Croatia: Sparks Fly As Referendum Bans Same Sex Marriage

Celebrations for Croatia's referendum on  constitutional definition of marriage  Photo: Aljazeera

Celebrations for Croatia’s referendum on
constitutional definition of marriage
Photo: Aljazeera

The issue of same sex marriage has been hot and deeply divisive throughout the world for quite some time. Some countries have managed to win the day, as it were, and declare same sex marriages legal. But all have had to deal with allowing social conscience on the issue to develop or to face itself in this war between traditional upbringing and modern demands of free society.  Some countries are still struggling to come to terms with the demands of modern society of freedoms, including gay marriages, and this does not make them bad countries nor rife with homophobia. All persons have a right to their beliefs and no person has the right to point a damning finger at anyone who has a different belief (unless, of course, a belief entails the right to commit crimes…).

While some of the world’s media, politicians, sociologists, academics…ordinary people may be (and some already are) tempted to portray Croatian people and its predominantly Roman Catholic church as homophobes because they just voted against same-sex marriage, many will pay humanly due note and thought and consideration similar to the contents of just-released Pilling Report (Church of England) in the UK, which in its recommendations on Page 150 says:

No one should be accused of homophobia solely for articulating traditional Christian teaching on same sex relationships.”

Regardless of anyone’s opinion on the issue of gay-marriage, a certain history was made in Croatia yesterday, on December 1, 2013. Referendum was held on the question: “Are you for the inclusion into the Constitution the provision that marriage is a union between a man and a woman?” Voters were to circle either “Yes” or “No”. The discussion on the referendum had bitterly divided Croatia, many pressure groups were formed on both sides of the debate, the government became a pressure group for “No” vote, the referendum was labelled as “fascism in action” by several journalists and public figures, threats were made to individuals who stood behind the referendum organising citizens’ group “In the name of the family” … a great deal of horrible name-calling and accusations happened, so horrible and utterly unjustified were some that I choose not to repeat them here.

In all this it is most important to keep in mind that Croatian society is still deeply divided when it comes to practicing or being formed by Christianity or religious teaching as multitudes of former communists hold high public positions or socially important jobs and they would be the last caste on earth to pause and consider non-judgmentally the mindset of those who are brought up to believe in Christian teaching that comes and came to them via the church. UK, or other countries where communism never ruled would not have that problem to the same degree even though many there are disbelievers or non-believers.

On Sunday 1 December, Croats voted overwhelmingly in favour of defining marriage in the constitution as a “union of a man and a woman”.  Almost 66% voted in favour of this and almost 34% against. The turnout was 37.84% of those eligible to vote in Croatia.

Such as weak turnout could mean that majority of Croatian voters are either not interested in the issue or are still examining their conscience regarding the matter, or both. But, the voter turnout for EU membership referendum in January 2012 was also relatively dismal and that did not stop Croatia from becoming EU member state – such is Croatia’s law on referendums (a handful of voters can turn up and the results are valid!).

So, this practically means that, for now, Croatian Constitution will be amended to ban gay marriage.

But, it also means that a convincing majority in Croatia is obviously not afraid of Sodom and Gomorrah, after all, despite the fact that they’ve been intimidated with it by the media, politicians and numerous opinion-makers for the “vote for” camp.

It also means that a convincing majority in Croatia are not “stuporous”, “human rights deniers”, “Nazis”, “Fascists” as the “vote against” aggressive camp, including government ministers, had labelled those who would vote for the change to the Constitution.

This pathetic mud-slinging, anger, portrayals of people continue as the referendum has well and truly closed.  Temperaments run high, sparks of defamation fly almost everywhere one looks. While president Ivo Josipovic reacted to the referendum result by articulating his hopes that they will not continue dividing the nation, in the same breath he states: “the results are very disappointing although not surprising!”

I do so wish Jopsipovic would keep his mouth closed on the issue since he evidently does not know how to mend divisions among people in sensitive and respect-all ways. When it comes to democratic voting nothing is disappointing to a nation, it is merely the picture of the sum of democratic, individual, thought.

In my previous post on the issue of this referendum I was most concerned about the government’s interference and pressure – such strategies can backfire terribly and I believe the government has done more damage than good here.

In fact the government’s interference had poured tonnes of fuel into what turned out to be campaign and opinion anarchy that often witnessed atrocious trampling on human rights (of both or either side) and human dignity.

Croats vote in referendum on marriage 1 December 2013   Photo: Stole Lasic

Croats vote in referendum on marriage
1 December 2013 Photo: Stole Lasic

It is done!

Voters who voted in the referendum are not representative in number of the Croatian nation by a fairly long stretch. Had the government and politicians steered out from pre-referendum public debates and hot-air, or at least not have been so hatefully oppressive, the likelihood is that voter turnout would have been much higher. And, gay right to marriage would not have been discriminated against, even if the apparent discrimination may not have been, or was not the focus for voting “Yes” or purposefully pursued. After all, this is the 21st Century and civil and democratic societies recognise and acknowledge the fact that we are all equal when it comes to access to fundamental social forms of life such as marriage is.

It is now the responsibility of the governing politics to sort out legally as soon as possible the rights of same-sex community that have been withheld from it, keeping in mind that the European Human Rights court and the Croatian Constitutional court protect its family life. Ina Vukic, Prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Syd)

Disclaimer, Terms and Conditions:

All content on “Croatia, the War, and the Future” blog is for informational purposes only. “Croatia, the War, and the Future” blog is not responsible for and expressly disclaims all liability for the interpretations and subsequent reactions of visitors or commenters either to this site or its associate Twitter account, @IVukic or its Facebook account. Comments on this website are the sole responsibility of their writers and the writer will take full responsibility, liability, and blame for any libel or litigation that results from something written in or as a direct result of something written in a comment. The nature of information provided on this website may be transitional and, therefore, accuracy, completeness, veracity, honesty, exactitude, factuality and politeness of comments are not guaranteed. This blog may contain hypertext links to other websites or webpages. “Croatia, the War, and the Future” does not control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness or completeness of information on any other website or webpage. We do not endorse or accept any responsibility for any views expressed or products or services offered on outside sites, or the organisations sponsoring those sites, or the safety of linking to those sites. Comment Policy: Everyone is welcome and encouraged to voice their opinion regardless of identity, politics, ideology, religion or agreement with the subject in posts or other commentators. Personal or other criticism is acceptable as long as it is justified by facts, arguments or discussions of key issues. Comments that include profanity, offensive language and insults will be moderated.
%d bloggers like this: