marriage equality : Gay & Black Glossary

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 (1896-03-08 1975-01-25 age:78) lesbian and Mayor of Ottawa.

Bigotry Drives Opposition to Gay Marriage

What is this opposition to gay marriage about really? Christians no longer have uppity niggers to look down on so they have taken to looking down on gays and feeling superior. They can feel superior no matter how uneducated, stupid, ugly, fat or bigoted they are. Without the assumed pariahood of gays, they would see themselves as they truly are, the ultimate losers. As Leonard Sidney Woolf observed, There is nothing to which men cling more tenaciously than the privileges of class.

~ Roedy (1948-02-04 age:70)

What Are We Gays Asking For?

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 (1948-02-04 age:70)

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?

Sarah Huckabee Sanders

Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Trump’s press secretary, will tell any lie she is told to. She shows no embarrassment or shame, no matter how preposterous the lie. As the Christians say: For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?
~ Mark 8:36.

~ Roedy (1948-02-04 age:70)

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?

Jews vs Christians

Jews have some pretty strange ideas about cooking. They offer their excellent cuisine to the world, but you would never catch a Jew with a meat cleaver in someone else’s kitchen threatening them for eating pork or putting some chipped beef into a cream sauce. Christians, on the other hand, insist on imposing their religious superstitions on others, such as beating up gays, blocking gays from marriage, unconstitutional prayer to Yahweh and unconstitutional religious tests for public office. It is a wonder they don’t demand human and animal sacrifice as their old testament commands.

~ Roedy (1948-02-04 age:70)

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 (1933-08-11 2007-05-15 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

Blind Trust

People like Michael Reagan have argued the people knowingly elected a wealthy businessman in Trump. Therefore he should not be required to put his holdings in a blind trust the way every other president has and the way the constitution demands. Reagan claims the people don’t mind if he makes money during his presidency.

That is not the issue. The problem is he must not be taking money from foreign countries in return for betraying the USA. He must avoid conflict of interest situations so he cannot even be tempted. His security advisor, Mike Flynn, has already confessed to taking hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Russians and Turks in return for favours.

Reagan further argued that the people do not care if Trump divests. This is not true. Only the core of his core supporters think that way. Even if the majority felt that way, you cannot let this slide because the constitution commands it. The constitution overrides popular opinion. To override the constitution, you need an constitutional amendment.

I doubt many of the people wanting to let Trump side realise that is unconstitutional.

~ Roedy (1948-02-04 age:70)

• Reduction in promiscuity and attendant disease.
• Couples are able to care for each other in times of adversity rather than relying on the state.
• Better rôle models for young gay people.
• More fully includes gay sons and daughters in the activities of adult family life.
• Imagine that Muslims became the majority in Canada and the USA and decided that Christians were filthy infidels who brazenly deny and insult the one true god Allah. To protect the sanctity of marriage they held a referendum which passed and annulled all marriages between Christians or descendants of Christians. You would be outraged. You would argue that civil rights such as marriage should not depend on popularity. They are fundamental, guaranteed by the constitution. You would be incensed at the high handedness of the those that voted away your rights. There is nothing second class or unclean about you. The nerve of those people! Well that is exactly how gays feel when Christian bigots vote away their civil right to marry. The constitution prohibits the government imposing religious superstitions, such as persecuting homosexuals. The constitution also requires that all citizens be treated equally.

Arguments Against Gay Marriage Rights

Gay Marriage vs Traditional Marriage

Gay marriage is not anti traditional marriage. It celebrates its values of commitment and fidelity. It just extends traditional marriage to people who have been heretofore foolishly excluded. It has absolutely no effect on those who oppose it. They interfere purely out of religiously fueled spite, out of a desire to put gays down, to treat them as second class citizens.

~ Roedy (1948-02-04 age:70)

The Law Around the World

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 (1948-02-04 age:70)

gay marriage law

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.
Israel	Israel 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
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 Wilsonand  George T.H. Fuller.

Constitutionality

Benefits of Bigotry

The religious right gain nothing by denying civil rights to gay people, especially the right to marry. It will not affect them in the least. Gays won’t suddenly start attending their bigoted churches. Their churches have the legal right to refuse to perform any marriage for any even bigoted reason. Their motive is traditional spite. For hundreds of years, the Christian churches have used gay people as their official scapegoat. Just as they dropped using blacks as an official scapegoat, they should drop using gays. No one, not gays, not blacks, not Muslims, not Hispanics, not children… should have to put up with religion-excused abuse.

~ Roedy (1948-02-04 age:70)

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 Yahweh 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

Senator Ball

On 2011-06-22 Senator Ball said a strange thing. His religion strongly condemns homosexuals, therefore that gives him the right to deny gay people the same rights as straights, e.g. being able to collect pensions they have paid into and marriage. The constitution guarantees freedom of religion. This means no religion may use force to impose its religious beliefs on others. In particular, Christians are not permitted to impose their superstitions about gays on gays. So far, the courts have failed to enforce the constitution. Polls are irrelevant when it comes to civil rights.

There is great scrambling to ensure New York churches may continue to spew hate speech and exclude gays even after gay marriage is permitted. That is probably their right. It was also their right to exclude blacks from church during the time of desegregation. However, in secular life, discrimination has to go. Christianity is no excuse. Neither is it a valid excuse for treating blacks badly which they originally claimed they were obligated to do. In a decade or so the churches that continue to harass gays will look as backward as those that refused blacks into the congregation at the time of desegregation.

~ Roedy (1948-02-04 age:70)

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

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 (1948-02-04 age:70)

A Conservative View

Benefits of Bigotry

The religious right gain nothing by denying civil rights to gay people, especially the right to marry. It will not affect them in the least. Gays won’t suddenly start attending their bigoted churches. Their churches have the legal right to refuse to perform any marriage for any even bigoted reason. Their motive is traditional spite. For hundreds of years, the Christian churches have used gay people as their official scapegoat. Just as they dropped using blacks as an official scapegoat, they should drop using gays. No one, not gays, not blacks, not Muslims, not Hispanics, not children… should have to put up with religion-excused abuse.

~ Roedy (1948-02-04 age:70)

The state’s protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply because such constitutional violation has become traditional.
~ Richard Kramer (1947-07-22 age:70), 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 (1806-05-20 1873-05-08 age:66)

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

Gay Marriage vs Traditional Marriage

Gay marriage is not anti traditional marriage. It celebrates its values of commitment and fidelity. It just extends traditional marriage to people who have been heretofore foolishly excluded. It has absolutely no effect on those who oppose it. They interfere purely out of religiously fueled spite, out of a desire to put gays down, to treat them as second class citizens.

~ Roedy (1948-02-04 age:70)

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

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 (1948-02-04 age:70)

Book referral for A Legal Guide for Lesbian & Gay Couples (Legal Guide for Lesbian and Gay Couples, 11th Ed)

	recommend book⇒A Legal Guide for Lesbian & Gay Couples (Legal Guide for Lesbian and Gay Couples, 11th Ed)
	by	Hayden Curry, Denis Clifford, Frederick Hertz	978-0-87337-790-4	paperback
	publisher	Nolo.com
	published	2002-03
Covers American gay legal issues.
Online bookstores carrying A Legal Guide for Lesbian & Gay Couples (Legal Guide for Lesbian and Gay Couples, 11th Ed) abe books anz abe books.ca abe books.de amazon.ca amazon.de Chapters Indigo amazon.es Chapters Indigo eBooks iberlibro.com abe books.com abe books.fr amazon.com amazon.fr Barnes & Noble abe books.it Nook at Barnes & Noble amazon.it Kobo junglee.com Google play abe books.co.uk O’Reilly Safari amazon.co.uk Powells other stores
Greyed out stores probably do not have the item in stock. Try looking for it with a bookfinder.

Book referral for Same Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe

	recommend book⇒Same Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe
	by	John Boswell	978-0-679-75164-9	paperback
	birth	1947-03-20 1994-12-24 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.
Online bookstores carrying Same Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe abe books anz abe books.ca abe books.de amazon.ca amazon.de Chapters Indigo amazon.es Chapters Indigo eBooks iberlibro.com abe books.com abe books.fr amazon.com amazon.fr Barnes & Noble abe books.it Nook at Barnes & Noble amazon.it Kobo junglee.com Google play abe books.co.uk O’Reilly Safari amazon.co.uk Powells other stores
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 (1964-05-13 age:53)