CanadianPatriot Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 I personally do not agree with homosexuality in general, nevermind same sex marriages. I want to know where everyone else stands on this issue and why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
udawg Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 Check some of the old threads, this issue has come up over and over again... pretty much everything that CAN be said, has been. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianPatriot Posted June 22, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 I´ve seen the other threads and I know gay rights have come up before, but it has been jumbled up and mixed in with other issues. I wanted to give the chance for people to have a specific thread open to the issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 Gay Marriage: old topic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanadianPatriot Posted June 22, 2004 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 My apologies. I didn´t take a close enough look at the page. Thanks for the link Black DOg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 22, 2004 Report Share Posted June 22, 2004 I personally do not agree with homosexuality in general, nevermind same sex marriages. I want to know where everyone else stands on this issue and why. Approve? I don't think it's my place to approve of what people do in the privacy of their own homes. I don't care what people do there. On the other hand, the gay "lobby" for want of a better term, is annoying, self righteous, and way too into victimhood given the group itself is probably one of the more advantaged and well-off in Canadian society. They seem intent on demanding societal "approval" for their lifestyle, which is impossible. People can treat them with respect, and generally do, but you can't legislate approval. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 As BD stated above, this has been debated in another thread. Well, we've got new posters so we either revive the old thread or start a new one. I don't think it's my place to approve of what people do in the privacy of their own homes. I don't care what people do there.Argus, do you think gays and lesbians should get survivor benefits in pension plans? Should they have to pay alimony in the case of a relationship breakdown? Should they be able to adopt children? Should they be mutually liable for debts? Have the right to co-sign on debt? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 As BD stated above, this has been debated in another thread. Well, we've got new posters so we either revive the old thread or start a new one.I don't think it's my place to approve of what people do in the privacy of their own homes. I don't care what people do there.Argus, do you think gays and lesbians should get survivor benefits in pension plans? Should they have to pay alimony in the case of a relationship breakdown? Should they be able to adopt children? Should they be mutually liable for debts? Have the right to co-sign on debt? Co-sign on debt? Debts have nothing to do with relationships And obviously, ones sexuality has nothing to do with what you owe, whether it's for a car payment or alimoni. I don't think gays should be adopting, at least, unless there's no other stable "normal" family left. It's my understanding there are hoardes of families which want to adopt, though. Statistics say that children are generally better off in a normal two parent (male-female) family. So that's where I'd put them. As for survivor's benefits. I have already given my opinion that survivor's pensions and benefits were designed with the traditional male working/female staying at home looking after the kids family. I don't think they should be generally available to any other couples, straight or gay, unless the same benefits were available to all other workers, to be extended to their loved one of choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hjalmar Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 ... Looks like the kids have been in here again!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
falling leaf Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 This is not one subject we can agree on its on the same level as abortion . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobocop Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 I for one wish they would give them what they want and we can lay this issue to rest. I don't understand why we would stop a church from allowing homosexuals to marry if they want. It does not negate anything I have with my own wife. If does not harm my family. Society may even be more tolerant to the 2% of the population as a result In closing, let's get on with it and deal with real issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noelandmero Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 I could care less if we have same sex marriages but consider this; currently our marriage laws are based on the judeo-christain faith. If we decide to scrap this, which I am fine with, what are we going to say to the next minority group that represents more than 2% of the population. If marriage laws are based on the charter of rights an freedoms Canadians had better also be ready to support poligamy. As when an upstanding, taxpaying muslim Canadian says that his religon says that if can afford three wives he should have them and he and his wife have found a second wife who they want to part of thier family how will the Canadian laws now say no to them. Freedom of religion and anti descrimantory laws would kick in, the argument that no one is getting hurt and they just want to be treated equally and be happy would apply. So to all people who support this issue think long and hard before you do as gay marriage is not all you will have to support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawk Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 excellent thoughts on the matter noelandmero, I worry about the same things as you bring up =o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Just out of curiosity: what's wrong with polygamy? If we can assume that such arraingements are between conseting and informed adults, what's the big deal? How would it pose a threat to anyone else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noelandmero Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 If you can sell polygamy to 50% of the population of Canada I have a job for you and will gladly pay you a million dollars a year get you an h1b visa and give you stock options. Also note if you read my post I said I could care less if gays get married or people have more than one wife. But accepting one is not accepting the other and if you allow one you you have to alow the other and I think if you told alot of canadians who say ok same sex marriage is fine that the same law would ensure legalisation of polygamy they woulsay hell no then we are not having same sex marriage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 But accepting one is not accepting the other and if you allow one you you have to alow the other and I think if you told alot of canadians who say ok same sex marriage is fine that the same law would ensure legalisation of polygamy they woulsay hell no then we are not having same sex marriage. That's a logical fallacy. Unless you can demonstrate an active correlation between gay marriage and polygamy, there's no reason to believe the former requires the lattter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noelandmero Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 How can you say that. If we say that