ListNook

LittleSchwein1234 May 5, 2026 +219

Is Council approval still required? Hopefully it passes.

219

Samski877 May 5, 2026 +115

It goes to the commission now to hopefully ratify it

115

LittleSchwein1234 May 5, 2026 +86

Yeah, hopefully it gets ratified. I'm still disgusted tho that gay marriage is still illegal in many EU countries.

86

TemporarySun314 May 5, 2026 +81

I mean you can go to a member state that offers to gay marriage, get married there, and every other EU member state has to accept that marriage. Having gay marriages across the whole EU would be better, but it's better than nothing.

81

LittleSchwein1234 May 5, 2026 +48

It's recognised only to a limited extent, but it doesn't confer the same rights as marriage, at least not in Slovakia.

48

Odd_Comment_6171 May 6, 2026 +2

Same in Hungary…

2

Bodiax May 5, 2026 +46

Unfortunately polish Civil Registry Offices refuse to register such marriages despite administrative court rulings mandating it. They argue that they don’t have fitting document templates because current ones have gendered columns in the table… and the government refuses to issue new templates because they say the constitution prohibits it (actually it does not)

46

BogiMen May 6, 2026 -36

(edit: in Poland) Just go for a civil partnership, don't blow things out of proportion. The differences are negligible in daily life, except for adoption rights and international recognition.

-36

ThingWithFeatherss May 6, 2026 +32

*The differences are negligible in daily life.* Are they though? *Except for adoption rights* See the problem? I'm not even queer. but it’s f****** disgusting how we will bend over backwards to allow homophobia to continue to exist. If adoption rights are threatened by not having a right to marriage, let alone all the other things that I don’t know about, then it’s not a negligible difference. Lots of queer families want and deserve to be parents. Even if it were negligible, there are still people— including queer people— who care about marriage as a concept. If they do, they deserve to be able to get married and be recognised for that.

32

Ivanow May 6, 2026 -12

> Lots of queer families want and deserve to be parents. Counterpoint: Do you have any idea how bullied a kid with "two dads" would be in Polish schools? It would be nice if people stopped being so selfish and recognized that what they "want and deserve" means sentencing other human being to at least 12 years of suffering. Whole concept of single-sex partnerships is relatively fresh in Poland, and it would be more prudent to not "rock the boat" and let society as a whole become more familiar with is, and see that "sky hasn't fallen"...

-12

Bodiax May 6, 2026 +12

There are already thousands of queer families in Poland. They’re just not recognized or protected by law. I worked with a lady who raises her daughter with her female partner.

12

DocPsychosis May 6, 2026 +11

"It's ok for the government to be anti-queer because most of society is also anti-queer". This is the defense of this sort of behavior? Not particularly compelling.

11

Ivanow May 6, 2026 -3

This is not a defense of anything. This is accurate description of what such adopted kid might experience. Recognition of same-sex partnerships in Poland is on shaky grounds already - there is a pushback from largely conservative parts of country. We've been with similar situation before regarding abortion. For few decades, there was a kind of compromise that neither side was particularly happy with (as good compromises tend to be). Then a bunch of mostly Western activists started making noise, and we ended up with "national pregnancies registry"... Sometimes, when you win in c*****, the best play is to pick up your chips, and cash out, rather than double-down...

-3

doublebaconator May 6, 2026 +12

Why aren't Polish people punishing the bullies instead of the victims? What kind of degenerate, bigoted trash infests Poland?

12

doublebaconator May 6, 2026 +6

Look up "separate but equal" doctrine in US history. "Equal" is just a lie to justify singling people out for abuse to appease degenerate bigoted trash.

6

Bodiax May 6, 2026 +3

Civil partnership is not even available in Poland

3

[deleted] May 6, 2026 +1

[deleted]

1

Bodiax May 6, 2026 +3

What do you mean? No such thing as civil partnership is recognized in Poland. Could you narrow down what should I google?

