Harper says he'll protect traditional marriage

T

tibear

Electoral Member
Jan 25, 2005
854
0
16
I thought the whole debate regarding SSM had to do with the fact that consenting people could do whatever they wanted as long as it didn't hurt others. SSM proponents claim they have been denied equal rights because their relationships are not equal to heterosexual couples. I'm simply making the exact same arguement for these other relationships.

Are they are a different moral level than SSM, our society seems to be in agreement that they are. However, how does take away from the human rights arguement??

Again, I've been asked the question, "How does a SSM affect your marriage or your life in general?" To those people that ask this question I ask, "How does an adult polygamous or incestuous marriage affect your marriage or your life in general??"

I'll give the same answer that you give to my question.

I'm putting forward the question are these not all human rights issues??? If they aren't please show me the fault in my logic. Remember can't say the others are illegal because legality is not the question. All of these relationships weren't legal in Canada.
 
T

tibear

Electoral Member
Jan 25, 2005
854
0
16
I thought the whole debate regarding SSM had to do with the fact that consenting people could do whatever they wanted as long as it didn't hurt others. SSM proponents claim they have been denied equal rights because their relationships are not equal to heterosexual couples. I'm simply making the exact same arguement for these other relationships.

Are they are a different moral level than SSM, our society seems to be in agreement that they are. However, how does take away from the human rights arguement??

Again, I've been asked the question, "How does a SSM affect your marriage or your life in general?" To those people that ask this question I ask, "How does an adult polygamous or incestuous marriage affect your marriage or your life in general??"

I'll give the same answer that you give to my question.

I'm putting forward the question are these not all human rights issues??? If they aren't please show me the fault in my logic. Remember can't say the others are illegal because legality is not the question. All of these relationships weren't legal in Canada.
 
Vanni Fucci

Vanni Fucci

Senate Member
Dec 26, 2004
5,239
17
38
8th Circle, 7th Bolgia
the-brights.net
Re: RE: Harper says he'll protect traditional marriage

tibear said:
SSM is still illegal in some provinces in this country and at the federal level, does this mean that the lower courts are wrong to strike them down??
Click to expand...

You are so wrong it's unbelievable that you're still even trying to debate this...

Those laws that I quoted were from the Criminal Code of Canada and the issue is that those relationships you have been spouting off about are criminal offences with commensurate jail terms for violations...that they are not enforced to our satisfaction is not the issue...

SSM has NEVER been illegal in any province...name one person that has received a fine or incarceration for either getting married to a partner of the same sex, or performing the ceremony...in provinces that don't recognize SSM, the couples' marriage would be considered void...period.

No criminal laws were repealed to grant gay couples the right to marry...that would not be the case with any of the other relationships you haphazardly mentioned as having some form of similitude...

Your logic is flawed, and your argument is the same ridiculous fear mongering crap that Stephen Harper has been spewing for weeks on end...

Learn the difference between civil law and criminal law, and then we might continue this discussion...
 
Vanni Fucci

Vanni Fucci

Senate Member
Dec 26, 2004
5,239
17
38
8th Circle, 7th Bolgia
the-brights.net
Re: RE: Harper says he'll protect traditional marriage

tibear said:
SSM is still illegal in some provinces in this country and at the federal level, does this mean that the lower courts are wrong to strike them down??
Click to expand...

You are so wrong it's unbelievable that you're still even trying to debate this...

Those laws that I quoted were from the Criminal Code of Canada and the issue is that those relationships you have been spouting off about are criminal offences with commensurate jail terms for violations...that they are not enforced to our satisfaction is not the issue...

SSM has NEVER been illegal in any province...name one person that has received a fine or incarceration for either getting married to a partner of the same sex, or performing the ceremony...in provinces that don't recognize SSM, the couples' marriage would be considered void...period.

No criminal laws were repealed to grant gay couples the right to marry...that would not be the case with any of the other relationships you haphazardly mentioned as having some form of similitude...

Your logic is flawed, and your argument is the same ridiculous fear mongering crap that Stephen Harper has been spewing for weeks on end...

Learn the difference between civil law and criminal law, and then we might continue this discussion...
 
Vanni Fucci

Vanni Fucci

Senate Member
Dec 26, 2004
5,239
17
38
8th Circle, 7th Bolgia
the-brights.net
Re: RE: Harper says he'll protect traditional marriage

tibear said:
SSM is still illegal in some provinces in this country and at the federal level, does this mean that the lower courts are wrong to strike them down??
Click to expand...

You are so wrong it's unbelievable that you're still even trying to debate this...

Those laws that I quoted were from the Criminal Code of Canada and the issue is that those relationships you have been spouting off about are criminal offences with commensurate jail terms for violations...that they are not enforced to our satisfaction is not the issue...

SSM has NEVER been illegal in any province...name one person that has received a fine or incarceration for either getting married to a partner of the same sex, or performing the ceremony...in provinces that don't recognize SSM, the couples' marriage would be considered void...period.

No criminal laws were repealed to grant gay couples the right to marry...that would not be the case with any of the other relationships you haphazardly mentioned as having some form of similitude...

Your logic is flawed, and your argument is the same ridiculous fear mongering crap that Stephen Harper has been spewing for weeks on end...

Learn the difference between civil law and criminal law, and then we might continue this discussion...
 
T

tibear

Electoral Member
Jan 25, 2005
854
0
16
vanni,

Its amazing how, you seemed to be stuck in one groove, with your fingers in your ears shouting, "The others are illegal, SSM isn't. The others are illegal, SSM isn't".

It doesn't matter whether something is illegal with it comes to human rights. That's the whole point.

You're right with assertion that technically, SSM wasn't illegal, but it wasn't legal either. BUT, again, IT DOESN"T MATTER.

The topic I'm trying to debate is that by trying to legalize SSM from a human rights point of view, will it open the door to other relationships. You and others are stuck on the legality of the "other" relationships and I will repeat again, the legality of the relationships is irrelevant if it can be shown that the law contravenes the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Let me repeat that: THE CURRENT LAW MEANS NOTHING.

Surely, you've heard about the polygamy group in BC who said on the CBC program "The Fifth Estate" that they would be putting forth a charter challenge if they were prosecuted. As well, simply visit the North American Man/Boy Love Association web site and you will see their position regarding their "relationships" and human rights. Adult Incest is the other scenario that I've put forward and even though I haven't heard of a case yet, in this wild and crazy world, I wouldn't doubt that there would be a pair of siblings somewhere who would want to get married and use the Charter to further their cause.

How about having an open and honest discussion rather than attacking each other.
 
T

tibear

Electoral Member
Jan 25, 2005
854
0
16
vanni,

Its amazing how, you seemed to be stuck in one groove, with your fingers in your ears shouting, "The others are illegal, SSM isn't. The others are illegal, SSM isn't".

It doesn't matter whether something is illegal with it comes to human rights. That's the whole point.

You're right with assertion that technically, SSM wasn't illegal, but it wasn't legal either. BUT, again, IT DOESN"T MATTER.

The topic I'm trying to debate is that by trying to legalize SSM from a human rights point of view, will it open the door to other relationships. You and others are stuck on the legality of the "other" relationships and I will repeat again, the legality of the relationships is irrelevant if it can be shown that the law contravenes the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Let me repeat that: THE CURRENT LAW MEANS NOTHING.

Surely, you've heard about the polygamy group in BC who said on the CBC program "The Fifth Estate" that they would be putting forth a charter challenge if they were prosecuted. As well, simply visit the North American Man/Boy Love Association web site and you will see their position regarding their "relationships" and human rights. Adult Incest is the other scenario that I've put forward and even though I haven't heard of a case yet, in this wild and crazy world, I wouldn't doubt that there would be a pair of siblings somewhere who would want to get married and use the Charter to further their cause.

How about having an open and honest discussion rather than attacking each other.
 
T

tibear

Electoral Member
Jan 25, 2005
854
0
16
vanni,

Its amazing how, you seemed to be stuck in one groove, with your fingers in your ears shouting, "The others are illegal, SSM isn't. The others are illegal, SSM isn't".

It doesn't matter whether something is illegal with it comes to human rights. That's the whole point.

You're right with assertion that technically, SSM wasn't illegal, but it wasn't legal either. BUT, again, IT DOESN"T MATTER.

The topic I'm trying to debate is that by trying to legalize SSM from a human rights point of view, will it open the door to other relationships. You and others are stuck on the legality of the "other" relationships and I will repeat again, the legality of the relationships is irrelevant if it can be shown that the law contravenes the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Let me repeat that: THE CURRENT LAW MEANS NOTHING.

Surely, you've heard about the polygamy group in BC who said on the CBC program "The Fifth Estate" that they would be putting forth a charter challenge if they were prosecuted. As well, simply visit the North American Man/Boy Love Association web site and you will see their position regarding their "relationships" and human rights. Adult Incest is the other scenario that I've put forward and even though I haven't heard of a case yet, in this wild and crazy world, I wouldn't doubt that there would be a pair of siblings somewhere who would want to get married and use the Charter to further their cause.

How about having an open and honest discussion rather than attacking each other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom