Homosexual marriage (social & military implications, and related events)

[George Wallace]

It's OK Bruce.....GIJane doesn't think Age Discrimination is in vogue anymore.

What a can of worms this could open up.  A question I have asked jokingly years ago had to do with similar Laws being passed.  For instance, a couple only have to live together for a year and a half before the "Law" recognizes them as Common-Law.  With new anti-discrimination laws supporting the Gay and Lesbian lifestyles, there is no mention of Homosexuallity, just same sex.  Could not two "non-gay" members of the CF then scheme to use the "Common-Law" relationship laws to manipulate the system in the following example:

Two CF members have been sharing a room in the shacks for over three years.  One is posted to Toronto, and the other isn't, but thinks that Toronto would be a jammy posting.  Could that member, not go to the Career Mgr and say that they were "Common-Law" and demand a posting to Toronto?  Take in account the new laws, the new quality of life of the soldier policies, etc.  Who will the first Barrackroom Lawyer be?

GW

 

[aesop081]

It's OK Bruce.....GIJane doesn't think Age Discrimination is in vogue anymore.

What a can of worms this could open up.   A question I have asked jokingly years ago had to do with similar Laws being passed.   For instance, a couple only have to live together for a year and a half before the "Law" recognizes them as Common-Law.   With new anti-discrimination laws supporting the Gay and Lesbian lifestyles, there is no mention of Homosexuallity, just same sex.   Could not two "non-gay" members of the CF then scheme to use the "Common-Law" relationship laws to manipulate the system in the following example:

Two CF members have been sharing a room in the shacks for over three years.   One is posted to Toronto, and the other isn't, but thinks that Toronto would be a jammy posting.   Could that member, not go to the Career Mgr and say that they were "Common-Law" and demand a posting to Toronto?   Take in account the new laws, the new quality of life of the soldier policies, etc.   Who will the first Barrackroom Lawyer be?

GW

Now there's an interesting prospect. In typical fashion, the law will undoubtably be vague about all this. By i can definately see the day where someone will try pulling a stunt like this.

 

[LowRider]

Being accepting of people because of their race, religion, or sexual orientation has absolutely nothing to do with 'accepting' a 56 year old dating your 17 year old daughter. You are trying a feint manoever!!!

Allow me to make it clearer for you sigpig!If sexual orientation is protected under the Charter of rights,thus setting precedent?Guess what buddy paedophiles cannot be disriminated against just because they like children.Is not Paedophilia also sexual orientation?Yes i believe it is,guess we gotta accept them as well.

 

[onecat]

"Could not two "non-gay" members of the CF then scheme to use the "Common-Law" relationship laws to manipulate the system in the following example:"

Well sure if someone or some people want to scheme the CF out of something, I'm sure they could do it.  BUt that's not reason, to discriminate based on  sexual orientation.  A couple is couple no matter what sex they.  In your example a male and female friend do that same thing, to get out of  shacks and get a PMQ.  If someone is going to scheme, then they'll find a way to do it.

 

[camochick]

I dont think common law is that easy. I'm prietty sure you have to file taxes together or do something that shows the government that you are a couple and not just two people living together. If that was the case, I would have been common law with my ex roomate and well i should be getting half of his sweet cd collection. As for the whole gay thing, my opinion is if it doesnt hurt you then its none of your business so just let people be. hehe >

 

[Horse_Soldier]

Allow me to make it clearer for you sigpig!If sexual orientation is protected under the Charter of rights,thus setting precedent?Guess what buddy paedophiles cannot be disriminated against just because they like children.Is not Paedophilia also sexual orientation?Yes i believe it is,guess we gotta accept them as well.

Sheesh - that tired and discredited argument.  Pedophilia is not a sexual orientation - it is the predisposition to a criminal act, i.e. sexual abuse of minors.

 

[onecat]

"Allow me to make it clearer for you sigpig!If sexual orientation is protected under the Charter of rights,thus setting precedent?Guess what buddy paedophiles cannot be discriminated against just because they like children.Is not Paedophilia also sexual orientation?Yes i believe it is,guess we gotta accept them as well."

Being Gay and being a paedolhile are not that same thing....I get so tire of of hearing from closed mind people who think that being gay and likimg children is the same. Making a statment like that is the same as saying all RC preists are gay or are paedophiles.  Its not.  And the charter, doesn't protect paedophiles.  To say that it is, is just blowing crap.  Get over your homophobia and move on.

