?
In fact a man married his dog in India a few years back, why not recognize that union?
If we use merely what/who someone ‘loves’ as the only criteria required to be in such a union.
We live in a culture where if it ‘feels’ good, just do it, which I think shows the sheer moral decay of our culture.
If you are indeed born with this type of orientation, for some it is a cross to carry, for others, in today’s world it appears to be a license to revel in nudity and depraved behaviour in exhibitionist parades. Why can’t our sexual identity, which is clearly not the sum of a person, be a private issue? Why do I have to be forced to accept behaviour that does not conform with my moral compass (and most of the planet’s) because a tiny portion of the population feels this way and lobbies to get their way accepted? It’s not about human rights or acceptance. It’s about a strong, vocal, sometimes angry and hateful lobby that is pushing to normalize behaviour that is not the norm.
Sorry, ali ne slazem se sa tobom. Homoseksualnost je poremecaj. Jednostavno je nenormalno da su dva muskarca (ili dvije zene) ‘u ljubavi’ medjusobno.
Nema to veze jesi vjernik, ateist ili nesto trece. Taj poremecaj je neprirodan i naravno da takve poremecene ljude ne treba sikanirati nego im treba pomoci.
Translation of comment by Perica: Sorry, I do not agree with you. Homosexuality is a disorder. Simply it is not normal that two men (or two women) are in love with each other. That has no association whether you are a believer, an atheist or something third. That disorder is unnatural and of course such people should not be shunned they should be helped.
REPLY: Perica, thank you on your comment but I do believe that adults have a right to practice consenting love in whichever way they choose. And yes, faith or the absence of it has little to do with it, or anything but historically it has been the religious institutions and political institutions that have made it to appear abnormal – medicine, responsible for the “treatment” of homosexuality has abandoned the notion that homosexuality is a disorder long time ago. Perhaps you belong to those that tend to disagree with even the profession that treats disorders. Just because you may personally feel that way it does not mean it is so. As far as I am concerned we all have rights and need to assert them.
Clearly showing progress in compassionate democracy. So interesting that the bad rap pointed to religion when in fact it was communism and oppression of that kind of rule. I’ve found that most people have decency and goodness in their hearts and are not concerned with how another lives providing that they bring no harm to others. Enter into that equation oppressive programming and a heart closes and the mouth espouses hatred. Bravo Croatia! Bravo to the author of this site for another insightful and inspirational post. Thank you. <3
Thank you, The Persecution of Mildred Dunlap. Indeed, most people are decent and at times of conflicting ideas it takes courage to express that decency.
Exceptional post!
Thank you Stacey
Democracy does not always mean equality but it does mean the will of the people. It looks to me as if the Parliament has circumvented the will of the people here. Right or wrong, I make no judgement call on that. If Democracy is how you go about achieving the laws of a nation, then you cannot allow another governmental body to overturn that choice because it disagrees. You have not made any steps toward democracy here. I am very sorry for Croatia. They are slipping back into the muck.
Thank you on your comment, Christie, it is a step forward whichever way you take it. Even the most democratically developed countries are at the very stage Croatia is at now when it comes to same-sex unions. Slipping into the muck would be to deny any kind of protection under the law for all citizens and gay people are citizens, for this case in issue.
ina i have to agree with christie on this one even though this might seem like a victory in a step for equality in democracy for the people it isn’t. If this is going to be democratic it needs to be the people who accept and make this law not the government, whose officials do not represent the entire will of the people only a small fraction of it since that fraction had a little bit more power to put them in. plus this also seems to be a last ditch effort by the yugos to change their appearance as more liberal and democratic party that cares about equality before the upcoming election which surely they are going to lose. in the end unfortunately we are falling back into their control which we actually wrestled away with the referendum no matter how “controversial it was”.
Thanks anonymous – I stand by my conviction that every person in a democracy needs to enjoy the protection under the law and I see no justifiable reason to deny the homosexual community the right to live together if they choose and at least have some rights under the law. Gay men fought in the Homeland war just as heterosexuals did, even if smaller numbers but numbers nevertheless. They fought for a free and democratic Croatia and democracy brings personal freedom within lawful boundaries, so why should sections of a community be excluded from freedom to choose with whom they wish to live. As far as I understand the Gay community (the people whom the law affects) have welcomed it and as far as I am concerned that is good. This topic has been controversial all over the world for decades and many countries have made steps forward, some are still making it. All political parties need to be in tune with all their citizens’ needs and if they’re not, that is their loss.
