marriage equality : Gay & Black Glossary

*0-9ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ (all)

gay_marriage  marriage equality

Whoever it was started calling the issue marriage equality instead of gay marriage or same sex marriage deserves a medal. It is very embarrassing to be against equality. It also makes clear we gays want the exact same familiar old thing as straights. We don’t want some weird new institution invented.

Gay marriage, aka same sex marriage, is the right of two men or two women to form a legal union with the same rights and responsibilities that a man and a woman have when they marry.

Whatever women do they must do twice as well as men to be thought of half so good… luckily, it’s not difficult.
~ Charlotte Whitton (born:1896-03-08 died:1975-01-25 at age:78) lesbian and Mayor of Ottawa.
marriage equality logo

Religion May Not Veto Rights

There is something deeply unfair and absurd about a society that insists that every discussion about civil rights, (e.g. euthanasia, gay marriage … ) has to have religious fundamentalist bigot on the panel for balance, even when that bigot cannot muster even a single fact to support his view. Yet evangelists may make the most hateful, absurd, fallacious and fraudulent claims from the pulpit without anyone invited or permitted to dispute them.

~ Roedy (born:1948-02-04 age:68)
What Are We Gays Asking For? Propositions
Special Rights Legit
What Gays Don’t Demand A Conservative View
Advantages to Society of Recognising Gay Marriage The Dallas Principles
Arguments Against Gay Marriage Rights Books
The Law Around the World Links
Constitutionality

What Are We Gays Asking For?

Newt Gingrich

I heard Newt Gingrich, famous Christian homophobic bigot, disgraced Republican and proffered presidential candidate rail against gay marriage using these three arguments:

  • Judicial fiat (determining constitutionality) changed several thousand years of Christian tradition and history.
  • It’s a profound mistake for judges to engage in social engineering.
  • Giving gays the right to marry would be a broad public experiment.

Those arguments applied equally well to the abolishment of slavery, giving renters the vote, giving women the vote and the end of segregation. Those are the standard excuses of the privileged for refusing to grant equal status to a subjugated group or to oppose any change they resist for purely emotional reasons.

Gay couples have been raising children for decades. Scientists have studied those families and discovered the kids do just as well as children of mixed-sex couples and better than single parent families.

Denmark has allowed gay marriages since 1989. If something terrible happens when a county permits gay marriages, surely we would have heard of it by now since so many countries have already granted the right to marry to gays. The USA, in granting equal rights, would hardly be treading on unknown territory or performing some rash experiment. The USA is backward among developed nations in its delay in granting full equality to gays. It is mired in Christian superstition and myth more than any other developed country.

Newt Gingrich, like many Fundamentalist Christian Americans, believes it is the government’s job to impose Christian beliefs, values and superstitions on the general public, including its hysterical hatred of homosexuals (and blacks up until recently) and the belief in the inferiority of women. The American constitution makes quite clear this is not the government’s function. To the contrary, the government’s job is protecting people from Christians (or other fanatics) trying to force their religion down the throats of others. The founding fathers saw the bloodshed in Europe between religious factions. They were determined to make it safe to hold any religious beliefs imaginable in their new country.

~ Roedy (born:1948-02-04 age:68)
Gays call for the right to form legally recognised unions. Such unions would give gays the same rights that straights have, namely:
  1. The right to choose your marriage partner.
  2. The right to choose a marriage partner not a citizen of your country and have it almost automatic they be allowed to live in your country with you.
  3. The right to visit your partner in hospital, even if the partner’s blood family does not like you.
  4. Income tax deductions for couples.
  5. Pension benefits and other spousal benefits such as company medical and dental plans.
  6. Wherever the term spouse appears in law, it also apply to gay couples who have formed a legally recognised union.
  7. The right to custody of children by a previous heterosexual marriage.
  8. The right to adopt children.
  9. The right to claim their partner or their partner’s children as dependents on income-tax forms.
  10. The right to transfer registered retirement savings plans to surviving homosexual partners without paying taxes the way straight couples can.
  11. Same-sex couples should not be forced to testify against each other, just as heterosexual couples are protected.
  12. Ability to transfer money back and forth without taxes and to leave the surviving spouse money without taxes.
  13. That this same sex union be called marriage. We all know that separate-but-equal in the context of segregation really means second class citizenship. The same applies to gay marriage. If marriage were given some other name for gays, it would inevitably become a pale shadow of heterosexual marriage with second class status. Only by calling it marriage do all the benefits and responsibilities mentioned in hundreds of acts of parliament automatically come into effect. This is the quickest route to full equality and to keeping it 100% equal.

What Current Special Rights are we Gays Willing to Give up?

Irrational Opposition

wedding cake

The Christian opposition to gay marriage is irrational. It does not in the least concern them. They are meddling where they have no right to interfere:

  • It is not as though gays are even asking, much less demanding, that the churches perform marriage ceremonies.
  • It is not as though gays are demanding Christians marry someone of the same sex.
  • It is not as though gays are demanding Christians attend gay weddings or buy them wedding presents.
  • It is not as though gays are demanding that florists, caterers, musicians, hotels, hall rentals, airlines, limo services, honeymoon vacation spots etc. accept the extra business.

Christians won’t be able to tell the difference, other than reduced social costs from promiscuity.

