Canada Freakin' At The Freaker's Ball

[Aegis]

Tonight, Canada become the third nation in the world to legally recognize Gay and Lesbian marriage. This was done after a very long, and exhausting battle in our parliament between the Liberal Minority, and the Conservative opposition. The timing, I feel, couldn't be better, with Toronto (the little known, actual, capital of Canada ) having just held it's Gay Pride day.

The funny thing, though, is that Stephen Harper, leader of the Conservative party, has already denouced it as 'illegitmate' because the Bloc Quebecois held put it through parliament. He has essentially alienated himself from his only allies.

Anyway, comments?

Oh, and here's the llink

[Magrus]

Go Canada!

I don't get people's problem's with the whole gay/lesbian thing. The bi and gay people I've hung out with, and dated (girls folks, girls ) have been all sorts of fun to hang out with. It doesn't hurt me any if people want to marry, doesn't matter who marries, how they marry or what. *shrugs*

I'm sad, my friends can't afford to go to Canada this weekend like they planned. It's been years since the police there asked me to go home.

[Cuchulain82]

One of my favorite quotes about this debate comes from the Massachusetts state supreme court, which said essentially that the right to marry means nothing if a person cannot marry who they want. To me, the right to marry is a human right (at least in my society, and in Canadia too)... so GO CANADIA!

[Darth Zenemij]

I haven't a problem with Gays Bi's or Lesbians. I was dating one for about 17 years. I think the world would be at least a bit better if it recognized gays and Lesbians. And Bi's.

[Magrus]

Yeah! I've only dated three straight girls. It really is great wandering around in public with a girl who's bi or lesbian and hitting on girls together with her. Nothing quite like that.

I know my step-aunt is a lesbian, and proud of it. She went through hell with her Catholic parents, but she really is the sweetest, most helpful, outgoing woman I've ever met. Everyone adores her, and yet, she can't get married because of a stupid law.

I do miss her old girlfriend Violet, started a fight in a restuarant in Dallas over how they were treating grandma. Hot little firecracker that girl was, and definately a lot younger than my aunt. Maybe 5 years older than me, my aunts about 20 years older than me, if not a few more. Odd match that was, funny though.

[Darth Zenemij]

My Uncle is gay, and I have no shame in it. He is pretty cool, my mom got into fights beacuse people would tease him, he has a partner, but again, he can't get married beacuse of the law. It doesn't make any sence.


I think that Cody's bi dunno.

[Xandax]

Congratulations @Canada. Let's hope that the exampel will be followed by more countries.
I find this bias against homosexual people for instance disallowing them from marriage needing to be wiped from modern societies.
I don't care if marriage is a "religous institution" or not - when marriage is carriying benefits of legal and economical nature in countries, it should be allowed to all or all benefits should be stripped from the institution.

Good going @Canada's politicans.

[Dottie]

Good for Canada. Now you only have homosexual adoptions left.


I found a quite interesting article in a swedish newspaper a week ago or so. It recognized that marriage as it is today is very much focused on regulating property issues between two people. The point of the article was that because that was the case marriage in a legal sense should be changed to include not only people who wish to live together for romantic reasons, but anyone who wishes to live and manage thier economy together, whether it be a hetrosexual couple, a gay couple, or a pair of siblings who live together or any other such combination. Should you want a ceremony to confirm you everlasting love to each other that would be private or religous buisiness instead.

What do you think? I though it was quite a reasonable idea.

[Xandax]

As I wrote - as long as there are legal and economical benefits connected with marriage then everybody should be allowed to marry.
I'd rather that they removed these aspects of marriage, so only people wanting to bind themself together in the religious aspect would get marriaged.

I read many (some) people complain that the institution of marriage is declining and by allowing homosexual marriages it will only further.
My position is that the institution is declining because its legal and economical benefits, which make people marry only due to these benefits.

[Dottie]

Well, I wasn't completely fair, the articles exact wording was that laws regarding marriage should be removed and replaced with general economic laws for people who wish to live together.

[giles337]

Personally, While I appreciate it is a step in the right direction for tolerance in general, it is, in my opinion highly unnecessary. (Unless, of coure, canadian parents suffer severe sanctions (as in lack of availible benefits) if they remain unmarried, as in britain) If people want to make a commitment, marriage should be unnecessary. In any case.

[Cuchulain82]

giles, there are legal rights that being married gives you that committing cannot- rights as next of kin, inheritance rights, etc. I'm sure you already know about this. Like many a stand up comedian has said- if gay people want the right to lose half their stuff in the divorce, let them have it!

[giles337]

Originally Posted by Cuchulain82

giles, there are legal rights that being married gives you that committing cannot- rights as next of kin, inheritance rights, etc. I'm sure you already know about this. Like many a stand up comedian has said- if gay people want the right to lose half their stuff in the divorce, let them have it!

I know there are in Britain, I didn't know about canada.

[Chanak]

Glad to see a victory for common sense and intelligence in Canada. The state should have no ability to interfere with choices in marriage. In the United States, this truly does take on an aspect of the issue of the separation of church and state. It would be a tremendous leap forward to see the nonsense here in the US over this end. I doubt this will happen anytime in the forseeable future, however.

Cheers to Canada.

[Magrus]

Originally Posted by Cuchulain82

giles, there are legal rights that being married gives you that committing cannot- rights as next of kin, inheritance rights, etc. I'm sure you already know about this. Like many a stand up comedian has said- if gay people want the right to lose half their stuff in the divorce, let them have it!

*nods* I'm against "marriage" as something someone should feel the need to do. There are some things, doors if you will, marriage gives you access to. Some good, some bad, all of them which you can't have just "choosing a partner". It comes down to the "in writing" thing. If you want to sign up for something, saying "yes, we're married" shows commitment, whereas "no, I just have a partner" doesn't as well as that "we have a document stating we'll be together" for some people.

That's changed a bit now, but I'd say 30 years ago there was a far larger difference. Anyways, you shouldn't need a piece of paper to say you'll stay with someone. On the other hand, anyone who wants that piece of paper should have access to it, regardless of any sexual preference, or anything else. I'd avoid the whole marrying your sister deal, that I can see discriminating against. There's good reasons for that though!