The Authentic Canada-U.S. Relationship:
"To Hell With The Reds In Both!"
Posted on 06/28/2005 7:19:43 PM PDT by Heartofsong83
Same-sex marriage bill passes in Commons CTV.ca News Staff
Canada will become the third country in the world to officially sanction same-sex marriage.
In a 158 to 133 vote, the House of Commons adopted Bill C-38 -- the controversial legislation legalizing same-sex marriage from coast to coast -- on its third and final reading Tuesday night.
The Liberals had the support of almost all New Democrat and Bloc Quebecois MPs for the vote.
The bill will become official once it receives approval in the Senate. An earlier Conservative motion to send the bill back to committee was voted down 158 to 127.
The decision marks the end of a long and divisive debate, with fierce opposition coming from Conservative members, religious groups, and even members of the Liberal Party. Opponents are vowing to keep up the fight against the C-38, which changes the traditional definition of marriage to one that includes same-sex couples.
Conservative Leader Stephen Harper is promising that he won't let the issue rest; he says he'll revisit the new law if he becomes the next prime minister. He also repeated Tuesday his claim that the law lacks legitimacy because it passed with the support of the separatist Bloc party.
"I don't think Canadians are going to accept as a final word a decision taken by only a minority of federalist MPs," he said. But Harper didn't specify how he would address the issue if the Tories were to form the next government.
Liberal Justice Minister Irwin Cotler said Harper is going to have to come clean and acknowledge that he would have to invoke the Constitution's notwithstanding clause to override the new law.
"They're going to have to acknowledge that they want to override the (Charter of Rights), override constitutional-law decisions in nine jurisdictions in this country; override a unanimous decision of the Supreme Court of Canada; override the rule of law in this country," Cotler said.
The clause is available to provinces to override federal laws that intrude on provincial jurisdiction.
But almost every provincial and territorial government has already legalized same-sex marriage; and the new legislation will ensure that the four "hold-out" jurisdictions that yet haven't -- Alberta, Prince Edward Island, Nunavut and the Northwest Territories -- now must.
"It's an historic moment, it's about equality for gays and lesbians," said NDP MP Libby Davies.
Alberta Premier Ralph Klein, who is "strongly opposed" to the bill on moral grounds, acknowledged Tuesday that little can be done to stop same-sex marriages in his province.
"Since this is federal legislation, to use the notwithstanding clause as contained in our own Marriage Act would be frivolous," Klein told reporters in Calgary. "It wouldn't stand up in any court of law. So there are some other options that we would have to consider."
Klein said although some members of his caucus are threatening to use every legal weapon at their disposal to get around the legislation, "there are no legal weapons; there's nothing left in the arsenal."
As expected, about 30 Liberal MPs voted against the measure tonight. Martin declared it a free vote for backbench MPs, but cabinet ministers were under orders to vote in favour of the bill.
On Tuesday, a junior cabinet minister chose to resign and return to the backbenches rather than vote in favour of same sex marriage.
Joe Comuzzi, the minister of state for economic development in northern Ontario, informed the prime minister of his decision in the early morning.
"I promised faithfully to the people of Thunder Bay-Superior North that I would defend the traditional definition of marriage," he explained to reporters on Parliament Hill.
With a report from CTV News
I see your point, sad but Canada took those left wing kids in and made their bed. They were thinking with their hearts and still are today. We can always hope that conservatives in Canada will one day reassert themselves. In the meantime, hold fast, and vote. With your feet if you have to eh?
I am sooooo pissed that this vote went through and was passed with NNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOO referendum for the public. I had not one damn single thing to say about this. I am Pissed!!!! And may God strike that piece of chit Martin dead. And may he take the rest of his lying, stealing, piece of chit cabinet with him. And Yes, why don't you really ask me how I feel about our piece of chit government here in Canukistan.
I Love my Country, I Hate The Liberals Who Are Trying To Destroy It. And I hate the people who are enabling them to do this. A**holes, one and all. Our pocket book, for the good of the country. When all is said and done, I hope everyone of those no good SOB's resides in Hell. What a fitting end.
I don't know the full answer, but when we had compulsory military in the US, we required registration of those immigrants who took permanent residence. So back then we would have made a man of military age register and serve if he came to stay. Israel does this too, and still has compulsory service so if one moves to Israel one must be prepared to serve in the military.
As far as refusal of a potential immigrant. We are operating under the immigration act of 1965, sponsored by Ted Kenedy, and this specifies that the ratio of immigrants must be representative of the prior years admissions. Therefore, I am not sure the govt of the US will take "just anyone who shows up". I know Boxer (Sen from CA) has passed special admission criteria for people fleeing repression in some countries, like San Salvador. I know we have a special immigration policy for Cubanos who reach our shore. I am speaking of "permanent entry" as for visitors entering as tourists, no, we don't restrict anyone except persons on the terrorist lists.
