well why change what has been in place for hundred's of years? so when we change one thing people are going to want to change much more than just that for example if the quebec referendum passed and quebec seperated all the other provinces would have wanted to change there possition in confederation and break off as well leaving almost no Canada. Same if ssm is passed puligomy will pass as well. What't next making it legal for pedifiles to roam the street praying on kids because som moron thinks it's normal and been around for years?
The marriage "Saviours"
- Thread starter peapod
- Start date
Smitty, if nothing ever changed, there wouldn't even be a Canada, now would there? And as for comparing consenting adults in mutually-beneficial relationships to paedophiles raping children - that isn't worthy of comment.
Smitty:
If the majority of the people want polygamy (and please spell it correctly you sound like an idiot) to be legal it will be. It has nothing to do with SSM.
Tradition is no way to run a society. Things need to change and improve. The fact a discriminatory custom has been around for hundreds of years is no reason not to change it.
Paedophiles are a totally different story, it is non-consensual and is therefore rape. The younger party would even if agreeing would be too young to give "consensus"
That would be violating someone's rights and getting them to be taken adantage of. Comparing that to allow people to call their partnership a marriage is an absurd analogy.
Honestly I'm not sold on either side. But what you are stating sounds to me like BS.
If the majority of the people want polygamy (and please spell it correctly you sound like an idiot) to be legal it will be. It has nothing to do with SSM.
Tradition is no way to run a society. Things need to change and improve. The fact a discriminatory custom has been around for hundreds of years is no reason not to change it.
Paedophiles are a totally different story, it is non-consensual and is therefore rape. The younger party would even if agreeing would be too young to give "consensus"
That would be violating someone's rights and getting them to be taken adantage of. Comparing that to allow people to call their partnership a marriage is an absurd analogy.
Honestly I'm not sold on either side. But what you are stating sounds to me like BS.
Is "puligomy" what you practice in your room alone at night, Smitty?
no, you dumbass old man, obviously your "40" year old brain (or if thast how old you really are) needs a refreshment of high school education since puligomy is marrage between multiple people.
(man i have to explain everything to this guy) :lol:
no, you dumbass old man, obviously your "40" year old brain (or if thast how old you really are) needs a refreshment of high school education since puligomy is marrage between multiple people.
(man i have to explain everything to this guy) :lol:
RE: The marriage "Saviour
You look back at some of the old customs and I think wtf?
Women could not vote and were property of the man.
Natives could not vote
Bars and liquor outlets had to be closed on voting days.
Sunday shopping even was not permitted. (still is not permitted in N.S. I believe)
When my Grandma got married in 1942 in Vancouver. She lost her Canadian citizenship because she married a immigrant from Poland who did not have Canadian citizenship. My Grandma was born in Winnipeg.
The funny thing was she never realized this until she needed a passport to go to Cuba in 1977. Now thats a pretty weird custom or law.
You look back at some of the old customs and I think wtf?
Women could not vote and were property of the man.
Natives could not vote
Bars and liquor outlets had to be closed on voting days.
Sunday shopping even was not permitted. (still is not permitted in N.S. I believe)
When my Grandma got married in 1942 in Vancouver. She lost her Canadian citizenship because she married a immigrant from Poland who did not have Canadian citizenship. My Grandma was born in Winnipeg.
The funny thing was she never realized this until she needed a passport to go to Cuba in 1977. Now thats a pretty weird custom or law.
yes that was all the wrong things canada has done in the past and should never be reapeated again
Yup and thats a good thing and another good thing is we have a Far better Charter of rights than most, if not all countries, to prevent "wacky laws" returning or being created.smitty295 said:
Whether one agrees with with SSM or not, the charter says they can get married(not literally but you get my drift) and to prevent it is discriminatory. The SCOC confirmed that. Most Conservatives do not understand that though or want to admit it. We need to move forward and not backwards like Harper would have us do.
why call the homosexual marriage...
yeah, the name is an emotional thing. Remember that any homosexual was raised as an heterosexual. the name mean as much for an heterosexual than an homosexual. if a civil union between a man and a woman can be call a marriage, then i expect any civil union to be call marriage... i dont remember who said that marriage should be exclusive to church and civil union for any other union, but i guess it would be a compromise...
yeah, the name is an emotional thing. Remember that any homosexual was raised as an heterosexual. the name mean as much for an heterosexual than an homosexual. if a civil union between a man and a woman can be call a marriage, then i expect any civil union to be call marriage... i dont remember who said that marriage should be exclusive to church and civil union for any other union, but i guess it would be a compromise...
