Canada Legalizes same sex marriages

[dornoforpyros]

I can't believe no one has posted this yet but last night Canada passed a law allowing same sex marriage:
http://north.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View?filename=karetak-samesex-29062005
Personally I support this 100% and I'm glad to see it go through. Ralph Klien(Alberta Premier) can go to hell as far as I'm concerned. More love is always a good thing :D

[solvs]

Good for them. I'm not gay, but I wouldn't want to be told who I could and couldn't love. That's probably not going to happen here any time soon.

[miloblithe]

Three down (Canada, Netherlands, Belgium) and what, 220 or so to go?

We're on our way.

[stridey]

Three down (Canada, Netherlands, Belgium) and what, 220 or so to go?

We're on our way.

151/50 down :D (Canada, Netherlands, Belgium, Massachusetts)

Edit: That's 3 and 1/50, for those opposed to top-heavy fractions

[rockthecasbah]

woo woo! Not gay but pro-gay rights...what's the big deal in my book. Homosexuals are people too ;)

[runninmac]

Im glad that they changed their laws. Everyone should be able to have the right to be equal to men at women couples. Im not gay but I hate that theyre treated unfairly.

[Sayhey]

I'm kind of surprised I haven't heard more spontaneous renditions of "O Canada" (http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewAlbum?playlistId=18172202&selectedItemId=18172013) on the streets of San Francisco. Always thought our northern neighbors had more than just a little common sense in dealing with social issues we can't help but get all worked up about. Good for Canada!

PS - I understand the Upper House of Parliment still has to approve, but it seems a forgone conclusion after this vote.

[Sayhey]

This seems to be catching!

Spain's lower house of parliament has voted in favour of allowing gay couples to marry and adopt children.
The controversial decision overrules last week's rejection of the bill by the upper house, the Senate.

The bill will become law in a month's time, making Spain Europe's third nation after the Netherlands and Belgium to allow same sex marriages.

Polls suggest most Spaniards back the move, although two weeks ago thousands joined a Madrid rally against the bill.

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4636133.stm)

[zimv20]

Spain's lower house of parliament has voted in favour of [...] decision overrules last week's rejection of the bill by the upper house, the Senate.
i think it's time i learned how spain's government operates.

[iGary]

Here it comes, the end of the world. :rolleyes:

[devilot]

Good for them. I'm not gay, but I wouldn't want to be told who I could and couldn't love. That's probably not going to happen here any time soon.
I was brought up in a pretty strict Christian household so they'd butcher me if they knew I felt this way, but I completely agree. It's only fair that people of all orientations are allowed to have legally binding marriages! I wonder, if everyone could marry whomever he/she wanted, would the divorce stats be more optimistic? I don't know anything as for the stats of same-gender partnerships and whatnot.

[feakbeak]

Great - now we can't trust their drugs or their marriages.

[krimson]

Here it comes, the end of the world. :rolleyes:

So THAT's the sound I heard... and here i didn't even get see my new orchid bloom. :p

[pulsewidth947]

'bout time too. I really cant believe its taking this long. Its tragic that gay people can be treated as second class citizens in this day and age.

Yet another blow for discrimination *cheers* :cool: Just imagine what a gay wedding would be like: I dont wish to generalise but all my gay friends have incredible taste in style :D

[stridey]

Just imagine what a gay wedding would be like: I dont wish to generalise but all my gay friends have incredible taste in style :D

I don't have to imagine, I've been! We have family friends who've been together for over 15 years, and finally got to tie the knot. It was pretty emotional for a lot of people there. And yes, everything was very stylish. :D

[iGary]

Great - now we can't trust their drugs or their marriages.

Hey, the world's ending, who cares?

[efoto]

I find it amazing how many people respond to gay topics with a thoughtful response, either for or against, and then if they are pro-gay in their comment they feel the need to throw in "I'm not gay by the way..." or something along those lines. If you are not gay, fine for you. If you are gay, fine for you. Either way, I honestly don't care, no need to share. I'm more interested in your opinion of the ruling than of your personal sexual interest. Not pointed at anyone in particular, not angry, just found it curious and a little funny to me that the little clarifying line has to be thrown in there.

It doesn't bother me that Canada approved same-sex marriages, it doesn't make me all smiles and chuckles either. Personally I think that the choices of all human beings, regardless of sexual preference, should be respected and honored.

<snip>Just imagine what a gay wedding would be like: I dont wish to generalise but all my gay friends have incredible taste in style :D

I have both stylish and non-stylish friends, tasty and non-tasty friends as well. I have known some gay people with impecible taste and style, others can't tie their shoes when it comes to style and fashion. Stereotypically I see your point, that is grouping gay men with the über-feminine or just the fashion concious males which are more frequent in today's society. Gay men can like football too you know, or hunting, or boxing. They are still men :cool:

[stridey]

I find it amazing how many people respond to gay topics with a thoughtful response, either for or against, and then if they are pro-gay in their comment they feel the need to throw in "I'm not gay by the way..." or something along those lines.

Now you see the homophobia inherent in the system! Do you see the homophobia inherent in the system? Help, help, I'm being oppressed!

Yeah, it's sad that the homophobia extends so deeply that we feel a need to "defend" ourselfs against any possible gaydom attacks just to say we're happy about a civil rights victory.

[IJ Reilly]

Now you see the homophobia inherent in the system! Do you see the homophobia inherent in the system? Help, help, I'm being oppressed!

Yeah, it's sad that the homophobia extends so deeply that we feel a need to "defend" ourselfs against any possible gaydom attacks just to say we're happy about a civil rights victory.

Now, now, don't be so quick on that trigger. Everybody has a sexual identity, that they prefer not to have others mistake. That's neither homophobia nor heterophobia, it's just part of our lives as sexual creatures.

[michaelrjohnson]

Now, now, don't be so quick on that trigger. Everybody has a sexual identity, that they prefer not to have others mistake. That's neither homophobia nor heterophobia, it's just part of our lives as sexual creatures.
Exactly.

[michaelrjohnson]

I'm very happy for the Canadians at this point! Unfortunately, our right-wing ultra-conservative government won't give equality the time of day. It's very embarassing, as an American.

[stridey]

Now, now, don't be so quick on that trigger. Everybody has a sexual identity, that they prefer not to have others mistake. That's neither homophobia nor heterophobia, it's just part of our lives as sexual creatures.

On an individual basis, perhaps, but in the "couple still holding hands after 80 years" thread you didn't get a lot of posts saying "now, I'm not straight or anything, but I think it's great that they're still married." I'm not saying it's homophobia on individuals' parts, but the fact that those statements are so prominent is indicative of the bias inherent in society.

[CanadaRAM]

Great - now we can't trust their drugs or their marriages.
Or our cows or lumber, evidently.

Just waiting for Dubya to invade based on Canada harboring Weapons of Moral Degradation.

[efoto]

Now, now, don't be so quick on that trigger. Everybody has a sexual identity, that they prefer not to have others mistake. That's neither homophobia nor heterophobia, it's just part of our lives as sexual creatures.

I'm not so sure the defenses are not rooted in homophobia. You don't know me, I don't know you, I am not planning dating you, nor do I honestly value your opinion of my personal life unless I specifically ask you about a certain aspect of my life.

If I say I'm glad that there was a human rights victory, in this case about gay-rights concerning the right homosexual marriage, and then follow it up by saying, "I'm not gay btw" how do you read that? What is the point of me saying that to you? Am I gaining anything by saying that? Are you losing anything if I don't say it? If you assume I am gay solely because I didn't say "I'm not gay" then you are jumping to conclusions. I don't see the upside other than personal defense to stating your sexual preference online, unless it is relevant to the conversation, which in this case I don't think it is. I purposefully didn't share my sexual preference because there is no point in doing so.

"that they prefer not to have others mistake"
I don't get this. We are online, on an internet forum discussing computers of all things. We have avatars that don't represent us realistically (except for mine :rolleyes: ), we have internet 'handles' because we don't want to share our real names, 90%+ don't fill out their profile information for god only knows why (myself included) but I'm willing to bet it is a subconcious self-presevation/protection mentality, etc etc. Now of all the things to share that might help me get to know you, in this setting, in this place, does your sexual preference have any bearing whatsoever?