~ Roedy (born:1948-02-04 age:68)
  1. Conflict-of-interest guidelines currently do not require people in same-sex partnerships to disclose their partner’s activities, as their heterosexual counterparts must.
  2. The Bank Act or legislation regulating business currently requires heterosexual spouses to disclose insider information, but does not ask the same thing of same-sex spouses.
  3. The country’s bankruptcy laws do not currently specifically prevent people in same-sex partnerships from shifting their assets to their partner and then declaring bankruptcy.

What Aren’t We Gays Asking For?

Get Stuffed

You can sell your shares of Starbucks and buy shares in another company.

~ Howard Schultz (born:1953-07-19 age:63) CEO (Chief Executive Officer) of Starbucks to bigot Tim Wildmon president of the American Family Association who is calling for a boycott of Starbucks because Starbucks supported the gay marriage bill in Washington state. source
We are not demanding:
  1. We have no desire for churches to be forced to perform marriage ceremonies for gays. We are not demanding churches welcome us to their services.
  2. We are not asking for any special benefit not already bestowed on straight couples. I repeat, we are not asking for any special rights. We just want to be treated equally. Women are allowed to marry men, so men should be allowed to also. Men are allowed to marry women, so women should be allowed to also. It is a simple matter of gender equality. You can argue for gay marriage even without the issue of homosexuality. We gays are tired of being sent to the back of the metaphorical bus, being forced to kowtow to straights as if they were morally superior. We want the Christians to acknowledge their bigotry against gays is not a universal truth, but merely a tenet of sectarian faith.
    AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome) is not just God’s punishment for homosexuals; it is God’s punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.
    ~ Jerry Falwell (born:1933-08-11 died:2007-05-15 at age:73)
    Falwell’s assertion is a faith-based assertion. He has no evidence to back it up. Therefore this is a religious belief and by the constitution, he may not force his religious nuttiness on me. Because Christians are in a majority in the USA, they often forget this limitation on their right to bully others.

Advantages to Society of Recognising Gay Marriage

Religion May Not Veto Rights

There is something deeply unfair and absurd about a society that insists that every discussion about civil rights, (e.g. euthanasia, gay marriage … ) has to have religious fundamentalist bigot on the panel for balance, even when that bigot cannot muster even a single fact to support his view. Yet evangelists may make the most hateful, absurd, fallacious and fraudulent claims from the pulpit without anyone invited or permitted to dispute them.

~ Roedy (born:1948-02-04 age:68)
The key advantages to straight society of permitting gay marriages are:

Arguments Against Gay Marriage Rights

Newt Gingrich

I heard Newt Gingrich, famous Christian homophobic bigot, disgraced Republican and proffered presidential candidate rail against gay marriage using these three arguments:

  • Judicial fiat (determining constitutionality) changed several thousand years of Christian tradition and history.
  • It’s a profound mistake for judges to engage in social engineering.
  • Giving gays the right to marry would be a broad public experiment.

Those arguments applied equally well to the abolishment of slavery, giving renters the vote, giving women the vote and the end of segregation. Those are the standard excuses of the privileged for refusing to grant equal status to a subjugated group or to oppose any change they resist for purely emotional reasons.

Gay couples have been raising children for decades. Scientists have studied those families and discovered the kids do just as well as children of mixed-sex couples and better than single parent families.

Denmark has allowed gay marriages since 1989. If something terrible happens when a county permits gay marriages, surely we would have heard of it by now since so many countries have already granted the right to marry to gays. The USA, in granting equal rights, would hardly be treading on unknown territory or performing some rash experiment. The USA is backward among developed nations in its delay in granting full equality to gays. It is mired in Christian superstition and myth more than any other developed country.

Newt Gingrich, like many Fundamentalist Christian Americans, believes it is the government’s job to impose Christian beliefs, values and superstitions on the general public, including its hysterical hatred of homosexuals (and blacks up until recently) and the belief in the inferiority of women. The American constitution makes quite clear this is not the government’s function. To the contrary, the government’s job is protecting people from Christians (or other fanatics) trying to force their religion down the throats of others. The founding fathers saw the bloodshed in Europe between religious factions. They were determined to make it safe to hold any religious beliefs imaginable in their new country.

~ Roedy (born:1948-02-04 age:68)
Argument Rebuttal
Gays can’t have children. Neither can barren straight couples, couples using birth control or elderly couples. Do we deny them the rights of marriage as soon as they stop producing children? Further, gay couples can have children, either by artificial insemination, a surrogate partner, or eventually via genetic manipulation.
Jeannine Lebel, president of Real Women, argued that "Parliament can give special support and recognition to the heterosexual relationship in carrying out its critical task of raising children, which is of benefit to all society." If the rights of marriage are based on child production, then you must be consistent and withdraw those rights from heterosexual couples who cannot or will not produce children. You cannot hand out special rights based on membership in some privileged class, irrespective of what one actually does. If special rights are to be based on child rearing, then, to be consistent, you must give them to any couples who are willing to raise children, including same sex couples. Clearly bigots like Jeannine Lebel are not willing to do that. Ms. Lebel is being disingenuous. This issue is a red herring. Gays also do things that are of benefit to all of society, so why should they be excluded from enjoying equal civil rights? Given the current problems with global overpopulation and the strain it puts on the environment, I find it odd to consider bringing even more children into the world a benefit. Should that questionably-valuable, potential of child-creation grant all heterosexuals special privilege before the law? Of course, not! (As I pointed out earlier, gays can create children almost as easily as straights.) A heterosexual woman who abuses her infant in the womb with drugs and alcohol and who later fails to provide food or shelter, is granted greater privilege before the law than a lesbian couple who wishes to adopt and properly care for that same child. Jeannine Lebel with her special rights for heterosexuals is spouting the same sort of elitist claptrap that privileged classes have always used to morally justify using the law to exclude others from enjoying those same privileges.
Gays are free to marry someone of the opposite sex. They are demanding a special right, to marry someone of the same sex. This is playing with language. Logicians warn of the logical fallacies introduced by self-referential terms such as opposite Restate it plainly enumerating all four cases.
  1. Men are not allowed to marry men.
  2. Men are allowed to marry women.
  3. Women are allowed to marry men.
  4. Women are not allowed to marry women.
Supposedly we do not discriminate on gender. Whatever men are allowed to do, so are women. If men are allowed to marry women, then so should women, and vice versa because women are allowed to marry men, then so should men. The real right is to chose your own marriage partner, regardless of sexual plumbing. In the days of legal racial discrimination, bigots defended the miscegenation laws by saying they were fair since everyone had the right to marry someone of their same race. They neglected to notice that a white woman was denied the right to marry a black man, a privilege that every black woman enjoyed.
Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve This is such a non-sequitur it is hard to even begin a rebuttal. The Bible condemns heterosexual sex hundreds of times more frequently than homosexual. The most commonly quoted anti-gay sections of the Bible are Lot (where the condemnation depends on a pun on the word know which appears only in the King James version and Leviticus (who also condemns to death everyone and everything for minor crimes like eating a lobster or not being sufficiently respectful to your father), or St. Paul (who pontificated that it was exceedingly wicked for women to wear hats in church). The Bible warns of the dangers of promiscuity. Why do the conservative forces want encourage promiscuity by banning legally recognised gay unions? Finally, this homophobia is a Christian superstition. What right have Christians to impose their religious superstitions on others? They have no more right than to demand that everyone pretend each week to eat a bloody piece of human flesh to commemorate the death of Jesus. According to the bible, Cain and Abel had sex with their mother. It that manadatory too by your logic?
It’s ain’t natural. Even a dog knows which sex to mate with. Gays are lower than the animals. Other animal species such as dolphins, cattle, geese, swans, rats, budgerigars etc. form homosexual unions. It may be a natural population control device. The way the planetary population is ballooning way above the ecology’s ability to support it, we should be encouraging homosexual unions or any other unions that don’t produce children.
The Canadian Catholic Church position is: Keep the traditional definition of marriage. It has served society well and it will serve society in the future. This argument works equally well for defending slavery or witch burning. Of course oppressing gays served the majority just fine in past. However, it did not serve the gay minority.
Born again Christian lawyer Doug Christie argues the slippery slope that if you allow gay marriage then you must also allow people to marry their pets and to marry children. The slippery slope argument can also be used in reverse. If we do anything the fundamentalists like, e.g. allow voluntary school prayer, then we are headed on an unstoppable path back to reinstating slavery and witch burning. The slippery slope is one of the classic logical fallacies. Horses can’t give consent to marriage. They cannot fulfill the commitments. It is harmful to children to push them into sexual relationships. There is no popular will to allow people and horses to marry. There is certainly no popular will to legitimise pedophilia through marriage. Why then would we, as a democracy, inevitably embark on a path that almost no one supports?
Doug Christie argues that allowing same sex couples destroys the moral sanctity of marriage. Same sex marriages have almost no effect on anyone but same sex couples. Bigots like Christie are unlikely to be invited to many same-sex weddings. He is a busy body meddling in the lives of others where there is almost no effect on his own life. Adultery and taking your partner for granted are what destroy heterosexual marriages, not same sex marriages between people you have never even met.
Conservative leader Stephen Harper lied to panic his bigot base.
The Liberals have allowed a handful of tenured judges to create a situation where churches, synagogues, mosques and temples could be compelled to perform marriages that violate their own moral codes.
~ Stephen Harper (born:1959-04-30 age:57) attacking the Liberals on same-sex marriage, News Hound, 2003-09-03
The proposed law specifically precluded any church, synagogue or mosque from having to conduct any marriage which violates their belief system. There was never any push from anyone to make churches perform gay marriages. Same-sex marriage is a civil liberties, legal, equal-rights issue, not a religious one.

The Conservative party agenda is driven my religious fanatics and bigots whose view of gays is as scientifically accurate as the KKK (Klu Klux Klan) ’s view of blacks.

