Romania forced to legalize same-sex civil unions by Europe’s top human rights court aka "Democracy"

[Cybele]

Think about Moldova and Transnitria.

Romania would directly get involved in the Rep. of Moldova+ Transnistria+ Russia affair, if we would talk about a Romanian-Moldovan unification.
Otherwise, with the current borders that we have, Moldova & Transnistria are not directly connected to Romania. Moldova does not want to give up on Transnistria, because is de jure its territory. Transnistria wants to be independent or join Russia. The unification of Romania and Rep. of Moldova under these conditions, would pose a question mark.
Personally, I have no issue with the independent Moldovan state to remain as it is, if that is what the Moldovan people wish (meaning no unification with us).

If you enter the Russian sphere again, Moscow is going to IMPOSE things on you that are much more difficult to accept than PROPOSING absurd options such as eating bugs.

My question is, how would Romania enter into the Russian sphere of influence and what are these things Moscow will impose? In the past Romania became a satellite of the Soviet Union, that happen after the Soviet troops occupied the country and after 1956 the de-satellization commenced. While still a communist country, Romania had times when did as it wished. For example when four Warsaw Pact countries (including USSR) invaded Czechoslovakia, Ro refused to take part in the invasion. Do you believe nowadays, Russia would try to attack or occupy us, to transform us into its satellite like in the USSR times, if we weren't a NATO member?
Regarding the insect consumption, digital identity and so on, these are promoted in Russia too from what I’ve heard and read, but maybe not so much as in West. This shows there it’s not a clear demarcation between West/Russia, when it comes to these sort of things.
Soon enough the absurd options, being just “proposed” by the EU for now, might start to be imposed on its citizens.

But if you are part of the 20% minority that does not support the EU or NATO and want to be part of the sphere of influence of Russia, we are going to enter the usual loop of discussions with all the typical arsenal of dizzying and nonsensical rhetoric proposed by Russian propaganda, so I desist from continuing with the topic.

This assumption is incorrect. I don’t want Romania to be under the sphere of influence of Russia (if by that we understand: Russia to have political, economic or military exclusivity on these lands ). I believe everyone should mind their own business.
I see this type of discourse, with some people in Romania too. If one does not support NATO, one must be automatically a “Putinist”. Surely, some people who are not for NATO might support Putin, but these two are not mutually exclusive. Not being part of NATO, does not mean we have to immediately look in other places, to “take orders” from someone else. As if, we can’t have a mind of our own. We are a country with resources, we can produce and live well enough. I don’t discourage the idea of trade be it with Russia, the West, etc. though.

Yeah, you are very slav, traditional values, you don´t want to eat bugs, gays, jews, Soros, Bill Gates, reptilians, Vietnam, Kosovo, colonialism in Africa, Ortodox, West imposing rules, vodka&rakia, blue eyed&light haired Europeans forever, inmigration, Irak, anti-Russian people, the war was provoked by the west, etc...

I don’t know. Is the bolded part directed at me specifically, or you are talking in general? I don’t see myself as a Slav. Many Romanians might have some Slavic DNA in varying degrees, but it’s natural to have it, given the geographical position of the country.
The rest, looks like rambling.

West=evil and Russia=good, ok.

I’m not saying things are as simple as that.
Do you have the opposite bias?

[Cybele]

Cybele will be fine with all that, as long as she doesn't see dried grasshoppers in a supermarket (I never saw them, all that disappeared years ago) and that there isn't a multicolored flag hanging from her town hall a few days a year.

I've explained how I see the Moldova, Transnistria, Russia and Romania situation. What that has to do with grasshoppers and multicolored flags, I don't know.

[Mejgusu]

…

Again, you won’t find such rates among Romanians. The rise of people who identify as Lgbt is often criticized even by some liberals/leftist and described as ridiculous which is especially a phenomenon among woke groups. So such statistics cannot be taken seriously. I am talking about real homosexuals who knew they are liking their own sex since they were children and not about a girl from Brown university who thinks she has 5 genders. People regardless of their sexuality have the right to have a partnership, they should have the right to marry each other.

EU clarifies that they are a community of values, before you join them you should understand that some values should be tolerated. I don’t support everything, quite the contrary I often criticize EU too. But some of you think, countries like Romania experience downfall after joining EU. Most nations of East/SE-Europe would be still a third world country without the benefits of being a part of the EU. When I was in Bulgaria for the first time I was traumatized, I never saw such poverty and misery. Now people are praising Bulgaria, I never was in Romania but I am sure they have a similar case.

