It's a good source of tourist revenue to promote gay marriage in Canada. Canada should require a one-week residency requirement verified by hotel receipts, and that would end the controversy. Then they should make divorces equally easy if the marriage was performed in Canada.

It's good for the economy, and Canada is liberal enough that it's not a big issue for its citizens. All couples have to do if they acquire property or children is to sign an agreement that if a divorce occurs, it will be handled by Canadian attorneys.

Can't anything be simple anymore?

alur

"It's a good source of tourist revenue to promote gay marriage in Canada."

Immorality shouldn't be a tourist revenue promotion, unless you are also in favor of pedophilia in Thailand, multiple marriages of grown men to multiple adolescent little girls in Islam countries, sex slavery wherever it happens, etc. etc.

It just amazes me how stupid the world has become under the laws made up on the whims of man.

Canadians have passed a law and don't think gay marriage is immoral. That's not an issue for them. You might as well argue that Las Vegas should shut down because another country considers nudity and gambling immoral.

What's more effective than a shocking first comment to get responses ?

Bob-3374873 Your association of mulitple hetereosexual marriages and sex slaves has nothing to do with gay marriage and shows the prejudice against gay people. The activities that you mention harm children are are illegal. Gay marriage is between consenting adults.

Chris, you are right - divorce is a deviance, since that is what Canada is refusing to do, grant some divorces...

(I think you need to read the article again)

What's more effective than a shocking first comment to get responses ?

Compassion and intelligence.

Same-sex sex is deviant sex behavior. And governments should not promote it.

Technically, deviant just means "deviating from the norm." People make it seem like an uglier word than it is because of the tone they often use it with, but it is perfectly correct. Psychologists decided that the prevalence of homosexuality in society, along with its overall lack of harm to society and individuals, put it in a classification that recognizes it is a deviation that is "within acceptable parameters" of the norm, which led them to declare that it's not a mental illness or psychological disorder of some sort. But technically, it still is, in fact, "behaviour that deviates." Which means "deviant behaviour." Get over it.

Alur, your argument about comparing pedophiles to homosexuals as not fair is valid, age of consent varies by country and in the USA by state but for argument lets say all are 16 or older which is old enough to marry in the United States. If you are using the consenting adult argument, a person should be able to marry as many people as they want. If the homosexual community claims their right to marriage based on that standard, it should be valid for multiple marriages as well.

culheath

What's more effective than a shocking first comment to get responses ?

Compassion and intelligence.

_____________________________

This is pretty much never true.

The laws regarding residency have existed long before the Civil Marriage Act. The issue here appears to be that the rules regarding residency were not adhered to.

With these two women who went to Canada to get married, if as the Canadians are stating that their marriage was invalid because at the time of their marriage same sex marriage was not legal in Florida or in England, then it would appear that they are not married period.

Perhaps they should just ask for some document stating that their marriage was not valid and thus what ever oath they took was not enforcible.

Or why don't they accept that they are not and were not legally bound to each other and go their separate ways without having to go through a divorce or pressing the issue? Unless of course the matter is about alimony or if there were children involved.. child support....

Instead of trying to illegalize all these weddings that took place in apparent good faith, perhaps Canada should just accept that what is done is done, then perhaps should require a 1 year residency before anyone can apply for marriage permit/certificate, for those who do not have a valid permanent residence permit or citizenship......

Perhaps folks that are getting divorce should have to go through at least 1year or so of therapy/marriage counseling before they can get a divorce, if they want to continue to be the Vagas of the North.

It is getting so easy to divorce these days.... Now a days it looks like more thought and months (sometimes a year even) of planning went into preparing for the wedding, more time was spent on chosing the wedding attire and shoes etc, chosing the wedding cake, chosing china pattern etc and venue to even having a wedding planner to plan the big event, than goes into trying to work on keeping a marriage alive, including learning to live with each other, fighting fair, plan budgets, merging finances, problem solve etc.

Folks need to stop living their lives through the prism of the reality star du jour or celebrity or some orgs that would seem to encourage these marriages as a means of pushing or bringing about change in present laws instead of leaving people to marry if and when they are ready to be responsible adults and realize that marriage is for the long haul and is also hard work period.

As the saying goes ...'it is often times the journey that is the most interesting and fun part of the trip and not the destination'. Also 'first you marry, and then life happens'.... Hmmmm..LOL

It never ceases to baffle me how and why so many of my fellow straight peeps worry so much about what "deviant gays" are doing?

Here's the deal. Veteran. Saw many a naked man. Didn't once go "oh my goodness, I need some o' that'. Never once worried about some guy trying to bust a move on me. Why 'cause I ain't gay. If every guy on the planet married every other guy, guess what, still wouldn't be gay.

Real straight men and women who are comfortable in their own skin don't obsess over this. I'm gonna go ahead and piss off some more people and say it's like Right to Life v Choice. I'm not a woman either, so I don't really feel I have the right or authority to judge. I don't have a uterus, so it's not my business.

And for the idiots that say allowing gay marriage is going to somehow "promote" a gay lifestyle and damage the precious children, I stand on this firm belief that if you aren't gay you can't be drafted into that particular club just because you see two guys or two women playing house.

Nor is gay marriage and divorce going to destroy the foundations of civilization as we know it! We're nearing 7-billion people. The human race has passed the survival of the species hump. We could do with some scaling back of the population.

And finally, as a divorced father myself, I submit humbly that straights haven't been doing so well in the marriage/divorce front recently.

Glass houses, folks...

Nevada-2385168

Same-sex sex is deviant sex behavior. And governments should not promote it.

