Canadians Losing Freedom of Speech?

[1feral1]

Come here and its in your face. Holding hands, kissing, and tonnes of public affection from gay men and women, but again its in their suburbs. I cant see them doing that in Red Deer, Alta or Kirkland Lake, Ont.

I personally find the entire behaviour disgusting, but I accept it as some people are always going to be that way inclined. I cant change that, its none of my business.

In fact here in Australia gay bashing is not all that common, as people seem to be more accepting here.

Thats just how it is.


Cheers,

Wes

 

[ZipperHead]

That was my point. It has become common, almost to the point of "normal". I‘m not a big fan of seeing young (straight) people making out in front of me and my family when I‘m at the mall, so it doesn‘t really matter whether it‘s gay or straight people, there should be some decorum and restraint shown. I think hand holding or hugging is OK (again, in some cultures same sex hand holding and hugging is "normal") so that‘s where people should just live and let live, and really just mind their own business.

Al

 

[1feral1]

Public affection between a man and a woman is a perfectly normal thing. The same between two gay people is totally abnormal, but its a lifestyle which is more accepted now than it was before.

We can never stop it, its just how some people are. Is it genetic or by choice? Its most likely a bit of both.

Cheers,

Wes

 

[ZipperHead]

Wesley, I think you are dating yourself a bit (the Archie Bunker is coming out in you ).

What is "normal"??? You say it‘s abnormal, but by your own admission, it happens all the time in Sydney. So, wouldn‘t that be normal, or at the least, not abnormal. Abnormal would be bears ice skating, but I did see a bear that was trained to do that (the bear probably didn‘t like it much.....).

I think what you are trying to get at is that you don‘t like it, and it makes you uncomfortable. Nobody is asking you to like it, or be comfortable with it. I don‘t like seeing those gay pride parades with the transvestites/drag queens prancing around, mainly because it plays into the stereotype. Nobody forces anybody to watch them, the same as nobody is forced to watch troops march through downtown Edmonton, Washington, Berlin, etc. We always had people (in Edmonton) whinging about how military parades glorify war, and they should be banned. Let them think it. I think a lot of good men died so that people are free to voice their opinions, no matter how misguided they may be.

Take care,

Al

 

[1feral1]

If its considered normal, why is not legal for gays to marry? Listen here mate, I have my opinion, and you have yours.

Regards,

Wes

 

[girlfiredup]

Originally posted by Wesley H. Allen, CD:
[qb] Today the Australian Prime Minister, John Howard will pass a law that all homosexual marriages in Australia will be illegal, and all overseas homosexual marriages will be not recognised, plus all adoptions of children by Australian homosexuals made overseas will also not be allowed.

So there ya go.

Try www.news.com.au or www.dailytelegraph.com.au for more info.

Cheers,

Wes [/qb]

Wow, someone with a brain. Maybe we could get this guy to run for PM here. Does he also support funding the military? Then again, that might be too much to ask.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I think a lot of good men died so that people are free to voice their opinions, no matter how misguided they may be.

I would guess there are quite a few homosexuals burried on the beaches of normandy.

I disagree however that it‘s not being forced down our throats. You can‘t turn on the TV with out seeing a sitcom without a token homosexual. 18 year old girls making out on music videos.Some trash talk show about trailerpark trash leaving her boyfriend for another woman only to flip out when she finds him sleeping with another man. Even the oprah show has shows on secret homosexual societies and meeting places. Go to bars and straight girls are humping each other all over the place because it‘s the cool thing to do. Woe to anyone who states they don‘t like homosexuals, your automatically a bigot who isn‘t with the new times.

Trying to lump a military parade with a gay pride parade is a little off the mark. It‘s unfortinuate more people would probably ***** about the military parade too.

 

[CDNsig]

I wonder if everyone will be so happy when all these same sex couples start demanding all the tax deductions, benefits, and government services heterosexual couples receive, not to mention the bureaucracy that will probably go with it. After all, someone will have to foot the bill...

 

[Gunnar]

Shouldn't cost all that much.  Benefits for equivalent to married?  Not a big deal.  Already factored into most deductions.  Insurance?  Same thing, they already have spouse plans.  Financially, it doesn't matter all that much, as long as I'm not paying.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

..and then there's Bob and Tom's theory that first of all it would be good for the economy as they would spend lavish amounts on the weddings, etc.[its not like they need to save it for THIER kids education] and second of all why shouldn't we spread the misery around? ;D

 

[ZipperHead]

I have never really understood the big drama that is always invoked in reference to same sex couples getting the same benefits as heterosexuals. Do not people who are common-law get that? And any stun-assed hetero couple can procreate, and pump out an unwanted kid, and do they not get benefits? I think that people trot out whatever excuse they can to make it inconvenient for themselves to accept that same-sex couples are a reality, whether they are blessed by the state or churches. I would rather see a same-sex couple that has been together for 20 or more years get the benefits that they should be entitled to, than to see a couple that is destined for Jerry Springer (trailer trash, etc) that happened to get pregnant and bring another unwanted child into the world receive the benefits. Who is the bigger drain on society?

And are these same-sex couples not members of our society already and entitled to government services (ie they are taxpayers)? Or are they less than equal in your eyes? Don't look, but your ignorance (and hatred) is showing.....

Al

 

[Infanteer]

You know, for all my past opposition, I agree with Allan.

No one has ever really given me a real satisfactory reason why not to let gays marry.

I always think back to an editorial I seen by a cop.  He had been through two divorces and was with his third wife; had a kid from each marriage.  He said he a had a quiet gay couple for neighbours.  These guys had been together for twenty years.  The cop goes on to say "with my marriage record, what makes me the authority on who can and can't live in a recognized monogamous relationship."

That one always makes me really question opposition to it.  I would be up to allowing it, but I would want a better definition of marriage given, lest we let the flood gates open.

Either way, it really bothers me that this has become an election issue.  Nothing will prevent gay people from living together.  Canada will not end if gay marriages are permitted tomorrow, and Canada will not end if gay marriages are not recognized tomorrow.  However, I do think Canada will have some serious problems if we don't sort out some of our foreign and domestic policies and trends.  Let's keep our eyes on the ball.

 

[ZipperHead]

Somebody that agrees with me!!! Alert the media. Seriously though, I used to be more or less opposed to it (probably because that is what I was "trained" to do) but once you see that people are people, there isn't much point in trying to tell two consenting adults what they can and can't do. Within reason of course....

I like the example you gave of that editorial. I heard something similiar before, and it reinforces how I feel about the issue. I have heard people say that they would kill their children if they told them that they were gay. That's pretty sensible, I think (****sarcasm****), and when I hear people talk like that, I pretty much disregard anything that they have to say.

That this has become an election issue, is indeed sad, but I think it is what is called a "hot button" issue, and if you don't have a stand for or against, your opponent(s) will, so that's how it goes.

Al

 

[Infanteer]

Some more food for thought.

If gay marriage is recognized by the government, should we give them the right to adopt a child?

I reflected on this following what was to me a pretty thought provoking event.  I was at my girlfriends apartment the other night and her neighbour comes over and asks for a ride to the bar.  Since it is pouring rain out, I decide to help her out.  Low and behold, a 20 year old girl, five months pregnant with a pack of cigarettes and her belly hanging out comes around the corner.  Although she was not going to drink, a greasy redneck bar full of thugs and drugs is the last place a girl with child should be.  As I drop this girl off, she muses to herself on how she is going to get home, being that she only has 2 dollars to pay the covercharge. I later find out that the guy who knocked her up is long gone.

My first thought was that here is a young, immature and clueless girl who will raise a child on her own.  Not only will I be paying her welfare check every month, but I will have to pay for most of the child's upbringing.  Not only that, there is a chance this kid was going to have a rough time of it living vicariously with a bimbo for a mom (hence the need for the government to often intercede for the child's welfare).

