BREAKING: French Parliament Takes First Step Toward Approving Same-Sex Marriage

paris_protest_11It looks like the battle raging over same-sex marriage in France is headed for a favorable end: This morning the French National Assembly approved the first article of a bill that would allow gay marriage by a 249 to 97 vote.

Judging by the standing ovation that followed, we assume it won’t be long before French President François Hollande officially signs the new bill into law.

An overwhelming majority of the French Parliament approved Article 1 of the bill, which defines marriage as “an agreement between two people,” rather than between a man and a woman.

Although a majority of the French public supports marriage equality, debate covering additional amendments to the bill (more than 5,000!) is expected to last several weeks. They’re moving quickly, though: an amendment proposing an “opt-out” clause has already been killed, thus requiring all French mayors, by law, to conduct gay marriages.

Hopefully it won’t be long before France becomes the 12th country in the world to embrace marriage equality. It would be lovely if it happened in time for Valentine’s Day, non?

Watch the historic vote confirmed in the video below:

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #europe #france #gaymarriage stories and more


  • Shanestud

    France’s Lady Liberty must be smiling today in New York’s harbour. I hope SCOTUS has taken notice.

  • niles

    Oui oui!

  • kvitka

    Without an access to surrogacy for gays this is not equality. And adoption is not for everyone. People want their own children for variety of reasons. Of course those, who feel that it is enough for them to adopt, can do it.

  • kayakriver

    @kvitka: calm down, it will happen.

  • Dionte

    Congratulations to the French.

  • L Streeter


    No matter who loves whom, no matter who marries whom, and no matter what consenting adults do in private—everyone else’s lives will just go chugging along as they always have, completely unchallenged and undisturbed.

    This is exactly how the repeal of DADT played out in the military. After 16+ years of fear and loathing, since the repeal of DADT there have been virtually NO changes, NO issues, and NO problems whatsoever! The military has been functioning as it always has. Proof positive that LGBT equality changes nothing and hurts no one!

    There is no question that those who denigrate and persecute LGBT American (and world) citizens are a rapidly dwindling minority, and each day LGBT American citizens reach another milestone in their quest for the equality. So keep the faith my LGBT brothers and sisters, the Constitution supports our equality and . . . WE TOO SHALL OVERCOME!!!


  • L Streeter

    It is not “gay marriage” or “same-sex marriage” it is MARRIAGE EQUALITY!

    Freedom and equality for ALL Americans were declared in 1776 and clearly mandated by the Constitution in 1787. There is no provision in the Constitution for second class citizens. That glorious document does not say, “Equal rights for everyone except homosexuals.” Therefore, in the eyes* of the Constitution, American heterosexuals and American homosexuals are equal.

    (* For the literacy impaired, “eyes” is a metaphor.)

    Despite the unchristian, unconstitutional and unconscionable war being waged against LGBT Americans by the WACOs (White American Christian Oppressors) and the GOP (Gays’ Odious Persecutors)—each day LGBT American citizens reach another milestone in their quest to access all of their equal rights which have already been ordained by the Constitution.

    Fifty years ago homosexuality was never mentioned, other than as a derogatory or in a joke. Back then the police raided ‘gay’ bars frequently and, even if they made no arrests, they’d drag a few of the more effeminate patrons out back for a beating … sometimes rape.

    Then there was Stonewall—the beginning of the homosexuals’ equal rights movement. By the 1992 presidential campaign homosexuals in the military was at the forefront of national debate. And, although it would take another 19 years … homosexuals can now serve openly in the military. That should be a message to those who oppose equality for LGBT citizens … we’re in this for the long haul. We are tenacious and, thanks to the Constitution, we will ultimately prevail on every single point of equality.

    In the 2004 campaign, marriage equality was the hot topic! Fifteen years ago support for marriage equality was at 27%, yet today 53% favour marriage equality and that number increases every day. On 1 January 2013 marriage equality became the law in three more states, adding Maine, Maryland and Washington to the already enlightened states of Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont—for a total of 9 states plus Washington DC, as well as the Coquille Indian Tribe in Oregon. More states are on the verge of adopting marriage equality as well.

    These days, the LGBT crusade for equality continues to be front-page news in the mainstream press worldwide. In 2011 the United Nations endorsed the rights of LGBT people for the first time in its history, expressing “grave concern” about abuses of LGBT people and commissioning a global report on LGBT discrimination. Later the UK announced that it would limit aid to Commonwealth countries that did not honour LGBT equality. While in America, 73% of the population now supports legislation to combat LGBT discrimination in the workplace.

    Clearly the barriers of bigotry, hatred and ignorance are being chipped away, and there is no question that those who denigrate and persecute LGBT American and world citizens are a rapidly dwindling minority. It is only a matter of time before LGBT American citizens obtain access to all of their equal rights which were ordained by the Constitution 226 years ago … the equality that all other Americans enjoy!


    So keep the faith my LGBT brothers and sisters, we are winning this!

    The Constitution demands our equality and … WE TOO SHALL OVERCOME!!!

  • The Real Mike in Asheville

    @L Streeter: Nice thoughts, but hardly tempered with reality.

