“The governor (Esteban Villegas) was a student of mine in Durango and I think I did not do my job well, because it is coming out parboiled,” said Arturo Macías Pedroza, Vicar General of the Diocese of Gómez Palacio, in relation to the decree published by the State in favor of same-sex marriage.
It was last Sunday that a decree was published in the Official Gazette instructing the Civil Registry Offices to celebrate marriage acts without discrimination.
For the Vicar General, same-sex marriage has nothing to do with discrimination, in addition to the fact that he considered that the fact could have been due to pressure.
“Discrimination must be avoided, but an equal marriage has nothing to do with discrimination or human rights. Marriage as an institution must be protected by the state, because it is the one that produces children, responsible citizens and when the family is cared for, society is taken care of, everything is cheaper, critical situations are avoided, such as leaving schools, unemployment, drug addiction, violence… when families are well,” he said.
Macías said that unions of same-sex couples are very respectable.
“But you have to take care of the family institution as it is originally, and the others are very respectable unions and that you have to take care of and that you have to defend their rights like every citizen,” he insisted.
And he commented “it was the governor’s first act, I don’t know if due to pressure, I don’t know for what reason, because he had declared himself in favor of life and the family and now he came out with this ‘little surprise'”.
APPROVED BY MAJORITY
With 15 votes in favor, 9 against and zero abstentions, the modification to the Civil Code of the State of Durango was approved, which will allow same-sex marriage in the entity.
The approval reinforces the decree published by the State Government, in which the Civil Registry Offices are instructed to celebrate marriage acts without discrimination and without the need for any legal recourse for its origin, beyond the requirements established in the Civil Code.
Yesterday, the draft decree was approved by majority in which a second paragraph is added to article 141 and article 142 is repealed, both of the Civil Code of the State of Durango, to read as follows: Article 141. “Officials empowered by the law to celebrate marriage, guarantee non-discrimination based on ethnic or national origin, gender, disabilities, social status, health conditions, religion, opinions, sexual preferences or any other that violates human dignity and has for the purpose of annulling or undermining human rights.
And article 142 of the same Code is repealed. This one said: “Any condition contrary to the perpetuation of the species or to the mutual help that the spouses owe each other, will be taken as not set.”
Of the deputies who voted against, they were for the PAN: Alejandro Mojica Narvaez, Joel Corral, Fernando Rocha, Gerardo Galaviz, Silvia Patricia Jiménez Delgado and Verónica Pérez; while from the PRI, it was: Susy Torrecillas and Sughey Adriana Torres Rodríguez, as well as Mario Delgado from the Labor Party.
In her speech, the PAN deputy Verónica Pérez anticipated that the vote of the PAN caucus would be against, but always open to dialogue.
“Against this opinion and the openness to dialogue and consensus is maintained to achieve the common good…”.
While Luis Enrique Benítez, a PRI deputy, whose vote was divided, had urged his fellow caucuses to vote in favor of the ruling.
“We cannot be eternally postponing or ‘kicking the boat’, like the previous legislation that was omitted… Let’s vote in favor, it is solid, an argument…”, was part of the legislator’s speech.
While the Morena legislators celebrated such a decision.
In her previous speech, Deputy Marisol Carrillo lamented the legislative delays that the state still has.
“I am very sorry that Durango is one of the entities that has one of the legislative delays and that in the middle of 2022, its rights continue to be violated, since we are one of the last five states that resists giving it that progressive interpretation and pro person…”.