Harper says he'll protect traditional marriage

[NSA]

RE: Harper says he'll pro

Rev, why waste your CPU cycles responding to this idiot? He's obviously just picking all the arguments from other peoples' posts and throwing them back up again to stir the pot.

More bigotry from down South, incidentally. Poor Americans.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Harper says he'll pro

If nobody answers challenges Observer's lies, then he is free to tell them. That's where that bigotry that caused the show in your link to be cut comes from.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Harper says he'll pro

If nobody answers challenges Observer's lies, then he is free to tell them. That's where that bigotry that caused the show in your link to be cut comes from.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Harper says he'll pro

If nobody answers challenges Observer's lies, then he is free to tell them. That's where that bigotry that caused the show in your link to be cut comes from.

 

[tibear]

RB,

Geesh, how many times do we have to go over the same point. The fact that paedophilia, polygamy or incest is illegal has NOTHING to do with the fact that if it goes against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the law is invalid!! And if the law is invalid you cannot use the fact that the act is illegal as a point of arguement.

I thought we had already established that issue many pages ago.

Gays are a minority that is discriminated against because of their differences.

Your going to tell me that polygamists, paedophiles and adult incest individuals aren't discriminated against. I thought that was a no brainer.

Actually most of them have known it was coming since the gay community became more activist in the 1970's.

Could we not say the same thing regarding NAMBLA and polygamists today. We hear more and more from them everyday and if SSM is sanctioned will continue to hear them even louder.

You have still not been able to show me how gays are a minority group that is different from a constitutional perspective than the paedohpiles or polygamists.

As for vanni claiming the since the word minority only appears in the Charter with respect to language, can you please tell me why your beloved PM constantly refers to SSM as a minority rights issue. I didn't know the gay community had a language issue they wanted cleared up using the Charter. As for having the laws repealed before they can have a charter challenge, you don't actually believe that do you?? Your telling me that if there was a law against Muslims practicing their faith, that they would first have to get the law repealed BEFORE they can make a charter challenge?? 8O

Mr Martin has consistantly claimed that the SSM is a minority rights issue and what I'm putting forward is that the paedophiles, polygamists and adult incest people are just as much minority groups as the gay community. They are all persecuted just as much, if not more than the gay community. I've asked repeated both RB and vanni to show me how the groups differ and the answers I get are old points such as "those are illegal"(we all know is BS, we're challenging the law!!).

You claim NAMBLA are predators many people make the same claim about organized religion. Should all of the religious groups be illegal? The NAMBLA group claims that there are no victims and that all of the participants are fully aware and fully consenting to their activities. If that is the case, how are they predators?? You'll say they are children and don't know what they're doing. Some of these children live on their own and make adult decisions already.

 

[tibear]

RB,

Geesh, how many times do we have to go over the same point. The fact that paedophilia, polygamy or incest is illegal has NOTHING to do with the fact that if it goes against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the law is invalid!! And if the law is invalid you cannot use the fact that the act is illegal as a point of arguement.

I thought we had already established that issue many pages ago.

Gays are a minority that is discriminated against because of their differences.

Your going to tell me that polygamists, paedophiles and adult incest individuals aren't discriminated against. I thought that was a no brainer.

Actually most of them have known it was coming since the gay community became more activist in the 1970's.

Could we not say the same thing regarding NAMBLA and polygamists today. We hear more and more from them everyday and if SSM is sanctioned will continue to hear them even louder.

You have still not been able to show me how gays are a minority group that is different from a constitutional perspective than the paedohpiles or polygamists.

As for vanni claiming the since the word minority only appears in the Charter with respect to language, can you please tell me why your beloved PM constantly refers to SSM as a minority rights issue. I didn't know the gay community had a language issue they wanted cleared up using the Charter. As for having the laws repealed before they can have a charter challenge, you don't actually believe that do you?? Your telling me that if there was a law against Muslims practicing their faith, that they would first have to get the law repealed BEFORE they can make a charter challenge?? 8O

Mr Martin has consistantly claimed that the SSM is a minority rights issue and what I'm putting forward is that the paedophiles, polygamists and adult incest people are just as much minority groups as the gay community. They are all persecuted just as much, if not more than the gay community. I've asked repeated both RB and vanni to show me how the groups differ and the answers I get are old points such as "those are illegal"(we all know is BS, we're challenging the law!!).

You claim NAMBLA are predators many people make the same claim about organized religion. Should all of the religious groups be illegal? The NAMBLA group claims that there are no victims and that all of the participants are fully aware and fully consenting to their activities. If that is the case, how are they predators?? You'll say they are children and don't know what they're doing. Some of these children live on their own and make adult decisions already.

 

[tibear]

RB,

Geesh, how many times do we have to go over the same point. The fact that paedophilia, polygamy or incest is illegal has NOTHING to do with the fact that if it goes against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the law is invalid!! And if the law is invalid you cannot use the fact that the act is illegal as a point of arguement.

I thought we had already established that issue many pages ago.

Gays are a minority that is discriminated against because of their differences.

Your going to tell me that polygamists, paedophiles and adult incest individuals aren't discriminated against. I thought that was a no brainer.

Actually most of them have known it was coming since the gay community became more activist in the 1970's.

Could we not say the same thing regarding NAMBLA and polygamists today. We hear more and more from them everyday and if SSM is sanctioned will continue to hear them even louder.

You have still not been able to show me how gays are a minority group that is different from a constitutional perspective than the paedohpiles or polygamists.

As for vanni claiming the since the word minority only appears in the Charter with respect to language, can you please tell me why your beloved PM constantly refers to SSM as a minority rights issue. I didn't know the gay community had a language issue they wanted cleared up using the Charter. As for having the laws repealed before they can have a charter challenge, you don't actually believe that do you?? Your telling me that if there was a law against Muslims practicing their faith, that they would first have to get the law repealed BEFORE they can make a charter challenge?? 8O

Mr Martin has consistantly claimed that the SSM is a minority rights issue and what I'm putting forward is that the paedophiles, polygamists and adult incest people are just as much minority groups as the gay community. They are all persecuted just as much, if not more than the gay community. I've asked repeated both RB and vanni to show me how the groups differ and the answers I get are old points such as "those are illegal"(we all know is BS, we're challenging the law!!).

You claim NAMBLA are predators many people make the same claim about organized religion. Should all of the religious groups be illegal? The NAMBLA group claims that there are no victims and that all of the participants are fully aware and fully consenting to their activities. If that is the case, how are they predators?? You'll say they are children and don't know what they're doing. Some of these children live on their own and make adult decisions already.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Harper says he'll pro

You refuse to understand, tibear. Let's start with your most annoying and untruthful argument. NAMBLA and other paedophiles are not committing a victimless crime. They are raping children. They not only don't have the status of a minority, but they have no other valid arguments either.

Polygamists are not a cohesive group. Because of that they are not a recognizable minority. They may be able to build a case, but it won't be on the precedent of SSM because the issues are different. With or without SSM they have every right to go to court and they could well win.

The same goes for incest.

I started a thread so you would have a place to put these scare tactics of the radical right and they could be discussed on their own merits. You insist on putting them in this thread because you want to muddy the issue of the right of gays and lesbians to marry.

Try to stay on topic for a change.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Harper says he'll pro

You refuse to understand, tibear. Let's start with your most annoying and untruthful argument. NAMBLA and other paedophiles are not committing a victimless crime. They are raping children. They not only don't have the status of a minority, but they have no other valid arguments either.

Polygamists are not a cohesive group. Because of that they are not a recognizable minority. They may be able to build a case, but it won't be on the precedent of SSM because the issues are different. With or without SSM they have every right to go to court and they could well win.

The same goes for incest.

I started a thread so you would have a place to put these scare tactics of the radical right and they could be discussed on their own merits. You insist on putting them in this thread because you want to muddy the issue of the right of gays and lesbians to marry.

Try to stay on topic for a change.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Harper says he'll pro

You refuse to understand, tibear. Let's start with your most annoying and untruthful argument. NAMBLA and other paedophiles are not committing a victimless crime. They are raping children. They not only don't have the status of a minority, but they have no other valid arguments either.

Polygamists are not a cohesive group. Because of that they are not a recognizable minority. They may be able to build a case, but it won't be on the precedent of SSM because the issues are different. With or without SSM they have every right to go to court and they could well win.

The same goes for incest.

I started a thread so you would have a place to put these scare tactics of the radical right and they could be discussed on their own merits. You insist on putting them in this thread because you want to muddy the issue of the right of gays and lesbians to marry.

Try to stay on topic for a change.

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Geesh, how many times do we have to go over the same point. The fact that paedophilia, polygamy or incest is illegal has NOTHING to do with the fact that if it goes against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the law is invalid!! And if the law is invalid you cannot use the fact that the act is illegal as a point of arguement.

The fact that you would even dare to make such an inane assertion is testament to your ignorance of how the Charter works...

I've made the point that those other forms of relationship are illegal, which you seem to think is irrelevant...but that is the only relevance in this argument, and makes it impossible to debate...

The Charter will protect the rights of ANY individual, so long as it does not break any laws, or infringe upon the rights of any other individual or group...your insistence that pedophiles should be able to enjoy the same rights as SSM is borne out of either ignorance, or outright stupidity...but I say to you again...same sex couples will not have broken any laws, or infringed upon the rights of any other if and when they decide to get married...the other groups that you've been blathering on about CANNOT be given those same rights, because it would be against statute laws as set out in the Criminal Code of Canada...and no law for an indictable offense will ever be repealed to accomodate a Charter challenge...it doesn't work that way...pretty damn simple isn't it...I fail to see why you aren't getting this...

Stephen Harper's arguments rely heavily on his assumption that Canadians know nothing of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and how it all works...and will buy into whatever trash he's selling...he assumes that Canadian citizens are all sheep and willing to follow his righteous lead...I would hope that most Canadians can see through this obvious obfuscation of the real issue...that he wishes to deny a group of people their Charter protected rights...

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Geesh, how many times do we have to go over the same point. The fact that paedophilia, polygamy or incest is illegal has NOTHING to do with the fact that if it goes against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the law is invalid!! And if the law is invalid you cannot use the fact that the act is illegal as a point of arguement.

The fact that you would even dare to make such an inane assertion is testament to your ignorance of how the Charter works...

I've made the point that those other forms of relationship are illegal, which you seem to think is irrelevant...but that is the only relevance in this argument, and makes it impossible to debate...

The Charter will protect the rights of ANY individual, so long as it does not break any laws, or infringe upon the rights of any other individual or group...your insistence that pedophiles should be able to enjoy the same rights as SSM is borne out of either ignorance, or outright stupidity...but I say to you again...same sex couples will not have broken any laws, or infringed upon the rights of any other if and when they decide to get married...the other groups that you've been blathering on about CANNOT be given those same rights, because it would be against statute laws as set out in the Criminal Code of Canada...and no law for an indictable offense will ever be repealed to accomodate a Charter challenge...it doesn't work that way...pretty damn simple isn't it...I fail to see why you aren't getting this...

Stephen Harper's arguments rely heavily on his assumption that Canadians know nothing of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and how it all works...and will buy into whatever trash he's selling...he assumes that Canadian citizens are all sheep and willing to follow his righteous lead...I would hope that most Canadians can see through this obvious obfuscation of the real issue...that he wishes to deny a group of people their Charter protected rights...