If that's the case, then so is marriage, including opposite-sex marriage. Humans are not biologically "tuned" to monogamy. Marriage places a strenuous bond upon normal human behavior. That is why more than half of all marriages end in divorce and why adultery within marriage is commonplace. Since divorce and adultery is considered a social "immorality" by a certain number of people, then get rid of marriage and there would be no divorce and adultery. When governments promote marriage, they promote divorce and adultery.

culheath

What's more effective than a shocking first comment to get responses ?

Compassion and intelligence.

_____________________________

This is pretty much never true.

Depends what group you converse with I suppose.

I managed to hide the first comment, it was easier than expected.

Come on people, you are way too sensitive about gay-marriage!

Why would I be narrow minded ? I am most likely more open minded about many things than you are.

Do you really believe that you are better than past generations ?

There is no need to comfort homosexuals on their orientation that's all. Soon it'll be totally normal for people to change their sex, when they only need a therapy.

Bob-3374873 Said "It just amazes me how stupid the world has become under the laws made up on the whims of man."

Yeah Bob.... and since you are so good at using god as part of your backdrop, please allow me to share w/you a letter that was sent to Dr Laura..

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I

have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that
knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend
the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that
Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other
specific laws and how to follow them.

1. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a
pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors.
They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in
Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair
price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in
her period of menstrual cleanliness - Lev.15:19-24. The problem is,
how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

4. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and
female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend
of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can
you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus
35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated
to kill him myself?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an
abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than
homosexuality. I don.t agree. Can you settle this?

7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I
have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading
glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room
here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair
around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.
19:27. How should they die?

9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes
me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two
different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing
garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester
blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really
necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town
together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn.t we just burn them to
death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with
their in-laws? (Lev.20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident
you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is
eternal and unchanging.

www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-2945.html

McCarthy said her clients' message was: "We can't get divorced in our own jurisdictions because they don't recognize the validity of our marriage. You guys here in Canada married us so please give us a divorce because no one else will."

Apparently, by Canadian law, they weren't really married in the first place either. (This also shows the level of desperation gays have to try and validate their relationship. Anyone with half a bit of sense would have checked to make sure this was really a true marriage.) Go your separate ways and be happy you don't have to spend the money on Lawyers. And if you have kids, they will go with the parent who actually birthed them, since most law does not recognize the claim of a non-related "parent." This is the risk you took. Unfortunately, you now have to accept the consequences of your actions.

I think Canada really screwed up allowing these marriages they knew wouldn't stand up in other countries. (And doesn't, by law, in their own country.) I agree with other posters who feel they allowed these weddings to increase tourism. There is no other reason that makes sense.

Psychologists decided that the prevalence of homosexuality in society, along with its overall lack of harm to society and individuals, put it in a classification that recognizes it is a deviation that is "within acceptable parameters" of the norm

Which proves that psychology is more like a religion than a science. What qualifies THEM, any more than anyone else, to define what it "acceptable" or not? That is moralizing disguissed as science. There will never be general agreement on such matters.

ItsAboutTime- Great post. As a Christian, I often find this argument to be moot and pointless. Jesus Himself never said anything about homosexuality, it is the OT (the Jewish Testament) and Paul's writings that say these things. I hope that some day people can understand to read the Bible for its figurative teachings, not a rigid, literal interpretation that exposes oneself to matters of contradiction and fallacy. God Bless Everyone!

OomYaaqub- Generally, it is a matter of prevalence. The "norm" is usually based upon how many members of a given community engage in the same actions or thought processes. Of course, picking one's nose and masturbating are fairly universal, so wouldn't that behavior be considered normal? In regards to your statement about moralizing disguised as science.....well, ALL science is subject to personal biases and prejudice. It's human nature. Psychology is rife with contradictory opinions because it is difficult to objectify a relatively subjective subject. Such is life, I suppose.

@ Its About Time: For a minute there, I thought Jon Stewart was posting. That was great. Thank you. But I am not sure everyone will understand the irony.

@ Its About Time: For a minute there, I thought Jon Stewart was posting. That was great. Thank you. But I am not sure everyone will understand the irony.

@ Its About Time: For a minute there, I thought Jon Stewart was posting. That was great. Thank you. But I am not sure everyone will understand the irony.

@ Its About Time: For a minute there, I thought Jon Stewart was posting. That was great. Thank you. But I am not sure everyone will understand the irony.

This is the lunatic fringe conservative government in Ottawa trying to rewrite Canadian history.

.

Jerry-1903677

"Humans are not biologically "tuned" to monogamy."

Humans are not biologically "tuned" to self control either. When someone gets us angry, most people's first response is to want to slap them or scream, etc. When most people want something, their first response is to take it.

It is with the practise of "self control", learned morality, and trying to practise the differences between "right and wrong" that we become mature and civilized.

If we just want to "follow our biology" without having to bypass our brains, then what is the meanings of laws and other civilized behaviour. We are no better than animals just following our "biology".

Its About Time - Thank You. That made my day!

It's about Time: What's so funny? You're so ignorant. Try to read a book before you copy-paste someone else's criticism (who probably also has never read it)

Let's try some "common" sense...... if you live in country "A" and travel to country "B" to marry, because YOUR country doesn't recognize same-sex marriages, then WHY would you expect it to be deemed legitimate when you get back home? Even "straight" couples have faced the same dilemma, after they traveled to another country to marry; not all countries recognize foreign marriages of their citizens.

I can understand your thinking there blondeness032....but let me put it this way. You marry in State A, which recognizes gay marriage and move to state B, which doesn't recognize gay marriage and therefore your marriage is null and void, how is that fair? Same country, just a different state.

First, let's get a couple things cleared up...