Ina thats the problem the people didn’t choose this law the government did it was not a direct vote, don’t get me wrong i am not saying i am against gay rights but after the referendum where the people got to decide and not the government that hows a true democracy should work even no matter how outdated anyone sees the outcome. The fact that this parliament is on a full pay roll and rarely meets except when its for public relation stunts such as passing these laws isn’t like i said a before a step forward.
True, anonymous. But all laws cannot be voted on through a referendum but in a democracy all should undergo the scrutiny of public submissions, comments etc before the law goes to parliament for a vote. This I believe may not have been done but also it may have gone through some kind of submissions because it was announced many months ago etc. The marriage definition referendum occurred because it sought a change to the Constitution etc and that’s different from passing a law. This law does not give the gays the right to enter into marriage because the referendum was successful to define a marriage between a man and a woman, this law defines a type of a “family life” and there are lots of families where couples do not get married at all but live together as family and if they are heterosexual then they are protected for certain matters under the law so too should other types of “family life” be. That is my view and I do understand what you are saying but I am also aware that parliament passes new laws or amendments to existing laws almost every week
Reblogged this on idealisticrebel.
Thank you for the reblog, Barbara
Commies have never had this type of issue on there hands,I don’t know where you got that info from.
Alija, you are either not informed fully about the Criminal Acts law of SF Yugoslavia or you are being your usual self … In 1951 the Federal Assembly of Yugoslavia passed a new Crimes Act and in its Article 186 it made homosexual acts criminal acts punishable by two years imprisonment etc etc. This Article was repealed in late 1976 and repeal effective from 1977. There are plenty of sources on the internet you or anyone can search of that fact.
Well in the time of Drug Tito nobody came out of closet ,nobody.I grew up in that time and have never met a gay person.Nobody came out not because of commies but because of coworkers,classmates,,neibrhood .Now since you know so much why don’t you name one person who came out.
I lived in Zagreb in the 1970’s and there were several men I met in cafes etc they lived in terror and fear – I remember one person in particular who liked to dress as drag queen, went to prison a couple of times and then had friends everywhere so when someone saw a policeman coming they would warn him and he’d hide at the back of the cafe etc
As I’ve said before, I am for “life partnership” for gay and hetero couples when it comes to the government/legal aspect of things and keeping the marriage side of things purely religious and leaving it to religious institutions to decide who they will and will not marry. At least now we can perhaps start moving towards a more “live and let live” attitude. While I completely understand that faith matters to Croats lets not lose perspective and think we know the answers to all of life’s questions based on our very limited, human understanding of spiritual matters. It’s so easy to get outraged and whine about how gay people will destroy the family unit, but let’s not be blinded hypocrites and ignore how much heterosexual relationships have been destroyed because of our greed and selfishness. Fix up our own backyard first, you know?
One thing I do find amusing is how I do not see any of the angry, screeching “Croatia is hateful and oppressive!” leftists speaking out now. With all due respect towards any decent LGBTQ people, there are some shockingly hateful morons within the “gay rights” community who only make a spectacle when things don’t go their way, but lets remember they do not speak for every gay person.
Yes Kat, it is a great achievement to reach the point in life when we “live and let live”. Gay people stem from families too; gay people fought for Croatian freedom and democracy so too they should enjoy it. And yes some in gay lobby can be hard to take, but as you say that is only some, few
I think there are way bigger issues for government to deal with.I’d trully like to see more people my age (21) getting (better) jobs. There are many young people i know who cannot get a job and I’m so thankful I have an excellent job but i feel sad for those who don’t. SSM is going to mess paperwork for courts, and i don’t feel like doing it, Lol!
Sure, Dani, there are much bigger things for the government to tackle but in that we as a nation must not forget to care for all. I can see why you LOL at the courts, they’re a mess and have been for years, backlogs keep piling up
Yeah right. Its step forward from communist totlitarism to liberal one. Now, we are just waiting for next attack toward the religious people, and forcing them to work against their moral concience.
Thank you Hrvoje for your comment, as I have observed in developed democracies when such or similar matters have been considered in parliaments they often involved publicly announced conscience votes, and conscience votes like any other have Yes, No or Abstain rules.