3

[deleted] May 6, 2026 +9

[deleted]

9

TemporarySun314 May 6, 2026 +9

The ECJ says otherwise: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jakub_Cupriak-Trojan_and_Mateusz_Trojan_v_Wojewoda_Mazowiecki "A decision of the European Court of Justice, which ruled that a same-sex marriage performed in one member state of the European Union must be recognized in all member states of the European Union."

9

TheMaskedTom May 6, 2026 +5

"Have to" does mot mean that they de facto do, only that they are in breach of their obligations if they don't. Which is the case in a few from what I gather in other comments.

5

Samski877 May 5, 2026 +173

Just to add a bit of context here, this is about the EU moving toward a possible bloc-wide ban on conversion practices. These are methods aimed at trying to change or suppress someone’s sexual orientation or gender identity, and they’ve been widely criticised by medical and psychological organisations as harmful. A number of EU countries already have their own bans in place, but the idea here is to make it consistent across all member states. It’s still in the discussion / legislative stage though, so nothing is law EU-wide yet, more of a step in that direction following pressure from several countries and advocacy groups.

173

Individual-Report May 5, 2026 +48

Thanks for the context. Sounds like a practice that belongs in a scientologist's basement, not in a civilized society.

48

Drunkmast May 6, 2026 +11

Are there any places where they still practice conversion therapy in Europe?

11

Meinersnitzel May 5, 2026 -39

How does this work when European countries such as Sweden have severely restricted the use of puberty blockers for use in underage individuals? Is refusing to give a teenager hormones of the opposite sex, a form of conversion therapy? Edit: I’m genuinely confused about why this was downvoted fairly heavily. How is this question controversial? Edit 2: It was the Swedes

-39

LurkerInSpace May 5, 2026 +26

They base that regulation on the argument that there is not sufficient evidence for the safety of puberty blockers as used to delay normal (rather than precocious) puberty, rather than claiming that the ban is a means to dissuade transition.

26

AuroraFinem May 6, 2026 +20

Is that actively taking steps to coerce or torture someone into rejecting their identity? Then no. Unfortunately, negligent medical practices don’t automatically fall under conversion therapy.

20

[deleted] May 5, 2026 +2

[deleted]

2

Meinersnitzel May 5, 2026

It mentions gender identity in the link on the page: https://citizens-initiative.europa.eu/initiatives/details/2024/000001_en

0

Own-Weather-9919 May 5, 2026

On it's own? No, I don't think so. It's just government mandated medical neglect. What governments tend to do to defend themselves from this accusation is coupling the denial of puberty blockers with "gender exploratory therapy." In spite of it's euphemistic name, that torture aims to make their victims embrace their AGAB. That's conversion torture.

0

Pigeon_Breeze May 5, 2026 +8

You're using Daily Mail-style language, which is making me wonder if you're trying to be sarcastic or otherwise discrediting what you're saying literally.

8

Own-Weather-9919 May 5, 2026 -9

Sorry about not being fair and balanced enough on my explanation about conversion torture for your taste. All those self described therapists want to do is make sure kids grow up cis and straight or die. Does that clear things up for you sweetie?

-9

CWRules May 6, 2026 +14

Please stop being an a****** while defending a position I agree with. You're not helping.

14

Brief_Hospital_1766 May 5, 2026 +97

Oh man, I can't wait for the MAGAts to tell us how wrong we are for doing this.

97

noir_lord May 5, 2026 +63

*shrugs* They can go back to enacting Gilead and f*** all the way off.

63

SilverLakeSpeedster May 5, 2026 -39

I'm not sure the US is an Islamic nation...

-39

TheMaskedTom May 6, 2026 +17

In the unlikely case that you don't know, the Gilead they are referring to is the one from *The Handmaid's Tale*, where the US becomes a Christian theocracy.

17

Brief_Hospital_1766 May 6, 2026 +5

>*"...where the US becomes a Christian theocracy."* Emm...we need to talk.

5

wrincewind May 6, 2026 +5

Even more of one.

5

SilverLakeSpeedster May 6, 2026 -9

You mean the book that seems to be a heavy criticism of Islam?

