'Focus on the family gets a shock (this from a Bi-pagan mailing list)

Question:

I’m glad I wasn’t that fucked up to ask Parse to marry me.

Response:

this is an offer that he can’t refuse. Pip

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Yes it is. Marry me. — Lush Lush-O-Mint: Double Yer Pleasure, Double Yer Fun Homosexual marriage is quite wrong. "Gay Marriage Poll Backfires On Conservative Family Group" by Ben Thompson 365Gay.com National Editor (June 15, Ottawa) The results of a conservative religious group’s survey of families shows Canadians are not in sympathy with its anti-gay position on marriage. The national survey was conducted for Focus on the Family by the polling firm Strategic Counsel and sought the opinions of Canadians on a wide variety of family issues including divorce, spanking, and family finances. FOTC, which submitted briefs to courts in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec opposing civil union legislation for gay and lesbian families, included in the survey a section on Canadian attitudes towards gay relationships and the issue of marriage. The survey found that 46% of Canadians believe that homosexual couples should be allowed to legal marry; 44% disagree. When collated by age, the survey found that among those under the age of 40, 60% of those surveyed agree with same-sex marriage. It also found that 46% of Canadians agree that "children raised by same-sex couples are as likely as any other children to be happy and well-adjusted." 55% of those under age 40 agreed. And it found that 68% of those under age 40 feel "homosexual couples should be entitled to the same tax, pension, and other benefits as heterosexual couples." Among the total population the number agreeing was 55%. The organization was so surprised by the result that it omitted the entire section from its mailings to the media. Instead FOTC dealt with families in general, saying 78% of the public undervalues the importance of the family. It also said that 82% of families believe tax policies should be changed so that one parent could stay home with children. FOTC also emphasized that the study showed most people believed divorce was too easy to attain. Gay and lesbian couples in Ontario and Quebec are before the courts fighting for the right to marry. The issue is expected to wind up in the Supreme Court of Canada, and lawyers for conservative Christian groups may find the FOTC survey used against them. Although FOTC did not provide the media with a summary of the gay and lesbian portion of the poll, the complete results are available on its website: http://www.fotf.ca/familyfacts/attitudes/ If a kid asks where rain comes from, I think a cute thing to tell him is "God is crying." And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell him is "Probably because of something you did." -Jack Handey

Response:

Yes it is. Marry me. — Lush Lush-O-Mint: Double Yer Pleasure, Double Yer Fun

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Homosexual marriage is quite wrong. "Gay Marriage Poll Backfires On Conservative Family Group" by Ben Thompson 365Gay.com National Editor (June 15, Ottawa) The results of a conservative religious group’s survey of families shows Canadians are not in sympathy with its anti-gay position on marriage. The national survey was conducted for Focus on the Family by the polling firm Strategic Counsel and sought the opinions of Canadians on a wide variety of family issues including divorce, spanking, and family finances. FOTC, which submitted briefs to courts in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec opposing civil union legislation for gay and lesbian families, included in the survey a section on Canadian attitudes towards gay relationships and the issue of marriage. The survey found that 46% of Canadians believe that homosexual couples should be allowed to legal marry; 44% disagree. When collated by age, the survey found that among those under the age of 40, 60% of those surveyed agree with same-sex marriage. It also found that 46% of Canadians agree that "children raised by same-sex couples are as likely as any other children to be happy and well-adjusted." 55% of those under age 40 agreed. And it found that 68% of those under age 40 feel "homosexual couples should be entitled to the same tax, pension, and other benefits as heterosexual couples." Among the total population the number agreeing was 55%. The organization was so surprised by the result that it omitted the entire section from its mailings to the media. Instead FOTC dealt with families in general, saying 78% of the public undervalues the importance of the family. It also said that 82% of families believe tax policies should be changed so that one parent could stay home with children. FOTC also emphasized that the study showed most people believed divorce was too easy to attain. Gay and lesbian couples in Ontario and Quebec are before the courts fighting for the right to marry. The issue is expected to wind up in the Supreme Court of Canada, and lawyers for conservative Christian groups may find the FOTC survey used against them. Although FOTC did not provide the media with a summary of the gay and lesbian portion of the poll, the complete results are available on its website: http://www.fotf.ca/familyfacts/attitudes/ If a kid asks where rain comes from, I think a cute thing to tell him is "God is crying." And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell him is "Probably because of something you did." -Jack Handey

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – No. I mean that there is more discrimination against single people than there is for race, religion and gender. It is presently the largest form of discrimination, and is promoted by many governments and the united nations itself. There is discrimination against single people but it is not as obvioius as other forms of discrimination and people do not look for it. I have seen people marry simply because it is what they thought they were supposed to do when they graduate. People have children for the same reason. People are always trying to set-up their single friends with another person almost as if there is something wrong with being single. Whether this type of descrimination is more pervasive than others I don’t know, but it does exist. Actually I was talking about the financial and legal discrimination, which is far more pervasive. Why is it that a spouse can act as a legal confidant? You mean and a SO or a close friend cannot? Good point. Yes. It’s ridiculous that they get the same privilege as lawyers. No one else has that right. well, in fact, we are only guaranteed against self incrimination by the constitution. the 5th ammendment… Oh, but you are canadian?…that might make a difference. The law is so filled with contradictions and flaws it is ridiculous. And what makes it worse is people keep trying to legislate morality. I’m pretty sure that any and all communication with your lawyer is protected, and he can’t be forced to testify against you. Just like with spouses. I’m not sure, but I think a lawyer has a legal ethic to state that you are guilty if you confess to a crime. As does a psychiatrist. While some things are bound in confidence, an actual confession of murder may not be.

No, you can confess to a lawyer and they’re not supposed to tell. Don’t you watch any television? Canadian law is silly. We have so few murders and such that I don’t think these things come up very often. Right, isn’t there one handgun murder in canada to every 350 in the US? I guess it is just too cold up there for people to leave their houses.

It’s too hot right now. Far too hot. ;_;

Response:

Yes. It’s ridiculous that they get the same privilege as lawyers. No one else has that right.

