Canada government: We will legalize gay marriage.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Berzerker
As I stated before, I'm opposed to homosexual "marriage" because the word "marriage" doesn't belong there. Marriage is defined as a union between men and women.

Is it defined solely as that? My dictionary also gives the definition as "Any close or intimate union." No man and woman specified.

At any rate, this is circular, as the debate is over what the definition of marriage should be. If Canadian society decides it should be between both men and women and other gender combination, that is what it will be.

We don't know for certain when marriages originated or when, but there is nothing to indicate there was always such a strict definition. We have many examples of ancient same-sex marriages, and the Christians were performing same-sex marriage rites in Europe for centuries after the fall of Rome.

[blackice]

There is no excuse whatsoever to be against this ruling unless you wish to force your religious beliefs on other people.

Yet gay people have a right to push thier beliefs on others?

Gay beliefs go against religious beliefs, deal with it, they too have rights, a vote and a voice.

It appears your as messed up as ever, one hand defending Kill'em Kline and now?

One hand saying a gay person has the right (s) and a religious person does not?



I truely believe you need your meds checked.

[Boris Godunov]

Allowing gays to be married infriges on what right held by religious people...?

[blackice]

Boris Godunov

At any rate, this is circular, as the debate is over what the definition of marriage should be.

yup.

[Asher]

Originally posted by blackice
Yet gay people have a right to push thier beliefs on others?

What beliefs are we forcing?
Are we outlawing heterosexual marriages?

Gay people aren't forcing beliefs by asking for equal rights under the law.

Nothing, whatsoever, changes for heterosexuals, while homosexuals get the same rights as heterosexuals.

The people whining are god-fearing cowards.

Gay beliefs go against religious beliefs, deal with it, they too have rights, a vote and a voice.

Hey, I'm not advocating taking them away.

It just so happens that gay people have rights, too, as the courts have ruled numerous times already.

We're not taking away anyone's rights, so stop trying to pretend like that's the case.

One hand saying a gay person has the right (s) and a religious person does not?



I truely believe you need your meds checked.

What kind of moron are you?
Where did I say, or even imply, that religious people don't have the same rights?

Christ man, you're the dumbest poster on Apolyton.

[monolith94]

"Christ man, you're the dumbest poster on Apolyton."
Don't forget Joe!

[blackice]

Have you looked at your track record?

It appears maturity is out of reach still, so be it give it time it happens sooner or later.

Allowing gays to be married infriges on what right held by religious people...?

Thier beliefs which are protected under the constitution. The government is putting this law to the supreme court judges to ensure that passing this law will not infringe religious constitutional rights already in the constitution.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Asher
People are waking up to religion, more people realize it as a crock than before because people are more enlightened.

Eh? You act as if homosexual marriages have never been preformed by Christian churches.

[Asher]

Originally posted by blackice
Have you looked at your track record?

It appears maturity is out of reach still, so be it give it time it happens sooner or later.

And what are you, 40 and still on the lookout?

You have the typing skills of a 8 year old and the mental capacity of a 6-year old. You continually ignore the valid points made against you because you have no case.

I really don't give a rats ass if I come across as mature here, there's more to maturity than being polite to ignorant ****** online. Maturity is respecting the rights of others, being supportive of people who need it, and generally having the thought capacity to make rational decisions.

You have demonstrated none of the above...

Thier beliefs which are protected under the constitution.

DUH.
Of course they are!

No one has even come close to saying we should ban their beliefs! They're welcome to worship broomsticks and Hugh Grant for all I care, no one's taking that away.

DinoDoc:

Eh? You act as if homosexual marriages have never been preformed by Christian churches.

They have been performed, I know. And I know quite a few Christian gays.

Of course not all religious people want to kill homosexuals or at the very least prevent them from having the same status as the "normals" under the government, but in 99% of the cases where people do not respect the rights of homosexuals, religion is the cause.

So forgive me if I seem a tad bit bitter that religion is such a pain in the ass for no good reason...

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by blackice

Allowing gays to be married infriges on what right held by religious people...?

Thier beliefs which are protected under the constitution. The government is putting this law to the supreme court judges to ensure that passing this law will not infringe religious constitutional rights already in the constitution.