-9

[deleted] May 6, 2026 +1

[removed]

1

porizj May 5, 2026 +32

The EU doesn’t even give its people the freedom to psychologically torture their children!

32

pomcomic May 6, 2026 +13

If they tell us we're wrong it's a pretty good indicator that we're on the right track

13

Zefyris May 5, 2026 +5

Not sure they'll really notice, being busy with their war and oil price rising and all

5

SilverLakeSpeedster May 5, 2026 -18

It's your country. You do what you want with it.

-18

Frozen_Thorn May 5, 2026 +40

Another EU win. Keep fighting the good fight.

40

Striking-Donut8491 May 6, 2026 +11

I used to pray for times like this

11

mental_monkey May 5, 2026 +20

Good! Heinous stuff like that needs to be banned.

20

Hiimpedro May 6, 2026 +10

Another W for european democracy

10

calamititties May 5, 2026 +24

Can someone ELI5 how the EU seems to consistently make progress on modern issues with such a diverse set of member states while the US has two parties and they can’t do literally anything but f*** things up and enrich themselves?

24

mikewhocheeitch May 6, 2026 +12

This move *will* be unpopular among eastern EU states, as there are some where majority of population oppose any form of same sex relationship recognition. They like getting EU funds though so they'll take it.

12

KryptosFR May 6, 2026 +10

Because bipartism prevents debate. It's always "us against them".

10

Origamipi May 5, 2026 +52

Christofascism and rich people

52

MexicanEssay May 5, 2026 +25

The *Citizens United* Supreme Court decision basically handed over control over the entire US political system to the ultra rich. Who, surprise surprise, immediately used that power to get even richer and bulletproof their privileged position while blocking any change or progress that may threaten it. The two parties are not the same, but they both are unable to defy these people, so nothing of value to society ever gets done if the ultra rich don't want it to happen.

25

Somepotato May 6, 2026 +2

I'm baffled that the rich propaganda machine hasn't gone full bore with the UK yet which is basically under a parliamentary dictatorship

2

TheMaskedTom May 6, 2026 +2

I mean, what do you think Brexit was?

2

suvlub May 6, 2026 +5

USA's 2-party system is messed up. One party says A, the other says B, just because. This makes it unreasonably hard to pass common-sense widely supported policies. IMO the most tragic and egregious case of this are the climate change policies. The majority of republican voters believe in climate change and see it as a threat, according to polls, but you wouldn't tell from following the US politics. A bigger majority of democrats support green policies, so it became the "democrat stance" and the republican party HAS TO take the opposte stance. It got that way because of the weird voting system that made sense at the time when it was adopted, but is pretty much obsolete. Instead of just counting votes and adding them up, they count votes per district and then count the number of districts where each party/candidate won. This makes it impossible for smaller parties to function.

5

GeneralErica May 6, 2026 -5

Well in an ideal world, democracy functions best in a 2 party system. Regrettably, we dont live in an ideal world. Even the paradigm of old, where both parties would at least keep each other in check, has faded in the Trump Era, and now, one side is openly fascist and genocidal and the other is incapable of realising the immense threat they face, completely spoilt by preceding years of relative peace. The Democrats - in addition to being barely better than standard Republicans on policy and thus far from being progressive - are now openly collaborationist and enablers of the Dictatorship. Democracy cannot function like that, and it doesnt. Calling the US a democracy at this point is… folly.

-5

suvlub May 6, 2026 +6

>Well in an ideal world, democracy functions best in a 2 party system Why do you think so? I strongly disagree. What if I like some policies of one party, and some of the other? Who do I vote? It's impossible for me to be democratically represented in such a system. I think in ideal world, democracy would work best with a humongous number of parties, such that everyone can find one that reflects their particular combinations of views extremely closely, and then all the representants would vote on each individual issue in a way that is a representative sample of how the population at large would have voted. Of course, in real world, we run into problems like every party needing at least enough votes to round up to 1 whole MP, and it would be kind of clusterfuck, but hey, we were discussing ideal world.