Response:

No. I mean that there is more discrimination against single people than there is for race, religion and gender. It is presently the largest form of discrimination, and is promoted by many governments and the united nations itself.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – PT, See other post to this thread for my replies. I just have to ask you. Maybe I’m reading this statement wrong. When you say this directly below, do you mean that discrimination against singles is more rampant that any other kind of discrimination? That’s what it reads like. (to me)If so, that is quite wrong.. There is far more and worse discrimination against many, many, other groups of people, than there is against single people being taxed! You must mean something else right? If you do, please clarify, if you don’t , please elaborate…..Witchy The fact that single people should not be subsidizing married people. The fact that discrimination against single people is far more rampant in the world than any other kind. This is why I can say that it is QUITE WRONG. Bet you my marriage has lasted longer than most. Who are you to deem a loving couple of any combination who are committed to each other, to be ‘quite wrong’? I can never understand that stance. You would rather gay people wouldn’t commit? Why? I think you are quite wrong, myself. How does who anyone loves effect you in any way whatsoever? You sound Bible thumpy and preachy to me….Witchy — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip Homosexual marriage is quite wrong. *snipped C. Fangs post*

Response:

I’m pretty sure that any and all communication with your lawyer is protected, and he can’t be forced to testify against you. Just like with spouses. Canadian law is silly. We have so few murders and such that I don’t think these things come up very often.

Response:

Actually I was talking about the financial and legal discrimination, which is far more pervasive. Why is it that a spouse can act as a legal confidant?

Response:

PT, See other post to this thread for my replies. I just have to ask you. Maybe I’m reading this statement wrong. When you say this directly below, do you mean that discrimination against singles is more rampant that any other kind of discrimination? That’s what it reads like. (to me)If so, that is quite wrong.. There is far more and worse discrimination against many, many, other groups of people, than there is against single people being taxed! You must mean something else right? If you do, please clarify, if you don’t , please elaborate…..Witchy

The fact that single people should not be subsidizing married people. The fact that discrimination against single people is far more rampant in the world than any other kind. This is why I can say that it is QUITE WRONG.

*snipped C. Fangs post*

Response:

Married couples do not include people with children. There are many unmarried people with children as well. There are also many married people without children. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Families. Couples. People who care about and have a vested interest in others. And you didn’t simply say "Single people shouldn’t be subsidizing married people." You didn’t say "Marriage was wrong, here’s why…" Your statement was: "Homosexual marriage is quite wrong." Perhaps you shouldn’t make assumptions about other beliefs that haven’t been specified. —– I wasn’t making an assumption about ‘other beliefs’ I was making a direct statement and comparison about what you said, and the way it was said. Homosexual, Interracial, Heterosexual, Pagan, or Symbolic, marriage. (Did I leave anyone out? Sorry. Tired The point I was trying to make was: What’s the difference? When it came to your statement, if you just meant marriage, why not simply say that? I must admit, if you did, I probably wouldn’t have replied. This caught my attention. Inflammatory works, at times. —–

Because the topic was homosexual marriage. Also, by saying homosexual marriage I guaranteed further discussion than if I had just said marriage, as you noted above. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – That’s what I replied to. That’s like saying ‘Interracial marriage is quite wrong’ then turning around and saying, "Oh, I meant ‘Marriage’" Why put the emphasis on one type of people then, if you meant in general? The topic was homosexual marriage, not marriage in general. Also, I am opposed to homosexual marriage because I am opposed to marriage. You do know that homosexual marriage is a subset of marriage, do you not? —– Really? (Actually, I wonder if there *is a real list of *main marriage, and *subset marriage guidelines anywhere. Is there a written Hierarchy?) Semantics. Your statement was, again: "Homosexual marriage is quite wrong." Even though the post you were replying to was about gay marriage, if you had posted: "Marriage is quite wrong" Your point would have been made clearly, and left less open to interpretation. As it is, if your main point was being against marriage, using the words ‘homosexual’, and ‘quite’ muddied the waters of your intent, and spread the focus away from just being against marriage in general. —–

There is. Homosexual marriage is a subset of marriage. Hetereosexual marriage is also a subset of marriage. This is because marriage includes any two people that are married, independent of sexual orientation. Marriage is quite wrong. Homosexual marriage, since it is marriage, is also quite wrong. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – And even then, I don’t agree with your stance. I think stable committed families/couples are good for society. All kinds. And here in Canada, although I may get certain tax breaks, not many, since as a declared gay couple, there are few indeed. You still get some. Why is it that you have tax breaks? What justification can there be for their existence? You’re actually worse for society, particularly when you’re without children. Single people spend more money. —– Some. Not much. I’m answering this point personally. The break *we get is about the same as people who aren’t related that own joint property. As in a business relationship. Do you think that small businesses shouldnt get tax benefits also?

A business is not an individual. Discrimination is presently permissible with businesses, in all forms. And I am actually worse for society? (Do you mean me? Or married people in general?) How is that?

Married people in general. All of my arguments against homosexual marriage are the same as against heterosexual marriage and most other forms of marriage. Married people consume less, and contribute less to the economy. And I hope you aren’t ‘Assuming’ that I would be childless? And also, so what if single people spend more money? I guess I’m missing your point on that one. Needs clarification. —–

For economic reasons, spending of money is a good thing. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – We also have to pay for basic automatic rights that legal marriage would provide. That’s unfortunate and quite discriminatory. That doesn’t change the fact that you have legal rights that aren’t available to single people. —– And that doesn’t change the fact that single people also have rights and benefits / or / less legal responsibilities with their partners/mates that a legal couple don’t. When single pensioners have a pension, they get a set amount. But if they decide to marry, both of their pensions are cut back, because they are married! Discrimination against married couples!?! See? Like I said, it goes both ways. I’m sure there are more examples. Someone with more knowledge about all this should chime in.

How unfortunate. A minor con for some massive pros. We don’t seem to know all the facts. & I still think its beneficial for society to have committed couples and families in this time. If you, as a single person get elderly and feeble, and you have no family to take care of you, who’s burden do you become?

Burden? It’s called a pension. You should be financially stable enough to pay for your own care. The taxpayers. Me. (And that includes singles. It’s a subset of taxpayers, you know! What is your utopia? No marriage?

No unjust discrimination. No legal responsibilities or ties? We should all just fend for ourselves, or by our moods that day? (I am being a bit of devils advocate here. I’m not Ann Landers/Dear Abby. I don’t mean that people *should* be married, as opposed to living together, or whatever arrangement chosen. I’m not proclaiming what people should do with their personal lives. But marriage is an option for people. It’s not new, and its not going away.) If society, and people in general could get along as a whole, and take care of each other, responsibly, without legalities, and rules, it would be a utopia. But that isn’t the way humanity has evolved so far, unfortunately, tax breaks or no. —–

White people should pay less in taxes, and instead have to pay a higher pension. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Like power of medical attorney, inheritance, insurance, etc. But for the few benifits there are, there are all the responsibilities that come with being a married couple. If something happens to me or mine, we don’t get a government handout/dole. We have to support each other, but if we just ‘lived together’ we would both be entitled to all kinds of individual benefits from the Government. It goes both The pros far outweigh the cons. There are more employed than unemployed. —— And see above. Like family taking care of their own when they get old or disabled. Like I said with the legal ties come responsibilities. Not just with unemployment. I don’t feel like being a poster child for marriage of any kind. I just don’t think its such a big drain on the single person. I personally think that big corporate business having huge, huge, tax breaks and umbrellas, sometimes to the point of paying little to no taxes, while the working poor get poorer every year is a bigger concern. But if you really feel that it is such an unfair tax disadvantage to be single, get married! <g Or vote for an independent political candidate. Or post your views to a newsgroup…..Witchy

Oh yes, because if you’re a black person that’s being discriminated against, you should just have plastic surgery to make your skin look lighter. Even the UN promotes marriage, not recognizing that it is very much discriminatory to do so. Promoting the family over people that choose not to have a family is quite unjust, and against the spirit of universal human rights.

