The issue you mentioned highlights a common debate regarding the role of the legislature versus the judiciary in matters of social change and individual rights. Different countries have varying approaches to this question, and it often depends on the specific legal and political context of each nation.
In some countries, such as the United States, courts have played a significant role in advancing LGBTQIA+ rights through judicial interpretation of constitutional principles. In landmark cases like Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriage bans were unconstitutional, effectively legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide. This decision was seen as a recognition of the fundamental right to marriage equality.
In other countries, the legislative branch has taken the lead in enacting laws to protect LGBTQIA+ rights and legalize same-sex marriage. For example, countries like Canada and several European nations have implemented marriage equality through legislation passed by their respective parliaments.
The specific approach to the legal recognition of same-sex marriage and LGBTQIA+ rights can vary based on the legal and political traditions of each country. It is not uncommon for governments to advocate for matters of social change to be discussed and decided within the legislative branch, arguing that it is the appropriate forum for such debates. However, it is also important to acknowledge that governments may face criticism for stonewalling or delaying discussions on these issues, as you mentioned.
Ultimately, the question of whether sexuality and LGBTQIA+ rights should be addressed by the legislature or the judiciary is a complex and multifaceted one. It often involves considerations of constitutional rights, public opinion, political will, and societal progress. Different countries will approach this issue in different ways, and it can be a subject of ongoing debate and legal battles within each jurisdiction.