In 2011, the Federal Supreme Court determined that a stable union between a same-sex couple constituted a family entity. Returning to the present, the Chamber Committee discusses a bill that determines to veto same-sex civil marriage.
The topic has been the scene of heated discussions in the brazilian parliament, where twenty deputies are divided into two groups. Opponents, a large part of the evangelical bench, are fighting for the proposal to be maintained and to include in practice the excerpt “under constitutional terms, no relationship between people of the same sex can be equated to marriage or a family entity”.
The rapporteur, Pastor Eurico (PL-PE), states that the Constitution determines stable unions only between couples consisting of a man and a woman. Furthermore, he spoke about how same-sex marriage would be “against the truth of human beings”.
“No less important, marriage is understood as a pact that arises from the conjugal relationship, and which, therefore, cannot be interfered with by public authorities, since marriage between people of the same sex is contrary to the truth of the human being. What is presupposed here is that the word “marriage” represents an objective and timeless reality, which has procreation as its starting point and purpose, which excludes union between people of the same sex”, he wrote.
For deputy Erika Hilton (PSOL-SP), the project is unconstitutional, as in addition to hurting a group of minoritized people, it also violates the Brazilian constitution. Erika states that the discussion is the vanguard of the regression, since the speeches given in parliament are in conflict with the violence practiced at the base of society against the LGBTQIA + community.
Community and civil rights
According to article 5th of the 1988 Constitution, everyone is equal against the law, without distinction of any kind, guaranteeing Brazilians, and foreigners residing in the country, the inviolability of the right to life, freedom, equality, security and property. In this way, the project goes against constitutionality and has discrimination as its principle.
It is important to mention that civil marriage brings couples certain benefits, such as: the right to heritage, inclusion in the health plan, community of assets and the composition of income for financing.
Representative Laura Carneiro (PSD-RJ) declares that the project is based on religious principles, thus not aiming for equality. “Nevertheless, there are those who insist that changes to the rules relating to civil marriage – and even stable unions – would be offensive to religious rites and rules, which is not true”, she highlighted.
The deputy also states that parliament was created to guarantee rights and not to take them away.
Deferment
After several discussions, the vote on the proposal was postponed twice. The project rapporteur asked for more time to analyze the text after a session lasting more than eight hours without any consensus.
The project continues to be debated and so far the deputies have not reached any agreement between themselves on the topic.
————————————–
The article above was edited by Rafaella Angelotti Alcici.
Liked this type of content? Check Her Campus for more!