Response:

—– You didn’t include it. I did. I wasn’t speaking about University. The ‘Public’ funding for education I’m speaking about, is basically for children. And paid through home taxes by childless couples as well as families. Another ‘unfair’ tax advantage? —– Families. Couples. People who care about and have a vested interest in others. And you didn’t simply say "Single people shouldn’t be subsidizing married people." You didn’t say "Marriage was wrong, here’s why…" Your statement was: "Homosexual marriage is quite wrong." Perhaps you shouldn’t make assumptions about other beliefs that haven’t been specified.

—– I wasn’t making an assumption about ‘other beliefs’ I was making a direct statement and comparison about what you said, and the way it was said. Homosexual, Interracial, Heterosexual, Pagan, or Symbolic, marriage. (Did I leave anyone out? Sorry. Tired The point I was trying to make was: What’s the difference? When it came to your statement, if you just meant marriage, why not simply say that? I must admit, if you did, I probably wouldn’t have replied. This caught my attention. Inflammatory works, at times. —– That’s what I replied to. That’s like saying ‘Interracial marriage is quite wrong’ then turning around and saying, "Oh, I meant ‘Marriage’" Why put the emphasis on one type of people then, if you meant in general? The topic was homosexual marriage, not marriage in general. Also, I am opposed to homosexual marriage because I am opposed to marriage. You do know that homosexual marriage is a subset of marriage, do you not?

—– Really? (Actually, I wonder if there *is a real list of *main marriage, and *subset marriage guidelines anywhere. Is there a written Hierarchy?) Semantics. Your statement was, again: "Homosexual marriage is quite wrong." Even though the post you were replying to was about gay marriage, if you had posted: "Marriage is quite wrong" Your point would have been made clearly, and left less open to interpretation. As it is, if your main point was being against marriage, using the words ‘homosexual’, and ‘quite’ muddied the waters of your intent, and spread the focus away from just being against marriage in general. —– And even then, I don’t agree with your stance. I think stable committed families/couples are good for society. All kinds. And here in Canada, although I may get certain tax breaks, not many, since as a declared gay couple, there are few indeed. You still get some. Why is it that you have tax breaks? What justification can there be for their existence? You’re actually worse for society, particularly when you’re without children. Single people spend more

money. —– Some. Not much. I’m answering this point personally. The break *we get is about the same as people who aren’t related that own joint property. As in a business relationship. Do you think that small businesses shouldnt get tax benefits also? And I am actually worse for society? (Do you mean me? Or married people in general?) How is that? And I hope you aren’t ‘Assuming’ that I would be childless? And also, so what if single people spend more money? I guess I’m missing your point on that one. Needs clarification. —– We also have to pay for basic automatic rights that legal marriage would provide. That’s unfortunate and quite discriminatory. That doesn’t change the fact that you have legal rights that aren’t available to single people.

—– And that doesn’t change the fact that single people also have rights and benefits / or / less legal responsibilities with their partners/mates that a legal couple don’t. When single pensioners have a pension, they get a set amount. But if they decide to marry, both of their pensions are cut back, because they are married! Discrimination against married couples!?! See? Like I said, it goes both ways. I’m sure there are more examples. Someone with more knowledge about all this should chime in. We don’t seem to know all the facts. & I still think its beneficial for society to have committed couples and families in this time. If you, as a single person get elderly and feeble, and you have no family to take care of you, who’s burden do you become? The taxpayers. Me. (And that includes singles. It’s a subset of taxpayers, you know! What is your utopia? No marriage? No legal responsibilities or ties? We should all just fend for ourselves, or by our moods that day? (I am being a bit of devils advocate here. I’m not Ann Landers/Dear Abby. I don’t mean that people *should* be married, as opposed to living together, or whatever arrangement chosen. I’m not proclaiming what people should do with their personal lives. But marriage is an option for people. It’s not new, and its not going away.) If society, and people in general could get along as a whole, and take care of each other, responsibly, without legalities, and rules, it would be a utopia. But that isn’t the way humanity has evolved so far, unfortunately, tax breaks or no. —– Like power of medical attorney, inheritance, insurance, etc. But for the few benifits there are, there are all the responsibilities that come with being a married couple. If something happens to me or mine, we don’t get a government handout/dole. We have to support each other, but if we just ‘lived together’ we would both be entitled to all kinds of The pros far outweigh the cons. There are more employed than unemployed.

—— And see above. Like family taking care of their own when they get old or disabled. Like I said with the legal ties come responsibilities. Not just with unemployment. I don’t feel like being a poster child for marriage of any kind. I just don’t think its such a big drain on the single person. I personally think that big corporate business having huge, huge, tax breaks and umbrellas, sometimes to the point of paying little to no taxes, while the working poor get poorer every year is a bigger concern. But if you really feel that it is such an unfair tax disadvantage to be single, get married! <g Or vote for an independent political candidate. Or post your views to a newsgroup…..Witchy

Response:

I understand. Your allegiance will never die. Even as you said. I respect that. Pip

