GayandRight

My name is Fred and I am a gay conservative living in Ottawa. This blog supports limited government, the right of the State of Israel to live in peace and security, and tries to expose the threat to us all from cultural relativism, post-modernism, and radical Islam. I am also the founder of the Free Thinking Film Society in Ottawa (www.freethinkingfilms.com)

Saturday, January 14, 2006

Polygamy in Canada???

Opponents of same-sex marriage are now clearly saying - Told you so - now that a study has come forward recommending that Canada legalize polygamy. However, the study says that the challenge to the charter would come under the freedom of religion section. This really has nothing to do with same-sex marriage at all.

13 Comments:

Blogger Joe said...

We must also root out those in the movement that enjoy porn. Porn is a liberal invention that leads to homosexual acts, which leads to gay marriage, which leads to beastially, which leads to a man marrying his pet, which leads to a man wearing a condom while having sex with his pet, which leads to a dead baby stephen harper.

4:54 PM  
Blogger AT said...

Yes, polygamy cannot be allowed in Canada at any cost!

5:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is what the liberals want, a multicultural wasteland of gay porn.

We must stand up for Canada
-for Christ
-against terrorists
-against the polygamists and others hoping to poison our children's mindss.

Vote HARPER!

2:53 PM  
Blogger CanadianTruth said...

All I can say is this.

The Islam Radicals kill and terrorize for the name of their God. Their religion. Is it their right to do this in Canada?

IF the Supreme Court says it is, without the notwithstanding clause it cannot be reversed by parliament.

And this is a slippery slope.

I actually support gay 'unions' like they have in the UK, but doesn't marriage imply the church? WHat happens when a gay couple wants to marry in a church? Religion vs sexuality. Who wins that one? The Charter claims to protect both.

We have swinger clubs upheld by the SC, they upheld a man's right to have anal sex with a 14 year old boy, I mean where does this draw the line?

Sorry, end of my rant.

4:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hmmm...polygamy. Now I can get that dishwasher the wife always wanted.

4:40 PM  
Blogger Nicol DuMoulin said...

SSM and polygamy are related. Once the definition of marriage became that it is only an issue of property rights and taxes between two adults, the number of adults becomes arbitrary.

Why only two? Why can't they be related?

The new definition of marriage says that children are not a factor in a marriage and therefore neither is sexuality. Anyone, liberal, marxist, red tory etc, who was for SSM can't back down now.

To say this is about freedom of religion is extremely disingenuous and I think you know that.

But of course to admit that means to admit the so-cons are also right that sooner or later there will be a case forcing them to marry two people of the same gender.

And please, do not resort to freedom of religion in the charter. Freedom as a principal will be redefined to accomodate this too.

I just hope that when this happens we have a strong Prime Minister Harper to fight it off.

5:16 PM  
Anonymous Xeno said...

Don't forget that the slipery slope argument leading to moral decay was also use in the context of interracial marriage in the US.

BTW should it mean that interracial marriage should be banned now since the people at the time were overwhelmingly against interracial marriage? Afterall, it was 'activist judges' that struck anti-miscegenation laws down. Didn't the legislators at the time deserve a free vote on this issue??? I don't see many so-cons (although I'm sure some of them hold secret grudges about this) complaining about this today.

As for polygamy issue in comparision to SSM, I'll only offer this link:

http://www.indegayforum.org/authors/carpenter/carpenter46.html

9:55 PM  
Blogger Mark said...

While I agree that the approach taken in the fight for SSM is not the same as that which will be taken for polygamy, I think it is incorrect to summarily dismiss the effect that SSM has had on marriage as an institution. By that I mean, do you honestly believe polygamy would even stand a fighting chance had SSM not first charged the gates?

7:05 AM  
Blogger GayandRight said...

The authors of the report make it pretty clear that it's the freedom of religion clause that MIGHT be used to fight for polygamy. Of course, this hasn't happened yet.

The fight for polygam will be fought on its merits.....not on gay marriage.

4:12 PM  
Blogger v said...

"This really has nothing to do with same-sex marriage at all."

This is just flat out wrong, and beneath the dignity of a man of your demostrated intellect and forthrightness.

You seem like an eminently sensible chap on virtually every issue but gay marriage; for whatever reason you are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off base on this one particular issue.

I don't sweat it, because the gay marriage extremists are dropping like flies in the blogsphere, unable to sustain the lie that opposing GSM is homophobic.

But I'm telling you as somebody who reads your blog regularly, when I see an otherwise sensible guy like you mysteriously start saying nonsensical stuff like polygamy not having anything to do with GSM my spidey senses start tingling.

5:33 PM  
Blogger GayandRight said...

Sorry, there is just no connection at all. Each issue has to be fought on its merits, and I suppose that each one will.

Same-sex marriage was not fought on freedom of religion, but on the fact that sexual orientation is protected under the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Polygamy MIGHT be fought on appealing to Freedom of Relgion...or it might not. But, whatever the Courts of the House of Commons do on polygamy will have nothing to do with SSM

3:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Trudeau may have ruined this country, but one thing he was absolutely, 100% correct about is that, "the government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation". The government has no business in sanctioning any marriage whether it be heterosexual monogamist, homosexual, polygamist, nor any other between consenting adults. If an adult in any "union" is not consenting, we already have kidnaping and rape laws to cover those areas. It is time for the government to get out of the marriage business all together. I really don't understand why homosexuals are so keen on being allowed to get married... you should have just gone and gotten married. Period. It is between you and your partner, and whomever you choose to officiate whatever ceremony you want. You are like a bunch of kids who grew up and still plead with your parents for permission to stay out late, or to let you go to the movies, or whatever. You are now an adult and you don't need the f***ing government to tell you, "that's ok, we will let you get married now". It is none of their goddamn business. That is what homosexuals should be standing up for, along with heterosexuals, and any other consenting sexuals. Oh well, I guess sheep will be sheep.

7:57 AM  
Anonymous Gay Videos said...

Hello.

Is it possible you add my site at your blogĀ“s links.


Blogname: Gay Videos
http://free-gayvideos.blogspot.com/

Thanks

TJ

5:34 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home