And so it begins: Same-sex marriage law tabled federally in Canada

[Mrs. Tuberski]

The key word here is tolerance. Relegion should have nothing to do with this.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
The key word here is tolerance. Relegion should have nothing to do with this.

Religion has everything to do with this.

I can't think of one group opposed to gay marriage that's not religious.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Isnt it written in most ethic textbooks that what is morally right for one is not going to be for the other, however doesnt make it wrong either.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Why should they be allowed to adopt? Adoption is not done for the sake of the couples wishing to adopt, but rather, for the sake of the children. It seems reasonable to me, that most children want two parents, a mom and a dad, and if they are lacking this, they feel deprived.

Actually, kids just want parents, and you're the one seeking to deny them that. There is an overflow of kids in foster homes and orphanages in this country. Are you saying it's better for kids to stay in those situations rather than be adopted by a loving same-sex couple? If so, I'd say it was you who weren't thinking about the kids.

https://www.lethimstay.com

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
I would be the first to argue against you on the first point. If I were to marry a deaf woman, I would not want us to be allowed to adopt a child.

What a horrible thing to say.

Have you actually investigated cases of deaf parents? You may not have the devotion to raising a child to do such a thing, but that in no way means other such couples do not.

http://www.listen-up.org/htm2/deaf-hearing.htm

Sure, there are challenges. But there are challenges to any child-rearing situation. Should poor people be prevented from having a child just because the ideal environment for child rearing is one of middle class comfort?

There are tons of kids who need adopting and not nearly enough "traditional" couples to do so. In that case, it's simply criminal not to allow couples outside that norm to adopt, so long as a social worker can reasonably determine the couple can provide a loving home.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

As for the second, Christians are probably the most tolerant people you will ever meet. They may disagree with you, but that disagreement doesn't mean hating you as a person. Tolerance means you put up with something you disagree with.

I'll have to dispute that. The christians I have encountered are some of the most intolerant, bigoted people I have ever met. Tolerance and acceptance means that a gay couple should have the right to get married.

I guess you guys only preach tolerance of other christians, but not gay people.... afterall gay couples will somehow contribute to a collapse of marriage... not.

[Boris Godunov]

I've encountered no correlation between tolerance and Christianity or a lack thereof. Some of the most wonderful, tolerant people I know and love are Christians. Some of the most hateful, intolerant ones are Christian. Same goes for pretty much every religious affiliation.

I will say that the highest percentage of people I know who are compassionate, tolerant people are agnostic/athiest/unreligious. That could just be my circle, but it's not as if I seek out friends based on their religious beliefs.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
I've encountered no correlation between tolerance and Christianity or a lack thereof. Some of the most wonderful, tolerant people I know and love are Christians. Some of the most hateful, intolerant ones are Christian. Same goes for pretty much every religious affiliation.

I will say that the highest percentage of people I know who are compassionate, tolerant people are agnostic/athiest/unreligious. That could just be my circle, but it's not as if I seek out friends based on their religious beliefs.

I have to agree i believe in christ and am catholic non practicing of course and i like to think im a very compassionate person.

[monolith94]

I would be the first to argue against you on the first point. If I were to marry a deaf woman, I would not want us to be allowed to adopt a child.

Holy crap. This is nuts! Does not compute?!?!

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by monolith94


Holy crap. This is nuts! Does not compute?!?!

The originaly statement was wrong I said earlier that there are many children that are not infants that need to be adopted. Children are adpoted by american families all the ime from out of the country where the child doesnt speak english.the families adapt. I guess thats my point. Just for the record the deaf statement didnt come from me.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Asher

Religion has everything to do with this.

I can't think of one group opposed to gay marriage that's not religious.

Macho chauvinists?

[Voltaire]

Originally posted by Asher As opposed to the good reason to limit that contract to man and woman exclusively?

The same arguments about polygamy were spewed by the racist bigots back when interacial marriage was legalized. Go figure that a generation or two later, we have a new generation of bigots (usually heavily Christian, pure coincidence I'm sure), using the same argument to oppress minorities.

Don't get me wrong. I'm in favor of gay marriage, as well as polygamy. Nothing is wrong with either, denying consenting adults the right to enter into legal relationships with other consenting adults on arbitrary grounds (such as sex) is discriminatory. What I'm trying to get across is that the right wing has usurped the slippery slope argument and is using it as though its a bad thing.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by SpencerH
Our marriage laws are based on Judeo-Christian beliefs i.e. 'one man and one woman'. IMO, once you reject the law to allow gay marriage you reject it outright and as a consequence must allow other types of marriage. Polygamy is not the problem, lack of enforcement of already existing laws that protect minors is the problem.

I disagree. I don't see how admitting that two consenting adults may include two men or two women who deserve the same protections that any traditional, but barren, couple enjoys opens the door to marrying your children, or your dog, or 53 other people.

As an aside, it's strange to me that in a country like Canada, where govt interference and regulation is so pervasive so as to have become accepted by intelligent people as 'normal', that the conditions that NYE alludes to still exist. So much for the socialist utopia eh?

And there's where you have it wrong. Canadian government is not very stiffling. In fact, I feel a good deal less stiffled than many poeple I have heard from who live in California.

I pay a reasonable level of taxation and receive a decent level of services in return. Outside of taxes, the government leaves us alone by and large. I recall an Austrian lawyer asking what steps were required to start a business. I told him all I had to do is go down to the registry and pay $5 to register myself with the government as being a proprietorship, then go to the bank with the government forms and open a bank account; bling bling, I'm in business. He didn't believe me.

Telling the government to mind its own business is a huge trait of the Canadian character. That helps explain why some isolated communities have been able to flaunt the laws.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by molly bloom



The law in North America (outside of Louisiana) is based on Anglo-Saxon common law.

Which is non-Christian in origin.

Do you mean Quebec?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Voltaire
I wouldn't count the first case as consensual. The girls are pressured by their closed communities to enter into such relations. But what is wrong with it is 3 or more consenting fully informed adults decide on doing it? If orgies are ok, then why not a legal arrangement between 3 or more people?

Practicalities of the matter? Sharing property, pensions, childcare responsibilities, etc?

Do you think I should be legally entitled to 5 wives and ten children, when only one wife and maybe 3 children will ever have a hope of maintaining a life for themselvesfrom my estate should something bad happen to me?

What are you going to do when there are 4 spouses showing up at the bedside of the accident victim who is fated to be a perpetual vegetable, and they split 2-2 over what to do?

Marriage is more than about sex. Sex I can get anywhere. Marriage, and the rights that go with it, are not so easily spread around.