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – It’s pure ego that it is included and Zoroastrianism is not. If you count world adherents in numbers, yes. But in influence, it is the undisputed parent of the other two. Besides calling them the big three is a well known appellation. I have to smile here…like wicca……hee hee . Pip Judaism is not, was never, and will never be one of the big 3 religions. It is a very minor religion, much like Wicca. Hi Witchy! You make several excellent points here…I agree with you that marriage between two people should not be for heterosexuals only. Besides all the great points you brought up, if the state decides that marriage between two people is for heterosexuals only, it is in a sense fostering a religious viewpoint. It is from religious roots that homosexuality is considered anything but a natural state for some people. If heterosexual marriage is condoned because it is formed to reproduce, then even then, the gov. has no business in whether a person reproduces or not….even so hetero marriage is NOT condoned for purposes of reproduction, there are too many people who can’t reproduce for whatever reason, who marry all the time. Any way you slice this, we get back to religion, not practicalities. Religious tennets of the big 3 religions..C,J, and I, are dead set against homosexuality…and I say fuck them all to pieces. For all of you "pagans" out there, the pagan world…ALL of it, had no problems with homosexual behavior or unions. It fills me with wonder that so much xtian attitude is residual in these so called pagans…must be because they all used to be xtians. Pip And childless people subsidise other peoples children. Society benefits from that. That child’s schooling, that you have no relation to, but pay taxes for. That child may grow up and save you or a loved one in the future. And society benefits from committed people. Families. Couples. People who care about and have a vested interest in others. And you didn’t simply say "Single people shouldn’t be subsidizing married people." You didn’t say "Marriage was wrong, here’s why…" Your statement was: "Homosexual marriage is quite wrong." That’s what I replied to. That’s like saying ‘Interracial marriage is quite wrong’ then turning around and saying, "Oh, I meant ‘Marriage’" Why put the emphasis on one type of people then, if you meant in general? And even then, I don’t agree with your stance. I think stable committed families/couples are good for society. All kinds. And here in Canada, although I may get certain tax breaks, not many, since as a declared gay couple, there are few indeed. We also have to pay for basic automatic rights that legal marriage would provide. Like power of medical attorney, inheritance, insurance, etc. But for the few benifits there are, there are all the responsibilities that come with being a married couple. If something happens to me or mine, we don’t get a government handout/dole. We have to support each other, but if we just ‘lived together’ we would both be entitled to all kinds of individual benefits from the Government. It goes both — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip The fact that single people should not be subsidizing married people. The fact that discrimination against single people is far more rampant in the world than any other kind. This is why I can say that it is QUITE WRONG. Bet you my marriage has lasted longer than most. Who are you to deem a loving couple of any combination who are committed to each other, to be ‘quite wrong’? I can never understand that stance. You would rather gay people wouldn’t commit? Why? I think you are quite wrong, myself. How does who anyone loves effect you in any way whatsoever? You sound Bible thumpy and preachy to me….Witchy — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip message Homosexual marriage is quite wrong. message

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "Gay Marriage Poll Backfires On Conservative Family Group" by Ben Thompson 365Gay.com National Editor (June 15, Ottawa) The results of a conservative religious group’s survey of families shows Canadians are not in sympathy with its anti-gay position on marriage. The national survey was conducted for Focus on the Family by the polling firm Strategic Counsel and sought the opinions of Canadians on a wide variety of family issues including divorce, spanking, and family finances. FOTC, which submitted briefs to courts in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec opposing civil union legislation for gay and lesbian families, included in the survey a section on Canadian attitudes towards gay relationships and the issue of marriage. The survey found that 46% of Canadians believe that homosexual couples should be allowed to legal marry; 44% disagree. When collated by age, the survey found that among those under the age of 40, 60% of those surveyed agree with same-sex marriage. It also found that 46% of Canadians agree that "children raised by same-sex couples are as likely as any other children to be happy and well-adjusted." 55% of those under age 40 agreed. And it found that 68% of those under age 40 feel "homosexual couples should be entitled to the same tax, pension, and other benefits as heterosexual couples." Among the total population the number agreeing was 55%. The organization was so surprised by the result that it omitted the entire section from its mailings to the media. Instead FOTC dealt with families in general, saying 78% of the public undervalues the importance of the family. It also said that 82% of families believe tax policies should be changed so that one parent could stay home with children. FOTC also emphasized that the study showed most people believed divorce was too easy to attain. Gay and lesbian couples in Ontario and Quebec are before the courts fighting for the right to marry. The issue is expected to wind up in the Supreme Court of Canada, and lawyers for conservative Christian groups may find the FOTC survey used against them. Although FOTC did not provide the media with a summary of the gay

Response:

It’s pure ego that it is included and Zoroastrianism is not.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If you count world adherents in numbers, yes. But in influence, it is the undisputed parent of the other two. Besides calling them the big three is a well known appellation. I have to smile here…like wicca……hee hee . Pip Judaism is not, was never, and will never be one of the big 3 religions. It is a very minor religion, much like Wicca. Hi Witchy! You make several excellent points here…I agree with you that marriage between two people should not be for heterosexuals only. Besides all the great points you brought up, if the state decides that marriage between two people is for heterosexuals only, it is in a sense fostering a religious viewpoint. It is from religious roots that homosexuality is considered anything but a natural state for some people. If heterosexual marriage is condoned because it is formed to reproduce, then even then, the gov. has no business in whether a person reproduces or not….even so hetero marriage is NOT condoned for purposes of reproduction, there are too many people who can’t reproduce for whatever reason, who marry all the time. Any way you slice this, we get back to religion, not practicalities. Religious tennets of the big 3 religions..C,J, and I, are dead set against homosexuality…and I say fuck them all to pieces. For all of you "pagans" out there, the pagan world…ALL of it, had no problems with homosexual behavior or unions. It fills me with wonder that so much xtian attitude is residual in these so called pagans…must be because they all used to be xtians. Pip And childless people subsidise other peoples children. Society benefits from that. That child’s schooling, that you have no relation to, but pay taxes for. That child may grow up and save you or a loved one in the future. And society benefits from committed people. Families. Couples. People who care about and have a vested interest in others. And you didn’t simply say "Single people shouldn’t be subsidizing married people." You didn’t say "Marriage was wrong, here’s why…" Your statement was: "Homosexual marriage is quite wrong." That’s what I replied to. That’s like saying ‘Interracial marriage is quite wrong’ then turning around and saying, "Oh, I meant ‘Marriage’" Why put the emphasis on one type of people then, if you meant in general? And even then, I don’t agree with your stance. I think stable committed families/couples are good for society. All kinds. And here in Canada, although I may get certain tax breaks, not many, since as a declared gay couple, there are few indeed. We also have to pay for basic automatic rights that legal marriage would provide. Like power of medical attorney, inheritance, insurance, etc. But for the few benifits there are, there are all the responsibilities that come with being a married couple. If something happens to me or mine, we don’t get a government handout/dole. We have to support each other, but if we just ‘lived together’ we would both be entitled to all kinds of individual benefits from the Government. It goes both — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip The fact that single people should not be subsidizing married people. The fact that discrimination against single people is far more rampant in the world than any other kind. This is why I can say that it is QUITE WRONG. Bet you my marriage has lasted longer than most. Who are you to deem a loving couple of any combination who are committed to each other, to be ‘quite wrong’? I can never understand that stance. You would rather gay people wouldn’t commit? Why? I think you are quite wrong, myself. How does who anyone loves effect you in any way whatsoever? You sound Bible thumpy and preachy to me….Witchy — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip Homosexual marriage is quite wrong. "Gay Marriage Poll Backfires On Conservative Family Group" by Ben Thompson 365Gay.com National Editor (June 15, Ottawa) The results of a conservative religious group’s survey of families shows Canadians are not in sympathy with its anti-gay position on marriage. The national survey was conducted for Focus on the Family by the polling firm Strategic Counsel and sought the opinions of Canadians on a wide variety of family issues including divorce, spanking, and family finances. FOTC, which submitted briefs to courts in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec opposing civil union legislation for gay and lesbian families, included in the survey a section on Canadian attitudes towards gay relationships and the issue of marriage. The survey found that 46% of Canadians believe that homosexual couples should be allowed to legal marry; 44% disagree. When collated by age, the survey found that among those under the age of 40, 60% of those surveyed agree with same-sex marriage. It also found that 46% of Canadians agree that "children raised by same-sex couples are as likely as any other children to be happy and well-adjusted." 55% of those under age 40 agreed. And it found that 68% of those under age 40 feel "homosexual couples should be entitled to the same tax, pension, and other benefits as heterosexual couples." Among the total population the number agreeing was 55%. The organization was so surprised by the result that it omitted the entire section from its mailings to the media. Instead FOTC dealt with families in general, saying 78% of the public undervalues the importance of the family. It also said that 82% of families believe tax policies should be changed so that one parent could stay home with children. FOTC also emphasized that the study showed most people believed divorce was too easy to attain. Gay and lesbian couples in Ontario and Quebec are before the courts fighting for the right to marry. The issue is expected to wind up in the Supreme Court of Canada, and lawyers for conservative Christian groups may find the FOTC survey used against them. Although FOTC did not provide the media with a summary of the gay and lesbian portion of the poll, the complete results are available on its website: http://www.fotf.ca/familyfacts/attitudes/

