Jump to content

Libertarian Guard

Member
  • Posts

    2
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Libertarian Guard's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  • First Post
  • Conversation Starter
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In

Recent Badges

0

Reputation

  1. VI. DISTRIBUTION OF LEGISLATIVE POWERS And any Matter coming within any of the Classes of Subjects enumerated in this Section shall not be deemed to come within the Class of Matters of a local or private Nature comprised in the Enumeration of the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces. And marriage and divorce are listed. Right. The point I was making was the choice the parties are giving. Gotcha. It's just the way it is. Probably because it's none of the governments business.
  2. Hi, this is my first post. I apologize if I'm posting incorrectly. It's been a while since I've posted on a board with posting rules. Well, I've had a couple issues with the passing of the Federal gay marriage bill(or whatever it was called). My first issue was that it's not the federal governments job. It's the province's and/or municipal governments job. It just seems these days that the federal government thinks it can make laws on anything. My second issue was basically with the proposed options by the parties. We have parties proposing that two persons can get married. We have parties(or party) proposing that it remain as man and woman. I found this kind of sad. Why do two consenting persons have to ask the government permission to get married? I guess that's my biggest beef. I remember seeing Ralph Klein on tv right after the bill was passed and he said he was going to work to get marriage out of the provincial politics. Which I thought was the best idea I heard anyone say. I'm not sure if he's continuing to pursue this. Where does the mentality come from that makes people think that the government can impose such a thing on people? Someone that advocates putting two persons can get married into law, are proposing that someone else could change this to man and woman. Wouldn't the most logical thing to do would be seperation of marriage and state? I'm not sure if I'm doing this right. Is this the correct way to present myself to spark a discussion? My apologies if it isn't.
×
×
  • Create New...