Homosexuality is a mental disorder that can be cured through counseling.
~ Stockwell Day (born:1950-08-16 age:66), Minister of Public Safety
Thankfully, at least at time of writing, 2007-02, the Conservatives are in a minority position and cannot impose their bigotry via law.
What’s the point? Gays are 100% promiscuous. They never have sex with the same person twice. There is some truth to that when you consider according to one study of gay males: 11 percent of gay males are in a committed monogamous relationship. 33 percent of gay males are in a non-committed open relationship. 56 percent of gay males are not in any relationship. This is partly caused by the wandering eye of all males, straight and gay and partly because society, up to now, has so strongly discouraged male couples and partly because of the esteem problem gays have. However, the current laws also discriminate against lesbians who are on average much more interested in long term relationships. However, other studies such as the one at BuddyBuddy discovered the following: about sexual agreements:
Women(%) Men(%)
Monogamy 91 63
Monogamy with agreed exceptions 7 26
Non-monogamy 3 11
There are several U.S. studies which claim that more than 60% of the gay/lesbian community are in a relationship.
If we make being gay respectable, all our kids will turn gay. Sexuality is hard-wired into the brain long before puberty. You can’t change your gender preference just by an act of will. Gays can’t make themselves straight. Straights can’t make themselves gay. I read three books provided by Reverend Terry Winter on how Christ can reputedly convert gays into straights. The books made no such claims. They simply talked of how some bi-sexual men were gradually able to stop acting on their gay side desires. They put their wives through hell in the process. They were never able to change their preferences, just white-knuckle avoid acting them out.
The Bible says its our duty to kill gays. We should at least make their lives as miserable as possible. How Christian! Jesus overturned much of that Old Testament nastiness with the first stone demonstration. Further, the Canadian constitution protects people based on discrimination based on gender or sexual preference. Canada is made up of people of many faiths. You can’t go forcing your brand of religion down other’s throats. There is a separation of church and state. Besides if you did everything the Bible told you, you would be obligated to dash out the brains of babies, adulterers, lobster eaters etc. Your daughter would be obligated to marry anyone who raped her. The Bible is a questionable source for equitable law.
Permitting gay marriage will destroy the institution for straight people, or to use George W. Bush’s phrase, Our nation must defend the sanctity of marriage People will start demanding to marry their poodles or their maple trees. No one will get married anymore. Marriage is an institution known in all cultures in all times. It is not about to go away so easily. I can’t imagine bride refusing her husband on the grounds she read in the newspaper that someone else who just happened to be male, shared a similar joy. Gay people fall seriously in love just like straights. Just how does encouraging gays to lead promiscuous unmarried lives strengthen family values? In medieval times marriage was possible between members of the same sex. Clearly, it did not stop straight people from marrying then. It would not now. Those highly opposed to gay marriages would likely never be invited to one. Same sex marriage would have no effect on their lives. The bigots just want to interfere and make like miserable for gays on general principle. Religious bigots feel they have a divine right, nay duty, to do this.

Religious bigots claim they feel persecuted at the thought of gays being allowed to participate in marriage. This is ridiculous. Gay marriage does not change their relationships or churches one iota. Their opposition is morally equivalent do denying black people the right to marry because of the perceived inferiority of blacks, unsupported by evidence.

The Puritans left England for America not because they couldn’t be Puritans in their mother country, but because they were not allowed to force others to become Puritans; in the New World, of course, they could and did.
~ Gore Vidal (born:1925-10-03 died:2012-07-30 at age:86)
The constitution of Canada and the USA guarantees freedom of religion. My religion does not condemn homosexuals. Yours may. You may not enforce your religion on me and I cannot enforce my religion on you. My choice of marriage partner is none of your business. You don’t have a right to impose what I consider silly and irrelevant superstitions on my choice, blocking me from marrying the man I love. I don’t insist on meddling in your choice of partner, so please butt out of mine.

If you feel sullied just knowing gay marriage exists somewhere unseen, it is because you are harbouring notions of preposterous superiority to gays. If you want a stronger marriage, tend to your own relationship, rather than meddling in those of strangers.

Marriage is a religious institution and God doesn’t want gays to marry. In his article in the 1999-01-18 National Post, Brad Aisa made the following argument. Gays are not demanding a religious ceremony, but the secular rights of marriage that heterosexuals enjoy. Many straight people who marry are not religious at all. Atheists marry. Conversely, many gay people are religious and have undergone religious bonding ceremonies, ahead of legal sanction of their relationship. Many churches now sanctify gay partnerships and even more are considering it. The new law strengthens the right of a minister to choose the couples he or she will marry. Ministers have total freedom to discriminate.
If gays are allowed to marry, they will be able to adopt kids. They will molest them and make them turn queer. The people most likely to molest children are straight males. Gay males and females are much less likely to molest children. Children raised by gays show the same likelihood of being straight or gay as children raised by hets. Sexual preference is something built-in, not something you copy from your parents. After all, straight daughters live with fathers who prefer women. They don’t usually copy them.

The Law Around the World

All Marriage is Good

Marriage is good for society. It reduces promiscuity. It encourages people to look after each other. It creates financial stability. It is the first line for health care. It encourages people to eat proper meals. It provides for survivors without putting a burden on the welfare system. It provides a stable environment to raise kids. It makes people feel relaxed, trusting, stable and cared for. The reasons it is good for women are the same ones it is good for men. For the same reasons it is good for straight people, it is also good for gay ones.

