CanPol: Gomery and a Looming Federal Election

[Drake Tungsten]

so you are saying that most women in muslim/mormon house holds are eager for more women to be added into the marriage?

How would I know? I'm not a Muslim/Mormon woman and not really fond of assumptions...

[Ben Kenobi]

The NDP are no more likely to kill NAFTA if they actually got into a position of power than the Church is likely to elect a Muslim as pope.

They've had atheists, so I guess the NDP will kill NAFTA.

Seriously though, the NDP have plenty of other economic problems that discourage people in central canada from voting for them.

NAFTA is just the most obvious and telling case. I really think they believe NAFTA to be an evil.

It's not so much that they repeal NAFTA, but they can sure gum up the works.

[Jon Miller]

I haven't talked to every, or even most, or read about the oppinions of every or even most

but those that I do know of, don't seem to prefer being in a multirelationship house

there is also my basic point about monogamy... (which you totally ignored)

Jon Miller
(btw, my observations were inconclusive as to whether long term monogamy or serial mongamy is more favored)

[Drake Tungsten]

there is also my basic point about monogamy... (which you totally ignored)

What was I supposed to say about it? It was your opinion, backed up with some unsubstantiated facts...

[Jon Miller]

backed up by my study of communes and utopias and the like (many of which got rid of marriage and such things.. but by the time the youth reached sexual ages they started pairing up and generally the commune/whatever ended not to long after that)

Jon Miller

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


They've had atheists, so I guess the NDP will kill NAFTA.

Seriously though, the NDP have plenty of other economic problems that discourage people in central canada from voting for them.

NAFTA is just the most obvious and telling case. I really think they believe NAFTA to be an evil.

It's not so much that they repeal NAFTA, but they can sure gum up the works.

I agree they might throw a few spanners into the works of NA peace and prosperity, based on rhetoric. However, I think the realities would mallow them rather quickly on most points. Still, I would be concerned about the reaction from the South to the increased throwing of pooh at the White House.

[Drake Tungsten]

backed up by my study of communes and utopias and the like

I know nothing of your study, so I don't see why it should hold any weight with me.

[Jon Miller]

also from observations...

I have never seen of, or read of, or in any other way observed, one person falling more and more in love with two or more people...

always would already be in love with one person, and as interest grew in another person (as they fell in love with them) their interest in the first person decreased...

Jon Miller

[notyoueither]

If anti progress is the anvil around the Tories' necks, anti Americanism would be that around the necks of the NDP.

Either party that can shed the dead weight first stands to gain a lot on the electoral landscape.

[Ben Kenobi]

Only people on glue would go with that argument.

Polygamy is outlawed as exploitative. In other words, it is harmful to the young or foolhardy who enter into it.

Gay marriage is not the same situation, and only the desperate would reach for polygamy as a defence of proscriptions that courts in seven of ten provinces have said are unconstitutional.

Are we ruled by law, or bigots?

Fine. Let Canadians decide whether they should permit gay marriage or not. Surely you can agree that the parliament ought to have the final say.

What I do not see as different, is that there are religious groups arguing for polygamy along the same lines, as groups that say they ought to be allowed to bless these marriages.

If it is good to support one group, then why is it also good to quash the other?

[Jon Miller]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

backed up by my study of communes and utopias and the like

I know nothing of your study, so I don't see why it should hold any weight with me. [/QUOTE

I wrote some essays, I will see if I can find them

if not, I think that anyoen elses study of that subject, if you are observant of what I noticed, would see the same as I (although interpretations I admit might be different, there might be some other that others think is more probable)

Jon Miller

[notyoueither]

Or maybe the Greens will come up the middle and send both to the graveyards of discarded dreams.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Fine. Let Canadians decide whether they should permit gay marriage or not. Surely you can agree that the parliament ought to have the final say.

I agree with this

judges should not in general make up legislation (of course both sides of any issue generally are in favor of this (see republicans in the US))

Jon Miller

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Avatars.

I think the Liberals are going to find Quebec an uphill battle, when the Tories are outpolling them.

avatar my ass

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Fine. Let Canadians decide whether they should permit gay marriage or not. Surely you can agree that the parliament ought to have the final say.

What I do not see as different, is that there are religious groups arguing for polygamy along the same lines, as groups that say they ought to be allowed to bless these marriages.

If it is good to support one group, then why is it also good to quash the other?

No, I cannot. I could not accept that Parliament has the final say if they decided to pass a bill allowing slavery. That is why we have courts. That is why we firmed up the common law and our legal heritage in a constitution. That document is now the supreme law of the land. No longer is it Parliament, and in fact Parliament in Ottawa never was. Westminster was. Now the Constitution is.

The reason that gay marrige is not the same as polygamy is mostly that gay marriage is no different from any other marriage in any meaningful way. It is between two adults who enter into it willingly and with equal expectations of benefit.

The same cannot be said of polygamy. First, the women who enter into these things are seldom if ever adults in any sense of the word except that they may be bleeding once a month. Secondly, it is extremely one-sided as to do with benefits. How many ways do you cut the pension of the recently deceased? Which child of which bride get shut out for those of the favourite?

There are good reasons why polygamy is outlawed. There are no good reasons to continue to stand in the way of gay marriage.