North Carolina (in before MrFun!)

[Hauldren Collider]

I believe the civil right is against discrimination. At least, this is the case in Canada. I don't care how the US does it.

There is no right to marriage - there is a right to be free from discrimination on sexual orientation, amongst other things.

You could argue all day on this--I don't think there's one conclusively correct answer, but it's my opinion that the distinction between gay marriage and traditional marriage is a perfectly reasonable one.

[Asher]

And if it's not a fundamental right, then it's perfectly ok for the state to discriminate.

I don't think you understand. I'm not arguing about the legality of what's going on in the USA.

I'm making the point that North Carolinans are unintelligent rednecks. They're welcome to do whatever the **** they want to further entrench their state as a redneck backwater. The rest of the world is moving on, North Carolina and Iran are free to hang out in the back.

[Asher]

You could argue all day on this--I don't think there's one conclusively correct answer, but it's my opinion that the distinction between gay marriage and traditional marriage is a perfectly reasonable one.

And it's fine to have ridiculous opinions. Freedom of speech and all.

There's no reason to it whatsoever.

Is it because marriage is a contract with God? (BZZ, church/state)
Is it because marriage is for procreation? (BZZ, not a requirement)
Is it because marriage has "always been like that? (BZZ, weaksauce and not even true)

[Hauldren Collider]

And if it's not a fundamental right, then it's perfectly ok for the state to discriminate.

False So very very very false.

Imagine - states having rights? Who knew?

What the **** does this have to do with state's rights? I don't think Canada has a 10th amendment the way the US does. The definition of marriage is not something left up to the provinces--deal with it.

[Asher]

False

What the **** does this have to do with state's rights? I don't think Canada has a 10th amendment the way the US does. The definition of marriage is not something left up to the provinces--deal with it.

All of the provinces have individually passed legislation legalizing it, as well.

Same-sex marriage was legally recognized in the provinces and territories as of the following dates:

June 10, 2003: Ontario
July 8, 2003: British Columbia
March 16, 2004: Quebec
July 14, 2004: Yukon territory
September 16, 2004: Manitoba
September 24, 2004: Nova Scotia
November 5, 2004: Saskatchewan
December 21, 2004: Newfoundland and Labrador
June 23, 2005: New Brunswick
July 20, 2005 (Civil Marriage Act): Alberta, Prince Edward Island, Nunavut territory, and the Northwest Territories

Note that in some of these cases, the marriage was in fact legal at an earlier date (for example, the Ontario ruling held that marriages performed in January 2001 were legal when performed), but the legality was questioned. As of the given dates, the legality was authoritatively established.

The decision by the Ontario government to recognize the marriage that took place in Toronto, Ontario, on January 14, 2001, makes Canada the first country in the world to have a government-legitimated same-sex marriage (the Netherlands and Belgium, which legalized same-sex marriage before Canada, had their first in April 2001 and January 2003, respectively).[2]

There's a reason Ben fled Canada, and it's called rationality. He fears it. So he went straight to Big Tex.

All of Canada turned against him.

[Hauldren Collider]

All of the provinces have individually passed legislation legalizing it, as well.

So it doesn't even matter then!

[gribbler]

Can someone explain why this was put up for vote in a primary and not a general election? If having the people decide the rights of a minority is so important shouldn't it happen in an election with high turnout?

[Ben Kenobi]

What the **** does this have to do with state's rights?

Everything.

I don't think Canada has a 10th amendment the way the US does.

They have a constitution.

The definition of marriage is not something left up to the provinces

Actually, yes it is, hence my point.

[Hauldren Collider]

Can someone explain why this was put up for vote in a primary and not a general election? If having the people decide the rights of a minority is so important shouldn't it happen in an election with high turnout?

I don't think it's terribly relevant. But actually if you think about it low turnout could be beneficial to something restricting the rights of minorities, because you can count on the minorities turning out in good numbers while unaffected people stay home.

[Jaguar]

YES.

I cannot emphasize that enough.

The government should be out of the marriage game entirely.

The government has three choices:

• Create difficulties for married people.
• Give benefits to married people.
• Do nothing to married people.

The first seems obviously unreasonable. The second encourages sham marriages. "Do nothing" should be the default rule of thumb anyway, and it's particularly obvious when the non-default options suck.

[Ben Kenobi]

There's a reason Ben fled Canada, and it's called rationality. He fears it. So he went straight to Big Tex.

Look up 'Coren Agreement'. BC didn't just pass it, they also made it part of their curriculum. As a humanities teacher, I have a choice, teach it there or teach elsewhere. I chose the latter. Texas at least values my contribution...

[Asher]

I don't think it's terribly relevant. But actually if you think about it low turnout could be beneficial to something restricting the rights of minorities, because you can count on the minorities turning out in good numbers while unaffected people stay home.

It doesn't make sense in this case. There are far more rednecks than gays in North Carolina. In order to reject the ban, the gays depended on the reasonable middle which don't show up to such silly polls.

[Asher]

Look up 'Coren Agreement'. BC didn't just pass it, they also made it part of their curriculum. As a humanities teacher, I have a choice, teach it there or teach elsewhere. I chose the latter.

More proof of the awesomeness of Canada.