[michaelrjohnson]

On an individual basis, perhaps, but in the "couple still holding hands after 80 years" thread you didn't get a lot of posts saying "now, I'm not straight or anything, but I think it's great that they're still married." I'm not saying it's homophobia on individuals' parts, but the fact that those statements are so prominent is indicative of the bias inherent in society.
I understand your point, and I see how you're getting that based on IJReilly's comment. But I don't feel that it's really a true litmus test for our society's biases. (Which exist, especially toward homosexuals).

Let's take a gay man (for example). If everyone that he talked to assumed, and talked to him as a straight man; don't you think that at some point he might correct them?

It's just a matter of personal identity.

[feakbeak]

Now, now, don't be so quick on that trigger. Everybody has a sexual identity, that they prefer not to have others mistake. That's neither homophobia nor heterophobia, it's just part of our lives as sexual creatures.You have a good point, but I'm not so sure this is always the case. I've met many a hetro that thinks "Well, I don't want people thinking I'm gay." However, I've never had any of my gay friends or family members express any concern that they might be mistaken for being straight. I could be way off here - these are just my personal observations.

[michaelrjohnson]

I'm not so sure the defenses are not rooted in homophobia. You don't know me, I don't know you, I am not planning dating you, nor do I honestly value your opinion of my personal life unless I specifically ask you about a certain aspect of my life.

If I say I'm glad that there was a human rights victory, in this case about gay-rights concerning the right homosexual marriage, and then follow it up by saying, "I'm not gay btw" how do you read that? What is the point of me saying that to you? Am I gaining anything by saying that? Are you losing anything if I don't say it? If you assume I am gay solely because I didn't say "I'm not gay" then you are jumping to conclusions. I don't see the upside other than personal defense to stating your sexual preference online, unless it is relevant to the conversation, which in this case I don't think it is. I purposefully didn't share my sexual preference because there is no point in doing so.

"that they prefer not to have others mistake"
I don't get this. We are online, on an internet forum discussing computers of all things. We have avatars that don't represent us realistically (except for mine :rolleyes: ), we have internet 'handles' because we don't want to share our real names, 90%+ don't fill out their profile information for god only knows why (myself included) but I'm willing to bet it is a subconcious self-presevation/protection mentality, etc etc. Now of all the things to share that might help me get to know you, in this setting, in this place, does your sexual preference have any bearing whatsoever?
Good point!

[efoto]

I understand your point, and I see how you're getting that based on IJReilly's comment. But I don't feel that it's really a true litmus test for our society's biases. (Which exist, especially toward homosexuals).

Let's take a gay man (for example). If everyone that he talked to assumed, and talked to him as a straight man; don't you think that at some point he might correct them?

It's just a matter of personal identity.

I don't know if I would correct them or not. Like I said in my other post, if it came down to a situation where I found it relevant then I would inform the neccesary parties at the proper time, but before that I would be hesitant because there are so many morons out there that would do who-knows-what stupid acts if they found that out. It is really quite stupid.

[CanadaRAM]

It depends if it is relevant to the subject of the thread.

If I am replying to a post on HTML formatting, it doesn't matter what my sexual orientation or gender is.

If I reply to a body piercing thread I may say I'm unpierced and (shudder) never will be.

If I am replying to a recent post "Women of MR, what do you think if I cut my hair short" I would identify myself as a male, because it is relevant to my point of view for that thread.

If I am replying to a gay issues topic, I may identify myself as hetero because again it may be relevant to readers regards point of view.

[IJ Reilly]

If I say I'm glad that there was a human rights victory, in this case about gay-rights concerning the right homosexual marriage, and then follow it up by saying, "I'm not gay btw" how do you read that? What is the point of me saying that to you? Am I gaining anything by saying that? Are you losing anything if I don't say it? If you assume I am gay solely because I didn't say "I'm not gay" then you are jumping to conclusions. I don't see the upside other than personal defense to stating your sexual preference online, unless it is relevant to the conversation, which in this case I don't think it is. I purposefully didn't share my sexual preference because there is no point in doing so.

You can read it any way you like, of course. But to suggest another more charitable reading, a person who says "I'm in favor of gay rights, though I'm not gay," is also saying, "I want these rights not just for myself but for other people."

So you might not want to jump to negative conclusions, especially when you're dealing with somebody who is basically on your side of a really big and important issue.

