The rising sun of Japan isn’t creating any rainbows, as a judge in one of the nation’s district courts just ruled gay marriage unconstitutional, finding that Article 24 of Japan’s Constitution does not confer protections on gay marriage, as marriage is meant for producing and raising children.
Thus the Osaka district court ruled against the three same-sex couples and their claim for damages.
Article 24 of the Japanese Constitution provides, for reference, that:
Marriage shall be based only on the mutual consent of both sexes and it shall be maintained through mutual cooperation with the equal rights of husband and wife as a basis.
With regard to choice of spouse, property rights, inheritance, choice of domicile, divorce and other matters pertaining to marriage and the family, laws shall be enacted from the standpoint of individual dignity and the essential equality of the sexes.
Explaining the decision on Twitter, a leftist account, though saying it was ready to “burst with rage”, did a reasonably good job of explaining the decision in a thread, first saying:
Yesterday’s court ruling was from the Osaka district court. And the statement from the ruling judge is so full of shit, I’m about to [f***ing] burst with rage.
The first point explained by the account is that the court found gay marriage is contrary to the purpose of marriage, which is reproduction, saying:
1. Osaka district court sided with the argument from the country of Japan which said that the “purpose of marriage was reproduction” & agreed with the definition that “marriage is a relationship between a man & a woman to bear children and raise them together in cohabitation.”
Furthermore, the Osaka court stated that the marriage system is system that exists based on the “””pragmatic purpose””” of “””the society protecting men and women to bear children and raise them”””
The second main point the account brought attention to was that the judge found the partnership system was good enough, as it mostly erased legal disadvantages and thus marriage didn’t need to be reworked for the purpose of legal equality, saying:
2. Osaka district court argued, “With partnership system spreading [in Japan], the differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals are becoming eased” and “in regards to legal disadvantages, those things can be taken care of by leaving a will and so on.”
The leftie account was predictably upset about that aspect of the ruling too and strenuously disagreed with it.
Thirdly and finally, the court ruled that the issue should be left to the legislature and that the democratic government handling it would be better, saying:
3. Osaka district court also argued same-sex marriage ban is constitutional because “the discussion of whether to change the current marriage system” or “to create a new system” etc are “still being discussed.”
3A. Osaka district court added that “The true dissolution of discrimination and prejudice” will be actualized by creating a system based on “free, democratic discussion by the majority.”
So Japan has shown cultural strength where America would not, refusing to bow down to the radical demands of woke activists.