brass

Was watching the news the other day and saw the Canadian politician bickering start even with an ocean's separation...

Harper says we are on our way to promoting polygamy with the passing of gay marriage...

Thought that was funny... thoughts??

also... Martin has threatened election..... ooooh

Charlatan

Harper is grasping at straws... The new legislation will make it legal for same sex marriage but it will also hold up the rights of religious institutions so they won't be forced to perform said marriages... Sounds like a happy medium.

As for Martin calling an election... whatever. I hope he doesn't but one is coming in the next year or so to be sure.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

vox_rox

Yup, you may think that we Canadians are a bunch of post-smokin' homo-lovin' peaceniks (Thanks to Rick Mercer for tjhat phrase), but really we ain't.

No sir, we can't have us no fags marryin' each other up here, or anywhere. It just aint natural. Next think you know, they'll be tellin' me that cars pollute the ozones or sumthin.' sheesh.

Anyway, I can't continue typing that anymore, so I'll respond as best I can.

Steven Harper's logical fallacy that polygamy follows gay marriage is meant to demonstrate his view on gay marriage by raising a sense of fear about it. It's a desperate move, and is completely illogical and even nonsensical.

Gay marriage will change nothing, and the "traditional definition" is a crutch for those who don't wish to face change. Strangely, the definition that they refer to was also changed from an earlier one, and that one was the re-writing of of yet an earlier one. These various definitions include such things as multiple wives, the inclusion of religious elements, and the strict enforcement of marriage under the law, NOT under religious tenet.

So, what do we do with this "definition?" Maybe, we just change it so that two people who love each other can get married, regarldess of age, gender, or the ability to procreate. If a church, ANY church, wished to not take part, it is their right to not marry any two indivuduals, just as they can deny two people marriage under their doctrine now if they wish. Only the law need recognize the marriage.

Why is that so difficult? Why is that so immoral? Why will that lead to decline in social or societal morality? How can that lead, in any way to polygamy?

It's time that the majority stopped stepping on the human righs of a minority based strictly on moral imperatives that aren't even accepted by everyone, or even in the same way.

Should I even mention that our Supreme Court has even said that to deny marriage to same-sex couples is contrary to our Charter of Rights and Freedoms? What more do we need to debate?

Harper should hang his head in shame, and Martin should stop being so wishy-washy. Laurel and Hardy look like better legislaters right now.

Peace,

Pierre

__________________
---
There is no such thing as strong coffee - only weak people.
---

splck

Polygamy is alive and well in Canada already.... Check out Bountiful BC.

__________________
nice line eh?

Yakk

How would Canada promote polygamy?

I can think of some advertising slogans:
"Two wives for the price of one!"
"For a Real Women, one man isn't enough. You can fit three!"
"A man for each season"
"Real men collect trophy wives."

__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

Charlatan

"Come to Canada! A chicken in every pot and two partners in every bed!"

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

JJRousseau

Well said vox. I'm sure Mr Harper checks his polls every day but I can't believe he isn't committing political suicide. If he'd put as much energy in to fixing the economy as he does snooping around our bedrooms, just imagine what he could accomplish.

Poor Mr Harper, first it's polygamy then next thing you know we'll be wanting to abolish slavery and give women the right to vote...

vox_rox

No, no, not slavery! Damn you!!!!!!!

ROTFL. J.J. - that's hilarious.

Harper...do you think he's the product of political evolution, or was he just created that dumb? Hmmm...

Peace,

Pierre

__________________
---
There is no such thing as strong coffee - only weak people.
---

JJRousseau

What this demonstrates to me is that there is no political party in Canada that reflects the views of moderate Canadians. The Conservatives are too socially conservative and the liberals are to fiscally liberal.

cdnjeepin

really tho..who cares if peter and paul or mary and sara get married..it has no affect on my life whats so ever..so why should i have a say in there life???

munchen

Im sorry, but what is the problem with polygamy anyway? If three people want to marry eachother why should we be stopping them?

