Canadian court backs same sex marriages - they're one step closer to being legalized in Canada

Canoe.ca (CP) ^ | June 10, 2003 | SB00

[IvanT]

Jesus ate with the Lepers, did he not?

[IvanT]

Agreed. I'm sure plenty of people have gay people as co workers. They contribute to the society, heck, the gay area in Toronto used to be a very run down area, they've bought up all the houses, fixed them up nicely, it's actually quite a pleasant place, aside from all the drag queens that is. I don't know, if they want to get married, whatever, I don't give a toss I suppose, it's their business. If they divorce, so be it. Not sure where the taxpayer comes into play with that, in my world, people generally tend to hire lawyers. As for gay adoption? That's another issue entirely, not entirely sure I like that idea or not.

[KCmark]

Prepare to suffer the wrath of many Christians who consider the Bible literal, even when it contains conflicting stories, and who consider Old Testament law (from Leviticus and Deuteronomy) to be morally applicable, except when it isn't (e.g. I have yet to meet people who formally observe all the laws in those books, but they still universally use them to support their arguments).

---

You are so right. Especially from Leviticus. Also, adultry makes the top ten. I don't see huge drives to curb adultry. Should people who commit adultry be kept from getting remarried?

I'm biased I guess as I have a close relative who is gay. He and his mate have been in a monogomous relationship longer than most heterosexual couples I have known. They deserve the same rights and responsibilities as every other couple in America. Your bible be damned.

[breakem]

Two women down the street from us were married to each other by their minister. It hasn't deconstructed our marraige or any others on out street to my knowledge. What are we doing wrong and how long before we can expect some deconstruction?

[TheAngryClam]

Don't say "my Bible" - I'm not the problem.

Tolerance is needed.

Tolerance means you put up with something even though it can still piss you off, like a crying kid sitting behind you on an airplane. If everyone were supposed to like it, it'd be called "acceptance."

South Park is such a great show...

[IvanT]

I think this is just another thread at Free Republic posted to take pot shots at Canada, more than complaing about same sex marriages. Gee, sounds like a Liberal M.O.

[IvanT]

I.e. all of those Libs who use the peace cause as an excuse to bash America.

[what's up]

Yes, all taxpayers pay for social problems, unfortunately. That's why I don't believe in creating more.

[KCmark]

It was too late, already hit post button. I should have said 'the' instead of 'your'.

No you're not; yes it is.

[GovernmentShrinker]

Two women down the street from us were married to each other by their minister. It hasn't deconstructed our marraige or any others on out street to my knowledge. What are we doing wrong and how long before we can expect some deconstruction?

Silly breakem, the only reason it hasn't deconstructed your marriage is that the lesbians' marriage wasn't endorsed and registered by the government. The minute that happens, your marriage will be down the tubes. Or at least that's what hordes of "conservatives" on FR seem to think (gotta wonder about the condition of THEIR marriages).

[breakem]

I've been wondering how to get my marraige deconstructed. Psst, don't tell my wife.

[Jim Noble]

If the state wants to usurp the definition of marriage, the churches should not grant their approval.

The problem with this argument is that the "usurpation of marriage" (good term, BTW) is already a done deal.

Heterosexuals are not really married, as the state has withdrawn enforcement of the two other key elements of "traditional marriage" (permanence and sexual exclusivity), replacing them with registered domestic partnerships terminable at will and with state-funded benefits.

This is in essence "gay marriage" for straights. Real marriage has been forbidden in most states since 1969 (try writing a contract with your spouse-it's the only one you can break without penalty).

Under these circumstances, it seems unfair to allow gay marriage only to straights.

[Jim Noble]

All of these make as much sense as their perversion of thousands of years of the definition of marriage. As much as their PC wishful thinking would like it to be, marriage doesn't mean two men, or two women, or a girl and her horse, or a man and his dog.

It also doesn't mean divorce at will, or adultery without penalty.

[kuma]

Jesus told everyone to "Repent" and "Go and Sin NO MORE". That goes for the heterosexuals with sexual dysfunctions as well. Including the Clintons. Sexual disorders are often an indicator of many other mental problems as well.

Geez can we call a mental illness a mental illness??? and at least offer "voluntary" therapy?

[kuma]

You have a POINT!!! Most of the 50% of divorces are people who remarry get divorced remarry again etc...

Like all CONTRACTS that are LEGALLY BINDING, when we have repetitive violators they should at least have to do something to prove they won't just go about violating the next contract.

We do that in business don't we? At least I hope we do. Enron et al.

[goldstategop]

We need to get the MFA amendment passed and ratified here to avoid Canada's fate and we need do it soon.

[longtermmemmory]

we also need to pass a law that says you may legally only have one father and one mother NOT multiples of each. It does not take a village it takes a family.

[Kuksool]

I don't think anyone doubts that the Old and New Testaments both speak against homosexuality.
319 posted on 05/20/2003 2:53 PM CDT by Emmylou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies |

Funny, I thought God made all of us. I'm sure my friends Adam and Steve will be surprised to know they're not children of God

---

Could you please care to reconcile these previous posts?