Hysteria about monosexual couples. Window for Media

Politicians of the right-wing opposition do not believe that specified a solution is possible. The judgement of the CJEU treats as interference in Polish law, sovereignty, the Constitution of Poland and all another freedoms as real and imaginary. For respective days on many tv channels, talking heads discussed single-sex marriages in the context of the TEU judgment. "We do not want the law to be introduced into our country by the back door. A arrogant Polish nation will not let this," the MP thundered.

The subject has become so hot that, erstwhile the Prime Minister opened a gathering of the government, to calm down, I believe, not to open the discussion, he has ensured that the TEU is incapable to impose anything on us and does not intend to. Commissioner for civilian Rights Marcin Wiązek answered briefly what to do with the judgement of the Court of Justice of the European Union – it must be done. Radosław Fogiel is of the other opinion. In the “Gozdyra Debata” with the stubbornness of a better case, he argued, shouted for 10 minutes, without letting others conclude that the judgement of the TEU was an effort to impose a law incompatible with Polish jurisprudence. It was impossible for a associate to explain that the intention of the ruling was to transcribe single-sex marriages concluded outside Poland. Agnieszka Gozdyr, who was leading the debate, tried unsuccessfully to direct the discussions on the consequences of the TEU ruling. Mr Fogiel was so relentless that he accused the leading incompetence and deficiency of logic. To say that he acted rudely towards the leading female is not to say anything. I admired the serenity of Agnieszka Gozdyra, possibly not a stoic one, but a worthy writer with a class that a specified arrogant individual is incapable to disbalance. I had the impression, and I guess I was not the only one, that the nonsubjective of the "culturally" aggressive MEP Fogel was not to have a meaningful conversation, but to effort to discredit the leading, possibly injury and as a consequence of bringing the debate to the level of magla or idle mouth. It didn't work.

TV debates are trendy. According to the research, the ratings of this kind of tv broadcast are increasing. However, the viewer does not always receive content and image at the appropriate level. Fights in front of the cameras, shouting the participants, origin the audience to hear sound and gibberish. After a fewer minutes of specified bustle, utilizing the pilot, they choose another program, e.g. "Millionaires". You can't blame publishers, realists or tv journalists for not being able to see the debate. These are MPs, politicians, little frequently senators, who cannot keep their dignity during its duration. How frequently specified conduct reveals a deficiency of material preparation for a meaningful conversation. I have the impression that any participants in tv debates, apart from the force on glass and transmission, and the formulas programmed by the "central" have small more to say.

The debate is governed by certain laws. The basis is clashes of parties to arguments, not fights or attacks ad personamAs frequently happens. Above all, culture and respect apply to all parties in the debate.