prohibiting gay marriage unjustified - federal brief to canadian supreme court

[jenny]

http://www.365gay.com/newscon04/04/040104canCourt.htm

[End of my rope]

I say, let them get married! It's not my cup of tea, but it's their life. Bush shouldn't use the bible to justify his predjudice. It's ignorant and narrowminded. I'm not saying it's right, and I'm not saying it's wrong. I'm saying it isn't the government's place to control that much of our lives. They need to stick to the budget and the war for Iraqi freedom (a.k.a. the war for Iraqi oil). Leave the gays alone and let them get married if they want!

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by End of my rope

Bush shouldn't use the bible to justify his predjudice.

*his interpretation of an english translation of certain books governing the regulations for maintaining ritual hebrew cleanliness

[TazmaGurl]

This is a very sensitive subject as many people have such extreme beleifs.

 

I just thought I would get my word in, "Marriage" should be about love, a bond to last for life through good times and bad. I think that if two people, be they different/same in skin color, gender, religion or age can fall in love, they should then be allowed to get married.

 

I don't beleive that children grow up "more proper" in hetrosexual marriage environments. By not allowing gay/lesbian marriages we are continuing to bring up the next generation with a closed mind.

 

Like it or not, Women can and will continue to fall in love with women. Men can and will continue to fall in love with men. Instead of tearing their world apart with doubts that only the closed minded/religious people share, why not let them have their love and let them share the same life that a hetrosexual couple could?

 

No one terrorizes our right to love.

 

Tazmagurl

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by TazmaGurl

I just thought I would get my word in, "Marriage" should be about love, a bond to last for life through good times and bad.

Love, lifelong commitment, and a willingness to work through hard times are NOT prerequisites for marriage in this country. From the standpoint of the state, all you have to do is sign a paper, and you're given civil rights.

 

ANY adult, unmarried male and ANY adult, unmarried female can marry for ANY reason and ANY duration of time.

 

The only reason we don't allow homosexuals to do it is because we're perfectly fine limiting the civil rights of people who are in a situation that we'll never have to deal with ourselves, the same mentality behind allowing slavery and the enfrachisement of only males.

[Darkangelism]

Originally posted by End of my rope

I say, let them get married! It's not my cup of tea, but it's their life. Bush shouldn't use the bible to justify his predjudice. It's ignorant and narrowminded. I'm not saying it's right, and I'm not saying it's wrong. I'm saying it isn't the government's place to control that much of our lives. They need to stick to the budget and the war for Iraqi freedom (a.k.a. the war for Iraqi oil). Leave the gays alone and let them get married if they want!

 

 

There are a lot more legal ramifications then oh they love each other so they can get married. Rremember democrts want big government. iraqi war was not for oil.

[TazmaGurl]

Like I said, a sensitive topic, I got my word in and won't continue with it.

^_~

 

 

Tazmagurl

[dyermaker]

Originally posted by Darkangelism

There are a lot more legal ramifications then oh they love each other so they can get married. Rremember democrts want big government. iraqi war was not for oil.

*yawn*

 

DA, we already ~have~ a thread for your unqualified political opinions. Your analysis of the Iraqi war is subjective, but your definition of a Democrat is just not true. There's a difference between Social Services and Big Government, especially in the one-sided way in which you convey it.

 

Anyway, most importantly, please don't sidetrack the gay marriage thread, I'm way more excited to read about Gay marriage than anything else you had in mind

[Clancy]

Hello to everyone,

 

As I think you already know Jenny, I'm very much opposed to gay "marriage." I don't want to go into a rant here (although on re-drafting I realize I have) so I'll try not to although if there is one political issue in play today it is this one that most likely would send me into a rant.

 

What pisses me off to a freakin' royal extent is that gays could help themselves to all of the benefits of marriage by simply embracing civil unions as they are offered the Quebec model, a model that is a very popular choice among straight couples in Quebec. The fact that gay activists typically reject the offering of the full legal status of civil unions to me, clearly shows threat they have ulterior motives for wanting to have gay marriage legalized.

 

Take some time to read what gay activists have stated publicly over the past three decades concerning their desire to work towards the complete destruction of of the institution of marriage. If you cannot find this info on your own let me know and I'll be happy to do find my sources again.

 

Gay activists like to cloud the issue for the mainstream population by whining about how gay couples, without the benefits of the term marriage, are deprived of their civil rights and suffer the cruelest kinds of legal discriminations, for example when one spouse dies and leaves the other open to financial ruin, exclusion from spousal rights etc. Why then, not accept Quebecois civil union model and reap all the benefits and get on with life. Instead they insist that they want the term marriage. Well, that's where my support for acceptance of gays stops. Dead.

 

Once again I'd also like to point out that the majority of Canadians, and Americans are opposed to gay marriage. Most do, in my understanding anyway, support the concept of gay civil unions.

 

In closing: Hurray for Stephen Harper (for you Americans, our conservative Prime Minister in waiting) and for George W. Bush (for you Canadians, a courageous President of the U.S. who clearly has balls but who does not feel compelled to show them to cute things in skirts at every opportunity.)

[Stone]

...... Marriage is between and should always be between a MAN and a Woman! Why blame that on Bush!

[zarathustra]

And the Brief is only 10 pages, too.

 

The Government must be very confident.