Response:

If you count world adherents in numbers, yes. But in influence, it is the undisputed parent of the other two. Besides calling them the big three is a well known appellation. I have to smile here…like wicca……hee hee . Pip

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Judaism is not, was never, and will never be one of the big 3 religions. It is a very minor religion, much like Wicca. Hi Witchy! You make several excellent points here…I agree with you that marriage between two people should not be for heterosexuals only. Besides all the great points you brought up, if the state decides that marriage between two people is for heterosexuals only, it is in a sense fostering a religious viewpoint. It is from religious roots that homosexuality is considered anything but a natural state for some people. If heterosexual marriage is condoned because it is formed to reproduce, then even then, the gov. has no business in whether a person reproduces or not….even so hetero marriage is NOT condoned for purposes of reproduction, there are too many people who can’t reproduce for whatever reason, who marry all the time. Any way you slice this, we get back to religion, not practicalities. Religious tennets of the big 3 religions..C,J, and I, are dead set against homosexuality…and I say fuck them all to pieces. For all of you "pagans" out there, the pagan world…ALL of it, had no problems with homosexual behavior or unions. It fills me with wonder that so much xtian attitude is residual in these so called pagans…must be because they all used to be xtians. Pip And childless people subsidise other peoples children. Society benefits from that. That child’s schooling, that you have no relation to, but pay taxes for. That child may grow up and save you or a loved one in the future. And society benefits from committed people. Families. Couples. People who care about and have a vested interest in others. And you didn’t simply say "Single people shouldn’t be subsidizing married people." You didn’t say "Marriage was wrong, here’s why…" Your statement was: "Homosexual marriage is quite wrong." That’s what I replied to. That’s like saying ‘Interracial marriage is quite wrong’ then turning around and saying, "Oh, I meant ‘Marriage’" Why put the emphasis on one type of people then, if you meant in general? And even then, I don’t agree with your stance. I think stable committed families/couples are good for society. All kinds. And here in Canada, although I may get certain tax breaks, not many, since as a declared gay couple, there are few indeed. We also have to pay for basic automatic rights that legal marriage would provide. Like power of medical attorney, inheritance, insurance, etc. But for the few benifits there are, there are all the responsibilities that come with being a married couple. If something happens to me or mine, we don’t get a government handout/dole. We have to support each other, but if we just ‘lived together’ we would both be entitled to all kinds of individual benefits from the Government. It goes both — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip The fact that single people should not be subsidizing married people. The fact that discrimination against single people is far more rampant in the world than any other kind. This is why I can say that it is QUITE WRONG. Bet you my marriage has lasted longer than most. Who are you to deem a loving couple of any combination who are committed to each other, to be ‘quite wrong’? I can never understand that stance. You would rather gay people wouldn’t commit? Why? I think you are quite wrong, myself. How does who anyone loves effect you in any way whatsoever? You sound Bible thumpy and preachy to me….Witchy — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip Homosexual marriage is quite wrong. "Gay Marriage Poll Backfires On Conservative Family Group" by Ben Thompson 365Gay.com National Editor (June 15, Ottawa) The results of a conservative religious group’s survey of families shows Canadians are not in sympathy with its anti-gay position on marriage. The national survey was conducted for Focus on the Family by the polling firm Strategic Counsel and sought the opinions of Canadians on a wide variety of family issues including divorce, spanking, and family finances. FOTC, which submitted briefs to courts in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec opposing civil union legislation for gay and lesbian families, included in the survey a section on Canadian attitudes towards gay relationships and the issue of marriage. The survey found that 46% of Canadians believe that homosexual couples should be allowed to legal marry; 44% disagree. When collated by age, the survey found that among those under the age of 40, 60% of those surveyed agree with same-sex marriage. It also found that 46% of Canadians agree that "children raised by same-sex couples are as likely as any other children to be happy and well-adjusted." 55% of those under age 40 agreed. And it found that 68% of those under age 40 feel "homosexual couples should be entitled to the same tax, pension, and other benefits as heterosexual couples." Among the total population the number agreeing was 55%. The organization was so surprised by the result that it omitted the entire section from its mailings to the media. Instead FOTC dealt with families in general, saying 78% of the public undervalues the importance of the family. It also said that 82% of families believe tax policies should be changed so that one parent could stay home with children. FOTC also emphasized that the study showed most people believed divorce was too easy to attain. Gay and lesbian couples in Ontario and Quebec are before the courts fighting for the right to marry. The issue is expected to wind up in the Supreme Court of Canada, and lawyers for conservative Christian groups may find the FOTC survey used against them. Although FOTC did not provide the media with a summary of the gay and lesbian portion of the poll, the complete results are available on its website: http://www.fotf.ca/familyfacts/attitudes/

Response:

Judaism is not, was never, and will never be one of the big 3 religions. It is a very minor religion, much like Wicca.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi Witchy! You make several excellent points here…I agree with you that marriage between two people should not be for heterosexuals only. Besides all the great points you brought up, if the state decides that marriage between two people is for heterosexuals only, it is in a sense fostering a religious viewpoint. It is from religious roots that homosexuality is considered anything but a natural state for some people. If heterosexual marriage is condoned because it is formed to reproduce, then even then, the gov. has no business in whether a person reproduces or not….even so hetero marriage is NOT condoned for purposes of reproduction, there are too many people who can’t reproduce for whatever reason, who marry all the time. Any way you slice this, we get back to religion, not practicalities. Religious tennets of the big 3 religions..C,J, and I, are dead set against homosexuality…and I say fuck them all to pieces. For all of you "pagans" out there, the pagan world…ALL of it, had no problems with homosexual behavior or unions. It fills me with wonder that so much xtian attitude is residual in these so called pagans…must be because they all used to be xtians. Pip And childless people subsidise other peoples children. Society benefits from that. That child’s schooling, that you have no relation to, but pay taxes for. That child may grow up and save you or a loved one in the future. And society benefits from committed people. Families. Couples. People who care about and have a vested interest in others. And you didn’t simply say "Single people shouldn’t be subsidizing married people." You didn’t say "Marriage was wrong, here’s why…" Your statement was: "Homosexual marriage is quite wrong." That’s what I replied to. That’s like saying ‘Interracial marriage is quite wrong’ then turning around and saying, "Oh, I meant ‘Marriage’" Why put the emphasis on one type of people then, if you meant in general? And even then, I don’t agree with your stance. I think stable committed families/couples are good for society. All kinds. And here in Canada, although I may get certain tax breaks, not many, since as a declared gay couple, there are few indeed. We also have to pay for basic automatic rights that legal marriage would provide. Like power of medical attorney, inheritance, insurance, etc. But for the few benifits there are, there are all the responsibilities that come with being a married couple. If something happens to me or mine, we don’t get a government handout/dole. We have to support each other, but if we just ‘lived together’ we would both be entitled to all kinds of individual benefits from the Government. It goes both — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip The fact that single people should not be subsidizing married people. The fact that discrimination against single people is far more rampant in the world than any other kind. This is why I can say that it is QUITE WRONG. Bet you my marriage has lasted longer than most. Who are you to deem a loving couple of any combination who are committed to each other, to be ‘quite wrong’? I can never understand that stance. You would rather gay people wouldn’t commit? Why? I think you are quite wrong, myself. How does who anyone loves effect you in any way whatsoever? You sound Bible thumpy and preachy to me….Witchy — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip Homosexual marriage is quite wrong. "Gay Marriage Poll Backfires On Conservative Family Group" by Ben Thompson 365Gay.com National Editor (June 15, Ottawa) The results of a conservative religious group’s survey of families shows Canadians are not in sympathy with its anti-gay position on marriage. The national survey was conducted for Focus on the Family by the polling firm Strategic Counsel and sought the opinions of Canadians on a wide variety of family issues including divorce, spanking, and family finances. FOTC, which submitted briefs to courts in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec opposing civil union legislation for gay and lesbian families, included in the survey a section on Canadian attitudes towards gay relationships and the issue of marriage. The survey found that 46% of Canadians believe that homosexual couples should be allowed to legal marry; 44% disagree. When collated by age, the survey found that among those under the age of 40, 60% of those surveyed agree with same-sex marriage. It also found that 46% of Canadians agree that "children raised by same-sex couples are as likely as any other children to be happy and well-adjusted." 55% of those under age 40 agreed. And it found that 68% of those under age 40 feel "homosexual couples should be entitled to the same tax, pension, and other benefits as heterosexual couples." Among the total population the number agreeing was 55%. The organization was so surprised by the result that it omitted the entire section from its mailings to the media. Instead FOTC dealt with families in general, saying 78% of the public undervalues the importance of the family. It also said that 82% of families believe tax policies should be changed so that one parent could stay home with children. FOTC also emphasized that the study showed most people believed divorce was too easy to attain. Gay and lesbian couples in Ontario and Quebec are before the courts fighting for the right to marry. The issue is expected to wind up in the Supreme Court of Canada, and lawyers for conservative Christian groups may find the FOTC survey used against them. Although FOTC did not provide the media with a summary of the gay and lesbian portion of the poll, the complete results are available on its website: http://www.fotf.ca/familyfacts/attitudes/

Response:

Hi Witchy! You make several excellent points here…I agree with you that marriage between two people should not be for heterosexuals only. Besides all the great points you brought up, if the state decides that marriage between two people is for heterosexuals only, it is in a sense fostering a religious viewpoint. It is from religious roots that homosexuality is considered anything but a natural state for some people. If heterosexual marriage is condoned because it is formed to reproduce, then even then, the gov. has no business in whether a person reproduces or not….even so hetero marriage is NOT condoned for purposes of reproduction, there are too many people who can’t reproduce for whatever reason, who marry all the time. Any way you slice this, we get back to religion, not practicalities. Religious tennets of the big 3 religions..C,J, and I, are dead set against homosexuality…and I say fuck them all to pieces. For all of you "pagans" out there, the pagan world…ALL of it, had no problems with homosexual behavior or unions. It fills me with wonder that so much xtian attitude is residual in these so called pagans…must be because they all used to be xtians. Pip

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – And childless people subsidise other peoples children. Society benefits from that. That child’s schooling, that you have no relation to, but pay taxes for. That child may grow up and save you or a loved one in the future. And society benefits from committed people. Families. Couples. People who care about and have a vested interest in others. And you didn’t simply say "Single people shouldn’t be subsidizing married people." You didn’t say "Marriage was wrong, here’s why…" Your statement was: "Homosexual marriage is quite wrong." That’s what I replied to. That’s like saying ‘Interracial marriage is quite wrong’ then turning around and saying, "Oh, I meant ‘Marriage’" Why put the emphasis on one type of people then, if you meant in general? And even then, I don’t agree with your stance. I think stable committed families/couples are good for society. All kinds. And here in Canada, although I may get certain tax breaks, not many, since as a declared gay couple, there are few indeed. We also have to pay for basic automatic rights that legal marriage would provide. Like power of medical attorney, inheritance, insurance, etc. But for the few benifits there are, there are all the