1. Marriage is NOT a sacrement, or religious. It is a contractual property agreement, predating any organized religion. You're thinking of Holy Matrimony.
2. No, this is not comparable to marrying any animal, any child, or any inanimate object. In order to contract, under the law, you need recognized legal capacity. That means, you must be an adult, in good mental health.
3. No, being gay isn't a mental illness. Check out the DSM-IV, it isn't in there, anywhere, nor will you find a credible doctor, or peer reviewed study to claim that it is. Your assertions, don't make it so either.
4. No, this isn't comparable to incest. Incestuous relationships are based in abuse and power/control, and one partner is either not consenting, or isn't aware that they don't have to consent, and they almost always begin prior to the age of consent. If this isn't so, please find me one credible source where two, immediate family members fell in love, where there were no mental health or abuse issues underlying it. Remember, in most cases you can marry your cousins.
5. No, this isn't the same as polygamy. Polygamy, with the exception of where its legal for some limited religious reasons, is never going to legalized in the mainstream because it would be a contractual law nightmare. Insurance, taxes, probate, divorce, yada, yada, yada, all of those laws would have to be rewritten in every state, for the very limited number of people who would want to have numerous spouses. Simply, it wouldn't be worth it.

Now, please continue, but enough with the ridiculousness.

It is much more deviant to deny your own sexual orientation. You cannot change your genetic makeup. Anyone that thinks that homosexuals choose their sexual orientation are deluded. Would you willingly choose to be ostracised by a large segment of society? Deviant is defined as varying from an accepted norm. The accepted norm for a homosexual is homosexuality. To be deviant, a homosexual would have to exhibit the behavior of a heterosexual. Norm and majority do not have the same meaning.

A very interesting legal question;

If non citizens of Canada, go to Canada to be married, but they are citizens of another foreign jurisdiction that forbids gay marriage; then may Canada deny jurisdiction of the issue since Canada has no legal right or obligation to overrule the laws of a foreign jurisdiction, the courts in Canada have a legal problem to sort out, from a conflict of laws standpoint, Canada may be correct, since Canada would have no civil legal right to invalidate the laws of a foreign jurisdiction.

Same-sex sex is deviant sex behavior. And governments should not promote it.

Anything other than missionary-style sex is deviant sexual behavior. Digest that before you make comments about someone else's behavior.

Deviance always changes as time passes. If you don't like it, you might as well hide yourself from the rest of society, because we'll be moving forward without you whether you like it or not.

Indy Patriot-1934313 Thank you for the comment and your post. I agree w/you as well. I do not see where Jesus himself said anything about homosexuality or it being wrong. I am also hopeful that our society will one day will be able to read and interpret the bible for themselves, but also recognize that our country was also founded on equal rights for all.

Gloria28
You are most welcome :). Its a letter that someone else had written on this same type of subject. I agree, I'm not sure everyone will see the Irony in it, but if one person does...

StateAtty

You are most welcome. Glad it helped your Friday!

journal journal

It's about Time: What's so funny? You're so ignorant. Try to read a book before you copy-paste someone else's criticism (who probably also has never read it)

Why am I ignorant? This letter to Dr Laura points out VERY specific modern examples based on the old testament. I have read and interpreted the Bible very clearly. There is no passage in the bible that says being gay or gay marriage is wrong.

my opinion1

Jerry-1903677

"Humans are not biologically "tuned" to monogamy."

Humans are not biologically "tuned" to self control either. When someone gets us angry, most people's first response is to want to slap them or scream, etc. When most people want something, their first response is to take it.

It is with the practise of "self control", learned morality, and trying to practise the differences between "right and wrong" that we become mature and civilized.

If we just want to "follow our biology" without having to bypass our brains, then what is the meanings of laws and other civilized behaviour. We are no better than animals just following our "biology".

You really missed the point.

That is purely religious reasoning and exactly why religion should keep it's big nose out of Law. Pretty sure if there is a God, he cares less about Homosexuals getting married then the Genocides being carried out on Earth.

Well, Bob, the murder rate in Canada is only 1/3 that of the US, and only 65% of the murders involve firearms, so maybe the gun control there in fact does have something to do with that.....

They are only saying that some marriages of non-Canadians in Canada were not valid, nothing against gay marriage.

What happens when your supposed "law of God" collides with a Muslim's "law of God"? You want to impose Biblical law. They want to impose Sharia law. You both think you have God's ear and God's word.

Do you just fight it out?

See, that's the problem with your so-called "law of God" -- it can be anything one wants it to be and everyone has their own interpretation.

Clearly, Bob does not live in Canada. Probably never been there.

Canada is not rethinking anything. This hubbub is about residency. The laws regarding residency existed long before the Civil Marriage Act.

The same validity concerns outlined in this article apply to any heterosexual couples who got married in Canada under the same circumstances.

Bob-3374873

Bottom line is that there is one law that predates man - The law of God. No one can fail under it. Everyone fails disregarding it. Only fools ignore it.

So, what you're saying is that the only reason why you don't steal and kill is because your god says so? You'll base your sense of morality solely upon what your god tells you? What if your god's law decides to tell you to fly jets filled with terrified passengers into skyscrapers......oh, that's right. Somebody else's god already had them do that. It was a god's law, one that predates man.

The God of the universe predates Bob's made-up God, and the God of the universe's Golden Rule predates Bob's God's made-up laws.

@Bob - You may be right about God, but you may be wrong. The upside is great -- you and others with exactly your belief system will spend an eternity together, or with virgins or whatever your particular group predicts. The downside however is pretty serious. If your God plan is wrong then your whole world view is wrong. The persecuted non-believers are innocent, we all are equal and people are inherently good.