~ Roedy (born:1948-02-04 age:68)
Argentina A law passed 2010-07-16 gives gay couples the right to marry.
Australia Despite being a very secular country, Australia is still in the dark ages. They appearently dumped the Christianity but kept the homophobia.
Belgium A law passed on 2003-06-01 gives gay couples inheritance rights and allows them to open joint bank accounts.
Brazil A law passed on 2011-05 gives gay couples equal right, but called civil unions.
Britain Since 2005 same-sex couples are allowed to enter into civil partnerships, a separate union which provides the legal consequences of marriage. However, marriage itself is reserved for mixed-sex couples. Since 2014-02-29 same sex couples can get married.
Canada On 2009-09-16 Angus Reid did a poll on same sex marriage:
  • Same-sex couples should continue to be allowed to legally marry 61%
  • Same-sex couples should be allowed to form civil unions, but not marry 23%
  • Same-sex couples should not have any kind of legal recognition 11%
At 11:25 PM on 2005-07-19, the Senate passed the equal marriage bill by an overwhelming 47 to 21, with 3 abstentions. This was the final step before royal assent. It was a long time coming. 1998 court rulings insisted that gay couples be given the same pension rights as straight couples. The provinces affected did not appeal the ruling. Gay groups launched a lawsuit demanding an overhaul of 58 laws to bring the into line with the charter of freedoms. Ottawa decided to proceed with amendments that would treat homosexual couples the same as heterosexuals in everything from pensions to bankruptcy laws. Ontario and BC, then later Québec and Nova Scotia, legalised gay marriages. New Brunswick announced they too were accepting gay marriage. The federal Liberals did not appeal. In BC, gay couples can adopt children. I don’t know about the rest of the country. There was a free vote in the federal legislature in 2005-02. In 2004, same-sex marriages were being performed routinely in both BC and Ontario. In 2004 the Supreme Court ruled that gay marriage was constitutional. The province giving most resistance was Alberta, the most right-wing part of Canada. As of 2005-02, the holdouts were Alberta, PEI (Prince Edward Island), New Brunswick, Nunavut and the North West Territories. On 2005-07-20 gay marriage was made legal across Canada.
China China’s psychiatric community still considers homosexuality an illness. However, it is not illegal to be gay in China, but police harassment depends on local municipal or provincial policies, many unwritten, as is much of Chinese law.
Columbia Military gays are now free to reveal their sexual orientation, live on base with a partner and be affectionate with each other away from work. Presumably civilian gays receive similarly enlightened treatment.
Denmark In 1989 became the first country in the world to allow same-sex unions. In 2000, Denmark passed a law that gives homosexuals couples the right to obtain custody of children by a previous heterosexual marriage, however gay couples still cannot adopt children. On 2012-06-07 full marriage rights were granted.
Iceland Approved registered cohabitation in 1996, which gives gay couples many of the legal rights enjoyed by heterosexual married couples, but doesn’t allow adoption. Iceland allows same-sex couples to adopt each others kids and allows couples to adopt other kids as a couple. On 2011-06-11 marriage was redefined in a gender-neutral way.
Finland Finland will give gay couples access to marriage-like registered partnerships. On 2000-11-29, the government accepted a proposal from the Justice Ministry, discussions will begin in Parliament December and an affirmative vote is expected in 2001. Most marriage rights and obligations are expected to be included except for access to adoption.
France On 2013-04-23 gay marriage and gay adoption became legal. Bigots protested en masse and beat up gays. A challenge to overturn it was defeated on 2013-05-17.
Germany The new center-left government intends to grant some legal status to same-sex couples, but not the right to adopt children
Hungary Passed a law in 1996 granting gay couples inheritance rights, but law doesn’t allow adoptions. Hungary’s situation results from a legal case that applied the European Charter, more for political reasons [i.e. fear of not being accepted into the EU] than anything else and ruled in favour of same-sex relationships. The status of gays is probably broader than just pension rights.
IsraelIsrael honours gay marriages in other countries, though there is no same sex marriage in the country.
Italy A few cities have taken the symbolic step of creating a register for unmarried couples, but the measures carry no legal weight.
Japan Japanese psychiatrists have now declared same-sex orientation is not a mental illness.
Mexico On 2009-12-21 same sex unions and adoption were made legal. Stats must recognise same sex marriages from other states, but so far no states have permitted them.
Netherlands New law took effect in 1999 permitting gay and lesbian couples to marry, giving them the same pension, social security and inheritance rights as other married couples. Dutch Cabinet approved a plan in 1999-11 to let homosexuals adopt children. The adoption bill places some restrictions on foreign adoptions. Gay couples, of either sex will have the option of being married or being domestic partners. The proposal became law in 2000-09. Gays will gain access to full marriage this January under the same laws that apply to opposite- sex couples. Couples who previously registered under the partnership law will be allowed to convert their unions to ordinary marriage.
New Zealand On 2013-04-17 New Zealand became the 13th country to celebrate gay marriage. The sang the Maori Love Song in the legislature to honour the occasion. Maurice Williamson’s speech click to watch
Norway Same sex marriage is legal and called Registered Domestic Partnership since 1993-08. It is virtually the same as Sweden and Denmark. It can be used for mental patient commitment. The Norwegian church does not allow church marriages, but it is very influential as it is a State Church and it supported the passage, though there is a rural backlash which has caused a church schism. Apparently as of 1997 there were 700 registered partnerships in a country of 4.3 million with 850,000 married. Registrations run about 100 per year. The legalization passed by only one vote, and a Norwegian representative named Anders Gasland came out just before the vote and his arguments about not being able to love was a help in the passage and a courageous thing for him to do. Adoption is still not available as is also the case with in vitro fertilization. The primary reason adoption is an issue in Europe seems to be the fear that if gays are allowed to adopt it will cause the cut off of international adoptions from countries with a different view who are currently relied on for a supply of babies. They psychiatric community in Norway has not considered same-sex attraction an illness for some time and that is not unusual in other European countries. Psychoanalysis in Europe is way behind.
Portugal On 2010-01-08, Portugal granted marriage equality.
South Africa On 2006-11-04, South Africa granted marriage equality. This is odd given the high degree of homophobia in the country. It is mainly the work of their supreme court.
Spain On 2005-06-03 Spain granted marriage equality.
Sweden Has allowed homosexuals to register as partners in a sort of civil marriage since 1995. The couples cannot adopt children or have them through artificial means. Church weddings are not permitted. On 2009-05-01, Sweden granted marriage equality.
Uruguay In 2013-04 Uruguay granted marriage equality.
USA

On 2015-06-26 the Supreme Court of the USA voted 5-4 to make same sex marriage legal in all states. I wondered what excuses the dissenting justices could give. The only argument I have ever heard against gay marriage are tradition and that the Christian beliefs about gays should be imposed on everyone. Neither of these arguments would fly in the Supreme Court. Justice John (appointed by W.) Roberts claimed the constitution had nothing to say about whether people should be treated equally vis a vis marriage, so the court could not rule either way. You have to give him credit for deviousness.

On 2013-03-26 the US Supreme Court debated the legitimacy California’s law to ban gay marriage and the Defence Of Marriage Act. They are expected to punt in some way. 2011-06-24 New York narrowly voted to permit gay marriage. New York has no residency requirement, so it will be a likely destination for weddings. Niagara Falls will become a gay wedding destination too. The protests melted away as it became clear the bill would pass. On 2010-08-12 a CNN (Cable News Network) poll in the USA discovered that 52% of Americans support gay marriage and 46% oppose. On 2010-04-30 the Hawaii legislature gave gay couples the same rights and straight ones. However, the governor still has not signed the bill into law and appears to be stalling. On 2009-09-01 Vermont allowed same sex marriage. Unlike other states that were pushed into it by court order, Vermont enacted legislation. In 2009-09-01, Maine will vote on a gay-marriage referendum. On 2008-11-12 Connecticut permitted gay marriage. Massachusetts was the first state to allow same sex marriage on 2004-05-17. As of 2008-11-13 30 states deny gays the right to marry, even California. The cause is persecution by religious fundamentalists forcing their beliefs on others. On 2009-05-26 the California Supreme court upheld Proposition 8 and the right of bigots to deny civil rights to gays on religious grounds. The court allowed those already married to stay married. Someday this ruling will seem as backward as courts upholding slavery. On 2011-06-15 courts upheld a ruling against Prop 8, so at least for now, gay marriage is legal in California. States where there is marriage equality include: Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, plus Washington, D.C. and the Coquille Indian Tribe in Oregon. Issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples in New York is set to begin on 2011-07-24. Utah reverse its ban in 2013-12. Oklahoma reversed its ban on 2014-01-14. The USA is one of the most backward countries on the planet, behaving more like some Arab sheikdom than a modern democracy. Whacko fundamentalist Christian sects control the politics. They believe they have the right to impose their religious superstitions on others. Americans give lip service to their constitution, especially freedom of religion. On 2013-11-20 Illinois instituted same sex marriage. On 2013-12-02 Hawaii instituted same sex marriage.

The above table was based on postings to the <queerlaw-can-request@egale.ca> listserv by Timothy Ross Wilsonemail Timothy Ross Wilsonand  George T.H. Fulleremail George T.H. Fuller.

Constitutionality

Malice First

People normally fight for their self interest. They want better pensions, better schools, better working conditions, lower taxes, better protection from criminals, freedom to do as they please… But the bigots who fight gay marriage are fighting purely out of malice, to make others’ lives miserable. They have nothing to gain. Whether gays can marry or not has no effect whatsoever on the bigots’ lives.

~ Roedy (born:1948-02-04 age:68)

The USA is one of the most backward countries on the planet, up there with the Islamic theocracies, when it comes to accepting equality of gay marriage. This is odd given how it is so progressive otherwise.

The constitution is very clear. The US government is not permitted to enact religious laws. They can’t for example force to you pray to a specific god or donate to a specific church. They can’t enforce religious dress codes.

Yet when it comes to gay marriage, many Americans forget that the sole reason for banning gay marriage is religious superstition. Christian believe gays ideally should be killed, or at the very least persecuted only because God (they mean some verses in the old testament) told them to. Blocking gays from marrying is thus clearly unconstitutional. It is an attempt force Christian superstition on those who reject it. It is just as unconstitutional as trying to force Buddhists to make burnt offerings to Jehovah in public schools.

It does not matter if you consider the religious objection correct or not because by the US constitution, you may not enact such a law. You are free to fulminate on the wickedness of gays marrying, but you may not enact a religious-based law to persecute gays. If Christians want to persecute gays, they need a secular excuse for it to bypass the constitution.

The catch is, the people of the USA are so thoroughly soaked in Christian superstition, they don’t even notice they are violating their own constitution, not even many learned judges. Otherwise all these anti-gay religion-motivated laws would have been instantly overturned.

In Canada, the constitution guarantees the strict equality of men and women. Whatever men are permitted to do, so may women and vice versa. It therefore follows as a corollary than women may marry women because men can.

Propositions

Encouraging Bad Behaviour

Homophobic Christians cite bogus facts about gays dying of hideous diseases and not living long. I could cite counter examples. However, it is true that a promiscuous life style with unprotected sex or drug use necessarily invites disease. Promiscuity and drug use are not the same thing as homosexuality. These bigots work ceaselessly to encourage gays to be promiscuous, denying marriage and persecuting them so they dare not live together openly and monogamously. What hypocrites!

