Israeli President Backs Marriage Equality

President Shimon Peres of Israel doesn’t have much power (that rests with Prime Minister Benjamin Netenyahu) but it’s still newsworthy that he endorsed the legalization and recognition of same-sex marriage in an interview with Ynetnews.

President Shimon Peres expressed unequivocal support for same-sex marriage during a state visit to Mexico.

In an interview with Ynet on Sunday while in Mexico’s Guadalajara, Peres said that “even a person who is a homosexual is a human being, and he has rights. We have no power to take away (their) rights.”

Peres added: “We cannot take away someone’s rights because they are different. We cannot take away their right to breathe, right to eat or right to start a family. We must allow everyone to live as is natural to them.”

Peres’ comments came in response to a new bill being promoted by the Justice Ministry called ‘Living together’ which attempts to regulate some form of a civil partnership between same-sex couples. The government is not scheduled to vote on the bill any time soon, but a memorandum signed by Justice Minister Tzipi Livni in its favor is being circled around.

So now God is going to judge Israel and send earthquakes and plagues of locusts, right?

"Build a 50 ft high fence, someone will build a 51 ft ladder. Then all ..."

More Trump Lies About Immigration
"Chump is a cruel, wanna-be king."

More Trump Lies About Immigration
"Birther King says what now? Hoping and praying that not many people follow Corsi. He’s ..."

Corsi: The New Replacement Q Anon ..."
"You have to understand that he has this strawman that he has to keep building ..."

More Trump Lies About Immigration

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Hatchetfish

    If Israel ever actually gets it, the fundy christian zionist meltdowns should be spectacular.

  • Silentbob

    even a person who is a homosexual is a human being,…

    Call me a nitpicker, but that could have been expressed better.

    … and he has rights


  • While this is a good thing, the Palestinians still don’t have any human rights. Even those “guaranteed” by the UN charter are denied to them.

  • iangould

    “Call me a nitpicker, but that could have been expressed better.”

    Call me a nitpicker but since the interview was given to a Hebrew language news outlet, your complaint should probably be directed to the translator not Peres.

  • colnago80

    Re the Vancouver vampire @ #3

    And gays not only don’t have any rights in the West Bank, they are subject to execution in the Gaza Strip. There are a number of gay men who are refugees from the Gaza Strip who are hiding out in Israel, protected by the GLBT organizations there.

  • Hatchetfish, I think you misunderstand the right wing christianist support for Israel. They don’t support Israel out of any kind of affinity or solidarity. They support Israel because in order for there to be a second coming of Christ, AKA the end of the world, Israel has to be a functioning society, according to Biblical interpretation.

    And that same Biblical interpretation tells them that this Armageddon predicted in the Bible will start in the middle east and Israel will be destroyed in that war. So in fact, the christianists don’t support Israel to help it along in their struggles. They support Israel because it is part of the davine plan that leads to its destruction.

    So gay marriage in Israel would simply validate to them just how much Israel needs to be destroyed. But that that destruction is predicated on its survival in the short term. Thus the support. And sending them billions in arms is part of that plan. And supporting right wing governments there is also part of that plan.

  • … and make no mistake about it, Israeli governments know exactly whats going on here as they laugh all the way to the bank. And make use of the state of the art weapons we send them.

  • coragyps

    Plagues of gay locusts, at that.

  • Michael Heath

    markmckee writes:

    . . . right wing christianist support for Israel. They don’t support Israel out of any kind of affinity or solidarity. They support Israel because in order for there to be a second coming of Christ, AKA the end of the world, Israel has to be a functioning society, according to Biblical interpretation.

    It’s more than that, and has to be since U.S. conservative Christians were once very antipathetic towards all Jews where their end-days beliefs have changed little since the early-1900s. What I see is a similar migration of alliance with Zionists similar to how they’re increasingly embracing Catholics and Mormons. Politics has trumped dogma and has for decades.

    The first and most obvious reason, though other reasons predate this one, is their mutual antipathy towards Muslims. Israel remains a predominant Muslim opponent in its geographical area (as do some tyrannies led by Muslims such as in Saudi Arabia* or Egypt). So as conservative Christians increase their hatred of Muslims, their support for Israel rises. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

    It’s increasingly convenient for today’s conservative Christians to embrace Zionism in order to falsely claim we’re a Christian nation based primarily on so-called Judeo-Christian principles. So as conservative Christians increase their commitment to a false American history, they increase their commitment to their imagined belief of a Judeo-Christian legacy. Bill O’Reilly makes a lot of dough off his propagation of this, as do others.