Bob-3374873 said"Canada is rethinking its bad mistakes, like gun control which has done nothing to reduce crime, and now homosexual marriage. Good for them. Starting to smarten up" The world has too much perversion to make it all legal by the word of man.

Well BOB, guess what. Despite this setback, gay marriage is still legal in Canada, and I applaud them for giving equal rights. It's only a matter of time before it becomes legal in the United States. As for your obtuse comment on the world has to much perversion to make it all legal by the word of man?? well, in that case, I think heterosexual marriage should be illegal as well. You never find perversion there do ya...

Bob3374873: I fully respect your right to have such a narrow mind.

Bob, you're an idiot. The "law of god" does not predate man. Who wrote/followed it/interpreted it before man? Oxen? Monkeys? Dinosaurs? He was invented by man, Bob.

The supposedly many Gods' law are given to man by men who want power and their money. If there is a God's law then let God give it to us directly instead of going through people who claim to have a direct line to God.

There's no such thing as god; it's a nice little fairy tale that you tell yourself so you can feel justified when you treat other people like garbage. "Oh, well, the word of god says I can." I wish all the religious morons would come out and just say it. Everybody already knows. I'd love to say you'll be sorry one day, but that wouldn't be true. You'll just be in the ground like everyone else.

Canada is rethinking its bad mistakes, like gun control which has done nothing to reduce crime, and now homosexual marriage. Good for them. Starting to smarten up.

Uh-huh. I'm sure you're Mr. Charlie Church too, right?

The world has too much perversion to make it all legal by the word of man.

Don't go where you're going, dude. It's not a pretty place, you will be smote by your own words if you continue this charade of un-perversion....?

If God doesn't exist, then nothing really matters. We are all Just evolve swamp scum.

Yes, we are all swamp-scum. How on earth does that make things 'worthless'? My God, have you SEEN the world? It's beautiful, I'm experiencing it right now. And I will tell you; God or no God, I LOVE how amazing our planet is, and I live to love, and explore it.

Maybe you just haven't spent enough time finding a reason for living?

Anything goes. Nothing is right or wrong. Anything government of ma is just fine. Stalin thought so, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot, the list goes on. Whatever man made government says is ok is ok at the time man says so.

No. Humans are inherently good. I have seen people be tremendously kind to strangers. Humans are also inherently evil. And I've studied enough history, and witnessed enough, to see true evil.

But I ultimately believe humans are good. I mean, we're SAFER now then we have EVER been in the HISTORY of man-kind, despite media reports. Rates of Religion are falling too... coincidence? No, but they do highlight: The fear or God only keeps people obedient. The fear of hell makes people behave. God is being taken out of the equation, and we are now SAFER.

And the wrong think that is ok, until it treads on them and then they shout racism, capitalism, totalitarianism, communism, democracy, nazism, or whatever there favorite word of the day is.

The fear of hell makes people behave. God is being taken out of the equation, and we are now SAFER.

Additionally, I question how you equate things. "racism, capitalism, totalitarianism, communism, democracy, nazism" And yet you call Homosexuality a perversion? Dear God, don't you see how much of a hypocrite you are.

You're hate-mongering. You're no better than the very people you are criticizing.

You know what, I sin. I sin every day, sometimes twice a day. Heck, I'm sure I'm neglecting a few sins here and there. But at least I'm open about being flawed. I don't hide behind religion, and use it as a weapon to cover for my own doubts and shortcomings.

Bottom line is that there is one law that predates man - The law of God. No one can fail under it. Everyone fails disregarding it. Only fools ignore it.

I disagree. There are natural laws which we all know. That's why there are so many Taboo's that seem to be nearly-universal. Incest, Rape, Cannibalism, etc... these are fairly common through most cultures. Yes, there are of course exceptions, there are ALWAYS exceptions. Even in religion.

How sad it is to see that there are people who think that the ONLY reason that human being should be decent people is because of threat of divine punishment.

If that's the case, then how are people any different than a pet who behaves only because it knows that misbehavior will result in punishment?

Increasingly people are realizing that the only true morality is that which is derived from compassion and respect for others. Morality derived from a dusty old book is a crutch - a substitution for true morality.

Bob, one could easily argue that marriage is an institution of religion and the government got it's big nose involved in religious matters, not the other way around.

As a conservative I'd like to see the government get their nose out of the marriage business altogether. If a chuch/temple/etc wants to marry gays, so be it. If they don't? So be it.

WaltDIS, excellent, rational and truthful statement.

It seems nowadays that any amoral or unethical behavior (and those most willing and content to partake in it), never have to acknowledge their problematic behaviors or views. They just say "cast the first stone..." only to mock the social mores/norms, and meanwhile they use others' "tolerances" or peaceful scoldings as a sick permission to continue the bad behavior (besides, they argue, it doesn't affect anyone else but me.)

OMG! Is our backwards, Puritanistic, sexually-repressed society EVER going to get over this "God hates homosexuals" kick???

Let me be clear here, guys- JESUS SAID NOTHING ABOUT GAYS OR HOMOSEXUALITY!!! NOTHING!!!!

He only preached love, compassion and tolerance....period. For everyone.

And if homosexuality was so bad, why wasn't it one of the Ten Commandments?? To be exact, God (via Moses) proclaimed that coveting (or lusting) after your neighbor's wife was more harmful than being gay. If not, why then is there no reference to homosexuality at all?

And if Jesus were here today to weigh in on the subject, I'm quite sure that He would be far more concerned with our warmongering and intolerance of other cultures than allowing two consenting adults (of any gender) to marry one another and live in peace. Just my 2 cents.......but then again, I do not hold a rigid, fallacious interpretation of the Bible. It makes more sense when you read it for its figurative teachings.