 

[sigpig]

Allow me to make it clearer for you sigpig!If sexual orientation is protected under the Charter of rights,thus setting precedent?Guess what buddy paedophiles cannot be disriminated against just because they like children.Is not Paedophilia also sexual orientation?Yes i believe it is,guess we gotta accept them as well.

Paedophilia, an adult preying upon and having sex with minor children is against the law in Canada I thought. A homosexual relationship between two consenting adults, or two consentiing minors for that matter, is not against the law.

Do you really want to be equating the two?

 

[Gunner]

I think this issue could very easily be solved by taking the word "marriage" out of government policy.  The federal/provincial government should provide guidelines and regulation over who and what can form unions that are recognized in a legal sense.  Marriage, in my mind, denotes religious affiliation "married in the eyes of the Lord".  Hence there is nothing wrong with a man and man, woman and woman or man and woman forming a lawful union.  Leave the religion out of the whole equation because, in my mind, the government has no business being involved in it anyway.  

Finally, the societal norms will dictate what a lawful union is (two 25 year old men or an 90 year man and a 17 year old girl).  If they love each other enough to make a commitment, all the power to them.  If a religious group wants to marry homosexual couples in accordance with their customs and beliefs, well done to them.  In the end, I hope we have moved beyond the entire homosexual debate and accepted it as is.  Can a man or woman do their job, that's what I worry about.

My 2 cents.

Cheers,

 

[LowRider]

 

Pedophilia is not a sexual orientation - it is the predisposition to a criminal act

So was Homosexuality 20 years ago,but i'm sure the comparison will escape you!Now everyone can flame me for being intolerant and un-Canadian because i don't agree with Liberal Social engineering.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Quote,
Sheesh - that tired and discredited argument.   Pedophilia is not a sexual orientation - it is the predisposition to a criminal act, i.e. sexual abuse of minors.
....for how long, though?   I think that is what some people[myself included] are worried about...just how long before "anything goes at any age with anybody" because no one will eventually put their feet down?
Again, my problem is definetally not with gays,......my problem is the slippery slope we are on in regards to our children in the future.


EDIT: and I can see I broke my own rule, staying on the article, lets keep it civil or down she goes, ladies and gents.....

 

[Cloud Cover]

Now there's an interesting prospect. In typical fashion, the law will undoubtably be vague about all this. By i can definately see the day where someone will try pulling a stunt like this.

The answer is 'no'. There are more elements to a common law relationship than just living together. 

 

[LowRider]

.

Making a statment like that is the same as saying all RC preists are gay or are paedophiles.

No i believe that is stereotyping,which has absolutly nothing to do with anything i said.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Quote from Whiskey 601,
The answer is 'no'. There are more elements to a common law relationship than just living together.

Well now that can bring us back to the article, does anyone know what these "elements" are?

 

[aesop081]

 
So was Homosexuality 20 years ago,but i'm sure the comparison will escape you!Now everyone can flame me for being intolerant and un-Canadian because i don't agree with Liberal Social engineering.

So what are you saying...that in 20 years pedophilia will be legal !  What are you....on crack ?

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I'm trying to keep this open but......

 

[camochick]

I dont think pedohilia will ever become legal. I'm prietty sure someone would step in I mean you're prietty worked up about it and its not even happening. You're not untolerant or un canadian because you dont agree with homosexuality. You dont have to agree with it, you just have to accept the fact that it is here and it will not go anywhere and that these people are going to get married(or have a union) and there is nothing you can do about it. You have every right to your opinion but as soon as that opinion becomes going in the streets and beating gays then its a problem.

 

[onecat]

There is nio slippy slope.  The law is very clear on having sex with kids, and that isn't going change.  And Canadian have always put their foot down on having sex with kids....  that's why they go jail.  If you honesty think that because we allow gays to marry, that we're going to aloow father's or mother's to have sex with their kids or that man down the street is going to allowed to picked up his next date at the playgound...  then you seriously need help.  They are not same.  If you think they are, then please explain it to me, because I don't see the link.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Then answer this, cause I really don't know, was homosexuality ever illegal in Canada?
...and if so, did people say the same thing about it that you just said?

 

[aesop081]

I'm trying to keep this open but......

Bruce, i realize what you mean but :

When someone starts equating homosexuality and pedophilia and implying that pedophilia , like homosexuality will become acceptable if given enough time......he needs to have his headspace and timing adjusted.