6

GeneralErica May 6, 2026

What youre arguing for here is, essentially, late-stage Weimar. Good point though because it allows me pretty well to explain why I said what I said. Theres two parts to democracy. One if the ability to vote for your beliefs. The other is having that voice be heard. In parliamentary democracies, to get anything done you need Majorities. The more individual opinions are recognized individually, that is to say the more parties there are, the more fragmented the entire thing becomes. If you imagine a pie, say you want as much of it as possible, but you need to unite every piece under a shared goal. One piece - thats easy. Two pieces - more difficult, you’ll most likely arrive at a stalemate (this doesnt factor in dissent in actual politics which can tip the scales). …if every person got their way, for the US, the cake would fragment into 162 Million slices. Even if we reduce that by 162 times, try to fit 1 Million pieces together, it is impossible. So then what do you have - a system where everyone can vote on their ideas and no vote is ever heard because youre stuck in a perpetual, messy gridlock. This is what brought Weimar to its knees. Instead, what you want is a system that is both capable of ruling, of governing (with one party leading) and a strong opposition that can stop the government if needed to oversee a more-or-less balanced body of legislators. This is obviously a feeble system. Democracy is weak. It’s a good system (the worst best that we have, Churchill is said to have said), but it needs to be defended both from outside influence and from itself (Fascists need to be barred from democratic elections. This is highly undemocratic in principle but the system will falter otherwise).

0

suvlub May 6, 2026 +3

I'm not quite sure what point you are trying to make when I concluded my own comment by pointing out the practical issues. Why are you trying to compare an idealized sunshine-and-unicorns version of one system to a realistic version of another? Seems absolutely pointless. The realistic version of the two-party system is what we currently see in America. It's not a hypothetically-perfect system corrupted by unrelated issues. It's a flawed system suffering from its own flaws. A false choice system where the entire discourse is dominated by handful of high-profile (not to be conflated with high importance) policy issues while the voters are robbed of choice on everything else is an inevitability of a two-party system in my view. If you want a real opposition, you need an opposition with real fear of being voted into irrelevancy. Without that, democracy has no teeth and you will see exactly what you are seeing.

3

3050_mjondalen May 6, 2026 +2

Well yes, but that is also why parliamentary democracies work, you need to make concessions and cooperate. And you smooth out/water down the crazy part, which is always a good thing

2

doublebaconator May 6, 2026 +1

Democracy functions best in a ranked choice system without political parties and strong campaign financing laws to protect the common person from being out shouted by the rich.

1

GreenHorror4252 May 5, 2026 +12

I think it comes down to campaign finance rules. In the US, anyone can donate as much money as they want to a politician's campaign, meaning that politicians only work for the wealthy. In the EU, this is much more limited, meaning that politicians who respond to the needs of voters don't risk losing an election.

12

3050_mjondalen May 6, 2026 +1

Because the us have always been the "Iran of the west" so to speak. Deep rooted religious believes and because the right exploits that. Look up "Powell memo from 1971" which marks the start sort of for where the us is today

1

jupiterkansas 1 day ago +1

It's simple. Republicans in the U.S. have abandoned democracy for demagoguery.

1

986754321 May 6, 2026 -14

One of those USA parties is more progressive on these things than Europe

-14

GeneralErica May 6, 2026 +2

Oh really, which one?

2

986754321 May 6, 2026 -1

One that legalized gay marriage before a lot of European countries despite the opposition from the other side. Also the one that's not suddenly against transgenders (and has been better on this issue for years than Europeans). I don't know if you're queer yourself, but as one I'd appreciate you leaving your "both sides same" agenda to economic/foreign policy discussions at least.

-1

50mmprophet May 6, 2026 +4

Gay marriage was legalized in US in 2015. A huge chunk of Europe already did it by then. Your idea of “progressive party” is why Americans have and deserve Trump.

4

986754321 May 6, 2026 +1

Earlier than Germany and Finland. Italy still doesn't have it. It was also harder to force that on red states federally due to American political system. And I'm not American so that's not the reason lmao. Also a lot of big European countries will have their own Trumps soon, they've just been getting saved by superior political system but the populace is more alike than you'd think.