~ Roedy (born:1948-02-04 age:68)

On 2012-11-06, Americans voted on various propositions. To approve gay marriage voters had to mark yes in most states but in at least one, they had to vote no. That was a deliberate attempt to befuddle the voter. A proposition should be clearly worded so the voter always marks yes to approve the proposed change and no to leave things the way they are.

Civil rights should not be determined by popularity and voting. The principles of liberty should be embedded in the constitution, inviolate from the whims of religious superstition or bigotry and adjudicated by sober reflection of the supreme court. The whole point of civil rights is to prevent the majority from bullying minorities. Civil rights would not be necessary if the minorities were popular. The very notion of empowering the majority to grant or deny rights on whim with a vote on the popularity of the affected minority is ludicrous.

I despise those who insist on playing parent to people a decade or two older than they are. This applies to gay marriage, marijuana use, right to die, abortion, forced religious indoctrination… The arguments against liberty are invariably fueled by religious superstition and fanaticism.

Legit

Encouraging Bad Behaviour

Homophobic Christians cite bogus facts about gays dying of hideous diseases and not living long. I could cite counter examples. However, it is true that a promiscuous life style with unprotected sex or drug use necessarily invites disease. Promiscuity and drug use are not the same thing as homosexuality. These bigots work ceaselessly to encourage gays to be promiscuous, denying marriage and persecuting them so they dare not live together openly and monogamously. What hypocrites!

~ Roedy (born:1948-02-04 age:68)
LEGIT (Lesbian and Gay Immigration Task force) is an organisation that helps same sex couples with immigration. It is possible, even now, to bring your lover from another country into Canada. It requires careful handling, but Legit has dozens of success stories. Contact Chris Morrissey (co-founder) email Chris Morrissey or Deb LeRoseemail Deb LeRose. They are wonderful warm people. I highly recommend them.

A Conservative View

Objection is Religious

The objection to gay marriage is purely religious. It is an attempt to use the law to impose religious superstitions on non-believers. It is a violation of freedom of religion. It is in principle no different than using the law to enforce circumcision or attending mass. Christians historically have been big on scapegoats: Samaritans, Jews, blacks and now gays. Christians get a perverse pleasure out of forcing gays into second class status. They enjoy blocking a gay couple from visiting in hospital. They enjoy excluding a gay partner from a funeral. They enjoy claiming gays are subhuman and hence have no right to marry, even though those marriages would have zero effect on Christians. This is simple spite. You would think Christians would be ashamed to be so blatant about their petty cruelties.

~ Roedy (born:1948-02-04 age:68)
The state’s protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply because such constitutional violation has become traditional.
~ Richard Kramer (born:1947-07-22 age:69), California Superior Court Judge

The following is a message I got from the Conservative MP (Member of Parliament) in the heart of Conservative anti-gay Canada. Jim Prentice is the MP for Calgary. To my surprise, he comes down on the side of gay marriage using an argument for personal liberty from John Stuart Mill. He will have a free vote in the commons.

2005-02-02, Calgary & Yesterday the Liberal government introduced their much-awaited marriage legislation.

The decision I have come to has been a difficult one. I have spoken to many hundreds in my riding of Calgary Centre-North. I have met with many community leaders including religious leaders from Calgary and representatives of the gay community. I have held an open Town Hall Meeting and I have done my best to understand the legal and theological issues that this decision has raised.

For me, the marriage question is one of individual liberty — of constitutional liberty.

Let’s be clear. I have been married to the same woman for 21 years, reflecting my own personal definition of what marriage is. It is also the definition of my own church, the Presbyterian Church of Canada.

It is not, however, the personal definition of many of our fellow citizens who are homosexual and who have sought the protection of the Charter to obtain civil marriage licences from the government.

Fundamentally the question is this: what right do we as a society have to refuse gay Canadians something that the rest of us are entitled to — namely, a civil marriage license.

Set aside the legal debate and ask the very simple question. What moral or political authority do we have to deny gay Canadians the issuance of a government marriage license?

The answer in my mind is clear. We have no such right at all because whether two people of the same sex marry and how and whether their gender enters into the relationship, is none of the government’s business, providing they do no harm to anyone else.

Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign.
~ John Stuart Mill (born:1806-05-20 died:1873-05-08 at age:66)
I am a conservative and this is the philosophy that guides me in public life.

Each of us has the right to fashion our own life to suit our own character without impediment from others, providing we harm no one else and providing we accept the consequences of our own decisions.

If we have the right, as a society, to prohibit homosexual Canadians from civil marriage because their idea of a marriage differs form ours, do we have an equal right to prohibit some Christians, Muslims, or Sikhs from preaching aspects of their faith, which are not shared by the majority of Canadians? By parity of reasoning, would we not have an equally valid entitlement to suppress the literature, political opinions or political association of those who hold views different than our own?

These are the modern liberties of our western society. They are the very liberties that underpin western society and they are owed to each of us equally and unconditionally.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ensures that all Canadians must be treated equally at law, including the right to marry. Equally the Charter protects the rights of religions to carry on their faith according to their own doctrine.

The vote for Conservatives is a free one. Stephen Harper has shown courage and leadership and his position has been very clear to Canadians. It is particularly disappointing that Mr. Martin did not have the strength of leadership to allow his entire Caucus to have a free vote on this issue.

I have come to the conclusion that I will stand in defence of the constitutional right of homosexual couples to civil marriage, even though their definition of marriage is not my own. I will be equally vigilant in defending religious marriage and religious freedom, for it is equally clear that neither the Christian community nor the other communities of faith can be compelled to accept or perform same sex marriages. Religious freedom must stand sacrosanct and religious marriage must stand as the exclusive preserve of our communities of faith.

I intend to vigorously support the Conservative Party amendments that would strengthen these protections of religious freedoms.

This decision has been a difficult one. My riding has a diversity of opinions on this question. I appreciate that my decision will not make everybody happy. I will be accountable.

In the final analysis, I have concluded that religious marriage is the authority of the church and that jurisdiction must be jealously guarded. But civil marriage, or governmental marriage, of two Canadians, must be available equally to all. Therefore, I will be voting in favour of this legislation and I will support Conservative Party amendments designed to protect religious freedoms.

The Dallas Principles

Encouraging Bad Behaviour

Homophobic Christians cite bogus facts about gays dying of hideous diseases and not living long. I could cite counter examples. However, it is true that a promiscuous life style with unprotected sex or drug use necessarily invites disease. Promiscuity and drug use are not the same thing as homosexuality. These bigots work ceaselessly to encourage gays to be promiscuous, denying marriage and persecuting them so they dare not live together openly and monogamously. What hypocrites!

~ Roedy (born:1948-02-04 age:68)
thedallasprinciples.org is an organisation that sprang up in response to the California supreme court’s ruling on Proposition 8 that bigoted voters could take away the civil rights of gays for religious reasons. It has many people hopping mad. The following eight guiding principles underlie our call to action. In order to achieve full civil rights now, we avow:
  1. Full civil rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals must be enacted now. Delay and excuses are no longer acceptable.
  2. We will not leave any part of our community behind.
  3. Separate is never equal.
  4. Religious beliefs are not a basis upon which to affirm or deny civil rights.
  5. The establishment and guardianship of full civil rights is a non-partisan issue.
  6. Individual involvement and grassroots action are paramount to success and must be encouraged.
  7. Success is measured by the civil rights we all achieve, not by words, access or money raised.

Books

Anti-Gay Target

When Target donated $100 million to anti-gay marriage candidates, its customers let them know in no uncertain terms that was not acceptable. It cost them so much they have backed off. Corporations are mindless. They will do whatever makes the most money. It is up to us to guide them by withholding money when they misbehave and rewarding them when they behave. They respond like giant retarded children.

~ Roedy (born:1948-02-04 age:68)
book cover recommend book⇒A Legal Guide for Lesbian & Gay Couples (Legal Guide for Lesbian and Gay Couples, 11th Ed)to book home
by Hayden Curry, Denis Clifford, Frederick Hertz 978-0-87337-790-4 paperback
publisher Nolo.com
published 2002-03
Covers American gay legal issues.
Australian flag abe books anz abe books.co.uk UK flag
German flag abe books.de amazon.co.uk UK flag
German flag amazon.de abe books.ca Canadian flag
Spanish flag amazon.es amazon.ca Canadian flag
Spanish flag iberlibro.com Chapters Indigo Canadian flag
French flag abe books.fr abe books.com American flag
French flag amazon.fr amazon.com American flag
Italian flag abe books.it Barnes & Noble American flag
Italian flag amazon.it Nook at Barnes & Noble American flag
India flag junglee.com Kobo American flag
UN flag other stores Google play American flag
O’Reilly Safari American flag
Powells American flag
Greyed out stores probably do not have the item in stock. Try looking for it with a bookfinder.

book cover recommend book⇒Same Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europeto book home
by John Boswell 978-0-679-75164-9 paperback
birth 1947-03-20 died:1994-12-24 at age:47 978-0-679-43228-9 hardcover
publisher Vintage 978-0-8041-5095-8 eBook
published 1995-05-30 B00DXKJ5HS kindle
A scholarly work about the sanctification of homosexual relations in Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches during Medieval Europe.
Australian flag abe books anz abe books.co.uk UK flag
German flag abe books.de amazon.co.uk UK flag
German flag amazon.de abe books.ca Canadian flag
Spanish flag amazon.es amazon.ca Canadian flag
Spanish flag iberlibro.com Chapters Indigo Canadian flag
French flag abe books.fr abe books.com American flag
French flag amazon.fr amazon.com American flag
Italian flag abe books.it Barnes & Noble American flag
Italian flag amazon.it Nook at Barnes & Noble American flag
India flag junglee.com Kobo American flag
UN flag other stores Google play American flag
O’Reilly Safari American flag
Powells American flag
Greyed out stores probably do not have the item in stock. Try looking for it with a bookfinder.
We should not allow gays couples to divorce. Divorce should be between a man and a woman.
Stephen Colbert (born:1964-05-13 age:52)

This page is posted
on the web at:

http://mindprod.com/ggloss/marriageequality.html

Optional Replicator mirror
of mindprod.com
on local hard disk J:

J:\mindprod\ggloss\marriageequality.html
logo
Please the feedback from other visitors, or your own feedback about the site.
Contact Roedy. Please feel free to link to this page without explicit permission.

IP:[65.110.21.43]
Your face IP:[54.226.238.178]
RTALabel
You are visitor number