Thursday, February 08, 2007

Update: Coverage of Colombian gay rights victory

Intrepid International News Reporter Rex Wockner, who sometimes cringes at my run-on sentences, rushed translating jobs and barely emerging journalistic skills is concerned that I might have given the wrong impression or given a bit of misleading information in yesterday's blog post regarding a ruling in Colombia granting "patrimony" rights to same-sex couples.

So, as he pointed out to me earlier today: The Colombian Constitutional Court ruled only on the issue of patrimony (or property rights) and not on civil unions or marriage, activists asked the court for a "clarification" of the law (and did not sue the court) and the court did indeed clarify the issue in favor of Colombia Diversa's arguments and same-sex couples.

Personally, I thought that I had gotten most of the info right except for the "clarification" issue. I translated "demanda" as demand or law-suit when, in fact, there was no demand, just a petition to clarify the law.

Comments about the impact on civil union legislation did not mean to imply that the ruling meant that gay couples could enter into a civil union as a result of the court decision.

Anyhoo, the best English language article on the ruling so far is from the Associated Press which reports on the semi-positive (!) reaction from the church ("Colombian court gay couples' right to shared assets"). The worst? Not surprisingly from supposedly irreverent and gossipy NYC gay blog Queerty which I really truly wanna like but... ("Colombian Faggots Can Totally Share That Bag of Coke").

Pictured above? The team that challenged the Constitutional Court. If you think they are worth supporting, please contact Colombia Diversa and make a donation.


No comments: