Tories to introduce gay marriage motion Wed
Ripcat @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:40 am
RUEZ RUEZ:
Avro Avro:
Gay couples can now get married........
If the debate had been reopened and the law changed they could no longer be married.....
Thus, they could no longer be married like you or I and that would would remove there right to get married.
The right they currently have.
You can toe the line all you want but that's what most Cons and some Libs wanted to do.
Not true they could be granted a civil union. I guess the next step is to eliminate a marriage license, since that is descriminatory towards poor people.If the debate had been reopened and the law changed they could no longer be married.....
Thus, they could no longer be married like you or I and that would would remove there right to get married.
The right they currently have.
You can toe the line all you want but that's what most Cons and some Libs wanted to do.
LOL, if you can't make a commitment to save $100 for a marriage license then you shouldn't be making a commitment to marriage.....
RUEZ @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:56 am
lily lily:
RUEZ RUEZ:
Avro Avro:
Gay couples can now get married........
If the debate had been reopened and the law changed they could no longer be married.....
Thus, they could no longer be married like you or I and that would would remove there right to get married.
The right they currently have.
You can toe the line all you want but that's what most Cons and some Libs wanted to do.
Not true they could be granted a civil union. I guess the next step is to eliminate a marriage license, since that is descriminatory towards poor people.If the debate had been reopened and the law changed they could no longer be married.....
Thus, they could no longer be married like you or I and that would would remove there right to get married.
The right they currently have.
You can toe the line all you want but that's what most Cons and some Libs wanted to do.
You don't need a license if you're getting married in a church - you can choose to have your banns read instead.
So we'll amend your statelment to discriminating against poor atheists.
RUEZ @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:58 am
Ripcat Ripcat:
RUEZ RUEZ:
Avro Avro:
Gay couples can now get married........
If the debate had been reopened and the law changed they could no longer be married.....
Thus, they could no longer be married like you or I and that would would remove there right to get married.
The right they currently have.
You can toe the line all you want but that's what most Cons and some Libs wanted to do.
Not true they could be granted a civil union. I guess the next step is to eliminate a marriage license, since that is descriminatory towards poor people.If the debate had been reopened and the law changed they could no longer be married.....
Thus, they could no longer be married like you or I and that would would remove there right to get married.
The right they currently have.
You can toe the line all you want but that's what most Cons and some Libs wanted to do.
LOL, if you can't make a commitment to save $100 for a marriage license then you shouldn't be making a commitment to marriage.....
EyeBrock @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:13 am
Lily wrote:
$1:
Tory voters may support SSMs, but Tory MPs don't.
Agreed.
Ripcat @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:14 am
RUEZ RUEZ:
That's not the point. What if a homeless couple chooses to get married? The fact is a marriage license will prevent some people from getting married.
...
If a couple can't make a commitment of time and effort to raise $100 to get married then they shouldn't be entering into the commitment called marriage....regardless of their financial situation.
EyeBrock @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:15 am
Avro Avro:
Eyebrock Eyebrock:
I didn't say I spoke with 98 MP's, just my own mates.
Well gee whiz, let's just forget about big expensive polls and just ask your mates to get the pulse of Cons across the country.
Every poll I have seen shows that most cons are against SSM.
Well maybe my mates and I are just very special.
Which polls would these be Avro?
Jabrwock @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:21 am
RUEZ RUEZ:
Actually that's incorrect what he was trying to do was bring back the traditional definition of marriage. I believe a lot of religious people see the term and ceremony of marriage as a sacred religious practice, hence the reading of scripture, and the use of a church in most cases. There's no reason gays couldn't have a civil union and have the same rights as every other Canadian.
Most interpretations of section 15 of the Charter go as follows. "make the law apply equally, without dividing it up based on the following criteria", rather than some kind of "seperate but equal"-type system.
This is what happens when people can't seem to seperate "legal marriage" and "holy matrimony" in their minds. The two are not the same, and never will be. One concerns religious vows, the other a legally binding contract between 3 parties (the 2 partners, and the government). Never the twain shall meet, and a good thing too.
I previously mentioned that Alberta had the right idea, renaming the "Marriage Act" as the "Civil Union Act", which, while a waste of billions of dollars as they rewrite every single government document that mentions "marriage", does make a clear distinction that it is in no way related to the act of marriage, as defined by whatever faith lays claim to it at any particular time.
$1:
I guess the next step is to eliminate a marriage license, since that is descriminatory towards poor people.
Fees for form processing aren't discriminatory. Besides, the Charter doesn't mention anything about wealth.
RUEZ @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:33 am
Jabrwock Jabrwock:
Fees for form processing aren't discriminatory. Besides, the Charter doesn't mention anything about wealth.
Well if you're poor and can't pay it I'd say it is.
Jabrwock @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:45 am
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Which polls would these be?
2003 NFOCF poll: surveyed 1000+ people
http://www.queensu.ca/cora/polls/2003/S ... rriage.pdf
done for CBC
PC's in favour of introducing gay marriage: 44%
Alliance in favour of blocking gay "marriage": 69%
Alliance in favour of "civil union": 39%
2005 Compas Poll: surveyed 880+ people from across the country
http://www.compas.ca/data/050202-SameSex-EPC.pdf
done for Global & National Post
Cons in favour of keeping marriage unchanged: 41%
Cons in favour of making a "seperate but equal" civil union definition for gays only: 50%
Cons in favour of making marriage apply to any couple: 9%
2005 Environics Poll
http://www.equal-marriage.ca/
surveyed 2000+ ppl
Cons 70% against reopening debate
2006 Environics Poll
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/s ... oll_060619
done for CTV when Harper wanted to reopen the debate
Cons in favour of revoking gay marriage: 35% (down from 46%)
Looks to me like while most Cons are against SSM, most are resigned to the fact that reopening the debate won't accomplish much.
Jabrwock @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:48 am
RUEZ RUEZ:
Well if you're poor and can't pay it I'd say it is.
Not neccesarily. Remember it's asking the government to process a change to your tax and legal status. If they truly seperated out the two, then the poor couple could get married in church, they just couldn't apply for the civil union tax changes until they fill out the form.
EyeBrock @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:18 am
Jabrwock Jabrwock:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Which polls would these be?
2003 NFOCF poll: surveyed 1000+ people
http://www.queensu.ca/cora/polls/2003/S ... rriage.pdf
done for CBC
PC's in favour of introducing gay marriage: 44%
Alliance in favour of blocking gay "marriage": 69%
Alliance in favour of "civil union": 39%
2005 Compas Poll: surveyed 880+ people from across the country
http://www.compas.ca/data/050202-SameSex-EPC.pdf
done for Global & National Post
Cons in favour of keeping marriage unchanged: 41%
Cons in favour of making a "seperate but equal" civil union definition for gays only: 50%
Cons in favour of making marriage apply to any couple: 9%
2005 Environics Poll
http://www.equal-marriage.ca/
surveyed 2000+ ppl
Cons 70% against reopening debate
2006 Environics Poll
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/s ... oll_060619
done for CTV when Harper wanted to reopen the debate
Cons in favour of revoking gay marriage: 35% (down from 46%)
Looks to me like while most Cons are against SSM, most are resigned to the fact that reopening the debate won't accomplish much.
Making Avro's point for him, or just stalking me? It really is rude to answer other peoples question for them, you really should try and be more polite.
The point really isn't made.
From the figures you present the most recent say 35% of Tories "in favour of revoking gay marriage." Which means 65% support SSM.
The other recent polls don't specify Tories polled. The Old 2003 poll really doesn't cut it to make Avro's point for him. The poll was commissioned around a vote in the House that was narrowly won by the Libs after 30 were mysteriously 'absent'.
And the questions on the compas poll are a tad weighted but the do allude to Avro's point but with only 800 samples. The interesting fact there is 74% of 'New' Canadians oppose the new definition of marriage.
Cast your mind back Avro to 1999 when most Liberals, including the then PM Chrétien, voted AGAINST SSM.
So according to your figures Avro and your little chum who wants to make your point for you, the latest poll says 65% of Tories support SSM.
I'd say that was a majority, although I wait for further lessons from your little chum on how to twist the facts.
Jabrwock @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:41 am
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Making Avro's point for him, or just stalking me? It really is rude to answer other peoples question for them, you really should try and be more polite.
You know, you never really answered my question from yesterday, are you always this rude, or just this rude to new people?
Oooo yes, I'm stalking you. :rolleyes: I'll follow you anywhere you go, as long as you don't leave this discussion... Seriously, such an accusation is juvenile.
I didn't realise that asking someone for polls precludes anyone else from providing them. If you have contradictory polls, please, feel free to list them. Or are you waiting for Avro to go look them up for you?
$1:
The point really isn't made.
Which, the "most Tories are against SSM", or "most Tories are against reopening the debate". That's two different points. The polls I listed address both. Most Tories seem against SSM as currently defined, and most seem against reopening the debate. They're not mutually exclusive thoughts.
$1:
From the figures you present the most recent say 35% of Tories "in favour of revoking gay marriage." Which means 65% support SSM.
You're misreading the poll. It doesn't mean 65% support SSM, it means 65% are against trying to revoke SSM now that it's been legalised. Again, there's a difference.
$1:
The other recent polls don't specify Tories polled.
Which? Or do you consider Conservatives and Tories seperate? Both 2006 polls I listed described "X % of Conservative-supporters polled said..."
$1:
The Old 2003 poll really doesn't cut it to make Avro's point for him. The poll was commissioned around a vote in the House that was narrowly won by the Libs after 30 were mysteriously 'absent'.
I don't recall Avro making any comments about Liberal views, just that he disagreed with your comment on Conservative ones.
$1:
And the questions on the compas poll are a tad weighted but the do allude to Avro's point but with only 800 samples.
a) It shows that most conservatives are against SSM as currently defined, that being marriage applying to any couple regardless of sex. Many are in favour of a "seperate but equal" definition, but that's still not the same as being for SSM as it currently exists. See, I'm not into that whole "you're either with us or against us" shtick. I acknowledge the existence of a grey zone.
b) many polls are about 1,000 ppl. but you can take whatever statistical interpretation you want from it.
$1:
The interesting fact there is 74% of 'New' Canadians oppose the new definition of marriage.
And this changes things how?
$1:
I'd say that was a majority, although I wait for further lessons from your little chum on how to twist the facts.
I'll leave the twisting to you. I'm not the one who's interpreting poll numbers and questions to come up with new statistics.
EyeBrock @ Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:51 am
Jabrwock Jabrwock:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
Making Avro's point for him, or just stalking me? It really is rude to answer other peoples question for them, you really should try and be more polite.
You know, you never really answered my question from yesterday, are you always this rude, or just this rude to new people?
Oooo yes, I'm stalking you. :rolleyes: I'll follow you anywhere you go, as long as you don't leave this discussion... Seriously, such an accusation is juvenile.
I didn't realise that asking someone for polls precludes anyone else from providing them. If you have contradictory polls, please, feel free to list them. Or are you waiting for Avro to go look them up for you?
$1:
The point really isn't made.
Which, the "most Tories are against SSM", or "most Tories are against reopening the debate". That's two different points. The polls I listed address both. Most Tories seem against SSM as currently defined, and most seem against reopening the debate. They're not mutually exclusive thoughts.
$1:
From the figures you present the most recent say 35% of Tories "in favour of revoking gay marriage." Which means 65% support SSM.
You're misreading the poll. It doesn't mean 65% support SSM, it means 65% are against trying to revoke SSM now that it's been legalised. Again, there's a difference.
$1:
The other recent polls don't specify Tories polled.
Which? Or do you consider Conservatives and Tories seperate? Both 2006 polls I listed described "X % of Conservative-supporters polled said..."
$1:
The Old 2003 poll really doesn't cut it to make Avro's point for him. The poll was commissioned around a vote in the House that was narrowly won by the Libs after 30 were mysteriously 'absent'.
I don't recall Avro making any comments about Liberal views, just that he disagreed with your comment on Conservative ones.
$1:
And the questions on the compas poll are a tad weighted but the do allude to Avro's point but with only 800 samples.
a) It shows that most conservatives are against SSM as currently defined, that being marriage applying to any couple regardless of sex. Many are in favour of a "seperate but equal" definition, but that's still not the same as being for SSM as it currently exists. See, I'm not into that whole "you're either with us or against us" shtick. I acknowledge the existence of a grey zone.
b) many polls are about 1,000 ppl. but you can take whatever statistical interpretation you want from it.
$1:
The interesting fact there is 74% of 'New' Canadians oppose the new definition of marriage.
And this changes things how?
$1:
I'd say that was a majority, although I wait for further lessons from your little chum on how to twist the facts.
I'll leave the twisting to you. I'm not the one who's interpreting poll numbers and questions to come up with new statistics.
So just more bollocks then eh? Who's question are you gonna answer next?
And in between all the crap you wrote yesterday, what actually was your question?
Please try and keep it free of 7 paragraphs of shite.