 

[Vanni Fucci]

Geesh, how many times do we have to go over the same point. The fact that paedophilia, polygamy or incest is illegal has NOTHING to do with the fact that if it goes against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the law is invalid!! And if the law is invalid you cannot use the fact that the act is illegal as a point of arguement.

The fact that you would even dare to make such an inane assertion is testament to your ignorance of how the Charter works...

I've made the point that those other forms of relationship are illegal, which you seem to think is irrelevant...but that is the only relevance in this argument, and makes it impossible to debate...

The Charter will protect the rights of ANY individual, so long as it does not break any laws, or infringe upon the rights of any other individual or group...your insistence that pedophiles should be able to enjoy the same rights as SSM is borne out of either ignorance, or outright stupidity...but I say to you again...same sex couples will not have broken any laws, or infringed upon the rights of any other if and when they decide to get married...the other groups that you've been blathering on about CANNOT be given those same rights, because it would be against statute laws as set out in the Criminal Code of Canada...and no law for an indictable offense will ever be repealed to accomodate a Charter challenge...it doesn't work that way...pretty damn simple isn't it...I fail to see why you aren't getting this...

Stephen Harper's arguments rely heavily on his assumption that Canadians know nothing of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and how it all works...and will buy into whatever trash he's selling...he assumes that Canadian citizens are all sheep and willing to follow his righteous lead...I would hope that most Canadians can see through this obvious obfuscation of the real issue...that he wishes to deny a group of people their Charter protected rights...

 

[tibear]

I guess we'll have to go back to agree to disagree.

 

[tibear]

I guess we'll have to go back to agree to disagree.

 

[tibear]

I guess we'll have to go back to agree to disagree.

 

[Canadian Observer]

Reverend Blair and NSA .

Speaking of Bigotry - watched the CBC show on how Canadians treat aboriginals.

In Edmonton , two cops are not to be tried for dumping an aboriginal man outside the city in a winter night.

Meanwhile , gays and lesbians live , work , live together in the US. Nobody lynching or kicking them out from their jobs.

Diffence of opinion is not bigotry . Harper is not against legalizing same sex unions. He just wants it called a different name.

If people like you insist on the word marriage for everyone , then it should apply to all aspects legal , like not calling immigrants - immigrants simply because they were born outside of Canada.

Or rather than Boy or a girl we would say -children. People instead of man or woman. There has to be a distinction , right.

Bigotry , my foot.

 

[Canadian Observer]

Reverend Blair and NSA .

Speaking of Bigotry - watched the CBC show on how Canadians treat aboriginals.

In Edmonton , two cops are not to be tried for dumping an aboriginal man outside the city in a winter night.

Meanwhile , gays and lesbians live , work , live together in the US. Nobody lynching or kicking them out from their jobs.

Diffence of opinion is not bigotry . Harper is not against legalizing same sex unions. He just wants it called a different name.

If people like you insist on the word marriage for everyone , then it should apply to all aspects legal , like not calling immigrants - immigrants simply because they were born outside of Canada.

Or rather than Boy or a girl we would say -children. People instead of man or woman. There has to be a distinction , right.

Bigotry , my foot.

 

[Canadian Observer]

Reverend Blair and NSA .

Speaking of Bigotry - watched the CBC show on how Canadians treat aboriginals.

In Edmonton , two cops are not to be tried for dumping an aboriginal man outside the city in a winter night.

Meanwhile , gays and lesbians live , work , live together in the US. Nobody lynching or kicking them out from their jobs.

Diffence of opinion is not bigotry . Harper is not against legalizing same sex unions. He just wants it called a different name.

If people like you insist on the word marriage for everyone , then it should apply to all aspects legal , like not calling immigrants - immigrants simply because they were born outside of Canada.

Or rather than Boy or a girl we would say -children. People instead of man or woman. There has to be a distinction , right.

Bigotry , my foot.

 

[peapod]

ya girandi goes on about the native issue to look at it this way.....at least you won't have to worry about gays having an abortion.