    In addition conservative Christians have a sort of cognitive dissonance between themselves and liberalism. On the one hand they claim liberalism is a failed political ideology, on the other they claim to embrace the liberal ideas of the founders and liberal democracy when it’s convenient. E.g.:

    1) Bush and Cheney’s constant neocon-friendly rhetoric** about installing a liberal democracy in Iraq or,

    2) that protection of property rights and gun rights is justified even in the face of majorities who lobby for increased suppression of those rights in order to defend the rights of others.

    They don’t typically use the ‘L’ word to voice their support of liberal democracy, the Cheney/Bush example where they did refer to liberal democracy as their standard-bearer form of government is an outlier, and it also contradicts conservative Christians claimed support for conservative democracy when they sensed they were about to have a permanent majority. “Conservative democracy” as expressed by conservative Christians in the early-2000s was really a desire for a theocratic fascist state, a type of tyranny of the majority. Tony Perkins was a heavy expositor during this period 10 years ago.

    This underlying premise of liberalism even within conservative Christianity is important to understand them. It’s what fuels them to make arguments from authority when a PHd holder makes arguments friendly to their cause, e.g., Michael Behe on creationism, Jerome Corsi defaming Misters Kerry and Obama, the TV weatherman denying the fact of global warming and its cause. Here they want to demonstrate that they too care about facts and are merely going down the path of objective truth rather than following dogmatic “truth”.

    It’s also what fuels conservative Christians to points towards their tolerance of the “other” in some cases. Here that would be their embrace of Zionist Jews, which has them posing as people now comfortable with religious protection for non-Christians – including (in their mind) Catholics, Mormons and Jews.

    How liberal of them, and in spite of the fact such tolerance and liberalism doesn’t extend towards Muslims in spite of their sharing the same Abrahamic god when expressing what they describe as ceremonial deism. This shared god was predominately conceded with Jews in the public square in order to maintain their contrived pose as supportive of Judeo-Christian philosophy, i.e., not religion as Bill O’Reilly likes to falsely promote.

    However I observe this argument decreasing now that they’re increasingly confronted with the fact this framing of their god requires conceding that this god is the same god worshipped by Muslims, which they’re adverse to do. So now they’re even more liberal since they align themselves with Jews in spite of Jews worshipping Satan just like Muslims worship Satan or the monkey god. How liberal of them.

    Principled consistency has never been a hallmark of conservative Christians, where hypocrisy and determined ignorance is instead. That’s why the behavior I note here is jumble of incoherent inconsistencies.

    *This sounds contradictory but it’s not. A reading regarding the history of al Qaeda explains how Muslim people are getting royally screwed by tribes like the House of Saud.

    **This is not to assert that President Bush was or is a neo-con, he isn’t. I doubt he understands their thinking any more than he knew the difference between Shiites and Sunnis prior to his invasion of Iraq. Instead neo-con arguments were convenient given they correlated with his goals and justifications in Iraq.

  • laurentweppe

    So now God is going to judge Israel and send earthquakes and plagues of locusts, right?

    When the corruption of the upper-class, the deliberate sabotage of public services by the local right-wing and the intellectual elite leaving the country eventually lead the state of Israel to collapsing under its own weight, you can bet your balls that the bigots will point Peres finding his backbone long after his political career ended as the reason of Israel’s demise.

  • matty1

    Where are the Assyrians/ Bablylonians/ romans etc when you need them eh?

  • John Pieret

    So now God is going to judge Israel and send earthquakes and plagues of locusts, right?

    They will, indeed, expect the “judgment of God” on Israel for this … but they have been, as others have pointed out, expecting that for a long time in the form of the “End Times” anyway. While there will be many head explosions, there will also be secret satisfaction that the mantle of “God’s chosen people” will have been officially passed to the “exceptional” American True Believers™.

  • colnago80

    Re the frog @ #10

    A message for the frog.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    But at least Peres still agrees with Pam Geller et al. about massacre of Muslims, so this can be forgiven.