I don't know what if anything the US would do if an Israeli (fleeing military service) wished to immigrate to the US. I suspect He would be denied because he is not from Asia, Mexico, or one of the repressed countries of Barbara Boxer. But my knowledge of the subject is unclear.
I did not mean to besmirch Canada and their policies, You have a present US deserter from the military, and so far he is not being sent home to face the music. He volunteered for service before he changed his mind. Back in the '60s, the Vietnam war was not highly supported and Canada offered an escape. I had friends who suggested I could consider this too if I were drafted. I was not. The radicals of that time do indeed have too much to say in government, here as well as Canada.
And they are definitely ruining Canada with their left leaning and multicultural approach to Canadian society.
They were subject to prosecution and jail time for desertion and draft evasion. I too was around at the time and had an acquaintance or two that contemplated fleeing to Canada to avoid military service. They didn't because Nixon ended the draft but had they done so they knew no one in Canada would send them home or refuse to allow them to stay.
Maybe it wasn't offical Canadian policy signed off on by the PM but it might as well have been since not one I've ever heard of was refused sanctuary.
The Authentic Canada-U.S. Relationship:
"To Hell With The Reds In Both!"
starting with rosie
Nothing wrong the UEL. Had some good values and virtues. Besides, I can count my fellow UEL fans on two hands and one foot these days. Sad, really. They've killed the true Canada and made Socialist Funland.
Unfortunately, my province, Ontario, is as liberal as they get. They fully support this depravity.
Nope, only Old Glory will flap in the breeze on Lake Erie this summer.
Plus, if the Marines land, they'll know I'm on their side!
49 Ontario MP's voted against gay marriage at some point (out of 106 - a few abstained at final reading and one actually flipped his vote in 3rd reading onto our side) and the population, outside of the liberal GTA (especially the ultra-liberal City of Toronto), is strongly against gay marriage.
So why doesn't that population in the other areas do something about this? Not to be simpleminded here -- a complex issue, counting voter opinion -- but it sure reads to most of us that this decision in Canada was done by interest group/s in Canada, with the aid and assistance of a very squirrely Prime Minister -- going out of his way to wiggle everything into everything, be about as New Age a Manipulator as he can be.
Such that, the decision does not represent the country so much as it represents more intensely and strangely interested persons in the country than anyone else.
So did, by the way, that ruling in Canada a while ago forbidding "hate speech." I mean, as if the act itself did not represent hate speech, and as if that which the issue was made to enable was not hate speech about everyone else.
Something's very nutty up there, if you don't mind me writing.
"A right is a right" the PM said yesterday/day before...
Oh, now THAT's an interesting justification for destroying civilization's values.
There is no "right" to marry. No homosexual is denied the ability to marry, either.
This is just New Age gobbledy-gook masquereding as nonsense from an elected leader. And the movement to make "gay marriage" a "law" is beyond legal reason, much less moral and social. The illegality and nonsense involved in this ruling is overwhelming. Perhpas that's why it passed, relying on fomenting certain voters and pacifying those who would otherwise oppose it (and therefore did not, or didn't bother, whatever).
Simple: if it weren't for overwhelming support among Quebec MP's (only about a half dozen voted against gay marriage out of 75), it would have failed by a decent margin.
The Anti-Defamation League's new, tougher hate bill, "The Local Law Enforcement
Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2005," HR 2662, http://tinyurl.com/835v5 , and
it's companion Senate bill, S. 1145 http://tinyurl.com/8aflu , if passed, will
very soon end FREE SPEECH and FREE SPEECH TALK RADIO. The ADL www.adl.org/ ,
through similar legislation, has already ended free speech in Canada. It wants
to do the same in America.
Here's a summary of how this bill would make law.
HR 2662 http://tinyurl.com/835v5 , intends to enforce nation-wide the working
ADL/federal definition that 'hate' equals bias against federally-protected
groups. Particularly against:
Homosexuals. Any specific public criticism of homosexuals will eventually be
considered a hate crime, just as it already has been for eleven Christians under
the ADL's Pennsylvania hate crime law on Oct. 10, 2004.
Transvestites. Female impersonators, and persons with confused or altered
gender, will gain special federal protection against bias-motivated threat. This
includes transvestites who are threatened for sexist reasons by males who
perceive them as really being women. Such men will be prosecuted as 'hate
criminals' against women, even though the 'woman' they were biased against was
actually a man!
Women. Any woman who claims, "The last time I had sex with him, he used a sexist
word against me. He raped me!" can press charges for a 'hate crime' of rape.
Punishment will be triple the usual penalty - about 30 years in prison.
Jews. B'nai B'rith http://bnaibrith.org/ , a Jewish religious organization,
invented 'hate laws' to make public criticism of homosexuality a 'hate crime.'