[Tommie]

It has already been proven that homosexuality is not genetic. So it can only be environmental/cultural, and it's obvious that since it is present far more in progressive circles it is mostly due to cultural influence or pressure.

It has been proved that there's not one single "gay gene", but multiple genes that correlate with homosexuality, so yes, homosexuality is genetic as well. And environmental factors include the mother's womb during pregnancy, the idea that environmental factors are just cultural or social is absolutely false.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full...8.2020.1818541

Research on the causes of human sexual orientation has been marshaled in support of predetermined and opposing theological viewpoints. Whilst acknowledging that there is still much that is not known, the peer reviewed scientific literature clearly shows that a combination of genetic and environmental factors contribute to sexual orientation, with approximately one third of variance currently attributed to the former. Much of the known environmental influence appears to be intra-uterine and there is no currently convincing evidence that social environment plays a significant part.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1719534115

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aat7693

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10....29100616637616

Multiple genes have been found to play a role in sexual orientation. Scientists caution that many people misconstrue the meanings of genetic and environmental.Environmental influence does not automatically imply that the social environment influences or contributes to the development of sexual orientation. Hypotheses for the impact of the post-natal social environment on sexual orientation are weak, especially for males. There is, however, a vast non-social environment that is non-genetic yet still biological, such as prenatal development, that likely helps shape sexual orientation.

Homosexuality is not a choice. And of course it's far more "present" in progressive circles because there they don't fear being disowned, discriminated, attacked, or possibly even killed for being gay.

[Cybele]

Update:
The Romanian government has contested the ECHR ruling, which condemned Romania's refusal to recognize some juridical form of gay partnership. Most probably this appeal will postpone the 2nd definitive condemnation by the ECHR.
https://www.stiripesurse.ro/ultima-o...x_3042803.html

[Scar95]

It has been proved that there's not one single "gay gene", but multiple genes that correlate with homosexuality, so yes, homosexuality is genetic as well. And environmental factors include the mother's womb during pregnancy, the idea that environmental factors are just cultural or social is absolutely false.


Homosexuality is not a choice. And of course it's far more "present" in progressive circles because there they don't fear being disowned, discriminated, attacked, or possibly even killed for being gay.

Bullshit.

There's no homosexual gene per se, but you can have some genes which will influence your life in this direction.

Homosexuality isn't born, however, it's also not a choice, which makes no sense anyway( who chooses to like to suck a dick out of the sudden?)

Homosexuality is more present in progressive circles because in those circles sexuality is more open and this has an affect on young children, before the age of puberty. A quick google will show you studies that concluded that adopted children being raised in homosexual families have higher chance of becoming homosexual themselves. Which is logical for the same reason why children raised by abusive, beating, alcoholic etc.. parents have a much higher chance of becoming serial killer themselves or abused children of becoming pedophiles themselves(or at the very least homosexuals).

There is zero difference between a homosexual, a pedophile or a serial killer. All of these are abnormalities resulted by more or less traumatic life events during early childhood.

The event itself doesn't even have to be traumatic -> it's enough for a child to be encouraged in this direction, perhaps being told that he looks more like a girl or behaves like one.

So no, neither God nor nature meant for you to become a homoseuxal, blame your early childhood influences for being gay, instead of searching for some illogical gene argument to prove that you were meant to become gay

[ugochaves]

Bullshit.

There's no homosexual gene per se, but you can have some genes which will influence your life in this direction.

Homosexuality isn't born, however, it's also not a choice, which makes no sense anyway( who chooses to like to suck a dick out of the sudden?)

Homosexuality is more present in progressive circles because in those circles sexuality is more open and this has an affect on young children, before the age of puberty. A quick google will show you studies that concluded that adopted children being raised in homosexual families have higher chance of becoming homosexual themselves. Which is logical for the same reason why children raised by abusive, beating, alcoholic etc.. parents have a much higher chance of becoming serial killer themselves or abused children of becoming pedophiles themselves(or at the very least homosexuals).

There is zero difference between a homosexual, a pedophile or a serial killer. All of these are abnormalities resulted by more or less traumatic life events during early childhood.

The event itself doesn't even have to be traumatic -> it's enough for a child to be encouraged in this direction, perhaps being told that he looks more like a girl or behaves like one.

So no, neither God nor nature meant for you to become a homoseuxal, blame your early childhood influences for being gay, instead of searching for some illogical gene argument to prove that you were meant to become gay

Not only childhood traumas lead to homosexuality, but also 1) the inability to copulate with women in some conservative societies or prisons. 2) Too careless and dissolute life, in which a person has tried a lot of women and different sex with them. These are, for example, numerous stars of show business.