responsibilities that – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – come with being a married couple. If something happens to me or mine, we don’t get a government handout/dole. We have to support each other, but if we just ‘lived together’ we would both be entitled to all kinds of individual benefits from the Government. It goes both — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip The fact that single people should not be subsidizing married people. The fact that discrimination against single people is far more rampant in the world than any other kind. This is why I can say that it is QUITE WRONG. Bet you my marriage has lasted longer than most. Who are you to deem a loving couple of any combination who are committed to each other, to be ‘quite wrong’? I can never understand that stance. You would rather gay people wouldn’t commit? Why? I think you are quite wrong, myself. How does who anyone loves effect you in any way whatsoever? You sound Bible thumpy and preachy to me….Witchy — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip Homosexual marriage is quite wrong. "Gay Marriage Poll Backfires On Conservative Family Group" by Ben Thompson 365Gay.com National Editor (June 15, Ottawa) The results of a conservative religious group’s survey of families shows Canadians are not in sympathy with its anti-gay position on marriage. The national survey was conducted for Focus on the Family by the polling firm Strategic Counsel and sought the opinions of Canadians on a wide variety of family issues including divorce, spanking, and family finances. FOTC, which submitted briefs to courts in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec opposing civil union legislation for gay and lesbian families, included in the survey a section on Canadian attitudes towards gay relationships and the issue of marriage. The survey found that 46% of Canadians believe that homosexual couples should be allowed to legal marry; 44% disagree. When collated by age, the survey found that among those under the age of 40, 60% of those surveyed agree with same-sex marriage. It also found that 46% of Canadians agree that "children raised by same-sex couples are as likely as any other children to be happy and well-adjusted." 55% of those under age 40 agreed. And it found that 68% of those under age 40 feel "homosexual couples should be entitled to the same tax, pension, and other benefits as heterosexual couples." Among the total population the number agreeing was 55%. The organization was so surprised by the result that it omitted the entire section from its mailings to the media. Instead FOTC dealt with families in general, saying 78% of the public undervalues the importance of the family. It also said that 82% of families believe tax policies should be changed so that one parent could stay home with children. FOTC also emphasized that the study showed most people believed divorce was too easy to attain. Gay and lesbian couples in Ontario and Quebec are before the courts fighting for the right to marry. The issue is expected to wind up in the Supreme Court of Canada, and lawyers for

conservative Christian groups may find the FOTC survey used against them. Although FOTC did not provide the media with a summary of the gay and lesbian portion of the poll, the complete results are available on its website:

http://www.fotf.ca/familyfacts/attitudes/ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – If a kid asks where rain comes from, I think a cute thing to tell him is "God is crying." And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell him is "Probably because of something you did." -Jack Handey

Response:

I wasn’t including funding for education. Education is not strictly for children. Or married people. Families. Couples. People who care about and have a vested interest in others. And you didn’t simply say "Single people shouldn’t be subsidizing married people." You didn’t say "Marriage was wrong, here’s why…" Your statement was: "Homosexual marriage is quite wrong."

Perhaps you shouldn’t make assumptions about other beliefs that haven’t been specified. That’s what I replied to. That’s like saying ‘Interracial marriage is quite wrong’ then turning around and saying, "Oh, I meant ‘Marriage’" Why put the emphasis on one type of people then, if you meant in general?

The topic was homosexual marriage, not marriage in general. Also, I am opposed to homosexual marriage because I am opposed to marriage. You do know that homosexual marriage is a subset of marriage, do you not? And even then, I don’t agree with your stance. I think stable committed families/couples are good for society. All kinds. And here in Canada, although I may get certain tax breaks, not many, since as a declared gay couple, there are few indeed.

You still get some. Why is it that you have tax breaks? What justification can there be for their existence? You’re actually worse for society, particularly when you’re without children. Single people spend more money. We also have to pay for basic automatic rights that legal marriage would provide.

That’s unfortunate and quite discriminatory. That doesn’t change the fact that you have legal rights that aren’t available to single people. Like power of medical attorney, inheritance, insurance, etc. But for the few benifits there are, there are all the responsibilities that come with being a married couple. If something happens to me or mine, we don’t get a government handout/dole. We have to support each other, but if we just ‘lived together’ we would both be entitled to all kinds of

The pros far outweigh the cons. There are more employed than unemployed.

Response:

And childless people subsidise other peoples children. Society benefits from that. That child’s schooling, that you have no relation to, but pay taxes for. That child may grow up and save you or a loved one in the future. And society benefits from committed people. Families. Couples. People who care about and have a vested interest in others. And you didn’t simply say "Single people shouldn’t be subsidizing married people." You didn’t say "Marriage was wrong, here’s why…" Your statement was: "Homosexual marriage is quite wrong." That’s what I replied to. That’s like saying ‘Interracial marriage is quite wrong’ then turning around and saying, "Oh, I meant ‘Marriage’" Why put the emphasis on one type of people then, if you meant in general? And even then, I don’t agree with your stance. I think stable committed families/couples are good for society. All kinds. And here in Canada, although I may get certain tax breaks, not many, since as a declared gay couple, there are few indeed. We also have to pay for basic automatic rights that legal marriage would provide. Like power of medical attorney, inheritance, insurance, etc. But for the few benifits there are, there are all the responsibilities that come with being a married couple. If something happens to me or mine, we don’t get a government handout/dole. We have to support each other, but if we just ‘lived together’ we would both be entitled to all kinds of — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The fact that single people should not be subsidizing married people. The fact that discrimination against single people is far more rampant in the world than any other kind. This is why I can say that it is QUITE WRONG. Bet you my marriage has lasted longer than most. Who are you to deem a loving couple of any combination who are committed to each other, to be ‘quite wrong’? I can never understand that stance. You would rather gay people wouldn’t commit? Why? I think you are quite wrong, myself. How does who anyone loves effect you in any way whatsoever? You sound Bible thumpy and preachy to me….Witchy — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip Homosexual marriage is quite wrong. "Gay Marriage Poll Backfires On Conservative Family Group" by Ben Thompson 365Gay.com National Editor (June 15, Ottawa) The results of a conservative religious group’s survey of families shows Canadians are not in sympathy with its anti-gay position on marriage. The national survey was conducted for Focus on the Family by the polling firm Strategic Counsel and sought the opinions of Canadians on a wide variety of family issues including divorce, spanking, and family finances. FOTC, which submitted briefs to courts in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec opposing civil union legislation for gay and lesbian families, included in the survey a section on Canadian attitudes towards gay relationships and the issue of marriage. The survey found that 46% of Canadians believe that homosexual couples should be allowed to legal marry; 44% disagree. When collated by age, the survey found that among those under the age of 40, 60% of those surveyed agree with same-sex marriage. It also found that 46% of Canadians agree that "children raised by same-sex couples are as likely as any other children to be happy and well-adjusted." 55% of those under age 40 agreed. And it found that 68% of those under age 40 feel "homosexual couples should be entitled to the same tax, pension, and other benefits as heterosexual couples." Among the total population the number agreeing was 55%. The organization was so surprised by the result that it omitted the entire section from its mailings to the media. Instead FOTC dealt with families in general, saying 78% of the public undervalues the importance of the family. It also said that 82% of families believe tax policies should be changed so that one parent could stay home with children. FOTC also emphasized that the study showed most people believed divorce was too easy to attain. Gay and lesbian couples in Ontario and Quebec are before the courts fighting for the right to marry. The issue is expected to wind up in the Supreme Court of Canada, and lawyers for conservative Christian groups may find the FOTC survey used against them. Although FOTC did not provide the media with a summary of the gay and lesbian portion of the poll, the complete results are available on its website: http://www.fotf.ca/familyfacts/attitudes/ If a kid asks where rain comes from, I think a cute thing to tell him is "God is crying." And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell him is "Probably because of something you did." -Jack Handey