[michaelrjohnson]

You can read it any way you like, of course. But to suggest another more charitable reading, a person who says "I'm in favor of gay rights, though I'm not gay," is also saying, "I want these rights not just for myself but for other people."

So you might not want to jump to negative conclusions, especially when you're dealing with somebody who is basically on your side of a really big and important issue.
Exactly.

I think this is the second time in this thread that your comments have been word for word my feelings. Great job!

[efoto]

You can read it any way you like, of course. But to suggest another more charitable reading, a person who says "I'm in favor of gay rights, though I'm not gay," is also saying, "I want these rights not just for myself but for other people."

So you might not want to jump to negative conclusions, especially when you're dealing with somebody who is basically on your side of a really big and important issue.

I see your point, perhaps I did jump to a few conclusions prematurely in this case. My point is not to jump all over your back, I'm blaming you are pointing the finger, just using your words to fuel mine, sorry.

I just don't see the point in clarifying "I want these rights not just for myself but for other people." instead of just saying "I want these rights, because they are right for all people." regardless of if they benefit me or not. At that point it would almost seem like bragging to say "I want this for homosexuals and I'm not one, awesome that I do/say that huh? :rolleyes: " I realize that is a mass generalization, and that probably not a single person who replied with that meant it in bragging, I am speak not at a single person here, just in general.
It's like regulations on certain products. I may not be a user of product A, but if someone wants to pass a law to make product A safer for the user base, I'm all for it. There is no point in me saying "Lets make product A safer, I don't use it btw." instead of just saying "Lets make product A safer because it is the right thing to do."

I see your point. I hope you seen mine, agree or disagree as you choose, but I hope you see it. This is a technicality really, I'm just trying to understand the mindset behind saying "btw I'm not......whatever".

[IJ Reilly]

I see your point. I hope you seen mine, agree or disagree as you choose, but I hope you see it. This is a technicality really, I'm just trying to understand the mindset behind saying "btw I'm not......whatever".

Don't drive yourself crazy with this sort of thing is my advice. Maybe it's just hard years of experience talking, but I'm satisfied when people come around to the right view on these issues, and becoming less interested in how they got there.

[efoto]

Don't drive yourself crazy with this sort of thing is my advice. Maybe it's just hard years of experience talking, but I'm satisfied when people come around to the right view on these issues, and becoming less interested in how they got there.

You are completely right. Like I said, I am focusing on a rather small bit of a rather good and positive thing, I'll stop.

It just bothers me when people don't have enough balls to be themselves in real life, let alone under the protection of internet alias' on a Mac forum. I realize people like their handle, me too which is why I use it on my blog as well, but I'm not afraid of reality and like I have said many times before I'll you the same thing to your face in person as I will here, I just prefer it that way.

Sorry if it felt like I was attacking you IJ Reilly, didn't mean to at all, I just get frustrated with ignorance often and your lines just keep fueling it for a bit (not that your lines were ignornant, that isn't what I mean). Okay, I'm done....long night and long day. Bonne nuit.

[IJ Reilly]

Not to worry, I don't feel attacked. Maybe it's only because I'm a regular on this board, but I've developed a pretty tough hide, and I actually thought this was a good and civil discussion. Better than a lot of times when this subject comes up. ;)

[QCassidy352]

I heard a very interesting theory last night that basically goes, "homosexuals shouldn't want 'marriage' because it would be an insult to them to be saddled with all of the relgious and historical baggage that comes with that term." I don't agree because having a separate word for it smacks of "separate but equal" to me, but it's an interesting thought. Basically, "You think we're ruining the scantity of your institution? Well, your institution sucks... we don't want to be associated with it anyway."

[stridey]

I heard a very interesting theory last night that basically goes, "homosexuals shouldn't want 'marriage' because it would be an insult to them to be saddled with all of the relgious and historical baggage that comes with that term." I don't agree because having a separate word for it smacks of "separate but equal" to me, but it's an interesting thought. Basically, "You think we're ruining the scantity of your institution? Well, your institution sucks... we don't want to be associated with it anyway."