[wideawake]

Originally posted by Clancy

Take some time to read what gay activists have stated publicly over the past three decades concerning their desire to work towards the complete destruction of of the institution of marriage. If you cannot find this info on your own let me know and I'll be happy to do find my sources again.

 

I've been unable to find these sources. Please post links.

 

 

 

Gay activists like to cloud the issue for the mainstream population by whining about how gay couples, without the benefits of the term marriage, are deprived of their civil rights and suffer the cruelest kinds of legal discriminations, for example when one spouse dies and leaves the other open to financial ruin, exclusion from spousal rights etc. Why then, not accept Quebecois civil union model and reap all the benefits and get on with life. Instead they insist that they want the term marriage. Well, that's where my support for acceptance of gays stops. Dead.

 

Dude, why? What possible reason do you have for objecting to other people living thier lives the way they want, when it doesn't harm nor interfer with your own life?

 

I mean what's the big deal man?

 

So what if two people wish to consider themselves married? Does it really rock your world so much that you would think to impose your own (narrow views in my opinion) views upon others?

 

It's just a word for cryin' out loud. Live and let live? Do on to others?

 

Once again I'd also like to point out that the majority of Canadians, and Americans are opposed to gay marriage. Most do, in my understanding anyway, support the concept of gay civil unions.

 

Once again, post a credible source for this info.

[moimeme]

that the majority of Canadians, ....are opposed to gay marriage

 

Untrue.

[End of my rope]

Originally posted by stoneheather

...... Marriage is between and should always be between a MAN and a Woman! Why blame that on Bush!

 

Why? If they want the validation of being married why should it matter if they are of the same sex. Who's it going to hurt?

[Clancy]

I'll be happy to provide sources wideawake and also to prove you wrong, Moimeme (by the way hi to you and nice to hear your disagreeing with me once again).

 

Give me some time to do this though as right after I post this I'm going on a 4 day trip. I'll PM you both to let you know I've posted info on this. Bye all.

[wideawake]

Originally posted by Clancy

I'll be happy to provide sources wideawake and also to prove you wrong.

 

 

Assuming one can be 'right' or 'wrong' on morality based decisions isn't rational.

[Stone]

RE; END OF MY ROPE

 

WHO IS IT GOING TO HURT!!!!!

 

this is nuts! it is hurting the values of our country, the sanitity of marriage, it is hurting religion and tuning marriage in to a joke

 

I am gonig to marry my dog is that o.k., should that be leagel........I love my dog!( hey I love my brother to)

Jesus christ what the hell is wrong with this world ...

 

People we're created by adam and eve NOT Adam and STEVE!

[wideawake]

Originally posted by stoneheather

WHO IS IT GOING TO HURT!!!!!

 

this is nuts! it is hurting the values of our country, the sanitity of marriage, it is hurting religion and tuning marriage in to a joke

 

 

How will this effect your life specifically?

 

Two men get married in your home town. What's the net impact to your life?

[Arabess]

Originally posted by dyermaker

*yawn*

 

DA, we already ~have~ a thread for your unqualified political opinions.

 

I wasn't under the impression this thread belonged only to those who shared your opinion.

[Stone]

it impacts my life because it is wrong! What the hell happened to faimly values! our for fathers would be rolling in their graves!......why can't they just call it a "civil unity " and accept it!........

[moimeme]

Assuming one can be 'right' or 'wrong' on morality based decisions isn't rational.

 

Well, actually, morality IS all about what's 'right' or 'wrong'. However, what people don't understand is that the fact that they don't think something is right does not make that thing wrong. It merely means that it's one human's opinion.

 

To say that there is an objective 'right' or 'wrong' may not be rational, however philosophers have been debating exactly this for centuries. I don't agree with objectivist views of morality, myself.

[Darkangelism]

Originally posted by dyermaker

 

*yawn*

 

DA, we already ~have~ a thread for your unqualified political opinions.

 

 

And your's are?

[Stone]

Momieme, your right it's my opinion........ ( Right ot Wrong)and I am not posting or reading this post any more cause it just upsets me! Sorry if I offended anyone

[Arabess]

If I attended a church and didn't agree with the way they were teaching, I would simply find a church which DID line up with my personal interpretations or start my own church. I wouldn't try to push my way in and try to change the way these people believed.

 

I think ALL the mainstream churches are saying is that they believe a certain way and don't want someone else's values pushed on them.

 

Then there are the legal/political ramifications and the 'majority' vote wins. As long as the church/conservative vote remains the majority....the laws aren't going to change. The only way to combat it is to try to convince them their Bible is the wrong interpretation....forgetting their acceptance of that interpretation goes far beyond just reading words. It's also about their relationship with their God.

 

So, people can speak their mind, bring light to the issue and VOTE accordingly....but change the way the church believes??? I THINK NOT!

 

If homosexuals want to get married in a church.....they need to find a church who accepts it or start their own church.

[jenny]

Originally posted by stoneheather

 

I am gonig to marry my dog is that o.k., should that be leagel........I love my dog!( hey I love my brother to)

Jesus christ what the hell is wrong with this world ...

 

this is a slippery slope fallacy. further, it is a fallacious analogy, as your dog, presumably, cannot consent.

 

People we're created by adam and eve NOT Adam and STEVE!

 

this is a bumper-sticker, not an argument. learn the difference.

 

 

clancy! nice to see you back! i'm looking forward to your post, actually. it's pretty difficult to have intelligent debates about this topic, for some reason, so i appreciate the time and effort you are taking.