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Homosexual marriage is quite wrong. Now *that’s* an intelligent statement. Oh it is. See you’re assuming that I think heterosexual marriage is alright. It’s not. It is wrong too. Marriage is the last bastion of discrimination. Even the UN discriminates against single people in favour of married people, and families. Suddenly 5 people who are legally/biologically related are of greater worth than 5 randomly selected people. It’s utterly ridiculous.

I won’t dispute that. I am opposed to the traditional concept of "marriage" and its legal and religions concepts in all forms. — Jeff George Soy El Diablo Gringo Supremo (Loco)

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Bet you my marriage has lasted longer than most. Who are you to deem a loving couple of any combination who are committed to each other, to be ‘quite wrong’? I can never understand that stance. You would rather gay people wouldn’t commit? Why? I think you are quite wrong, myself. How does who anyone loves effect you in any way whatsoever? You sound Bible thumpy and preachy to me….Witchy — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip Homosexual marriage is quite wrong. "Gay Marriage Poll Backfires On Conservative Family Group" by Ben Thompson 365Gay.com National Editor (June 15, Ottawa) The results of a conservative religious group’s survey of families shows Canadians are not in sympathy with its anti-gay position on marriage. The national survey was conducted for Focus on the Family by the polling firm Strategic Counsel and sought the opinions of Canadians on a wide variety of family issues including divorce, spanking, and family finances. FOTC, which submitted briefs to courts in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec opposing civil union legislation for gay and lesbian families, included in the survey a section on Canadian attitudes towards gay relationships and the issue of marriage. The survey found that 46% of Canadians believe that homosexual couples should be allowed to legal marry; 44% disagree. When collated by age, the survey found that among those under the age of 40, 60% of those surveyed agree with same-sex marriage. It also found that 46% of Canadians agree that "children raised by same-sex couples are as likely as any other children to be happy and well-adjusted." 55% of those under age 40 agreed. And it found that 68% of those under age 40 feel "homosexual couples should be entitled to the same tax, pension, and other benefits as heterosexual couples." Among the total population the number agreeing was 55%. The organization was so surprised by the result that it omitted the entire section from its mailings to the media. Instead FOTC dealt with families in general, saying 78% of the public undervalues the importance of the family. It also said that 82% of families believe tax policies should be changed so that one parent could stay home with children. FOTC also emphasized that the study showed most people believed divorce was too easy to attain. Gay and lesbian couples in Ontario and Quebec are before the courts fighting for the right to marry. The issue is expected to wind up in the Supreme Court of Canada, and lawyers for conservative Christian groups may find the FOTC survey used against them. Although FOTC did not provide the media with a summary of the gay and lesbian portion of the poll, the complete results are available on its website: http://www.fotf.ca/familyfacts/attitudes/ If a kid asks where rain comes from, I think a cute thing to tell him is "God is crying." And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell him is "Probably because of something you did." -Jack Handey

Response:

Homosexual marriage is quite wrong.

Now *that’s* an intelligent statement. — Jeff George Soy El Diablo Gringo Supremo (Loco)

Response:

Homosexual marriage is quite wrong. Now *that’s* an intelligent statement.

Oh it is. See you’re assuming that I think heterosexual marriage is alright. It’s not. It is wrong too. Marriage is the last bastion of discrimination. Even the UN discriminates against single people in favour of married people, and families. Suddenly 5 people who are legally/biologically related are of greater worth than 5 randomly selected people. It’s utterly ridiculous.

Response:

Bet you my marriage has lasted longer than most. Who are you to deem a loving couple of any combination who are committed to each other, to be ‘quite wrong’? I can never understand that stance. You would rather gay people wouldn’t commit? Why? I think you are quite wrong, myself. How does who anyone loves effect you in any way whatsoever? You sound Bible thumpy and preachy to me….Witchy — "This message brought to you by Jani. Jani- she’s better than fOt in every way." It’s not the fight against the darkness- It’s the fight to find the light ~ Pip

Response:

Homosexual marriage is quite wrong.

Response:

"Gay Marriage Poll Backfires On Conservative Family Group" by Ben Thompson 365Gay.com National Editor (June 15, Ottawa) The results of a conservative religious group’s survey of families shows Canadians are not in sympathy with its anti-gay position on marriage. The national survey was conducted for Focus on the Family by the polling firm Strategic Counsel and sought the opinions of Canadians on a wide variety of family issues including divorce, spanking, and family finances. FOTC, which submitted briefs to courts in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec opposing civil union legislation for gay and lesbian families, included in the survey a section on Canadian attitudes towards gay relationships and the issue of marriage. The survey found that 46% of Canadians believe that homosexual couples should be allowed to legal marry; 44% disagree. When collated by age, the survey found that among those under the age of 40, 60% of those surveyed agree with same-sex marriage. It also found that 46% of Canadians agree that "children raised by same-sex couples are as likely as any other children to be happy and well-adjusted." 55% of those under age 40 agreed. And it found that 68% of those under age 40 feel "homosexual couples should be entitled to the same tax, pension, and other benefits as heterosexual couples." Among the total population the number agreeing was 55%. The organization was so surprised by the result that it omitted the entire section from its mailings to the media. Instead FOTC dealt with families in general, saying 78% of the public undervalues the importance of the family. It also said that 82% of families believe tax policies should be changed so that one parent could stay home with children. FOTC also emphasized that the study showed most people believed divorce was too easy to attain. Gay and lesbian couples in Ontario and Quebec are before the courts fighting for the right to marry. The issue is expected to wind up in the Supreme Court of Canada, and lawyers for conservative Christian groups may find the FOTC survey used against them. Although FOTC did not provide the media with a summary of the gay and lesbian portion of the poll, the complete results are available on its website: http://www.fotf.ca/familyfacts/attitudes/ If a kid asks where rain comes from, I think a cute thing to tell him is "God is crying." And if he asks why God is crying, another cute thing to tell him is "Probably because of something you did." -Jack Handey

Response:

Filed under: Human Rights

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.

Activism Change

Learn, read, react :: Activism