Well, in additional to all the religious and historical baggage, there's the far more important legal baggage. There are SO, SO many rights that married couples have to eachother that today in America (except Massachusetts. MA represent!) same-sex couples just don't have access to. Hospital visitation rights, asset-sharing, next-of-kinship stuff, child-custody. The list goes on and on.

[devilot]

Well, in additional to all the religious and historical baggage, there's the far more important legal baggage. There are SO, SO many rights that married couples have to eachother that today in America (except Massachusetts. MA represent!) same-sex couples just don't have access to. Hospital visitation rights, asset-sharing, next-of-kinship stuff, child-custody. The list goes on and on.
That's pretty much what I was thinking of. As well as tax breaks. ;)

[efoto]

Not to worry, I don't feel attacked. Maybe it's only because I'm a regular on this board, but I've developed a pretty tough hide, and I actually thought this was a good and civil discussion. Better than a lot of times when this subject comes up. ;)

Well glad it wasn't an attacked feeling, and glad we can both look at it in a civil manner. It was nice, even though disagreeing at times to actually carry a discussion that didn't get smiley-spammed or go off on huge rants, actually staying relatively close to the original topic.

Well, in additional to all the religious and historical baggage, there's the far more important legal baggage. There are SO, SO many rights that married couples have to eachother that today in America (except Massachusetts. MA represent!) same-sex couples just don't have access to. Hospital visitation rights, asset-sharing, next-of-kinship stuff, child-custody. The list goes on and on.

A definite point. I see the points on this that QCassidy32 made as well, about the "separate but equal" vs. the baggage of the religious impact on the term "marriage". I wonder, if there was another legally binding term written into law that gave all the same benefits as "marriage" in the government institution, but was uniquely named outside of religious affiliation (perhaps) that not only homosexual but heterosexual people had access to, would we see a shift in the number of people "married" vs. "new term"?
I wonder how many people would like to be legally bound without all of the other 'stuff' that comes with marriage in most cases.

[mactastic]

Well my garage was full of tiny frogs last night, so I'm pretty sure iGary is correct about the world ending pretty quick here. Of course I was expecting it to happen after the Mass. decision and California actually marrying gays, but I'm sure God's just been busy these last few months.

[Xtremehkr]

Well, I guess we should start taking bets on when a giant crack in the earth will open and swallow Canada whole. Any bets on what type of vengeance God will take on Canada?

Things could not just go on as normal, not with what all of what we have heard on this side of the border.

[IJ Reilly]

Well, I guess we should start taking bets on when a giant crack in the earth will open and swallow Canada whole. Any bets on what type of vengeance God will take on Canada?

Things could not just go on as normal, not what all of what we have heard on this side of the border.

Most assuredly it will snow a great deal in Canada next winter. Serves 'em right.

Edit: And it will almost certainly rain in Spain.

[stubeeef]

Good for them. I'm not gay, but I wouldn't want to be told who I could and couldn't love. That's probably not going to happen here any time soon.


Who is telling who-that they can't love someone?

BTW

Same-Sex Marriage: Kerry initially said he does not support same-sex marriage, but supports civil unions. Kerry admitted to the Boston Globe that he is against a US Constitutional ban on gay marriage, but would support a Massachusetts ban, if it allows for civil unions. (See quote below)

[skunk]

Edit: And it will almost certainly rain in Spain.But mostly in a limited, flattish area...

[IJ Reilly]

But mostly in a limited, flattish area...

By Jove, I think he's got it!

[Ugg]

Most assuredly it will snow a great deal in Canada next winter. Serves 'em right.

Edit: And it will almost certainly rain in Spain.

Not to crash anyone's party, but have you seen the weather forecasts in Spain lately, not pretty.

[solvs]

Who is telling who-that they can't love someone?
For the record, one of the many things I disagreed with Kerry about. And it is telling someone they can't love someone else. You can be with them, but you can't make a commitment? You can't visit them in the hospital if they're dying? That's not right to me. I still don't remember Jesus teaching hate, and that's just what this is. Hate.

My point is not to jump all over your back
I hope not! :eek: Didn't you hear me say I'm NOT gay!?! :p J/K BTW

For the record, the reason I said I was not gay was as a sign of solidarity. As in I may not be gay, but I feel for those who are. As I told vniow when I said something stupid, as we heteroes are known to do - hey, I'm on your side. But that's ok, I know you guys are persecuted more than Mac users, so I can understand if you're a little touchy.