I then figured this; you have two women, married for 15 years and living in a good neighbourhood and bringing home a good income.  They obviously want to love and care for a child if they are going through the pains to adopt and raise an orphan.  They have the desire and the means to ensure that some kid will get a decent living and be properly provided for.

I figure that it is a bit unfair that some bimbo can spread her legs and get knocked up, not really caring about it, and yet people who are willing to do the right thing are shut out due to someone preconceptions of the "norm".

Mind you, there are other issues to the argument, but this one weighs heavily on my conscience when I debate the merits of the argument....

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Just for the record, I'm for gay marriage and adoption.

I've worked with a large number of homosexuals in my day and I think denying the right to either get married
or adopt children is wrong....

My expectation is that within 20 years the laws will have been rewritten and our current system will be looked
upon much like segregation is today....



Matthew. 

 

[SFontaine]

I'm all for gays getting the same benefits of being married (Hospital visitation, taxes etc) but I'm against it being forced upon me, my family and my church. I saw a gay pride parade once and there were all these men dressed as women making asses of themselves.. Being "proud", which I found offensive. Keep it in the damn bedroom I say. I don't want that to be forced upon me because as a straight male I find it disgusting. I won't treat them any different but I don't want to know anything about their private life. Period.
When I have kids I also don't want gay pride to be thrust down their throats much like black pride and asian pride has been thrust down ours (The hip-hop clothes, ricers etc).

On the subject of adoption. Think of the kid. How would the kid react if both his parents were men?  It seems pretty weird to me. How would the kids at school treat him if they saw this kid walking around with two men as his guardians? Pretty shitty methinks. This is a situation where you really need to "think of the children". How would it affect them?

 

[Jascar]

it all has to do with activist judges and politicians who think they know better than its citizens.....go figure.

What an incredibly hypocritical statement. You don't want a judge telling you what the definition of marriage is, but it's ok for you to tell a gay person what the definition is.......???

By the way, why were "same sex" marriages not legal in the 17, 18, 19, 0r 20th century in Canada?   Descrimination my ***, its stupid!

Yeah! And what about the days when we hunted Indians, moved the Japanese into "special" camps, and made women stay at home? Discrimination my ***! Let's bring those days back too!

And since you seem to think anything we did in the past is ok, did you know that homosexuality was practiced and accepted in many ancient cultures? Spartan men used to take young boys as their lover/student. Since it was ok then.........

 

[ags281]

Stupid cat jumping on my head and waking me up at 0520... now I can't get back to sleep   :threat: Sorry, moving on,

Regarding the issue of homosexuals raising children, I can't help but think back to a story I came across a couple years back.

A lesbian woman became pregnant - can't remember the specifics, but I think it involved a sympathetic ex-boyfriend specifically for the purpose. So far so good, but then grandma hears her lesbian daughter is going to be a mother and loses it. She demands that she be given the child to raise. The mother, understandably, tells her own mom to shove off, and the child is born.

Grandma, however, can't go down without a fight. She goes to the courts and actually files a lawsuit to have custody of the child given to her. The argument presented by her was that in the custody of her homosexual daughter, the kid would undoubtedly grow up to be gay.

I found this argument absolutely hysterical. It's based on the premise that the child always takes the sexual orientation of the parent. Now, clearly this is stupid, as the lesbian woman was raised by her straight mother. From this we can assume that it is entirely possible for a lesbian mother to raise a straight child. As if that's not good enough, we can also examine the past history of each potential caregiver to determine the probability of the child being straight.

Mother: insufficient data - possibility of child growing up to be straight
Grandmother: batting 1000 - 0% chance of child growing up straight

Good argument grandma!   ;D

 

[muskrat89]

I'm not 100% sure where I stand on the issue, but a couple of points:

- People talk about the threat to the "institution of marriage". I think that a 50% divorce rate is a far greater threat than the (relatively) few same-sex couples that want to get married.