Having lived and worked in beautiful Vancouver BC I can tell you that Canada is far smarter and safer than the USA as regards most of its social policies, and the lack of guns and gun lust is one reason. Canada has far less gun violence per capita than the USA, because it doesn't allow guns to be sold like candy at 7-11. The love of guns is a bizarre love, based on fear and a desire to have power over others. The worship of guns says a lot about the darkness in the hearts of those who constantly advocate for them.

oh bob....if God hated homos , there would be no priests. But I bet ur ok with watching lesbians in porn right?

you know what Bob..lets take the Gays, Lesbians, Hispanics,Jews, Blacks, Muslims, democrats and guns and send them away for good...

this might make you feel better...if not , atleast alone!

Bob: As far as your idea of God's law, surely you realize that it is open to interpretation. Leviticus is the basis for the anit-gay attitude of the Christian right. If you read Leviticus, it's clear that it was written by an angry old man. If that's not the case, then it is law and everyone violates it. Just read down the list and look at all of it. All the food regulations. I missed the part where God came down and said "oh, remember when I said....... and ........ and ........, well they no longer apply. Add to that, the Bible says that "Thous shalt no lie with a man as with a woman, it is an abomination." If it means what it says, then everyone lies with woman and not with men. So, we have straight men and lesbian women. Of course, it's not clear what "lie with" means. Is it no possible that men should be honest with women, but don't have to be with men? Of course, there is the commandment "Thou shalt not kill." Yet, David is praised for killing Goliath. Interpretation please!

Karl: I realize that Canada has a lot going for it. But, and what everyone seems to be missing the point here, Canada seems to be in the business of committing FRAUD! For 9 years it has been collecting fees for marriage licenses and has promoted itself as the place to go for gay marriage. If they are now saying that the marriages are not valid, then should reimburse all those invalid marriages for not only the fees, but the expenses of those traveling there, with interest. And, maybe a lot of Canadians should be placed in jail for theft. Just saying that if anyone in the private sector collected a lot of money and failed to deliver what was promised, they'd end up in jail. Doesn't sound like a great place to live after all, does it. What else is the government promising that is fake?

Bob, homosexuality existed long before your god did, and will exist long after He/She/It has been consigned to the dustbin of history.

Bob, you ignorant slut. We are not rethinking gun control, we just don't have to register our long guns anymore, we wasted billions on that little exercise, and handguns are pretty much totally banned. The city of Toronto which is the 5th largest city in North America had under 50 TOTAL murders last year. The city has millions of people, so we will keep our gun control.

Now as far as the issue with the marriages, what do you expect, politicians were involved, of course there is going to be screw ups.

Bob-3374873 oh Bob, people really let you have it , ha!

"Bob-3374873 If God doesn't exist, then nothing really matters."

Bob, I feel bad for you. I pity you.

I do not believe in an afterlife. When you die, that's it. You cease to exist. There is no credible evidence to suggest otherwise. I am also an Atheist. I do not believe any gods exist do to lack of evidence. Therefore, I believe this life is infinitely more valuable than any afterlife you believe you might have. That means I value my life infinitely more than you value ANY life.

BTW, according to your own Bible, your god required blood sacrifices and killed more people than Hitler (who was not an Atheist), Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao combined.

"Bottom line is that there is one law that predates man - The law of God. No one can fail under it."

Except everyone that does like... everyone.

Bob-3374873

I suppose you also believe that women should stop wearing pants, correct? Because up until the 50's and 60's, pants were men's clothing. And god views women wearing men's clothing the same as he views homosexuals, according to the bible. Also, anything "highly esteemed among men" is also an abomination.. so I guess that nice house, car and job you have should also be outlawed.

If we're going to convert to a religious society, we can't just cherry pick what we want, right? We gotta go all the way. No more pants-wearing women! No more things that might be coveted by others! Slavery is legal again! Polygamy too!

First, let's get a couple things cleared up...

1. Marriage is NOT a sacrement, or religious. It is a contractual property agreement, predating any organized religion. You're thinking of Holy Matrimony.
2. No, this is not comparable to marrying any animal, any child, or any inanimate object. In order to contract, under the law, you need recognized legal capacity. That means, you must be an adult, in good mental health.
3. No, being gay isn't a mental illness. Check out the DSM-IV, it isn't in there, anywhere, nor will you find a credible doctor, or peer reviewed study to claim that it is. Your assertions, don't make it so either.
4. No, this isn't comparable to incest. Incestuous relationships are based in abuse and power/control, and one partner is either not consenting, or isn't aware that they don't have to consent, and they almost always begin prior to the age of consent. If this isn't so, please find me one credible source where two, immediate family members fell in love, where there were no mental health or abuse issues underlying it. Remember, in most cases you can marry your cousins.
5. No, this isn't the same as polygamy. Polygamy, with the exception of where its legal for some limited religious reasons, is never going to legalized in the mainstream because it would be a contractual law nightmare. Insurance, taxes, probate, divorce, yada, yada, yada, all of those laws would have to be rewritten in every state, for the very limited number of people who would want to have numerous spouses. Simply, it wouldn't be worth it.
6. In America, marriage is a civil right. It has been ruled that 14 times by SCOTUS, and they have deemed it detrimental to humanity. That means in order to deny a legal adult, with legal capacity, the right to marry you need a reason that passes strict scrutiny. Reasons that DON'T pass strict scrutiny are all of the following... The Bible says so, God says so, Jesus says so, My morals say so, It's an abomination, They're menatlly ill, It could cause the collapse of society... Of course, the reasons aren't limited to what I've wrote. Do you know why these reasons won't count??? Because you can't prove a single one of them. (Hint: The Bible can't be used to prove The Bible true).
7. The majority of people argument also doesn't work. We don't vote on civil rights issues. If we did, we'd still have segregated schools down south.