Texas at least values my contribution...

Oh, I'm sure they do.

Y'all learned yer correct grammers in Texas.

[Asher]

Hey, do you teach law, Ben?

[Ben Kenobi]

Y'all learned yer correct grammers in Texas.

So the ex-torontonian who fled to Alberta is mocking Texans for being rednecks? Sheesh.

Real rednecks ride and shoot guns and do all kinds of stuff. What would you know about rednecks? The only redneck you've ever seen is from your tanning salon.

[Hauldren Collider]

So the ex-torontonian who fled to Alberta is mocking Texans for being rednecks? Sheesh.

Real rednecks ride and shoot guns and do all kinds of stuff. What would you know about rednecks? The only redneck you've ever seen is from your tanning salon.

Oooh, Asher. Are you gonna need some lotion for the sunBURN?

(yeah that was a bad pun. and I'm sorry.)

[Asher]

So the ex-torontonian who fled to Alberta is mocking Texans for being rednecks? Sheesh.

Real rednecks ride and shoot guns and do all kinds of stuff. What would you know about rednecks? The only redneck you've ever seen is from your tanning salon.

Tanning salon? Have you SEEN my pics? I'm most likely the whitest guy in all of Apolyton, if not the interwebs.

I don't even know what this ex-Torontonian business is all about. What is the implication? Toronto is redneck? Alberta is redneck?

You can't even get a cohesive zinger, Ben.

You could have also called me a hippy for my four years outside of San Francisco. Then you would've had a truly confusing insult.

[gribbler]

I don't think it's terribly relevant. But actually if you think about it low turnout could be beneficial to something restricting the rights of minorities, because you can count on the minorities turning out in good numbers while unaffected people stay home.

You can count on religiously motivated nutjobs who outnumber the gays showing up. And if the Republican race for the presidential nomination had still been competitive, this would have been very, very relevant. And some people seem to have a fetish for having a larger number of people vote on this directly and whine if an elected legislature votes on it in a way they don't like.

[Ben Kenobi]

Hey, do you teach law, Ben?

No, I teach history. I have a few students I tutor as well - chem and biology atm.

My course focusses on ancient + medieval history - Greece + Rome + Byzantium up to the fall of the Turks. Focus on the Church and Church history, but it's a pretty broad survey. We cover a lot of stuff...

[Asher]

No, I teach history. I have a few students I tutor as well - chem and biology atm.

My course focusses on ancient + medieval history - Greece + Rome + Byzantium up to the fall of the Turks. Focus on the Church and Church history, but it's a pretty broad survey. We cover a lot of stuff...

Oh man. How did I know you loved ancient Greece?

[Ben Kenobi]

Tanning salon? Have you SEEN my pics? I'm most likely the whitest guy in all of Apolyton, if not the interwebs.

And why are you explaining the joke?

[Ben Kenobi]

Oh man. How did I know you loved ancient Greece?

Actually I far prefer the Baroque period, after the Romantics. Romantics > Baroque > Classical.

[Asher]

Actually I far prefer the Baroque period, after the Romantics. Romantics > Baroque > Classical.

Do you teach the full history of Ancient Greece or do you censor it to pretend the Church invented marriage?

[Ben Kenobi]

Do you teach the full history of Ancient Greece or do you censor it to pretend the Church invented marriage?

I teach the difference between marriage in a secular context and marriage as a sacrament, and how the understanding of marriage changed. The Christian position was very radical for the time. I have a whole class devoted just to this concept.

[Asher]

secular context? as in government?

[Ben Kenobi]

secular context? as in government?

Greek laws weren't the same as other laws, elsewhere. I look at the Mosaic code, and the Greek and Roman laws. I try to give them a good understanding of how different the world was back then, and what stuff hasn't changed. Simple stuff- like the days of the week, the calendar, the dating system. Stuff that people take for granted today that weren't present around the time of Christ. When you look around you and all you see are certain things, there's a cultural inheritance that you are completely unaware of, unless someone points these things out and asks the stupid questions, "why is Saturday Saturday?"

[gribbler]

If I had children teaching them the origin of the week would not be a priority. Actually, I can't think of a good reason to teach American children about medieval Greece.

[Ben Kenobi]

If I had children teaching them the origin of the week would not be a priority. Actually, I can't think of a good reason to teach American children about medieval Greece.

Medieval Greece? You mean Byzantium? Most of the cool stuff we have today is stuff that they kept.

Why there is 7 day week, 30 day month and 365 day year is actually a really good question. It's a good astronomy primer. I teach the difference between sidereal and tropical years, and why people 2000 years cared about either, and why they are important to know.

200 years ago, these questions dominated people's lives, and we've mostly forgotten about it now, with the advent of electricity.

[gribbler]

You just refuted yourself. It is irrelevant to modern life. Much like religion.

[Ben Kenobi]

You just refuted yourself. It is irrelevant to modern life. Much like religion.

The distinction is responsible for one of the larger achievements - the Gregorian calendar. Also, understanding the motion of the stars over the course of the year is really handy for navigating without a compass. Comes in handy if you're ever stuck someplace.

Maybe you won't do any exploring outside of your own backyard but kids are kids and they like learning about stuff like that.