Hall of Fame Member
Posts: 10,505 
Location: The Evil Empire
Location: The Evil Empire
January 17th, 2006, 09:02 PM
Look, you know you can never please everybody, but the way I see it, the more people you satisfy, the more chance this issue gets buried. Now I have seen Conservatives even on this board saying they don't like SSM, but they consider it a done deal never to be dealt with again. On the other hand you have others that consider homosexuality some sort of "cancer to society", you can never hope to please these people, but they are few and far between in the grand scheme of things.
A moderate approach is always best in society, when one side forces something on the other there will always be tense situations that never get resolved. Civil Unions and Religious Marriages seem very reasonable to me and quite honestly, I haven't heard anyone advocating removing benefits from SSM, only to refine the definition of marriage. So, I don't know, I'm watching this closely up north, because it's catching up down here and will surely explode when His Excellency King George the Second leaves office.
Look, you know you can never please everybody, but the way I see it, the more people you satisfy, the more chance this issue gets buried. Now I have seen Conservatives even on this board saying they don't like SSM, but they consider it a done deal never to be dealt with again. On the other hand you have others that consider homosexuality some sort of "cancer to society", you can never hope to please these people, but they are few and far between in the grand scheme of things.
A moderate approach is always best in society, when one side forces something on the other there will always be tense situations that never get resolved. Civil Unions and Religious Marriages seem very reasonable to me and quite honestly, I haven't heard anyone advocating removing benefits from SSM, only to refine the definition of marriage. So, I don't know, I'm watching this closely up north, because it's catching up down here and will surely explode when His Excellency King George the Second leaves office.
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,838
Location: Independent Palestine
Location: Independent Palestine
January 17th, 2006, 09:06 PM
Quote:
I agree. A moderate approach is needed, however, I don't think Harper would take a moderate approach, especially if he got a majority.
Look, you know you can never please everybody, but the way I see it, the more people you satisfy, the more chance this issue gets buried. Now I have seen Conservatives even on this board saying they don't like SSM, but they consider it a done deal never to be dealt with again. On the other hand you have others that consider homosexuality some sort of "cancer to society", you can never hope to please these people, but they are few and far between in the grand scheme of things.
A moderate approach is always best in society, when one side forces something on the other there will always be tense situations that never get resolved. Civil Unions and Religious Marriages seem very reasonable to me and quite honestly, I haven't heard anyone advocating removing benefits from SSM, only to refine the definition of marriage. So, I don't know, I'm watching this closely up north, because it's catching up down here and will surely explode when His Excellency King George the Second leaves office.
A moderate approach is always best in society, when one side forces something on the other there will always be tense situations that never get resolved. Civil Unions and Religious Marriages seem very reasonable to me and quite honestly, I haven't heard anyone advocating removing benefits from SSM, only to refine the definition of marriage. So, I don't know, I'm watching this closely up north, because it's catching up down here and will surely explode when His Excellency King George the Second leaves office.
Super Genius
Posts: 1,458
Location: Toronto
Location: Toronto
January 17th, 2006, 10:46 PM
Quoting
One would think, huh? This stance makes emminent sense. Only extremists on either side would be opposed to this.
Well here's my view on how I would personally handle it, if I were PM. If anyone wants to get married and call it a marriage, let them do a religious ceremony and that's the end of that.
Everybody else heterosexual or homosexual can get a license from the government and call it a "civil union".
Neither marriage or civil union wold have different benefits or priveleges. Wouldn't that make everybody happy?
Everybody else heterosexual or homosexual can get a license from the government and call it a "civil union".
Neither marriage or civil union wold have different benefits or priveleges. Wouldn't that make everybody happy?
Hall of Fame Member
Posts: 10,505
Location: The Evil Empire
Location: The Evil Empire
January 17th, 2006, 11:42 PM
Actually MMMike, that would even have some complications, at least in the US. The government would require to recognize religious marriages, and it presently does not. Hence an argument will develop between the separation between church and state. There is never an easy way out it seems.
Actually MMMike, that would even have some complications, at least in the US. The government would require to recognize religious marriages, and it presently does not. Hence an argument will develop between the separation between church and state. There is never an easy way out it seems.