Now, please continue, but enough with the ridiculousness.

"Faith" in one book is the result of a weak mind. The comment's to Bob's posting certainly illustrate that.

Further, Canada's gun laws have been extremely effective and this has been proven over and over again. Just look at the studies. The American obsession with guns is both ridiculous and dangerous. We have a right to bear arms in order to form a militia to stand up to the possibility of our centralized government becoming too large and too powerful. It was a safe-gap. It was never intended to give redneck's an excuse to go hee-hawin' around with a lethal weapon.

Guns and God - the platform of the mind too lazy to engage in logical reasoning.

MSNBC is clearly just spreading US propaganda. FOR SHAME! They're trying to make this look like some big political issue, and it's not.

A: Gay marriage is still legal, and anyone who knows anything about Canada knows that won't change. Canadians are proud of our record of tolerance. Any PM who tries to repeal this human right will cease to be PM very quickly.

B: Issues like this arise all the time, are usually resolved fairly quickly, and tend to favour human rights when they are. Canadians use these issues to refine law and set precedent... not stall government and divide people.

Also, did anyone notice that throughout the article were links to the story of a debate between (of all people, intolerant, homophobic republicans) Romney and Santorum on gay rights? MSNBC did not post this story because it's important or relevant... only to manipulate Americans. Respect our news, or don't report on it!

SHAME ON THE AMERICAN MEDIA!

SHAME ON MSNBC!!

Homosexuality goes back thousands of years. It is more normal than having blue eyes.

Yeah, tell my wife that. :=)

So you can cut and paste, what's your point?

Evidently for you... nothing. Let's leave it at that. I don't want to tax your brain with having to read more than a few sentences about the subject. NO SOUP FOR YOU!

"Recent studies show homosexuals have a substantially greater risk of suffering from a psychiatric problems than do heterosexuals."

My guess is that is because of having to deal with idiots like you Maverick.

What you have posted is interesting and good source of info but a post that long will not be read by 99% of the people. You should just summarize the facts and give a link to the info to provide the source of evidence

Then why do we find the same increased risk even in very liberal, accepting cultures like the Netherlands?

LOL...basically, yeah.

So gay people suffer from more emotional problems? What's the surprise? They have to live in a world filled with HATEFUL people such as YOU. A LOT of them! That would drive anyone to drink. That they don't have more psychological problems is the surprise. You dick.

Brag about the fact that gay people are driven to suicide by straight people's hatred. Go ahead. Because in the event that you 'stand before your god' or whatever it is you people think you're going to do one day, do you think he won't know about that? No blip on the radar there? No "Hey, you know what? You were a real dick and made people kill themselves with your hatred and bigotry. Oh, you want to come into this paradise place behind me? See, we reserve that area for people who weren't nasty jackasses. You don't really qualify for that level, but there's a place a little farther south where you'll fit in just fine."

Gee Walt did you do any research that comes to opposite conculsions. Probably not just a one sided posting, which is very typical of your kind. History shows thats alot of research is eventually proven incorrrect, faulty. If thire research premise was antigay then that is the results they looked for. There is a lot of research out there that straight people have thes same conditions which you cite. So really what is your point other than you are homophobic. Perhaps if you came out of the closet you would feel better about yourself.

I think it comes down to the chicken or the egg again. Are the psychological problems from being gay or is being gay another symptom of their psychological problems.

What makes you think being straight is normal? Sounds like your not normal at all. What gives you the right to make a comment like that? You know nothing about being gay so you need to keep your mouth shut.

As a biologist BA, MS, who happens to be happily married to a wonderful woman for 30 years, I can assure you that in t he natural world homosexuality is, and ALWAYS has been, a normal behavior.

GA chick, did you read the article? 2/3 of gay suicides are due to a relationship ending and have nothing to do with discrimination.

Maverick, while I applaud you for taking the time to post your dissertation, I would argue that the conclusions of the studies beg the question of causality.

Many of the studies you posted about find that homosexuals have more mental-emotional problems. Ok, I can buy that. Makes sense to me. But couldn't we also find similar conclusions about black people, short people, disabled people, etc. given the notion that they have elevated levels of these illnesses as well due to the social pressures of not being considered "normal" in American society??

Many intelligent people engage in research every day. But even smart people forget sometimes that you cannot argue a point when you have a situation which the "tail is wagging the dog". That, and with numerous strawman arguments, makes most of your post contradictory.

You may have personal differences with gays, or homosexuality itself, but that does not mean that the research you provided is absolute.

Bunch of homophobes in here too mad that their gender of preference would rather screw each other than screw them.

Don-1179590

Sooner or later the same thing will happen here.

Homosexuality is not now, and never will be normal behaviour.

Define 'normal" Don. you can't, because what one deems normal isn't necessarily normal for others. Gay people are more normal than any heterosexual that displays their ignorance and bigotry.

Sometimes Don, it's better to think before speaking.

:)

But couldn't we also find similar conclusions about black people, short people, disabled people, etc. given the notion that they have elevated levels of these illnesses as well due to the social pressures of not being considered "normal" in American society??

There are certainly plenty of studies showing that most of these problems are correlated with poverty, but obviously gay people are not poorer than most folks. If male, they are statistically likely to be wealthier.

Gee Walt did you do any research that comes to opposite conculsions.

Don't hate me because I'm intelligent, and considerate of others.

These are things you should be trying to emulate, not shrink in fear from.