__________________
"Love is a perky elf dancing a merry little jig and then suddenly he turns on you with a miniature machine gun" -Matt Groening

vox_rox

Meet my new wife, Marnie. she may look like a Grey Wolf, but she's actually part shepard. We can still get married, right? I mean, she passed the blood test and she has GREAT teeth!

And, don't worry, I already got divorced from my previous wolf pack, so this is now my only partner. I'm truly monogamous now, except for the odd affair with the coyotes that hang around the farm. Still, I don't marry them!

Peace,

Pierre

__________________
---
There is no such thing as strong coffee - only weak people.
---

Yakk

I assume you have informed consent from your doggie bride?

__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

vox_rox

Oh CRAP!

Um, give me a minute...


Peace,

Pierre

__________________
---
There is no such thing as strong coffee - only weak people.
---

Antikarma

You know, there's rumours on the internets about that. Liberal lies.

__________________

"Whoever you are, go out into the evening,
leaving your room, of which you know each bit;
your house is the last before the infinite,
whoever you are."

vox_rox

Friggin' Eh! It's a conspiracy I tell ya!

And, y'aknow, this interweb thing is some kinda conspiracy too I think. Bunch of commies tryin' ta brainwash us all into thinking that everyone deserves some kind of human rights and stuff. Ha!

Anyway, I gotta go, my wife needs me to take the garbage out, and she is, after all, the only sister I gots!

Peace,

Pierre

__________________
---
There is no such thing as strong coffee - only weak people.
---

Antikarma

Man, remind me to buy you a beer if you're ever at a TFP party in my neck of the woods

__________________

"Whoever you are, go out into the evening,
leaving your room, of which you know each bit;
your house is the last before the infinite,
whoever you are."

RCAlyra2004

Harper... misses the Bus on two essential issues. (fact)

One: Parliamentarians , if they choose to do so, WILL have to use the "Not Withstanding" clause in order to stop Gay Marriage... and then it can only be stopped for 5 years when the clause will time out and has to be passed again. Recently a letter from a large colection of Law professors from all across Canada explained that harper IS wrong about this.

and

TWO: They would also have to use the Not withstanding clause to stop polygamy also... here is the reason why: Consenting adults cannot be discriminated against no matter what thier orientation... If consent is assumed then any act by another to stop them from doing what they want in respoect to thier relationship (ie marriage) would be constured as discrimmination.

This IS problematic.... the threat of polygamy isn't merely a contrivance meant to scare people away from the Gay marriage issue.It is Legally Plausible according to our charter of rights and freedoms.

I am not choosing sides here, but merely explaining that we are on a slippery slope towards a much more liberal definition of marriage. Polygamy is NOT out of the question according to Canadian Law.

__________________
Living on the edge of sanity

vox_rox

Hey Antikarma, buy me a beer when I'm your neck of the woods. This is just a friendly reminder.

By the way, I'm in Calgary, the heart (or should I say Hart) of Redneck country. Where IS your neck of the woods? I mean, are you really in in NWT.

Hell, I'd go up there for a beer. Gaddamn right I would!

Peace,

Pierre

__________________
---
There is no such thing as strong coffee - only weak people.
---

Drewzy

Thats my view exactly. I aint saying it should be promoted or encouraged, but it shouldnt be illegal. Its an extra option for some women, and the more options the better

Antikarma

I WAS in the NWT. I love it up there. Born in Yellowknife and raised in northern saskatchewan. UNFORTUNATELY, I married an albertan, and apparently they are all born pansy. She hated the cold so in November we moved down to Penticton BC.

Now our two daughters are gonna grow up hippies too. Meh.

__________________

"Whoever you are, go out into the evening,
leaving your room, of which you know each bit;
your house is the last before the infinite,
whoever you are."

