+Mini.jpg)
the issue: gay marriage
the issue, gay marriage, is being revisited again. the harper government will allow for a free vote in the fall, asking mp's if they think the issue of gay marriage should be revisited, rather than asking them if they approve of gay marriage. parliament passed bill c-38 in june 2005, making canada the fourth country in the world to recognize gay marriage. marriage for gays and lesbians was already legal in most provinces before that, with courts across the country ruling that the conventional definition of marriage violates the charter of rights and freedoms.
however, the conservatives, have long had a hard-on to have this changed. the good thing is that a growing number of cabinet ministers and mp's are questioning whether the debate should be revisited, with some saying that the issue has already been debated thoroughly, which it has, both in the media, and the public. the u.s. government is already moving to ban gay marriage, and harper seems to want to go back on that route. - sorry, he's not wanting to ban gay marriage, he's just wanting to call them civil unions. basically, he just won't let the issue die.
for me, this is a complete non issue and it's irritating having to deal once again with whether or not you're allowed to marry someone of the same gender. you have the religious arguements against same sex marriage, such as how it is immoral, or against God's wishes, that marriage is a bond between a man and a woman, and you have the social arguements, such as what it would do to children if you not only allow gay people to marry, but to raise kids, and how it could lead to people wanting to legalize beastiality, incest, polygamy, etc.
for me, i see marriage as an institution created by mankind for mankind, not some sort of religious thing. and because it is created by people, it is subject to change and evolution as people's perceptions and desires change and evolve. you can't help being gay any more than you can help being born short or stupid. people are born gay. i myself have wondered if i could be gay several years ago in my teens, but then i realized that i am just unsuccessful with women. you also can't chose to be gay (i'm not talking about college girls that like to think they're bisexual because guys like that sort of thing) and you can't chose who you fall in love with. if there is a god, and i highly doubt it, but if there is, i severely doubt he would punish you for just falling in love. if there is a god that does that, then i don't want to know him. her. it. (that's another issue).
gay marriage hurts nobody. it will not lead to beastiality (animals cannot give consent), it will not lead to people being allowed to marry their relatives (birth complications) and it will not lead to polygamy (which usually involves an unhealthy lifestyle of implied slavery on the part of the wives). personally, if you want to have five wives, go for it. i don't care. i have trouble handling one woman, let alone five. gay marriage won't lead to the breakdown of civilization either. you don't see belgium or the netherlands up in flames, do you? they legalized gay marriage before we did.
in terms of morality, i believe heterosexual couples have screwed up marriage enough on their own, what with their cheating and divorce rates, so i don't see why heterosexuals seem to think they have the higher moral ground. as for children, i'd rather have them live with a loving gay couple than a heterosexual couple who are fight all the time or hate each other and use their kids as favorites against each other. i'm not saying gay people won't divorce or fight or cheat, far from it, but what i am saying is that simply, marriage is an artificial institution and this can be changed. i mean, why else would you need a ring and a ridiculously expensive party to commit to someone? legally, these days, common-law is pretty much the same as being married as far as rights go (i think kids have more rights in common-law, not sure).
gay people have been around longer than we probably had words to label it. i bet there was some cave man somewhere who, while out on a hunting party, longed to just screw his hunting buddy's brains out. just think of it as brokeback, b.c.
honestly, i am so suprised at the lengths people will go to nose their way into other people's business. the courts had said the current definition of marriage violated the charter of rights and freedoms, so this had to be changed. gay people have the right to marry now. history shows that once you give rights to people, it is very hard to take them back without a massive fight on your hands (unless you're the american government and you do it secretly under the guise of national security and you stoke people's fears through the media, keeping them deaf, dumb and blind to what you're really doing).
however, the conservatives, have long had a hard-on to have this changed. the good thing is that a growing number of cabinet ministers and mp's are questioning whether the debate should be revisited, with some saying that the issue has already been debated thoroughly, which it has, both in the media, and the public. the u.s. government is already moving to ban gay marriage, and harper seems to want to go back on that route. - sorry, he's not wanting to ban gay marriage, he's just wanting to call them civil unions. basically, he just won't let the issue die.
for me, this is a complete non issue and it's irritating having to deal once again with whether or not you're allowed to marry someone of the same gender. you have the religious arguements against same sex marriage, such as how it is immoral, or against God's wishes, that marriage is a bond between a man and a woman, and you have the social arguements, such as what it would do to children if you not only allow gay people to marry, but to raise kids, and how it could lead to people wanting to legalize beastiality, incest, polygamy, etc.
for me, i see marriage as an institution created by mankind for mankind, not some sort of religious thing. and because it is created by people, it is subject to change and evolution as people's perceptions and desires change and evolve. you can't help being gay any more than you can help being born short or stupid. people are born gay. i myself have wondered if i could be gay several years ago in my teens, but then i realized that i am just unsuccessful with women. you also can't chose to be gay (i'm not talking about college girls that like to think they're bisexual because guys like that sort of thing) and you can't chose who you fall in love with. if there is a god, and i highly doubt it, but if there is, i severely doubt he would punish you for just falling in love. if there is a god that does that, then i don't want to know him. her. it. (that's another issue).
gay marriage hurts nobody. it will not lead to beastiality (animals cannot give consent), it will not lead to people being allowed to marry their relatives (birth complications) and it will not lead to polygamy (which usually involves an unhealthy lifestyle of implied slavery on the part of the wives). personally, if you want to have five wives, go for it. i don't care. i have trouble handling one woman, let alone five. gay marriage won't lead to the breakdown of civilization either. you don't see belgium or the netherlands up in flames, do you? they legalized gay marriage before we did.
in terms of morality, i believe heterosexual couples have screwed up marriage enough on their own, what with their cheating and divorce rates, so i don't see why heterosexuals seem to think they have the higher moral ground. as for children, i'd rather have them live with a loving gay couple than a heterosexual couple who are fight all the time or hate each other and use their kids as favorites against each other. i'm not saying gay people won't divorce or fight or cheat, far from it, but what i am saying is that simply, marriage is an artificial institution and this can be changed. i mean, why else would you need a ring and a ridiculously expensive party to commit to someone? legally, these days, common-law is pretty much the same as being married as far as rights go (i think kids have more rights in common-law, not sure).
gay people have been around longer than we probably had words to label it. i bet there was some cave man somewhere who, while out on a hunting party, longed to just screw his hunting buddy's brains out. just think of it as brokeback, b.c.
honestly, i am so suprised at the lengths people will go to nose their way into other people's business. the courts had said the current definition of marriage violated the charter of rights and freedoms, so this had to be changed. gay people have the right to marry now. history shows that once you give rights to people, it is very hard to take them back without a massive fight on your hands (unless you're the american government and you do it secretly under the guise of national security and you stoke people's fears through the media, keeping them deaf, dumb and blind to what you're really doing).
there are so many more other pressing issues, so why are we focusing on this? why can't the conservatives let it go? forget all the international problems (nuclear proliferation, civil wars, ethnic cleansing, rape campaigns, world hunger), we've got tonnes of problems in our own backyard that need to be addressed, such as the declining health care system, urban poverty, drug use, gun control... trying to control who people are allowed to marry seems so... trite.
bottom line, will you get cancer because somebody somewhere marries someone of the same sex? if your answer is yes, then there is no hope for you.
(source)
(source)
|