not allowing gay marriage is against the charter of rights and freedoms in Canada then banning polgamy would also be against the charter of rights in freedom. As we would be violating not only that persons human rights by discrimanating against him we would also be violating his/her right to freedom of religon as both the islamic and mormon faith advocate polygamy. Thus if we as a society can not dictate who can and can not get married we can not ban polygammy amongst consenting adults. If we alow gay marriage and then somebody decides to take to court there right to have more than one wife I guarantee he will win as the same legal arguments apply. As I have previously stated I could care less if we ban it or do not ban it what 2 or 4 consenting adults want to do is none of my concern. However you can not say we can discrimanate agaisnt one group and not another. I feel people should be informed about this before making a decision. I would hope the left wing also feels informed decisions should be made on an issue such as this. PS. It is Jack layton who says this is a human rights issue and that it is not upto canadians to chose if they like it or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 If we say that not allowing gay marriage is against the charter of rights and freedoms in Canada then banning polgamy would also be against the charter of rights in freedom. Because they are seperate issues. May I suggest reading the Ontario court decision vis a vis same sex marriage? In it, the court concluded that the prohibition on same sex marriage was "unjustified discrimination". Anyone arguing for polygamy would have to demonstrate why the ban is unjustified. As we would be violating not only that persons human rights by discrimanating against him we would also be violating his/her right to freedom of religon as both the islamic and mormon faith advocate polygamy. Quibble: neither Islam or Mormonism sanction polygamy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noelandmero Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 Quibble: neither Islam or Mormonism sanction polygamy. Only post things you know as both these religons do promote polygamy. Polygamy is still a canonized doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.Many polygamists claim that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the only true church. Many members leave The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in order to join Mormon faiths that practice polygamy. Many other LDS practice polygamy very discretely within the church. Many members of the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are descended from polygamous ancestors. http://www.absalom.com/mormon/apostasy/polygamy.html The Qur´an says, "If you fear that you will not act justly towards the orphans, marry such women as seem good to you, two, three, four [at a time]; but if you fear you will not be equitable, then [marry] only one or what your right hands own, so it is likelier you will not be partial" (Sura al-Nisa´ 4:3). Polygamy was a widespread phenomenon in pre-Islamic times, just as it was with the Semitic peoples of the time.(1) http://www.polygamy.com/Islam/Polygamy.htm Note Islam also supports polygamy so blackdog read before you post as now you just appear ignorant. And this would certainly qualify unjust discrimination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAC Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 FWIW, while the biblical standard is monogamy, polygamy is far less objectionable than homosexual unions. I'm not greatly troubled by the fact that it could easily be argued that rejection of polygamy is as discriminatory as rejection of homosexual unions. There are three issues that are serious in dealing with gay rights, it seems to me. The first is that they really should have equal protection under the law. We don't need hate legislation to protect them. What we need is to stomp on those who attack them, just as we do (or at least should do) for all others who are attacked. The second is child welfare. That remains an extremely serious issue as long as gays accept groups such as NAMBLA as legitimate parts of their movement. If they can accept NAMBLA they are at best luke-warm in defence of children. That means they should not be allowed to adopt. The third is marriage. By every law we've ever had, by every tradition we've ever had, marriage means a union between male and female. In some traditions it may be polygamous, but it is union between male and female. Rights do not allow you to have some status without meeting the normal qualifications. If they did, I'd be Prime Minister tomorrow, and get this country straightened out. Gay rights do not give them the right to force a redefinition of marriage on the rest of us. Bottom line: they should have the same rights and the same responsibilities as everybody else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Blair Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 The redefinition of marriage is not being forced on anybody, bobocop. Churches are not being forced to perform gay marriages and nobody is going to force you to marry anybody. As for polygamy, why not? If a man wants five wives or a woman wants five husbands or if somebody wants to enter into a polygamus same sex marriage, what the hell business is it of ours? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noelandmero Posted June 23, 2004 Report Share Posted June 23, 2004 As for polygamy, why not? If a man wants five wives or a woman wants five husbands or if somebody wants to enter into a polygamus same sex marriage, what the hell business is it of ours? I happen to agree, I just feel that before Canadians are asked to support the redefinition of marriage and have it used as a campaigne issue the consequences should be fully explained to all canadians so that they can make a decision they are comfortable with and not because they feel guilty because someone called them a bigoted homophobe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobocop Posted June 24, 2004 Report Share Posted June 24, 2004 Thanks NoelandMero You have given me pause for thought on this issue. It falls under the slippery slope problem. You may have assisted in adjusting my stance somewhat on this issue. I do want to follow this through. If we allow gay marriages, we then open ourselves up to polygamists due to religious believes. Do we then open ourselves up to removing women’s rights, female castration, and hounor killings? I think we can stop at a union between two consenting adults. The after affects from the slippery slope can be halted due to an erosion of societal values. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 24, 2004 Report Share Posted June 24, 2004 The redefinition of marriage is not being forced on anybody, bobocop. Churches are not being forced to perform gay marriages and nobody is going to force you to marry anybody. Not yet. But I'm betting the lawsuit is already being drafted somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted June 24, 2004 Report Share Posted June 24, 2004 The redefinition of marriage is not being forced on anybody, bobocop. Churches are not being forced to perform gay marriages and nobody is going to force you to marry anybody.Not yet. But I'm betting the lawsuit is already being drafted somewhere. Any such lawsuit would fail. Freedom of religion is guaranteed in the Charter. No reasonable judge would interpret it otherwise. And if you still think that supreme court judges would produce an erratic decision, then why trust elected officials to be less erratic ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.