It does not matter if homosexuality is normal behavior or if it is not the behavior of the majority. All people should have equal rights no matter if they fit the normal mode or not. Everyone should be able to marry any one consenting adult they want to. Rights are not delegated according to if a person fits a certain preconceived definition of normal.

Wow, really, you post all that info, and you can't even grasp the concept of cause and effect. To prove your point, you need to show that the cause of the mental health issues in gay people are because they are gay, that the homosexuality in and of itself is what makes them depressed or committ suicide. What you're doing is blaming the victim, that's like saying the cause of muggings is walking alone in a bad neighborhood... The cause of the mental health issues in that post, isn't the sexual orientation of the person, but society's response to their sexual orientation.

I see nothing in the law that talks about the validity of the marriage anywhere else. Unless I'm missing something, I believe that's simply poor reporting.

The issue here appears to be failure to comply with long-standing laws regarding residency. In the specific case the court is addressing, neither of the people are currently resident in Canada, and Canada requires that the plaintiff be a Canadian resident in order to sue for divorce.

What is reprehensible is allowing gay marriage at all in any country. It is morally wrong and always has been...

What's reprehensible is presuming to judge others by your own precepts.

I'm a vegetarian. In my view, if you are a meat-eater in this country then you are consuming the misery and suffering of sentient animals, almost all of whom are treated inhumanely to some extent - treated inhumanely solely to slake the meat-eater's blood-thirst. As you can tell, I consider the practice of consuming the misery and suffering of sentient animals to be immoral. Would you, if you're a meat-eater, graciously accept my condemnation of your actions as immoral? Of course not. You live in accordance with your own beliefs and values, regardless of what other people think. While I would love to help you see the corruption and horror your casual consumption of meat causes, to prompt you to perhaps accept my beliefs and values as your own, is that something you invite? Because your marginalization of homosexuals by advocating keeping them from enjoying the benefits of marriage that us heterosexuals enjoy is exactly the same.

Do you want people railing against you because you commit what they consider immoral acts? Or would you rather they respect you as a person, and expect you to live in accordance with your own beliefs instead of theirs?

Presumably you were taught the Golden Rule when you were a child. It is a lesson that apparently many adults today have forgotten.

Immoral = allowing two people of the same sex think they can get married

I know THAT, what I'm saying is that if you extend the reasoning behind this action, you can invalidate any marriage performed in Canada that is illegal in another country. But that isn't the main issue.

The main issue is that already existing marriages are so arbitrarily dismissed--causing a lot of anxiety and monetary waste. The Canadian government will pay for this outrage in court--and when they lose, straight and gay people alike will be much happier for it.

Oh and by the way, if homosexuality were a choice, that would mean that straight people [including the dorks that post such a ridiculous argument] could be changed into gay people rather easily. It simply doesn't work that way, and it doesn't work in reverse either--according to any real, non-hypothetical gay person I know. 'nuff said.

Immoral = allowing two people of the same sex think they can get married

Incorrect. Indeed, presuming to lord over others with regard to the nature of their sexual orientation is immoral. These are free societies, not totalitarian regimes with Maddog as dictator.

WaltDIS, you claim people forgot the Golden Rule, which of course if you are talking about "the" Golden Rule then you are talking about guidance from the Bible. So it is ok to say people have to follow the Golden Rule, or not ok to forget about it, but they don't have to follow anything else from the bible? You can pick and choose which ones (rules) you like? Then of course if you are talking about some other Golden Rule then maybe its ok.

then you are talking about guidance from the Bible.

Wrong. The Golden Rule predates the Old Testament by at least a thousand years.

It must be surprising and embarrassing for many Jews and Christians to learn that so much of what they think originated in their religion actually originated long before.

I bet your head would explode (figuratively, of course) if you actually read up on what the Bible actually says about gay marriage. (Hint: nothing "specific, literate, or even concerned with what we call same-sex orientation or gay marriage.")

I don't think anyone knows what golden rule you are talking about. Perhaps you could share some more on this rule that has stood for so long. I guess they dated the letter when they wrote it right? You are correct, the bible doesn't talk about gay marriage, it talks about marriage. Man will leave his parents and cleave to his wife. God made Eve because it was not good for Adam to be alone. Elders should be married to one wife. A man should not covet another man's wife. Man should love his wife like Jesus loved the church. I have read the bible cover to cover and I am well aware of what it says and does not say, so don't for a second purport to know what I do or don't know. My head is not going to explode, figuratively of course. The bible doesn't need to say anything about gay marriage because there was never intended to be gay marriage. Now we can debate the bible and all manner of homosexuality, but as long as man is on earth there will be evil, wars, and pain, including homosexuality. If man is still on this earth when I die and when you die we'll both know who was right pretty quick. That can't be debated.

- Ancient Egyptian story "The Eloquent Peasant"

-Confucius

– Pittacus

I guess they dated the letter when they wrote it right?

Blinding yourself to the truth of history doesn't make you seem more intelligent and credible; it makes you seem less intelligent and credible.

The bible doesn't need to say anything about gay marriage because there was never intended to be gay marriage.

By your warped logic, you shouldn't be allowed to type comments on the Internet, because according to the Bible there was "never intended to be" an Internet.

@Maddog, Are you really so full of yourself? You are talking about a book, that's all. A book written by man. A flawed man. I have found that so many of you ignorant people who find the thought of two men or women being married, immoral, are the ones who have either been married more than once, or are very unhappy in their life as it stands. The only way you seem to make yourself happy is by tearing down others and over-inflating your own sense of self worth.