As a minority, LGBT are a convenient scape-goat, a victim to pick on when others need to relieve feelings. Nazis, communists and some democrats have oppressed us, much of the British Commonwealth anti-gay law dates from the British Empire. But recognising our rights benefits everyone: it is an increase of freedom. Everyone can be very slightly more themselves.
I agree Clare, particularly given that democracy should not exclude anyone from having protection under the law of the country.
Thanks for telling me more about the issues in such a well-written format!
Thank you, Christie, I appreciate your feedback very much
Progress! 😀
Indeed, Kev 😀
The issue of SSP should not even be an issue to anyone. Everyone has a right to be loved and to be happy. If you do not like the law then turn a blind eye and move on with your life as you have no say in how people chose to live a life that has absolutely no personal impact on you. Being a CATHOLIC I only believe that we live under gods judgement and only he has the right to judge us and he most certainly does when our time comes. The GLBT community are all someones children.They were all born and brought into this world by so called straight parents and most were baptized under the watchful eye of the lord and the church who guided them through their lives. Many still practice our faith, still believe in our lord and participate in our church with out asking for anything more then respect.Croatia was right to enact the SSP law because it removes any obstacles of debate that will pit one group of people against another in the future for political reasons. There were many GLBT that fought for our homeland and many I am sure had lost their lives so that YOU and YOUR children could have the freedoms you have today.No one has a right to deny them the basic of human rights which is respect and compassion.They love their homeland and people as much as anyone else does.In a country that has suffered so much through war and communism one would think we all would be rejoicing in the freedoms we have and move to make Croatia a progressive country that shows the world that we respect our people regardless of who they are and not follow into the failings of other countries that destroy their own people from within which reeks havoc on other parts of society.You can not condemn one group of people and not expect another group of people to be the next target of discrimination.
So right Michael – thank you. There is no greater joy I think than when one realises that one has made a positive difference to someone’s life. We are not here to judge others but to do our best in ensuring freedom. Well put comment, thank you
Very well said Michael, especially that last line – it is 100% correct. 🙂
Thanks so much for sharing this, Ina. I am heartened by the political progress, but still saddened to see the bigotry to be found in some of the other comments. I trust that such unhappy people are now just part of an ever-shrinking minority.
Yes, fjpeter1961 – in every country in the world there are people who hold views on matters that have little or anything to do with human and democratic rights and everything to do with bigotry, with hard views and cold hearts, with power-games and all sorts of sad things. But I am so glad this step was made in Croatia because I believe most Croats are fair minded people and even in the face of difficult issues of conscience and morality they know they are able to rise above it all and see freedom. Those against will always exists in Croatia and elsewhere 🙁
Ina, sorry but I disagree with you when you write: “The lawsuits regarding photos being taken or not allowed to take them or hold a reception has all to do with public access to facilities and business owners should know that otherwise if they refuse it would be the same as refusing a person of a different culture ethnicity etc to use the facilities.”
Sorry, but that makes no sense as they are not public facilities.
If someone is a private business owner he/she can decline anyone for whatever reason.
Period.
Being gay is not the new Black. In other words, homosexuality and heterosexuality are intimate personal behaviours. For most people, their race and nationality cannot be hidden. In other words, it’s not the same.
This is just like forcing Mozilla CEO Brendah Eich to resign because he made a personal and private donation in support of a ban on gay marriage in California.
He was metaphorically crucified.
This to me speaks volumes of so-called tolerance and so-called freedom of opinion and religion.
Forcing any private business to take the business of anyone they don’t wish to is bullying.
We might as well be in Communist Yugoslavia.
Why doesn’t a business owner have the right to express his First Amendment rights – freedom of religion?
It’s declining a patron, it’s not forcing someone to sit at the back of a bus, use a separate washroom, or be treated like a slave, like the evil inequality African-Americans suffered in their history.
Ina sorry but it’s not the same.
I agree with what you are saying Veronika, however, I do believe that a private business unless open only to members of the business, club etc is I believe a public venue by law – perhaps I misunderstood the venues you wrote about.
bl. Stepinac would be so happy with this law.
No he wouldn’t be. Nice try. You’ve obviously never read his work. Just a reminder he was a Catholic Cardinal who was pro traditional family. Hey maybe next time write: “Jesus would be so happy with this law.”
I don’t know what I will had done if a guy told me he was in love with me hahaha the communists viewed Homosexuality as moral filth Sarajevo does now have gay bars but no same-sex marriages.