Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Canadian Political Free-for-All -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (8604)	2/25/2006 2:02:03 PM
From: Lino...	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 37868

the easiest way to get a disproportionate amount of attention to an issue is to portray it as a rights issue....liberals will jump on it every time, usually to the neglect of other stuff, like running the country. Gays have the same protections under the criminal code as everyone else in this country. The existing hypocritical argument is that gays should be "more equal" than others...after all, in a lot of cases the same people that want Quebec to be recognized as "distinct" because they are different than Anglos are the same vocal bunch that say gays need to use the term "married" to be the same while in fact they are definitely different. The real issue is about using sensationalism in the left media to get special protections. If we had the death penalty, could we execute a killer of a gay twice if the killing was deemed a hate crime?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (8604)	2/25/2006 4:26:09 PM
From: Ichy Smith	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 37868

Can you tell me exactly which rights the legal term 'marriage' confirms upon Gays they do not already have or would not have with an equal and equivalent term ? I think the fear was that if the terms are the same, then it becomes much harder to change the rights of Gay Married people without influencing the rights of Straight married people. Since so many Conservative Christians reserve the right to preach hatred of Homosexuals from their pulpits, the battle becomes much more difficult. It is my understanding that an alternative that would have been accepted and would still be accepted is if every legal "marriage" license became a "Certificates of Civil Union" and marriage itself became a strict term for a religious joining of two people in accordance with the values and traditions of the particular religious sect that was involved, but with no legal value or consequence. Thus to the Certificate of Civil Union, which both hetero and homo alliances were given would be the certificate that enjoins the rights and privileges of Marriage. The Church Marriage would be a simple religious recognition of the Legal fact.