    Example: the Declaration of Independence is as hypocritical as it is grand: no where does it say “[F]reedom and equality for ALL Americans….” It says the “…all men are created equal…” And the definition of “men” did not include women, did not include slaves (owned by more signers of the DOI than not), did not include native Americans.

    As for the “glorious” Constitution, well that placed into law the hypocrisy of the DOI: slaves were Constitutionally chattel, native Americans were Constitutionally 3/5 of a white man, and women, not mentioned anywhere.

    As for your 50 years-ago comment, again, while the sentiment is not untrue, you miss the history of much of the gay movement: Mattachine was founded in 1948; Walt Whitman published Leaves of Grass in 1855: had they and many many others not started the fight for equality, we would be that far behind where we are today.

  • alexoloughlin

    Well done, France. Next stop, London on tuesday where the first vote takes place there, expected to pass. Huge message to send to the world, two of the five permanent members of the UN. Huge for Europe too. NOM won’t be happy campers. They’ll skew it every which way. I can just hear the nonsense coming out of Brian Brown’s mouth. He’d better get a refill for his antidepressants (maximum dosage) and plenty of kleenex to dry those tears.

  • Ken

    @ The Real Mike in Asheville

    In the Declaration of Independence, the word “men” did not mean individuals, it mean nationalities. It didn’t even include all male adults. In the constitution, to vote in a presidential election, you had to qualify to vote for the lower house of your state legislature, and except in New Jersey, that meant you had to be a landowner. All those rules about slaves and native Americans (I think you got the details wrong) came in later amendments or laws.

    In figuring a state’s population for the purpose of representation in Congress, a slave (not a Native American) counted 5/8 (not 3/5) of a free man (some blacks were free). This was not originally in the Constitution. It was a later compromise between those who wanted to decrease the power of slave states by reducing their representation in Congress by not including in their population the people who were unable to contribute to the political process, and those who wanted the slaves states to keep a larger presence in Congress by counting people would could not.

  • Ken

    Incidentally, Germany has been making incremental progress by gradually changing the Eingeschriebene Lebenspartnerschaft until it is marriage in all but name (but does not include the ability to adopt). This isn’t really because of resistance to gay marriage in Germany. It is an unintended side effect of the wording of the constitution. The Nazis controlled internal communications, in the end, by breaking up families and sending family members all over the place. The constitution addressed Nazi abuses by guaranteeing (among a lot of other things) the freedom to move around in the country, the freedom to leave the country, the freedom to be a conscientious objector, and the integrity of the family.The wording that protects the family talks about husbands, wives, and children, making “marriage” a difficult word to use. However, civil and religious marriage are separate in Germany. Everyone has to go to a public office to be legally married before having a church wedding. Gay people can do the first part, and that’s all that counts for legal purposes. Note that the foreign minister and the mayor of Berlin are both openly gay.

    That’s why we don’t hear much about gay marriage in Germany.

  • Ken

    Gay history: Magnus Hirschfeld led a gay rights movement in Germany that was mercilessly put down by the Nazis, and the FBI raided a gay newspaper in Chicago in the 1930s. Gay history goes back as far as all lhistory does.

  • L Streeter

    @The Real Mike in Asheville: [1st] My apologies to “The Real Mike in Asheville” and any others that may have been offended by my shoddy, inaccurate and thoughtless commentary on the progress of LGBT equality; I sincerely regret that my contribution did not live up to your surprisingly rigid and rigorous standards. In my defence, however, that having been my first posting on Queerty, I was not aware that reader comments would be subjected to such a doctrinaire and pedantic editorial review board.

    [2nd] That said, it was not my intention to do an in-depth dissertation on the history of world homosexuality since the beginning of time—had it been so, I would have started with the first recorded incident of ‘gay-bashing’ dating back to the 8th century BC, or at the very least the first known record of a homosexual partnership, which was that of an Egyptian male couple who lived circa 2400 BC. Had I done so, it would have filled a few volumes … not 3000 characters or less.

    [3nd] With all due respect to Mattachine, Walt Whitman and ever so many others, it is generally accepted that the Stonewall Riots of 1969 (44 years ago) were the genesis of the ‘gay’ rights movement of today, and the reason that Gay Pride Parades are held in June. My piece was based on that defendable premise, as well as my own experiences from when I first started going to ‘gay’ bars 50 years ago.

    [4th] The second sentence of The Declaration of Independence says, “We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are CREATED EQUAL, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Now you may debate the meaning of the word “men” as much as you like, there is no shortage of people willing to “interpret” the meaning of the Declaration, the Constitution and the Bible to their own ends … but there is no question that the above referenced “men” is referring to human beings. Ergo, the Declaration undeniably declares “EQUALITY” for all.

    [5th] In closing, please rest assured “The Real Mike in Asheville” that I will not be sullying myself within the pages of Queerty again. Although I am more than willing to engage in constructive debate with just about anyone on just about any topic … there is no room in my life for discourse with catty, condescending and overbearing egotists. And even if there is only one of you on Queerty, that’s one too many for me. Have a great day.

Comments are closed.