- I truly think what bothers most right-wing conservatives (like me) is the appearance of making this normal. Some posters have mentioned "throwing it in our face". Accepting something, or not treating people meanly or discriminating against them is not the same as condoning it. I think that line is getting more and more fragile. Look at "Will & Grace" - it practically glorifies homosexuality. I think that is a different (and wrong) message than what I am comfortable with.

- I do think long term same sex couples should have hospital visitation rights, etc.

- Why does it have to be "marriage", which most people agree is more a religion- based concept? What about a civil union, common-law, or whatever.

- I recently heard a homosexual man call in to a radio station that I listen to - he said many gays could really care less about marriage, per se - but that it was a way to politicize their issue

- How can you say "yes" to a homosexual, but "no" to a bigamist?

- Right or wrong, "traditional" values seem to be eroding. People are afraid, not necessarily of this issue, but what comes next. Where does one draw a line, and make a stand on their values? "You're sitting in a tub of water, and the temperature of the water is increased, one degree at a time - at what point, do you scream?" I think this is further demonstrated in that it almost seems that some kids are gay now, for the "cool" factor...

- People say "its genetic" or "its not their choice"... they've isolated genes related to alcoholism - does that mean it's OK to be an alcoholic? That we shouldn't nudge, steer, counsel people towards a life of sobriety?

- I'm supposed to be more accepting of someone's lifestyle choices, but they can't be accepting of the fact that I don't want my 6 yr old daughter to watch 2 men sucking face in public?

I guess, in my ramblings, here is what I think - both sides seem to try and pull us to one extreme or the other. I would like to think that many people are more in the middle, and that somewhere in the middle, a compromise can be found..

 

[ZipperHead]

I hear the argument that "these" people (be it gays, blacks, asians, Trekkies, whatever) throw "it" (their pride, culture, whatever) in our face. Will and Grace is cited quite often on the gay issue, Hip-hop culture on black's, etc. If "Will and Grace" comes on and you don't want to watch it, change the channel. There must be a NASCAR race on the boob-tube somewhere. I personally hate the baggie pants and sideways baseball caps of hip-hop culture, but I don't think it's thrown in my face. I hate the white-trash look, but I doubt it will be banned, nor do I feel it is an extension of my Caucasian persona (I'm a fashion assasin, so I don't know what is really in fashion, so my examples may be dated......).

My wife uses the gay pride parades as an example of what's wrong with the same-sex issue. "They shove it down our throat.....". Well, I don't remember the last time we were forcibly dragged out and forced to stand at attention and watch while the drag queens and mincers pranced down the streets of Oromocto.... I think it's kind of silly, but no sillier than grown men wearing fez's driving mini-cars in circles during "normal" parades. Or the floats in parades that are just glorified advertising for local businesses.

One day, people won't bat an eye in White Bread Canada when they see two men holding hands walking down the street, much in the same way nobody notices when an inter-racial couple does the same (just go back 50 years in the U.S in some places (and Canada for that matter) and it would have caused a stir.

As for "marriage", my wife and I are married, even though we weren't "married" in a church. Should we call it a civil-union? Should we have less rights than someone who had a member of the clergy perform the ceremony. There's a concept called separation of church and state. Definitions are changed all the time, so the definition of marriage can (and will) be changed. People trot out examples such as legalized rape and bigamy being legalized if same-sex "unions" are. Sure. How about registering our guns because we have to register our cars. Ooops, we have to do that don't we. Unless you want to break the law..... It seems that the people who are most against gun control are also the ones most opposed to same-sex marriage. Seems kind of ironic, doesn't it.... If it's not the church making the rules, it's judges, and if it's not priests or judges, it's politicians..... Well, who else is going to do it? Seeing as how we elect politicians, they should be the one's making (or passing) the laws, and judges enforcing them. So, in effect, if a law comes to be, it's our fault if it's not "right".

Whether we like it or not, things and times change, even if we're not comfortable with it or ready for it. A lot of people start to sound like their parents a lot sooner than they should.....

Al