PING !
Posted on 07/02/2005 6:14:21 AM PDT by GMMAC
Oh! Canada
How 'gay marriage' relates to economics
WorldNetDaily
Posted: July 2, 2005, 1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Ted Byfield
Canada is about to become the third nation on Earth to legally recognize as a marriage the union of two people of the same sex. The bill passed the House of Commons Tuesday by a vote of 158-133. Fifteen of the 34 Liberals who had previously opposed the bill absented themselves from the final vote. This will put Canada right up there – some would say, right down there – with the Netherlands and Belgium.
Something else happened last Tuesday. The chief executive officers of six major Canadian corporations – among them, the Royal Bank, Manulife Financial and EnCana – described the country as "a nation adrift" and formally warned the government that unless specific changes are made rapidly, Canada will fail to meet the competitive threat posed by the two rising economic giants of the East – India and China – and a slide in Canadian living standards will inevitably follow.
No media commentator saw any link between these two events. The response of the National Post was typical. It described the gay-marriage debate as "a relatively minor issue" that "has dominated political discourse at the expense of other more pressing matters." Among other "more pressing matters" it no doubt had in mind the imperiled state of the Canadian economy, noted by the chief executive officers.
That is, the Post could see no link between a country's social morality and its economic performance. The Royal Bank would agree. It has been an industry leader in the corporate recognition of the homosexual lifestyle, and at one point advanced a program that urged employees to display a rainbow symbol in their offices to indicate to homosexuals that they could feel "comfortable" there.
Behind that staff policy lies an understandable and well-intended moral ideal. Since certain people find within themselves inclinations about which they have concluded they can do nothing, then society has an obligation to accept and accommodate those inclinations, however unfavorably they might have been regarded in the past.
The bank would, of course, deny that it is in the business of moral philosophy. It loans money, that's all, and it tries to be fair. Besides, while there may not be very many gay people, they tend to be talented, well-paid and good customers of the bank.
But the bank has definitely plunged into the world of moral philosophy, and it has acted on what (to a bank in particular) is a very dangerous principle. It has reasoned that if a person feels an inclination within himself, then society should accommodate that inclination.
But people have other inclinations. We have an inclination not to keep promises if it is painful to us. On occasion, we have an inclination to tell lies. We have an inclination to avoid hard work, to slide out of uncomfortable commitments, to cheat if we think we won't get caught, to let the other guy do the job, and to put our own interests ahead of everybody else's. All these are human inclinations.
Now, the bank depends on us resisting these inclinations, and meeting our obligations. And when it in effect endorses the gay lifestyle – which rests upon the principle that whatever I feel like doing is right for me – it validates and encourages a human tendency once known as decadence. And decadent societies do not long prosper.
The threat posed by India and China can be stated in moral, as well as economic terms. Both have massive work forces renowned for diligence, commitment, intelligence, an eagerness to learn of new skills and a willingness to work long hours at low pay with minimal individual recognition or recompense. If our response to this is to tell our people that whatever they feel like doing is fine with us – and that is the message of the gay-marriage bill – then we will soon be working for our competitors, and so we should.
The strength of Americans is a sense of duty, rooted in Christianity, and requiring a stern resistance to those inclinations that they know to be destructive. If that kind of resolve still dwells within them, they will meet the economic threat posed by India and China in the 21st century, just as assuredly as they met the military threat posed by Germany and Japan in the 20th. Canada, unhappily, served notice last Tuesday that such things are no longer important here. We are concerned with "more pressing matters."
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
BOYCOTT all vacations and trips to canada (small C)!!!!!!
AIDS will now become rampant.
PING !
Leathers at the weddings now mandatory. But, it would be really funny if every homo-bride had to wear a white gown.
All the more reason for improved border control to keep out guys in leather and white wedding gowns.
How interesting and tragic to live in the historic period where a once great nation (canada) committed suicide.
But isn't it a darn shame how homosexual perverts can twist an entire society.
I guess it's just one of the ongoing results of the sexual revolution.
kanaduh is officially a third world nation BEHIND all the emerging ecconomies.
"AIDS will now become rampant."
Give me a break. Yes, AIDS is more prevalent in the gay community. That's a fact. And there are plenty of reasons you can oppose gay marriage. But saying that gay marriage will lead to rampant outbreaks of AIDS is ludicrous. Do you honestly think it will change personal behavior to make them take *more* risks? If they're taking risks already, they'll continue to. If they're allowed to marry, they'll probably just continue their current behavior - either high risk multiple partner or lower risk single partner. That won't make a lick of difference in the AIDS rate.
On the up side for Canada, you're lawyers will be getting quite rich as the divorces start.
no, but it is a valid point. Look at the number of homosexuals who are moving to boston. Consider the strain on canadian healthcare when more homosexuals move to canada.
Then there is the whole marrige for insurance consideration.
If it costs only $100,000.00 US for each aids patient, every mere 10 additional aids patients who plug into the canadian healthcare cost the canadian taxpayer 1 million.
keep multiplying.
Will canadians agree to increase sales taxes above the present 15%?
Provincial?
Federal?
How about support by the public? How about the military? How many canadians are willing to die in combat for the right of some man to stick his penis in the anus of another man?
How about a US citizen "marrying" a Canadian citizen.
At present the USA provides for the RIGHT of a us citizen to bring a spouse to the US on a visa.
At present the 1996 DMA prevents issuing or recognizing such a marriage on the FEDERAL level.
Will CF recognize homosexual marriages done in canada? Mass?
This is another reason we need the Federal FMA.
Too late.
You can thank Quebec and its separatists and whiners for this. If it weren't for nearly unanimous support from the Quebec MP's, gay marriage would have been defeated by a healthy margin.
All the more reason to support Quebec separation!
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.