Yet this is only a step toward B'nai B'rith's REAL objective: making public
criticism of Jews, matters Jewish, and the State of Israel, a hate crime.
HR 2662 intends to give the same special federal protection to Jews as to
homosexuals, providing a green light for corrupt Jewish leaders to intensify
their domination of the media, Congress, and the Mideast. Hate laws will
eventually empower Jewish leadership to imprison those who criticize them, be
they Jews or Gentiles.
HR 2662 will invite pedophiles, witches, warlocks, Satanists and even 'sinners'
to acquire special federal protection from anyone who criticizes them, including
pastors. Witches and warlocks in England are, today, lobbying hard for inclusion
under Britain,s ADL hate law.
If passed, HR 2662 will provide immediate special FBI, Justice Department and
local police assistance to protected groups that claim to have been offended. On
the slightest evidence of bias, the police will descend [as the world saw happen
last October in Philadelphia] upon Christians, pastors, talk show hosts and
radio station managers, indicting them with trumped-up 'hate crime.' charges and
exorbitant penalties.
FEDERAL TAKEOVER OF LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
A huge barrier to establishment of a federal hate bureaucracy has been the
sovereign right of states to enforce the law as they see fit. Heretofore, the
federal government has had to prove that such abuses as jury tampering, voter
fraud, and slavery existed in states before it could meddle in state law
enforcement. HR 2662 would legitimize as law several devious strategies to break
down all barriers to federal intrusion.
HR 2662 asserts that if a violent bias crime within a state in any way affects
interstate commerce, the federal government has the right to invade state law
enforcement. This means that, if a homosexual has been called a 'faggot' and
been threatened to have his butt kicked by a gas station attendant, and as a
result does not patronize that gas station, whose products have come from across
the state line, the federal government can intervene. Or if the homosexual buys
a Greyhound ticket (vehicle of interstate commerce) to re-settle in San
Francisco as a result of such threatened 'violence,' the federal government has
a green light to take over state hate crime law enforcement in that state. Sec.
7(2)(B), Sec. 2(5-8).
HR 2662 asserts that bias-motivated violence in states is a 'relic' of slavery.
This bill contends that the presence of bias-motivated violent crime within a
state is proof that slavery still exists in that state. This provides the same
justification for intervention that the federal government had in putting down
slavery during the Civil War! Sec. 2(10,11).
Under HR 2662, the government can take over local law enforcement if
1. states do not have hate laws; Sec. B (b)(2A)
2. states are not enforcing state and federal hate laws as zealously as the
federal government wishes; Sec.B (b)(2A)
3. states do not produce the kind of verdicts in hate crimes trials that the
federal government wants. Sec. B (b)(2D)
VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION
HR 2662 is in flat violation of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which
prohibits government from favoring any particular group.
HR 2662 will give ADL complete control of the federal anti-hate agenda. Very
quickly, via enabling legislation and judicial precedent, any pretext of respect
for the rights of Christians or dissenters will dissolve. This has already
happened under the ADL anti-hate law in Canada, England, Ireland, Sweden,
France, Italy, Australia, New Zealand, and under Pennsylvania's ADL hate law in
Philadelphia on Oct. 10th.
All criticism of protected groups via politically incorrect terms, such as
'homosexual' or 'sodomite,' will become hate crime, just as it is under the
British ADL hate law.
A huge number of legal precedents will continuously widen hate law jurisdiction.
Courts will quickly become clogged with federal indictments.
Staggering backlogs of unresolved cases, will make the federal hate law, like
Roe vs. Wade, virtually impossible to repeal.
FCC restrictions will soon descend on talk show hosts with lists of unapproved
topics. Talk show hosts will be fined or imprisoned and stations will lose their
broadcast licenses, just as in Canada today, if they violate those restrictions.
It's gonna be illegal to be normal.
They're still queers, and they know it. It's nothing more than the manifesto reaching it's goal. I gotta say it... damn, they're good.
That rumble you just felt is all the US gays stampeding north to get hitched.
Canada is a beautiful country filled with (historically) enterprising and fair-minded people. It hurts every American to see her go wrong (just as it hurts us to see our own country go wrong). But we're still friends. Besides, you are our number one supplier of foreign oil. Better you guys than the Saudis.
Thanks for your kind comments.
I am BC bred. I love my country. Or at least, I used to. What has been done to my country under this stinking, corrupt, Liberal government is tearing me apart. I try to vote the Liberals out every election. And every election, I am again, dissappointed, and out voted. I would be all for a Western Confederation. I have no use for the rest of the country. Ontario and Quebec have no problems with political corruption, as long as they keep gaining from it. I am soooo dissappointed in my country, as a whole. The west has far suffered, and been removed from the rest of the country. They rape our resources, and leave us hanging out to dry. Screw Em.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.