The final legislative session of the year concluded last Friday, and many Taiwanese are deeply disappointed that the legislature failed again to amend the Civil Code for marriage equality. In fact, the legislature never put the proposal on the agenda for review.
The proposal was made in 2013 by Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators Cheng Li-chiun (鄭麗君), Yu Mei-nu (尤美女), Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴), Lin Shu-fen (林淑芬), Tuan Yi-kang (段宜康) and Chen Chi-mai (陳其邁) and cosigned by another 16 legislators. But the draft bill had been consistently blocked after passing its first reading.
The Act Governing the Legislature’s Exercise of Power (立法院職權行使法) states that the draft bill would become invalid automatically if it did not pass a second and third reading during the last session. In other words, the efforts of the country’s lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community in recent years have been in vain, as they will have to restart the whole process.
Photo: Lee Jung-ping, Taipei Times
Despite the disappointment, Taipei Watcher would like to applaud the 22 lawmakers who proposed and cosigned the draft bill, and the handful of lawmakers supporting it directly or indirectly. Meanwhile, since the presidential and legislative elections are only three weeks away, it is time to take a look at where the major presidential candidates stand on the issue.
WHAT THEY’VE SAID
For the two major parties’ presidential hopefuls, DPP candidate Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is in support of the LGBT community. On the eve of the 13th Taiwan LGBT Pride Parade (台灣同志遊行) on Oct. 31, Tsai released a video on her Facebook page supporting same-sex marriage.
Photo: Liao Chen-huei, Taipei Times
“All are equal before love, so I support marriage equality. Everyone should be allowed to pursue love and happiness freely,” Tsai said in the video. Her national campaign headquarters in Taipei was also illuminated in rainbow colors to endorse the gay parade. Still, she has yet to propose any concrete LGBT policy.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate Eric Chu (朱立倫) said that the public should respect LGBT people and try to understand the issue during an interview with online news outlet ETtoday (東森新聞雲) on Oct. 20.
When asked to comment on marriage equality, Chu said that Taiwan should handle it with a rational and open attitude, but he argued that pressure on the government to address the issue mostly comes from the public’s comparison of Taiwan and the US, where same-sex marriage was legalized in June this year. He added that the push for same-sex marriage is time consuming, and that the issue has not been discussed in society until quite recently.
But in fact, the country’s LGBT rights movement was launched three decades ago in 1986 when the court rejected gay rights pioneer Chi Chia-wei’s (祁家威) marriage to his same-sex partner, and the issue has been in discussion since. In late October, an online poll conducted by the Ministry of Justice showed that 71 percent of Taiwanese supported same-sex marriage. Is Chu completely unaware of these facts, or is he choosing to ignore them?
Chu is also serving as New Taipei City’s mayor. Despite his claim of a rational and open approach, New Taipei City and Tainan are the only two municipalities banning same-sex couples from registering at household registration offices as quasi-married couples or participating in public mass weddings. If the mayors of Taipei, Taoyuan, Taichung and Kaohsiung can do it, why can’t he?
A FAKE RESPECT
Just like Chu, some officials and politicians claim that they “respect, but don’t support” (尊重，但不支持) LGBT rights, pretending to be “neutral” on the issue through their inaction. Such a claim reminds me of the powerful statement by Nobel Peace Prize laureate Elie Wiesel, “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.”
It is hoped that all the candidates, including Tsai and Chu, can learn from Wiesel’s inspiring message to humanity. And more importantly, let’s cast our votes cautiously next month so we can build a fairer and more equal country.
The Nuremberg trials have inspired filmmakers before, from Stanley Kramer’s 1961 drama to the 2000 television miniseries with Alec Baldwin and Brian Cox. But for the latest take, Nuremberg, writer-director James Vanderbilt focuses on a lesser-known figure: The US Army psychiatrist Douglas Kelley, who after the war was assigned to supervise and evaluate captured Nazi leaders to ensure they were fit for trial (and also keep them alive). But his is a name that had been largely forgotten: He wasn’t even a character in the miniseries. Kelley, portrayed in the film by Rami Malek, was an ambitious sort who saw in
It’s always a pleasure to see something one has long advocated slowly become reality. The late August visit of a delegation to the Philippines led by Deputy Minister of Agriculture Huang Chao-ching (黃昭欽), Chair of Chinese International Economic Cooperation Association Joseph Lyu (呂桔誠) and US-Taiwan Business Council vice president, Lotta Danielsson, was yet another example of how the two nations are drawing closer together. The security threat from the People’s Republic of China (PRC), along with their complementary economies, is finally fostering growth in ties. Interestingly, officials from both sides often refer to a shared Austronesian heritage when arguing for
Among the Nazis who were prosecuted during the Nuremberg trials in 1945 and 1946 was Hitler’s second-in-command, Hermann Goring. Less widely known, though, is the involvement of the US psychiatrist Douglas Kelley, who spent more than 80 hours interviewing and assessing Goring and 21 other Nazi officials prior to the trials. As described in Jack El-Hai’s 2013 book The Nazi and the Psychiatrist, Kelley was charmed by Goring but also haunted by his own conclusion that the Nazis’ atrocities were not specific to that time and place or to those people: they could in fact happen anywhere. He was ultimately
Even after years in business, weekend tables here can be booked out a month in advance. The price point far exceeds its competitors. Granted, expectations are soaringly high, but something here failed to hit the high notes. There are a few telltale signs that a restaurant relies solely on outstanding food to create the experience, no gimmicks or distractions needed. La Mole is such a restaurant. The atmosphere is food-forward, with an open kitchen center stage. Our tables are simple; no candles, no dim lighting, no ambient music. The menu is brief, and our waiter directs most
RSS