Nonsense. The constitution protects their rights to hold certain beliefs, not to see them enshrined in the law. Allowing gay marriage does not in any way prevent them from holding their beliefs. It doesn't in any way force them to do something they morally oppose. They aren't obligated to condone, participate in or even watch gay marriages.

Under this logic, the government shouldn't allow homosexuality whatsoever, since it goes against some people's religions.

Gay marriage doesn't deprive anyone of a right, it recognizes the rights of a certain group that has had them denied. Unless you're going to make the claim that for every right recognized to one group, another group is deprived of one, and of course this argument holds no water.

[blackice]

Most ancient societies needed a secure environment for the perpetuation of the species and a system of rules to handle the granting of property rights. The institution of marriage handled both of these needs.

Joseph Campbell, in the Power of Myth, mentions that the Twelfth century troubadours were the first ones who thought of love in the same way we do now. The whole notion of romance apparently didn't exist until medieval times, and the troubadours.

Pope Nicholas I, in A.D. 866, wrote in a letter, "If the consent be lacking in a marriage, all other celebrations, even should the union be consummated, are rendered void".

There appeared to be many marriages taking place without witness or ceremony in the 1500's. The Council of Trent was so disturbed by this, that they decreed in 1563 that marriages should be celebrated in the presence of a priest and at least two witnesses. According to Tammi Sprout, marriage was seen as a way to "prevent men and women from sins, for companionship, and procreation. Love wasn't needed to marry a person and often had nothing to do with marriage."

Years later, the Puritans referred to marriage as "the highest and most blessed of relationships." They saw that every day in marriage is an opportunity to love, and a chance to forgive.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09693a.htm

http://www.marriageequalityca.org/history_marriage.php

So when it all boils down the "marriage" as we know it today in reality and in law is religious and government based.
The rights of a gay couple to marry is sealed. The rights of a gay couple to the legal bennifits of marriage is sealed.
The rights of religious people who see "marriage" as something holy and devine in the eyes of god remains in question. This means that while gay marriages are a fore gone conclusion. Should the word "marriage" be used to describe thier union? Does this infringe on religious beliefs and rights protected under the constitution?
Let's face it religion and government ( http://www.cyberparent.com/women/marriage4.htm)invented "marriage" as it is today.

So do they have a right to protect that concept and wording under the constitution...That will be decided by the high courts and for the most part that right has been conceeded by the government. The mere fact they are sending the bill to the high courts for legal interpretation clearly acklnowledges that.

So yes religious people have protected rights and a right to protest something devine to them and in fact something they and the government invented.

I am sure most do not care provided it is not called a marriage per se.

Assher you have done nothing but prove my point about you over and over again. Thanks

[Asher]

I'm simply...astounded.

Wow.

[img]http://www.howardshrine.com/howardshrine/gary_the_******/gary_03.jpg[/img]

[Sava]

Allowing gay marriage doesn't infringe on rights... that's the dumbest thing I've heard...

if you don't believe gay marriage is right, THEN DON'T HAVE ONE.

[Agathon]

The right to one's religious values does not extend to the capacity to impose them on others. What is really at issue is that some citizens would like to continue imposing their religious values on society - all this sophistry about tradition and custom is merely masking that fact.

The reason religious rights don't extend this far is that doing so in a pluralist society would result in social disintegration and mob violence.

The State runs marriages for the simple reason that marriages imply legal standing: i.e. certain rights and privileges. Not extending those to gay people is denying them equal treatment under the law. It's that simple. The State is not intefering in religious ritual simply because marriage qua a legal institution is the State's business and not that of any church or religious organisation.

The State does not infringe at all on the freedom of religious organisations to perform the sacrament of marriage in the way they see fit. Render unto Caesar.....

The same goes for abortions. The question of whether an abortion is right or wrong largely boils down to philosophical issues about the nature of personhood about which there is no real agreement in our society. That's why it's a matter of conscience and the real reason why the State allows abortion.

And, more importantly, that is why one can be a Christian or member of another religion and still support a liberal abortion policy.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Sava

if you don't believe gay marriage is right, THEN DON'T HAVE ONE.

That's a nice shiny new avatar there, Sava.