Charlatan

I think the real point to be made here is that Polygamy and Same Sex Marriges are different issues.

and more to the point, using the Notwithstanding Clause isn't going to make either issue go away. It just postpones it to later governments... In the meantime, discrimination is the rule of law.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

holymoly

I don't get how the denial of gay-marriage on the grounds of religion is even being talked about.

My athiest self, and my athiest girlfriend can go down to athiest city hall and have an athiest city official pronounce us man and wife in an athiest fashion. Legal marriage is entirely secular. It has nothing to do with the chuch AT ALL. It just turns out that a lot of people happen to have it done in churches by religious figures. Well then, THEY can keep on not doing same-sex unions, but why should they have any say on an entirely secular law? I seriously cannot understand how this whole thing has gone this far.

edit: (sorry if this isn't entirely on-topic. I just get frustrated over this whole thing. And the claim that same-sex marriage will lead to polygamy would be laughable if it weren't so sad.)

Charlatan

The problem is that the legal wording for Marriage is one man and one woman... In ruling that denying the right to marriage to smae sex couples is contrary to the Charter of RIghts and Freedoms, the court has put the government in an awkward situation.

They have marriage defined in way that contravenes the Charter.

The Feds would like to have their laws in line with the provinces that have already ruled in favour of same sex legislation. They have opted to change that definition and in doing so has raised the ire of anyone who things it should stay as it is.

The truth of the matter is that regardless of the definition, same-sex marriages are not going to go away. That threshold has been crossed and the door has been taken off the hinges...

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Yakk

Just define marriage to be 'a union of two people for the purposes of raising children in the future'. People who are infertile or don't plan on making babies lose all marriage standing. Problem solves -- the zealots have their traditional meaning of marriage defended, gay people can form a union for raising children, and all those old married people with adult children are de facto split up, saving on divorce lawyer costs.

=p~

__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

Molo

It looks like Stephen Harper is falling for the old 'Slippery Slope' fallacy. Allowing gay marriage will not lead to allowing polygamy/incest/beastiality.

One thing has no relation to the others.

I mean, look at Denmark and Scandinavia. They have had a form of gay marriage implemented for years, and none of those countries currently allow polygamy.

__________________
Everyone on the Universal Serial Bus!

BigBen

That is without a doubt the most brilliant thing I have ever read.

If you ever run for office, let me know so that I can move there and vote for you. Seriously. I have thought that way for YEARS.

scotchandwater

My basic thought on this whole thing is:
Why should I give a shit who gets married, the only people so far that got married and I got a say in it were my wife and myself.(and I barely got a say in that). If two people want to show the rest of society that they are a couple, then go ahead. This is where we are sitting in this debate right now, because right now gay couples have the right to insure each other, they can make medical decisions for each other, they can file taxes together( not that, that usually helps) they just have no way of showing to their community that they are one.
People keep saying that they don't want these relationships to use the word "marriage", they somehow think that if G&L get to use the word then it will somehow cheapen or change the word when it is used to describe their union. Well I have seen a lot of "marriages" out there that do more to harm the word than some of the G&L couples I know could ever do.
This just comes down to bigotry, some want a part of society for themselves and no one else.

__________________
Got to keep the looneys on the path.

JJRousseau

Thanks BigBen. In one of my previous lives (my favourite phrase tonight) I spent two years roaming the halls of Ottawa. It was disheartening to realize how poorly our country is run. Now, I've become a staunch Libertarian. It's my quest to bring the rest of the tfp to my way of thought...

Back on topic: I give Mr Martin a lot of credit for this stand. It is a difficult and unpopular route but IMO it is the right one.

__________________
Take from the philosopher the pleasure of being heard and his desire for knowledge ceases.

Yakk

I put a thread on Paul Martin's speech into the general Politics forum.

Swing over if you are interested.

__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.

Charlatan

It is interesting to see how posters from other nations react to this...

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

JJRousseau

Thanks Yakk, can't wait to see the response. {shudder}

__________________
Take from the philosopher the pleasure of being heard and his desire for knowledge ceases.