Same-sex motion defeated by wide margin

[mikedavid00]

Suppose there was evidence that people of a particular race, religion or ethnicity had higher accident rates. What do you think are the chances that any North American automobile insurance company would charge that group higher rates?

Immigrants get charged more for insurance which viotates the b.s. charter of rights.

People that are of a younger age are charged more insurance which violates the b.s charter of rights.

I can not get some jobs in the gov't unless I am a visible minority which violates the b.s. charter of rights.

Why can't people just admit that there's no such thing as equality? If there was, children would be allowed to vote. There wouldn't be people who could jump the queue for organs or in healtchare.

[Rue]

Can you please be specifc on what "experience" you have had to led you to draw this conclusion?

The term "experience rating" means rates based on insurers' experience, not mine.

So your contention is that insurers' experience is that straights have a more "conservative lifestyle" over gays and this affects their driving risk. Also you contend that by allowing gays to be married, it would increase the overall risk of the "married" group of drivers. Did I get that right?

So if it is really their "gayness" which impacts their driving risk, why is it that insurance companies do not provide differentiated rates based upon whether you are gay or straight, regardless of if you are married or not?

Well I would think gay men would be better at handling stick shift and so would be better driving standard vehicles then straights. Sorry couldn't resist.

[mikedavid00]

Some insurance companies have lower rates for smokers but do we want society to operate on the principles of insurance companies?

Your missing the point.

It's NON equality and it violates the charter of rights. The insurance companies are in violation right now, but nothing gets done about it becuae we don't have true equality in Canada.

We should accept that and stop pretending that this is a country where eveyrone is equal. It's quite the contrare.

[mikedavid00]

I'd take that statement and change it a little. No one's rights need to be violated by extending equal state treatment to alternative sexual arrangements.

The people of Canada have a right to consider marriage what we want it to be. The laws represent us. It's not up to a judge to decide the countries definition of marriage.

Let them have a legal civil union if that's what the people want.

I have a right to consider marriage something that is between a man and a women under God. What about my rights?

So the argument eventually falls apart and everyone eventually becomes I minority.

THis is why we need to start voting on propsitions.

[guyser]

Suppose there was evidence that people of a particular race, religion or ethnicity had higher accident rates. What do you think are the chances that any North American automobile insurance company would charge that group higher rates?

Immigrants get charged more for insurance which viotates the b.s. charter of rights.

People that are of a younger age are charged more insurance which violates the b.s charter of rights.

I can not get some jobs in the gov't unless I am a visible minority which violates the b.s. charter of rights.

Why can't people just admit that there's no such thing as equality? If there was, children would be allowed to vote. There wouldn't be people who could jump the queue for organs or in healtchare.

Come on one trick pony...show us where any of that is true, at least for the reasons you think so.

You are right in one aspect though, you do have the right to think of marriage as one man and a woman under god.

Who is taking that away from you?

[Black Dog]

Married couples' auto premiums are lower than single peoples' because their more conservative life style makes them better drivers. My rights are violated if that discount vanishes.

So the assumption is that gay couples are less "conservative" drivers than straight couples?

[guyser]

Married couples' auto premiums are lower than single peoples' because their more conservative life style makes them better drivers. My rights are violated if that discount vanishes.

So the assumption is that gay couples are less "conservative" drivers than straight couples?

Married couples rates are lower because they tend to go out together, you know , like shopping or for dinner and things like that.

It has NOTHING to do with lifestyle.

Having two cars, but only one is used lots of time is why they get a discount (there are a couple other reasons -but this is the main one)

[mikedavid00]

You are right in one aspect though, you do have the right to think of marriage as one man and a woman under god.

Who is taking that away from you?

A judge is taking that away from me.

And the gays can have all the rights and also say that they are married when they get their civil union certificate. Maybe the people who own the country do not want this to be labeled 'marriage'?

We'll never know unless we all vote on this and direct the path of our country.

I definately don't want someone's 'vision' dictating this upon us. That's the problem with Canada - it's a dictatorship, not a democracy.

The senate is an issue for all of us. I do believe we need reform. Again, this needs to be put to a vote amongst the people.

[guyser]

You are right in one aspect though, you do have the right to think of marriage as one man and a woman under god.

Who is taking that away from you?

A judge is taking that away from me.

