Tourism Commission Looks to Woo Gay Couples to Canada

CFRA News Talk Radio ^ | June 16, 2006 | Josh Pringle

[UnbornChild]

Tourism Commission Looks to Woo Gay Couples to Canada Josh Pringle Friday, June 16, 2006

The Canadian Tourism Commission wants to attract same-sex couples to Canada.

The agency has launched an advertising blitz in the United States to woo gay couples to tie the knot in Canada.

If you want to express your objections:

http://www.canadatourism.com/ctx/app/en/ca/contactSubmit.do

I encourage Americans to write as well. You just know American gay couples will use this to get their unions acknowledged by American courts.

[Darksheare]

Sure!
It'll be worth the laugh.

[Irish_Thatcherite]

I remember seeing him...

[Darksheare]

Yeah, and he was quite rabid.

[darkangel82]

I'm having a mindblock here, who's OWK? (Dumb question, I know).

[Irish_Thatcherite]

I only seen a thread posted by him once, I think he was banned by the time I joined.

[spatso]

"It'll be worth the laugh."

Yes, much of the discussion has been more hilarious rather than substantive, but there is also an image issue associated with the debate. Perhaps the gay agenda is inevitable. But, does it not bother you, just a little, that Canada seems so keen to lead the parade in the entrenchment of gay rights.

[Darksheare]

OWK, or 'one who knows', rabidly pro-gay yet denied being gay, loved to hurl insults, loved to sound the clarion for everything pro-gay, loved to insinuate his opponents were gay, hated having that tossed back at him.
He's been gone for awhile, and good riddance.
He also loved to claim to be a 'true conservative', and loved to claim to have the enlightened position.

[Darksheare]

He's been gone awhile, yes.

[Darksheare]

Why not?
They insisted that we were wrong for attacking teh terrorists.
Then they recently found out, much to their chagrin, that terrorists were looking to attack them.
The conservatives up there were not surprised, teh liberals were quite shocked.

Yes, it will be worth the laugh.

[darkangel82]

Sounds like the usual FR troll.

[Darksheare]

Yup.
He was posting at an anti-Freep site last if memory serves.

[darkangel82]

I see his last post was February '04, ten months before I joined, so it wasn't a dumb question after all, although all FR trolls look alike to me now.

[King Prout]

spatso,

to hazard a guess, I'd say fanfan's irritation with you is a direct result of your somewhat belligerent posts and questions, coupled with your unsubtle insinuation that fanfan might have a personal interest in Canadian "gay Meccas"

for a rather new n00B, you certainly have a well-developed knack for annoying people needlessly. Perhaps you should stop and reflect on that for a bit.

[Darksheare]

OWK got it around the time of his last post.
One of his last posts, now showing a red x, was to post a pic of another Freeper without permission.
And, he was being his lovable charming self as usual for him.

[GMMAC]

"Do you really think it is a legitimate conservative option to say we will use the home state of Kennedy, Kerry and Tip O'Neil to legitimate our values?"

Nahh ... & since you asked, I'm more thinking I'm getting pretty damned tired of someone - now habitually - sniping at those of us up here already addressing this problem while he turns a conveniently blind eye to the very same thing going on a whole whack closer to his own home base.

[spatso]

No I don't feel that way at all. Last week Kanawa posted a statement on how he felt to be conservative with a new conservative government just having been elected after many years of liberal rule in Canada. It was really quite outstanding. Not unlike the GOP and conservative feelings after GWB was first elected. Indeed, I felt a little jealous of Kanawa's enthusiasm and probably the feelings of many Canadian conservatives at this time.
The gay issue, on the other hand, is a stand alone matter especially as it relates to the war on terrorism and my favorite issue of border security. How is anybody going to take you seriously if your agenda is consistently being hijacked by the gay priority?

[Irish_Thatcherite]

I happened to come across a thread of his, shortly after I joined up - I narrowly missed him by a few months!!

[darkangel82]

LOL, he was zot dust by then.

[Darksheare]

"No I don't feel that way at all."

Yeah, right.

"The gay issue, on the other hand, is a stand alone matter especially as it relates to the war on terrorism and my favorite issue of border security. "

I mentioned it as an example, not as an issue.
You need to learn what an example is.

"How is anybody going to take you seriously if your agenda is consistently being hijacked by the gay priority?"

Once again, the terrorism was an example, not the issue.
Once again, you have failed to meet the standards.
"Gay Tourism" will turn into "Sex Tourism" quicker than you can say "The Wiggles" or "Booh-Bah".
Then there's the gay marriage issue where they will 'wed abroad' and insist their 'union' be recognized in the US.

Now, take two bolts, and show me how by themselves they can be united.
Using ONLY the bolts themselves.

[spatso]

"your unsubtle insinuation that fanfan might have a personal interest in Canadian "gay Meccas"

I think he first implied the same for me.