Quote: Originally Posted by DasFXQuote: Originally Posted by Reverend BlairSince nobody is forcing you to enter a same sex marriage, perform a same sex marriage, or even show up for the free booze at a same sex wedding, you are trying to dictate the morals and traditions of others. That is inherently undemocratic.
Is that above statement still true if I inserted polygamous or incestual instead of same sex? If no, then why not?
A very big difference -- It's like asking what the difference is between same-sex marriage and sacrificing virgins at some altar: which would still be murder regardless of religious beliefs.
Religious rights and freedoms do not preclude criminal or any other law. Polygamy is illegal under federal law as is incest and pedophilia and all the other things religious extremists bring up as though the sky is going to fall in if we allow Sunday shopping.
There was quite a stink about Sunday shopping in Ontario and I thought it must have been the last jurisdiction in the free world that didn't allow people to shop on Sundays for no apparent reason.
As per usual, religious nuts (I'm not referring to you in any of this; I've just read every ridiculous excuse in the book, every single one of them was brought up at the Supreme Court of Canada over three days about same-sex marriage and they were all shot out of the sky so full of holes, ridiculous "logic" based on nothing but hypocrisy and typical religious discrimination, that I find it difficult to understand how, by now, everyone hasn't heard every stupid argument around and seen them all shot down a thousand times over) were bringing up all kinds of totally hypocritical excuses, holding back progress/capitalism, profits, better standards of living as though the gods themselves had told the religious people not to work on Sunday.
And if anyone believed/believes so, then don't work on Sunday but don't be hypocritical about it. No yard work, no work period. If you have to eat on Sundays then prepare the food on Saturday because perparing meals is work. It's the whole problem with "fundamentalists" (codeword for extremists): they're all hypocrites, closed-minded, so intolerant based on ignorance.
Don't work on Sunday -- it was built into the legislation, just as no one who doesn't want to stamp a form if SSM is against their religious beliefs does not have to, due to the same Charter rights that homosexuals have and homosexuality is not illegal. And it would pointless to make it illegal.
As to it being some choice, why would anyone choose to be wildly discriminated against and possibly put themselves in danger of physical violence for something to do? People are born with no sex organs, both and the wrong ones.
Religion leads to war/murder, with ample proof that's still going on today so why isn't religion banned? It leads to murder and anything that leads to murder should automatically be illegal. It's more reasonable to make that argument than to make the argument that homosexuals are so by choice and, given than the United Church of Canada started the same-sex marriage this time around, they are perfectly entitled to marry at any United Church of Canada, let alone at a city/town hall.
Everyone knows that religion causes closed-mindedness while proclaiming the opposite, which leads to ignorant intolerance, which leads to discrimination and justified by the gods no less or whatever particular god someone has a subscription with.
Who cares about polygamy? Go talk to a Mormon male to find out how much fun it is to never win an argument because you're ganged up on by your wives.
But in today's world, it guarantees that kids are going to have a parent around -- if they plan to have any kids, another ridiculous argument that homophobics (obviously closet homosexuals, what are they so afraid of?) try to use: marriage is an "institution" (so are psych wards) designed to raise children in a "healthy" religious discriminatory environment that has never been healthy for anyone.
So if someone is impotent or has any reproductive problems at all, people are born with no sex organs, both, and the wrong ones: So they have no right to the "institution" of marriage because they can't have children. No woman who has been through menopause and wants to marry her boyfriend, whether they have sex or not, is allowed to do so: because she can't produce children.
Where are the laws forcing people to have their reproductive systems tested before they're allowed to use the "institution" of marriage? Everyone has to be tested if marriage is around exclusively to raise children.
But testing reproductive systems isn't good enough: one or the other or both may have no sex drive. They may have no interest in having sex at all. So they have to prove that have sex. Stick video cameras in their what, bedroom? What if they don't have sex in the bedroom? Maybe they use the kitchen table, parks, subways, airliners, elevators, on and on, so video cameras have to be everywhere to prove that married couples are not just having sex but are trying to have children -- because there is no other possible reason to get married. No birth control, no abortions, miscarriages are made illegal as well, all birth defects are made illegal and if an 11 year-old girl is raped by her grandfather and gets pregnant, well too bad for her.
The gods intended for her to be raped by her grandfather or she wouldn't have become pregnant. Then she has to marry her grandfather because you can't raise children without being in the "institution" of marriage; the god buildings have to profit off it, and the Jewish ... whatever, with the commandments from Moses, on videotape, CNN, every media organization was there to watch Moses on his cell phone talking directly to god and carving the ten commandments out on stone tablets; because his laptop's batteries were dead.
Strange that this god thing speaks in medieval English with thees and thous, "Thou shalt not kill". <-- Period. There's no asterisk stating conditions. Abortion is murder! But it's okay to kill people in the name of the gods on Holy crusades and so forth.
And it's okay to kill people if some possibly negligent cops/detetives, medical examiners whatever (we just had one in Toronto at Sick Kid's hospital who hid evidence and gave false testimony for years, and got all kinds of people convicted for pedophilia/statutory rape and murder; too bad all the innocent people the idiot put into prison hadn't been killed).
The hypocrisy is sickening. When there's a 100% reliable lie detector that works in 100% of all cases around all people, then we'll be reasonably sure that the police/detectives actually got the right person. They screw up all the time. But the same religious people who call abortion (in all cases, rape, whatever), murder, support capital punishment. Thou shalt not kill. <--- Period. There's no asterisk pointing out all the exceptions that religious intolerance/discrimination makes murder okay if some majority of religious freaks agree that murder is okay under certain circumstances.
Religion leads to murder. It's a very valid argument with plenty of proof still going on today. "Fundamentalist" (codeword for extremist) religion in particular. So it should be illegal.
The more religion tries to discriminate in this secular country the more religion/religious people ares going to be raked over the coals.