And the gays can have all the rights and also say that they are married when they get their civil union certificate. Maybe the people who own the country do not want this to be labeled 'marriage'?

We'll never know unless we all vote on this and direct the path of our country.

I definately don't want someone's 'vision' dictating this upon us. That's the problem with Canada - it's a dictatorship, not a democracy.

The senate is an issue for all of us. I do believe we need reform. Again, this needs to be put to a vote amongst the people.

Name the judge that removed your right to call it a marriage........cricket sound now.......still silence..............

You cannot sit there and say a judge did this to you because he did not. You and your sister are having cake, dad walks in and says "where's my piece?" . Mom says "here you go honey, sorry about denying you your piece too!"

But of course you yell at mom (the judge) that she violated your rights.

Get it now....no?...wouldn't suprise me.

So, what about your links to back up your claims about the charter denying rights to drivers, immigrants or not?

Naw...didn't think you had those either.

If you want to debate show some moxy.

[mikedavid00]

Married couples rates are lower because they tend to go out together, you know , like shopping or for dinner and things like that.

Yeah true. My fiance drivers her car mainly to work and stuff and my car is the main car that we do all our night/weekend and traveling with.

[mikedavid00]

Name the judge that removed your right to call it a marriage........cricket sound now.......still silence..............

The supreme court judge ruled on it and it was never voted on. Then it was voted on which was kind of close to the right thing to do.

It's our country and we the people should determine whether we want our country to call 'marriage' the union of 2 men.

You've been brainwashed and dictated to for far too long to understand the greater meaning of this.

Take a look at real democracy and tell me if you don't feel we should be able to do the same:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UnhY_VPXT8&NR

http://yeson85.net/

[normanchateau]

Suppose there was evidence that people of a particular race, religion or ethnicity had higher accident rates. What do you think are the chances that any North American automobile insurance company would charge that group higher rates?

Immigrants get charged more for insurance which viotates the b.s. charter of rights.

People that are of a younger age are charged more insurance which violates the b.s charter of rights.

Still can't imagine race, ethnicity,religion or sexual orientation coming into play. Incidentally, in British Columbia which has public auto insurance, age and immigrant status aren't factors. But I suppose private insurers can violate the b.s. charter of rights. They can even deny insurance coverage to an applicant.

[mikedavid00]

Still can't imagine race, ethnicity,religion or sexual orientation coming into play. Incidentally, in British Columbia which has public auto insurance, age and immigrant status aren't factors. But I suppose private insurers can violate the b.s. charter of rights. They can even deny insurance coverage to an applicant.

Well it's not equality what they are doing. Especially the age part.

BC has real equality it seems when it comes to auto insurance.

[guyser]

Still can't imagine race, ethnicity,religion or sexual orientation coming into play. Incidentally, in British Columbia which has public auto insurance, age and immigrant status aren't factors. But I suppose private insurers can violate the b.s. charter of rights. They can even deny insurance coverage to an applicant.

Well it's not equality what they are doing. Especially the age part.

BC has real equality it seems when it comes to auto insurance.

Auto insurance cannot be denied. We MUST provide a carrier if asked to do so.

[mikedavid00]

Still can't imagine race, ethnicity,religion or sexual orientation coming into play. Incidentally, in British Columbia which has public auto insurance, age and immigrant status aren't factors. But I suppose private insurers can violate the b.s. charter of rights. They can even deny insurance coverage to an applicant.

Well it's not equality what they are doing. Especially the age part.

BC has real equality it seems when it comes to auto insurance.

Auto insurance cannot be denied. We MUST provide a carrier if asked to do so.

yes but factor in the criteria they use to base your rates. They pre-judge you based off things which I feel may violate the charter.

[guyser]

yes but factor in the criteria they use to base your rates. They pre-judge you based off things which I feel may violate the charter.

Let me then spell out what "we" (read Ontario) uses to establish your rate.

AGE

SEX (IF UNDER 25)

MARITAL STATUS (IF UNDER 25)

PRIOR CLAIMS (6 YEARS @ FAULT ONLY)

PRIOR TICKETS (3 YEARS)

KILOMETRES DRIVEN TO WORK (OR USE OF CAR-MAYBE BUSINESS-COMMERCIAL)

NSF'S

# OF UNDERAGE DRIVERS IN HOUSEHOLD

OTHERS IN HOUSEHOLD (COUSINS, AUNTS, GPARENTS,BOARDERS)

I am not sure where the violation per the Charter is . Can you inform me?

