El Sitherino Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Just wanted to share the good news. Click Canadian court OKs same-sex marriage Gay weddings ruled constitutional; Legislature expected to approve. By Beth Duff-Brown Associated Press TORONTO — Canada's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that gay marriage was constitutional, a landmark opinion allowing the federal government to call on Parliament to legalize same-sex unions nationwide. If approved by a majority of the House of Commons, as widely expected, Canada would become the third country to embrace marriage by homosexuals and lesbians. Belgium and the Netherlands are the other two. However, the court added that religious officials cannot be forced to perform unions against their beliefs. It also declined to answer a contentious question about whether traditional marriage between men and women also was constitutional. Prime Minister Paul Martin said after the court's ruling that since judges in six Canadian provinces and one of its territories already allow gay marriages, it should be approved nationwide. He said his government would introduce a bill shortly after Christmas. He noted that members of Parliament would be free to vote their conscience, but his Cabinet ministers would have to support his bill. "For many Canadians and many parliamentarians, this is a difficult issue involving personal and religious convictions and it represents a very significant change to a long-standing institution," Martin said. The court's decision brings to the final stages a long, bitter fight over whether gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry in Canada. Public opinion is evenly divided on the matter, and advocates for both sides are preparing for the final phase of the battle. "This is a victory for Canadian values," said Alex Munter of Canadians for Equal Marriage. He said that while public opinion may be split on the subject, Canadians endorse the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the constitution's bill of rights. "One area of overwhelming consensus is that the charter is a document that Canadians cherish," Munter said. In the United States, gay marriage is opposed by a majority of Americans, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll taken in November, shortly after constitutional amendments in 11 states to ban same-sex marriage were approved. "I think it's a tremendously historic day that will help not just families in Canada, but people across the border who are wrestling with this question, of how the denial of marriage harms gay people and their loved ones," said Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry, a gay-rights coalition based in New York. "Canada is setting a standard for inclusion and fairness, and offering the real proof that ending discrimination helps families and hurts no one." Wolfson said of Canadians: "We now have the benefit of your wind in our sails, and we are charting the same course." In California, the Campaign for Children and Families called the Supreme Court opinion "shabby." California's state legislature last week began reconsidering a bill legalizing marriage licenses for gay couples. To pass in the House of Commons, the legislation needs the approval of about 44 of the 95 Liberal backbench members of Parliament to obtain a 155-vote majority in the 308-seat House. One top Liberal predicted the legislation should pass easily after its introduction, likely early next year. It already has the support of the 38-member Liberal cabinet and virtually all the 54 Bloc Quebecois and 19 New Democrat lawmakers. However, some Liberal members of Parliament are opposed. "I do personally have a problem with redefining marriage and I'm sure some of my colleagues do as well," said Roy Cullen of the Liberal Party. Gordon Young, pastor of the First Assembly of God Church in St. John's, Newfoundland, was disappointed by the ruling. "It's a sad day for our country," Young told CBC television news. "God is in the DNA of this nation. We believe that changing the definition of marriage is changing the divine institution that God put in place for the order of our society." In its ruling, the Supreme Court said the legal definition of marriage should change with public opinion over time. "Several centuries ago, it would have been understood that marriage be available only to opposite-sex couples," the court said. "The recognition of same-sex marriage in several Canadian jurisdictions as well as two European countries belies the assertion that the same is true today." The opinion is not legally binding and it now is up to the federal government to make gay marriage protected by law nationwide. The high court opinion comes 18 months after former Prime Minister Jean Chretien abandoned his government's fight against same-sex marriage by refusing to appeal provincial court rulings in Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec, which declared traditional marriage laws unconstitutional. His government then drafted legislation that would allow gay and lesbian weddings in city halls, courthouses and in religious institutions that choose to perform them. To ensure the bill would be passed, the Liberal government asked the Supreme Court three questions: • Does the federal government have exclusive authority to define marriage? • Does the charter protect religious groups from having to perform gay weddings against their beliefs? • Is the proposed same-sex marriage law constitutional? Martin added a fourth question after he was sworn in a year ago: Is the traditional definition of marriage between one man and one woman also constitutional? This was aimed at clarifying whether the century-old definition of marriage was flawed. The Supreme Court answered in the affirmative to the first three questions but declined to address Martin's query. this is awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 +1 for Canada! "It's a sad day for our country," Young told CBC television news. "God is in the DNA of this nation. We believe that changing the definition of marriage is changing the divine institution that God put in place for the order of our society." Canada has freedom of religion, bub. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted December 10, 2004 Author Share Posted December 10, 2004 If god didn't like gays, why would he make them in the first place? That's what I always wonder. Silly fundies, happiness is for everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipperthefrog Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by InsaneSith If god didn't like gays, why would he make them in the first place? That's what I always wonder. Silly fundies, happiness is for everyone. They choose to be gays, god din't make them gay. There are former gays ,but there are no former blacks and whites. Gay is not like race. Don't get me wrong, I'm not aginst the gays. I don't think homosexuality is wrong. Their personal choice is not hurting anybody. Homosexuality is a personal choice rather than a "race" or "breed". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Sitherino Posted December 10, 2004 Author Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by kipperthefrog They choose to be gays uhm... no they don't. Originally posted by kipperthefrog There are former gays ,but there are no former blacks and whites. Gay is not like race. these people are only fooling themselves and denying themselves true happiness. Originally posted by kipperthefrog Homosexuality is a personal choice. no, no it's not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 I don't think that gays choose to be gay, just as we don't choose to be hetero. You didn't just, when you were a certain age, decide: "Hmm, I think I'll be straight. Yes, I'll be straight." Just as gays don't decide: "Hmm, I'm gonna be gay." Someone said in a homosexuality debate that 25% of all homosexuals have attemped suicide. Why do you think they'd do that? If all people were born straight, why doesn't everyone stay straight? How could you change what you're attracted to? That's like saying that you can change what kinds of foods you like, or what smells good to you. "Hmm, I think grass tastes better than hamburgers. I'll eat grass from now on." Damn you IS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GothiX Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Hello, and welcome to reality! This is where homosexuals are still human beings, and get the same rights as every other human being! And hah, my country started the revolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pie™ Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by kipperthefrog There are former gays ,but there are no former blacks and whites. Gay is not like race. *Sings "Thriller"* I think that's great news! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipperthefrog Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 quote:Originally posted by kipperthefrog They choose to be gays uhm... no they don't. how so? these people are only fooling themselves and denying themselves true happiness. Who is denying themselves true happiness. You can't turn a different race and deny you self true happiness. the only reason they are gay is they think it is the IN thing to do. Why would you WANT to be with another guy? if it IS natural, why don't we you see any gay animals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GothiX Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Human species isn't your standard species in nature, sir. I mean, there aren't any other species where a female can come [you know what I meant], in example. And if you'd remove your arse from that cave you're in, you'd have found out that there's been plenty of research as to wther it's a choice or not. The results were usually the same: You're born with it, or you're not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by kipperthefrog the only reason they are gay is they think it is the IN thing to do. Sorry kip, but that gave me a chuckle. Originally posted by kipperthefrog Why would you WANT to be with another guy? I wouldn't. But people who have a different sexuality might, because they're attracted to the same sex, just as we're attracted to the opposite sex (except IS, silly bi ) Originally posted by kipperthefrog if it IS natural, why don't we you see any gay animals? There was a lawsuit against a farmer who sold a breeder a gay pig that wouldn't breed, because it was only interested in other male pigs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipperthefrog Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by TK-8252 There was a lawsuit against a farmer who sold a breeder a gay pig that wouldn't breed, because it was only interested in other male pigs. really! I guess religius people don't know what they're talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elijah Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 If we have Equal right for gays when will there be Equal rights for the unborn? Originally posted by kipperthefrog really! I guess religius people don't know what they're talking about. I'd like an explanation for that statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by Elijah If we have Equal right for gays when will there be Equal rights for the unborn? Originally posted by gothiX Hello, and welcome to reality! This is where homosexuals are still human beings, and get the same rights as every other human being! If you want rights for the unborn, I guess you also want rights for bacteria, fungi, viruses, and parasites? Because that's about what they're equivilant to before they develop their nervous system. Cleaning my bathroom must make me a genocidal maniac. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elijah Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Babys are not humans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipperthefrog Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by Elijah I'd like an explanation for that statement. I could't think of anything to argue with the guy who talked about the gay pig in an earlier post, so I stooped to sarcasm. Can you help me with theese guys? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipperthefrog Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by TK-8252 If you want rights for the unborn, I guess you also want rights for bacteria, fungi, viruses, and parasites? Because that's about what they're equivilant to before they develop their nervous system. Cleaning my bathroom must make me a genocidal maniac. so an unborn baby is no different than bacteria? Bacteria don't develop into a human life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by kipperthefrog so an unborn baby is no different than bacteria? Bacteria don't develop into a human life. Until the baby has developed its nervous system, it's no more complex than a parasite, living off the mother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipperthefrog Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by TK-8252 Until the baby has developed its nervous system, it's no more complex than a parasite, living off the mother. It is still human. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by Elijah Babys are not humans? Oh, babies are certainly human! However, as it's been discussed TO DEATH in the abortion thread in the senate, I will merely say that I do NOT believe a human is a mere combination of a sperm and an egg. Embryos are not human. And with that I'm DONE debating THAT. Oh, and GO CANADA! WEWT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pie™ Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by Elijah Babys are not humans? I don't think they're considered babies before they are born. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipperthefrog Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by ET Warrior Oh, babies are certainly human! However, as it's been discussed TO DEATH in the abortion thread in the senate, I will merely say that I do NOT believe a human is a mere combination of a sperm and an egg. Embryos are not human. And with that I'm DONE debating THAT. Oh, and GO CANADA! WEWT! I agree on one part: this is a gay marrage thread. personally I dont care if people are gay, I still beleive it ia a personal choice. a sexual prefrence is a choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Originally posted by kipperthefrog a sexual prefrence is a choice. You chose to be straight? I know I didn't. I just am naturally attracted to girls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe© Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 no one is stopping gays from being gay. As to the abortion issue we were all once that knot of cells and we would not be who we are today if we had not been there at one point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwing Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Go Canada. Originally posted by kipperthefrog There are former gays ,but there are no former blacks and whites. Gay is not like race. No, there are not former gays. This is a misnomer created by people who see homosexuality as a "lifestyle" or a "choice". Homosexuality is being attracted to your own gender. With "ex-gays", the gays are still attracted to their own gender, but aren't having intimate relations with their own gender. They are pronounced "cured", and their remaining attractions are just "temptations of the Devil". Originally posted by kipperthefrog Don't get me wrong, I'm not aginst the gays. I don't think homosexuality is wrong. Their personal choice is not hurting anybody. Homosexuality is a personal choice rather than a "race" or "breed". So, kipper, did you choose to be attracted to women? Originally posted by kipperthefrog Who is denying themselves true happiness. You can't turn a different race and deny you self true happiness. the only reason they are gay is they think it is the IN thing to do. What?! Then what about all the gay people who go through horrible things and put themselves in physical/emotional danger because of their orientation? Who would 'choose' to be gay because it was an 'in' thing to do? And where the heck did you get this info from? Do you actually have any friends/family who are gay? Originally posted by kipperthefrog Why would you WANT to be with another guy? Why would you WANT to be with a girl? Originally posted by kipperthefrog if it IS natural, why don't we you see any gay animals? Are you being serious here? If so, let Google enlighten you. edit: Originally posted by JoeBeforeJedi I don't really have much to say about this, only the "parts" would fit if that were the way it was meant to be, but if you want to be gay then it is your choice, who?s stopping you. If you mean procreation isn't possible, then are sterile heterosexuals not 'meant' to have sex? If you mean the "parts" don't "fit", then I'm not sure what you're talking about, and I don't think you know either. I'd ask for clarification, but this is a PG/PG-13 forum, and as staff I am obligated to keep it that way. Suffice to say that gays find their parts work together just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.