Besides, my girlfriend is gay (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=118937)... :(

[efoto]

For the record, one of the many things I disagreed with Kerry about. And it is telling someone they can't love someone else. You can be with them, but you can't make a commitment? You can't visit them in the hospital if they're dying? That's not right to me. I still don't remember Jesus teaching hate, and that's just what this is. Hate.


I hope not! :eek: Didn't you hear me say I'm NOT gay!?! :p J/K BTW

For the record, the reason I said I was not gay was as a sign of solidarity. As in I may not be gay, but I feel for those who are. As I told vniow when I said something stupid, as we heteroes are known to do - hey, I'm on your side. But that's ok, I know you guys are persecuted more than Mac users, so I can understand if you're a little touchy.

Besides, my girlfriend is gay (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=118937)... :(

I don't have time to peruse through that entire thread, which post are you referring to so I can check it out in specific? I have a feeling it is leading to a humerous comment....so I'm interested.

But that's ok, I know you guys are persecuted more than Mac users, so I can understand if you're a little touchy.

I love it. So because I don't say "I'm not gay" I am not assumed to be gay. Okay, that is fine. You can think what you want about my personal decisions, I still choose not to answer :p
I think "giving in" and admitting my sexual preference is missing the point of what I was arguing, that regardless of my choices, I'm glad that this was a gay-rights victory. That is all I am going to say, because that is the point I am making ;)

[solvs]

I don't have time to peruse through that entire thread, which post are you referring to so I can check it out in specific?
I find it amazing how many people respond to gay topics with a thoughtful response, either for or against, and then if they are pro-gay in their comment they feel the need to throw in "I'm not gay by the way..."
;)

I was the first response to the post, and mentioned the being straight.

You guys was perhaps poor phrasing, but I just meant that in trying to defend homosexuality, sometimes we straight people may say the wrong things. We mean well, sometimes it just comes out wrong. Like Mac users, gay people may be a bit defensive due to so much persecution. Maybe not the same thing, but an apt allegory. I don't know whether you are gay or not, but it doesn't matter either way to me.

[efoto]

;)

I was the first response to the post, and mentioned the being straight.

You guys was perhaps poor phrasing, but I just meant that in trying to defend homosexuality, sometimes we straight people may say the wrong things. We mean well, sometimes it just comes out wrong. Like Mac users, gay people may be a bit defensive due to so much persecution. Maybe not the same thing, but an apt allegory. I don't know whether you are gay or not, but it doesn't matter either way to me.

Fair enough. I realize that "you people" may say the wrong thing on occasion about "those people", I am admittedly just nit-picking about a couple small things that really bug me.

I know what it is to be on the hated side of a battle, I wouldn't wish that on anyone. I realize you are arguing for and not against, which I thank you for greatly, I am just saying that the words we use can have very particular meanings, especially when discussing topics like homosexuality or Mac computers. Although I realize you mean well, and probably to many that is how it comes off, I was just trying to point out that generalizations like "you people" and "those types" etc can be quite hurtful. Even though you may be arguing for "those people", to group them like that can be just as hurtful as arguing against them.

[solvs]

Although I realize you mean well, and probably to many that is how it comes off, I was just trying to point out that generalizations like "you people" and "those types" etc can be quite hurtful. Even though you may be arguing for "those people", to group them like that can be just as hurtful as arguing against them.
"You guys", not "you people". Bit of a difference. I appreciate you understanding that I was not trying to be hurtful, merely supportive but with a poor choice of words. Perhaps we should just leave it at that, lest we continue arguing over semantics. ;) No need to take offense, as none was clearly intended.

[efoto]

"You guys", not "you people". Bit of a difference. I appreciate you understanding that I was not trying to be hurtful, merely supportive but with a poor choice of words. Perhaps we should just leave it at that, lest we continue arguing over semantics. ;) No need to take offense, as none was clearly intended.

Agreed, I also meant no offense and was just about to suggest we leave it where it lay. It is really nice to have discussions that can be mature and end when they are due to end. So many topic get carried away after a new topic is hashed, glad we had a few toss-backs but are of enough mind to let it rest now. No harm meant, no harm done ;)