RE: The marriage "Saviour
Yes it would be safe to assume most "homosexuals" were raised by hetrosexuals. But so what. You are what you are.
The problem is people from the day they are born are brainwashed by religion at home and even at school. And thats what has corrupted the minds of so many people. You hear the same old crap over and over again you are bound to believe it.
It all starts when you are born you are constantly told if you are good you go to heaven if you are bad you go to hell, doing "so and so" is a sin, if you are a "so and so" you are a sinner and go will end up in hell. Adam and eve is where we all come from etc etc
Intentionally or unintentionally you are brainwashed by (in Canada) Christianity by your parents and extended family.
If you dare to think or believe something outside of the "bible" or "christianity" your a deviant, devil, and headed straight for hell.
It is called a marriage license for a reason. It is marriage and thats what it should be called. Whats the big deal calling it what it is? The sun will still come out tomorrow. The moon will still rise. Armegeddon will not happen if two guys or two girls marry each other.
FYI: Same sex civil unions will be legal in Britain in December. Elton John is marrying his Canadian partner. Here
Yes it would be safe to assume most "homosexuals" were raised by hetrosexuals. But so what. You are what you are.
The problem is people from the day they are born are brainwashed by religion at home and even at school. And thats what has corrupted the minds of so many people. You hear the same old crap over and over again you are bound to believe it.
It all starts when you are born you are constantly told if you are good you go to heaven if you are bad you go to hell, doing "so and so" is a sin, if you are a "so and so" you are a sinner and go will end up in hell. Adam and eve is where we all come from etc etc
Intentionally or unintentionally you are brainwashed by (in Canada) Christianity by your parents and extended family.
If you dare to think or believe something outside of the "bible" or "christianity" your a deviant, devil, and headed straight for hell.
It is called a marriage license for a reason. It is marriage and thats what it should be called. Whats the big deal calling it what it is? The sun will still come out tomorrow. The moon will still rise. Armegeddon will not happen if two guys or two girls marry each other.
FYI: Same sex civil unions will be legal in Britain in December. Elton John is marrying his Canadian partner. Here
well charter of rights or not people are still granted their own oppinion such as Harper has about SSM.
Re: RE: The marriage "Saviour
what i meant is that even if you're gay, you're still have your cultural background (that brainwash that you talk about), and that explain why homosexuals want to call the union between two person of the same-sex marriage...
and read correctly, i said that any homosexual are not only raise by, but raise to be heterosexual...
Sure, and of course we still have the right to object against people like harper
no1important said:
what i meant is that even if you're gay, you're still have your cultural background (that brainwash that you talk about), and that explain why homosexuals want to call the union between two person of the same-sex marriage...
and read correctly, i said that any homosexual are not only raise by, but raise to be heterosexual...
Sure, and of course we still have the right to object against people like harper
smitty295 said:
I never said otherwise. It is time for him as a possible PM to stop his blatant discriminatory opinions on this. He could be our next PM and should conduct himself appropriatly.
He should also get it through his skull it is here to stay and he can't do anything to change it. He should accept it and move on to the more important issues facing Canada.
Cathou- my apologies but sometimes your posts can be a little hard to understand.
no1important said:smitty295 said:
I never said otherwise. It is time for him as a possible PM to stop his blatant discriminatory opinions on this. He could be our next PM and should conduct himself appropriatly.
He should also get it through his skull it is here to stay and he can't do anything to change it. He should accept it and move on to the more important issues facing Canada.
Cathou- my apologies but sometimes your posts can be a little hard to understand.
yeah i know, i stuggle with my english sometimes :wink:
i guess harper would get a few seat in quebec if it wasnt for the gay marriage and his abortion position...
yes i dont know their seems to be a lot of people hwo agree on his abortion possition. Honestly I don't but there is a lot of people who do.
RE: The marriage "Saviour
Well I honestly believe if Belinda Stronach was Conservative leader they would pick up a few seats in Quebec. She is moderate compared to Harper, plus she is one of 4 tory mp's that support it. (gay marriage).
If she was leader she would probley win more seats across Canada than Harper.
Don't worry about it. It seems ok. I wish I knew more than one language. Your lucky in that reguard. I assume you are from Quebec?
Well I honestly believe if Belinda Stronach was Conservative leader they would pick up a few seats in Quebec. She is moderate compared to Harper, plus she is one of 4 tory mp's that support it. (gay marriage).
If she was leader she would probley win more seats across Canada than Harper.
Don't worry about it. It seems ok. I wish I knew more than one language. Your lucky in that reguard. I assume you are from Quebec?