[mikedavid00]

AGE

SEX (IF UNDER 25)

MARITAL STATUS (IF UNDER 25)

I am not sure where the violation per the Charter is . Can you inform me?

Lol.

You can honestly sit here in say that that you don't know where they are using sexism, agism, and the oh so trendy marital status.

[guyser]

AGE

SEX (IF UNDER 25)

MARITAL STATUS (IF UNDER 25)

I am not sure where the violation per the Charter is . Can you inform me?

Lol.

You can honestly sit here in say that that you don't know where they are using sexism, agism, and the oh so trendy marital status.

I already asked you to show me where . Please do so.

[normanchateau]

Still can't imagine race, ethnicity,religion or sexual orientation coming into play. Incidentally, in British Columbia which has public auto insurance, age and immigrant status aren't factors. But I suppose private insurers can violate the b.s. charter of rights. They can even deny insurance coverage to an applicant.

Well it's not equality what they are doing. Especially the age part.

BC has real equality it seems when it comes to auto insurance.

Auto insurance cannot be denied. We MUST provide a carrier if asked to do so.

Maybe not in all provinces but private insurers can deny auto coverage in Canada.

[guyser]

Maybe not in all provinces but private insurers can deny auto coverage in Canada.

Just so that we do not leave a false impression here let me clarify your statement.

Private insurers CANNOT deny you auto coverage, should you meet their underwriting criteria that THEY file with the Ontario Insurance Commission.

Penalty for ignoring that rule is severe.

In fact, every driver seeking or currently with auto insurance coverage can request quotes from all insurance companies a broker represents. (cant remember if it is all or 4 companies) But we must privide them in writing.

[normanchateau]

Maybe not in all provinces but private insurers can deny auto coverage in Canada.

Just so that we do not leave a false impression here let me clarify your statement.

Private insurers CANNOT deny you auto coverage, should you meet their underwriting criteria that THEY file with the Ontario Insurance Commission.

Penalty for ignoring that rule is severe.

In fact, every driver seeking or currently with auto insurance coverage can request quotes from all insurance companies a broker represents. (cant remember if it is all or 4 companies) But we must privide them in writing.

Private insurers can deny you auto coverage in Nova Scotia.

[guyser]

Private insurers can deny you auto coverage in Nova Scotia.

No they cannot.

They operate under much the same system as does Ontario.

Written reasons must be given as to why you were denied insurance and you can in fact dispute the reasoning with the Superintendant of Insurance.

http://www.gov.ns.ca/JUST/REGULATIONS/regs/iautoup.htm

[normanchateau]

Private insurers can deny you auto coverage in Nova Scotia.

No they cannot.

Written reasons must be given as to why you were denied insurance and you can in fact dispute the reasoning with the Superintendant of Insurance.

I know they must give you written reasons for denying you insurance.

I'd want written reasons when I was denied insurance.

[geoffrey]

AGE

SEX (IF UNDER 25)

MARITAL STATUS (IF UNDER 25)

I am not sure where the violation per the Charter is . Can you inform me?

Lol.

You can honestly sit here in say that that you don't know where they are using sexism, agism, and the oh so trendy marital status.

Your a little misguided Mike. The Charter doesn't protect you from anything other than the government. The Charter doesn't prevent me from hanging a big sign on my door that says "No Black Unmarried Gay Women under 32.5 from another Nation with a Criminal Record allowed."

There is provincial legislation that protects people from discrimination for goods open to sale. This is where you'd find your protection.

Is there a possibility that you'd win a case on discrimination because your a younger-20's male. I certainly hope so, women my age pay 30% less despite having traffic convictions. I've got a clean record for 5 years of driving and I pay much more. Is that bullshit? Absolutely.

But it ain't the charter helping you.

[guyser]

Private insurers can deny you auto coverage in Nova Scotia.

No they cannot.

Written reasons must be given as to why you were denied insurance and you can in fact dispute the reasoning with the Superintendant of Insurance.

I know they must give you written reasons for denying you insurance.

I'd want written reasons when I was denied insurance.

Well if you know that why did you obfuscate in your earlier post?

First it was Canada, then it was Nova Scotia.

Perhaps the issue is you feel that a private industry should provide you without limitations?