1

GeneralErica May 6, 2026 +2

Germany had the precursor to gay marriage (which was basically identical apart from the name) since 2001. Try again.

2

986754321 May 6, 2026 +1

I'm reading about it and they didn't have adoption rights, and economic benefits were only gradually increasing but not reaching levels of marriage into the 2010s. You try again.

1

Machinencio May 6, 2026 +10

***Looks like common sense is back in the menu boys.***

10

Sensitive-Lab3032 May 6, 2026 +4

It's time Canada did the same! This shit amount to torture.

4

BearlyDraconic01 May 6, 2026 +6

We banned it years ago with unanimous consent in the house. https://globalnews.ca/news/8417651/conversion-therapy-ban-bill-house-of-commons/

6

Foreveralone84 May 6, 2026 +2

The church will find a way to continue operating it.

2

ZaphodG May 6, 2026 +2

I had to read the article carefully to understand whether conversion therapy was mind control or gender change operations & hormone injections. I’m near Boston. I’d have to drive 500 miles to West Virginia or Ohio before I encountered a state that didn’t ban it.

2

Darklight731 6 days ago +1

Are there states where it wasn\`t banned?

1

ddollarsign May 6, 2026

How does EU law work? Is this law binding on member states? If so, in what sense are they still separate countries?

0

Rhoderick May 6, 2026 +2

In terms of what's popularly called 'EU laws', there's a few types we need to differentiate. The Commission, Council, and Parliament can, following the legislative procedures and within EU competences as laid out in the treaty, create Regulations as well as Directives. Regulations apply immediately, both on the EU level and in the states. Regulations instead create a requirement on each member state to pass a law that fulfills certain goals within a given timeframe. >If so, in what sense are they still separate countries? The EU does carry most of the markers of a federation (compare USA, Germany). Really, with common resources being established, the main marker of statehood that it's missing is perception. People just don't think of it as a state. (There is also the fact that it's founded on a treaty, rather than a constitution in its own right. This should certainly be remedied, but it's not typically considered a requirement to statehood.)

2

britbongTheGreat May 6, 2026 +1

> Really, with common resources being established, the main marker of statehood that it's missing is perception This is not true. The Montevideo Convention defines what is a sovereign state under international law and the EU does not pass this. The tests are: > The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states. The EU is missing sovereignty - each citizen is still a citizen of their respective country and its territory is comprised of its member states' territory. It also does not have the power to directly tax or maintain a standing army. It is a supranational collection of states, not a state in its own right.

1

rintzscar May 6, 2026 +1

How does google work?

1

ddollarsign May 6, 2026

I could go into the basics of HTTP, crawling, indexing, databases, and so forth if you actually want to know..

0

rintzscar May 6, 2026 -2

How does autism work?

-2

[deleted] May 5, 2026 -15

[removed]

-15

Minister_xD May 5, 2026 +16

If you're gonna be a bigot, at the very least have the balls to do it openly. Don't come here with this "teehee I'm just asking an innocent question :3" bullshit. The way you phrased that question and the immediate follow up comparison make it increadibly obvious that you know exactly what you are talking about here. You are not asking a question. You made a statement disguised as a question so you can feign ignorance when it, predictably, backfires on you.

16

OkTimeTraveller1337 May 6, 2026 -22

I am not a bigot.

-22

bluesam3 May 6, 2026 +8

So why do you keep saying bigoted things?

8

Origamipi May 5, 2026 +26

Conversion therapy is an abusive process where "doctors" psychologically manipulate children to try to convince them that being gay or trans is a mental illness and that they are horrible people because of it. Spoiler: it never works and only causes unnecessary trauma

26

zaborgmonarch May 5, 2026 +17

It's when people like you beat, electrocute, and r*** them into being straight and cisgender

17

OkTimeTraveller1337 May 5, 2026 -28

What you mean people like me?