Wrong all all counts Moralleft and you don't know anything about me, so of course you try and tear me down as you say others try to do to you. Its easy to attack the person instead of debating doctrine. The book is not flawed, nor is the history, and I guess WaltDis forgot Egypt came around long after Adam, not before. The so called "golden rule" is found in 8 different religions. There is no flawed logic and the internet is not related to same sex marriage, so that is "doesn't follow" and faulty logic. And of course Walt you avoided my point that when you die and I die we'll both know real quick if either of us was right. I'll stick with my ideas where I am going and you are welcome to stick with yours. We'll both find out soon enough.

I heard prejudice was immoral. But then again homophobic bigots have always been using their twisted sense of 'morality' to further their goals.

Immoral = Making hateful, trollish, uninformed statements with the intent to inflame the sensibilities of others while using one's religion to justify their sociopathic worldviews.

Maddog, once again, if Jesus thought being gay was so bad (and don't worry, they were around in Jesus' day also), I'm sure He would've made mention of it. But He didn't.

Marriage has Always been a stable relationship between a human male and a human female (some cultures have more than one) for the purpose of procreating children and raising them without burdening society until such point as the children are self-sufficient (according to the society) or the society assumes their further integration into society. I have studied history amply and a deal of anthropology, and it is the Natural Biological couple in their reproductive role, as there are only two sexes with a clear biological role. An unstable union leads to children that are a burden to society. As Senator Santorum says, if we want to Redefine marriage, what is it to be? Everybody has different views, not only homosexuals. There are proponents of animal marriage (bestiality), group marriage, child marriage, incestual marriage. If we redefine marriage only some kind of union, why favor only homosexuals?? The whole notion of homosexual "marriage" is only a push towards anarchy in the social field. In Canada, why should people get "married" in a form Not permitted by the laws of their country or state? Why should a party or a judge declare what the People have not decided on by vote or even Against what the People have decided on? The Canadian judge was right to challenge the provision for foreigners.

I guess WaltDis forgot Egypt came around long after Adam

Now you're just being silly: Adam didn't write the Old Testament. It was written much later, most likely around 400 BCE.

The so called "golden rule" is found in 8 different religions.

Which is why I said, so why you're embarrassing yourself like this bewilders me.

And of course Walt you avoided my point that when you die and I die we'll both know real quick if either of us was right.

I don't believe in your mythology, so your statement there is vacuous. Don't confuse my neglecting to call you out on that bit of silliness too as anything other than compassion on my part.

Uh, guys? "Adam" didn't exist. He's a character in a fairy tale...

Well yeah, I know that... I was just trying to talk to the previous poster in a manner they could perhaps understand. Sorry for not making that clear.

I hope they at least realize that "moral" refers to an "individual" belief. What's moral from some isn't moral for others. They're not universal, they're personal.

YES, Toasty, we all know that YOU do not believe in God, or have any spiritual leanings whatsoever. Fine. I have no issue with that. You're an adult, and you live a "free" country.

I'm now well aware, after trying to inform you (in past threads) of the veridical occasions of NDE's, that you are completely closed to trying to understand other's viewpoints when it pertains to anything religious or spiritual. That's fine, too. You refused to go to the websites I listed try to understand my assertion that NDE's are real, but that's your choice. End of discussion.

So my question to you, then, is this: If so many self-proclaimed athiests are "sick and tired" of having "religious nuts" spew their spirituality at you, then why do you feel it is okay to constantly remind others about your atheism??

I don't want to read your offensive posts about "fairy tales" or, my favorite, the "Flying Spaghetti Monster", anymore than you wish to hear Christians quoting scripture! Knock it off, it doesn't add anything constructive to the debate.

You and I think very alike in terms of politics, but I find your public rants against religion to be just as offensive as the very things you are opining about.

I can debate the credibility of the scripture itself if you'd prefer.

Knock it off, it doesn't add anything constructive to the debate.

And, neither does quoting scripture, yet many people here do it anyway. So, why shouldn't Toasty and others respond?

... why do you feel it is okay to constantly remind others about your atheism??

Why do the GOP presidential candidates constantly remind others about their religious faith? It is offensive.

Indeed, it is offensive because of the inherent presumption: "I believe in this fairy tale as if it were fact, and obey one fabricated interpretation of dogma, and so that makes me better than person than people who only believe in the lessons of the fairy tale, and exercise a moral compass founded on reality and truth." As long as Presidential candidates engage in that silliness, it is essential that people of conscience characterize such claims properly, keeping them in their proper perspective.

This has nothing do to with religion or intolerance towards gays.

Just another example of atheists spreading their cult words of hypocrisy and intolerance. Atheism is just another stupid cult, only it has no God or any divine deity, you guys are only helping me prove that point.

This has to do with FOREIGN gays going into another country for the sole purpose to get married then divorced. Canada should ot become a divorce haven.

This is from the same people who allowed gay marriage in their country for a while, if Canada was truly anti-gay, they wouldn't even have any rights to begin with.

I'm not an atheist. I just don't believe in fabricated dogma, nor do I try to claim that the Bible is anything other than parable. There's no hypocrisy in my statements: I'm holding a mirror up to offensive bigotry and engaging in the only legitimate intolerance: intolerance of intolerance.

"This" actually has to do with residency. Period. That's all "this" has to do with. Instead, though, right-wing reactionaries decided to spew their vitriolic bigotry into the thread, attacking homosexuals out of arrogance and ignorance, instead of keeping to the topic, residency.

Canada still recognizes and supports gay marriage. The latest word is that this situation will be fixed in that direction, i.e., by relaxing the rules on residency for the purpose of divorce, under certain circumstances. It is nothing but vacuous wishful-thinking to assume that Canada has any intention to reverse the progress it has made.