-28

AlyssaAlGaib May 5, 2026 +19

Bigots

19

Limis_ May 5, 2026 -3

I thoght exactly the same

-3

Acrobatic_Net9501 May 6, 2026 -3

For a second I thought this was the other way around where schools and universities are flooded by sex change conversion "treatments" for kids, but sadly this is the opposite change.

-3

Agreeable-Race8818 May 6, 2026 -16

I hope they approve reverse conversion therapy to create more gays. We need more people on our team 🙏

-16

LC1903 May 6, 2026 -20

I was being stupid and thought it was referring to transition therapy. At the end of the day, what matters is freedom, and I definitely support the cause. Although, to have the controversial discussion, should conversion therapy be allowed if it’s the person’s own choice to undergo it? (in a moral, not practical sense). And, what’s the fundamental difference between converting and transitioning?

-20

Smart_Ass_Dave May 6, 2026 +4

Even when the person undergoing it consents, conversion therapy is at best quackery. You can't pray the gay away and you sure as shit can't beat it out of a person, even if they are willing.

4

morgrimmoon 6 days ago +1

In this case, the ban comes because of two overlapping reasons: the first being that it causes measurable harms in almost all cases, and the second being that it flat out does not work. Many things in medicine can be permitted if they have a benefit, even if that comes with side effects. Many pseudo-medicines can be tolerated if they just waste money. The intersection is when stuff gets banned. Effectively, banning "conversion therapy" falls under a similar bracket to banning "drinking bleach to cure autism"; scammers aren't allowed to actively hurt people.

1

[deleted] May 5, 2026 -2

[deleted]

-2

FedBySheep May 5, 2026 +23

What are you on about? This does not oppose people changing gender at all. Maybe learn about a topic before commenting on it.

23

CloudySpace May 6, 2026 -11

Sorry, we got russia breathing down our neck and we got eu funds going where?

-11

Benshito May 6, 2026 +7

how is this taking ressources from the military?

7

CloudySpace May 6, 2026 -6

Well, its going there, not here, so? Im sorry im a little confused about your question. Are you serious even?

-6

GeneralErica May 6, 2026 +3

The same Russia that can’t even conquer and hold a part of a fraction of Ukraine as Moscow quivers in fear? Pff.

3

CloudySpace May 6, 2026 -3

Pretty big mistake to underestimate your enemy like that. But im happy youre feeling safe living your luxury life far away from the eastern flank. Your prioritisation of how buttery your lobster is in face of mordor betrays a gap in historical education and misalligned priorities.

-3

GeneralErica May 6, 2026 +3

Generally, yes. Here, no. Russia is done. they pose no threat apart from their Nuclear arsenal, which they wont use unless 1) Putin Cawks it and Dead Hand gets activated or 2) someone pressures them to. This Russia fearmongering has got to stop, we are facing unprecedented crises domestically and all we do is fund the military because of some vague threat.

3

Manach_Irish May 5, 2026 -67

Given that this sort of ban is being used as a potential means to prosectute tradtional religious clerics elsewhere in Europe (eg Iceland) I'm sure the leftists will likewise weaponise this against the churches.

-67

Lonely-Management452 May 5, 2026 +36

The mainstream conservative bloc voted in favour of this but okay, blame everything on leftists.

36

spice_weasel May 5, 2026 +39

If those clerics are practicing conversion therapy, they yes, it should be used against them. Religion isn’t a free pass to torture people.

39

Katyusha_454 May 5, 2026 +31

I sure hope they do.

31

przemo_li May 6, 2026 +6

Conversion therapy is something like putting car battery to someone's private business. As a normal person you may then think that as such extreme cases usually go, that small % and majority of cases look more normal, like psychologist in a studio. However, no psychologist does conversion therapy. That's because by all nervous available to psychology, there is nothing that can be ethnically done. And unethical methods just harm to suppress, rather then introducing meaningful changes. So crazy people with car batteries aren't alone and torture-to-suppress method is all too common.

6

EU Parliament votes in favour of banning conversion therapy across member states

💬 Send a Message

112 Comments