News Is Polygamy Legally Permitted in Canada?

[drankin]

As long as there are people paying there will be a church for anyone.

 

[mgb_phys]

I do think it's a bit unfair to blame religion for homophobia - these people don't like gays and say so in church and at the ballot box. I'm not sure it's really god's fault.

To quote the famous Jewish philosopher Brooks in his seminal work Blazing Saddles.
"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons."

 

[CaptainQuasar]

The same way a straight Mormon does, I suppose...

Seriously, though, there are more gay Mormons/Catholics/etc. than people seem to realize. Just because they teach that you're evil and work to oppress people like you doesn't mean that you weren't born into that religion, or that your family isn't committed to it, etc. Probably they believe that the teachings pertaining to homosexuality are wrong and will eventually be reconsidered, but in most cases I suspect that it's a simple matter of weighing the costs of staying in the church (living with some annoying sermons about homosexuality) vs the costs of leaving (isolation from one's family, going to hell, etc.)

Not only that but there are probably lots of them who simply believe in everything except the homosexuality part. Just like most Christians don't consider themselves bound by many of the mitzvahs of Judaism.

To provide a larger example, take a look at things like Wiccanism and Neo-paganism. For many people those are complete make-your-own-religions, they pick through historical and quasi-historical information like they're at a dinner buffet, choosing whatever they think is nifty and leaving out anything they turn up their nose at. (I won't conceal it, I have almost no respect whatsoever for people who approach religion that way and then insist on others taking their "faith" seriously as though they're rock-solid, deeply held beliefs.)

So I can definitely buy people trimming or otherwise slightly modifying the faith they grew up with in the light of strong personal convictions they've arrived at in adult life. The puritanical sexuality element that is often part of Christianity in this era was a fairly late comer, mostly introduced by St. Augustine four centuries after Christ.

⚛​

 

[mgb_phys]

I did think it was funny when the pope complained about people's pick and mix attitude to religion - given that christianity started as Judaism Lite.

 

[quadraphonics]

I do think it's a bit unfair to blame religion for homophobia -

I'm not blaming religion for homophobia. I'm blaming a religion for encouraging people all over the country to interfere in my state's politics, and then turning around and demanding a tax break (which I end up paying for) because of their "apolitical" nature. I have the distinct impression that they would not react kindly to a California-based religion working to legalize gay marriage in Utah.

 

[mgb_phys]

and demanding a tax break (which I end up paying for) because of their "apolitical" nature.

It would be particularly unfair to make mormons pay tax. They aren't allowed coffe - Salt Lake City is like a strange parallel universe without starbucks - there is no way you can work your way through a US tax form without a few expressos.

 

[quadraphonics]

It would be particularly unfair to make mormons pay tax. They aren't allowed coffe - Salt Lake City is like a strange parallel universe without starbucks - there is no way you can work your way through a US tax form without a few expressos.

Well, I don't drink coffee, and they still tax me, so... and, anyway, what do you need coffee for if you also don't stay up late or drink?

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

What do you mean by 'not many people realize'? About 16.9% of people don't realize?

Sorry, my point wasn't very clear.
I mean that although CA is heavily Democrat and votes in a Democrat for president many of those democrats are really fairly conservative when it comes to many issues. Homosexuality being one of them. Hispanics, who make up a very significant portion of the electorate here, tend to be quite religious, quite intolerant of homosexuals, and also tend to register as democrats.

So while many people may think that its inbred evangelical rednecks and neocons who passed this proposition its simply not true. Most of the local conservative talk radio people are very much against it. "John & Ken" even chastized a woman who called them to tell them how happy she was it passed.

This isn't exactly a party issue.

 

[Zantra]

Sorry, my point wasn't very clear.
I mean that although CA is heavily Democrat and votes in a Democrat for president many of those democrats are really fairly conservative when it comes to many issues. Homosexuality being one of them. Hispanics, who make up a very significant portion of the electorate here, tend to be quite religious, quite intolerant of homosexuals, and also tend to register as democrats.

So while many people may think that its inbred evangelical rednecks and neocons who passed this proposition its simply not true. Most of the local conservative talk radio people are very much against it. "John & Ken" even chastized a woman who called them to tell them how happy she was it passed.

This isn't exactly a party issue.

Another point is that blacks tended to favor prop 8, so the same blacks whose high turned out helped Obama also contributed to Prop 8.

 

[drankin]

Another point is that blacks tended to favor prop 8, so the same blacks whose high turned out helped Obama also contributed to Prop 8.

I heard about this. 70% of voting blacks voted to ban gay marriage in Cali. So gays protested at a white church. I heard an interview of a black man who said it would be interesting to see them protest at their churches but figures they are going the path of least resistance.

 

[LowlyPion]

I heard about this. 70% of voting blacks voted to ban gay marriage in Cali. So gays protested at a white church. I heard an interview of a black man who said it would be interesting to see them protest at their churches but figures they are going the path of least resistance.

But protesting at the Mormon churches is really where the blame lays. By promoting a referendum on gay unions they are the ones that attempted to divide society by making it a question in the first place.

Their self righteous encouragement of this sort of tyranny, a tyranny that seeks to penalize a minority merely for their differences, ironically differences that in California were once denied to blacks up until 1948, is simply antithetical to the fundamental constructs of the Constitution that we all live under. It looks to me like it's their intolerance that has led to this kind of meddling action - attempting to impose their morality on others, not through persuasion or proselytization, but rather by mandate, to deny others fundamental rights that they themselves would choose to enjoy.

As a result if there is any shame in any of this I think a good measure of it should be laid at the feet of these hypocritical Mormons - a sect that historically was itself persecuted and forced on their own westward diaspora by the very kind of intolerance that they are now fomenting toward gays.

 

[wildman]

Hmm... McCain wins South Dakota easily and a very reasonable pro-life bill gets trounced. Obama wins California easily and a anti-gay marriage passes... Could the association of the two parties with the "social issues" be a lot more complicated than people think? Could there be a lot of Republicans that are pro-choice and a lot of Democrats who are anti-gay marriage? If so what does that say about politics in the US? Interesting questions...

 

[mgb_phys]

lot of Republicans that are pro-choice and a lot of Democrats who are anti-gay marriage?

Definitely - a lot of non-religous people vote Republican for economic prinicples and a lot of democrats are religous, especially in the black and mexican communites.

People also think that there are simple good and bad side guys in every issue.
eg. Gays ae oppressed, that's bad - Blacks are oppressed, that's bad - therefore blacks must support gays M'kay.

 

[LowlyPion]

Definitely - a lot of non-religous people vote Republican for economic prinicples and a lot of democrats are religous, especially in the black and mexican communites.

People also think that there are simple good and bad side guys in every issue.
eg. Gays ae oppressed, that's bad - Blacks are oppressed, that's bad - therefore blacks must support gays M'kay.

The harder bridge to cross is that which bridges our differences. I think the only way across is the recognition that there but for the current circumstances might go each of us, and for no good reason other than that we may be different. But that is difficult to keep divorced from whatever biases or prejudices we may harbor. And at times we falter.

In theory the Constitution should backstop such expressions of intolerance and insure that the rights of all are equally preserved. Of course given the more recent packing of the court one can only hope that the 14th Amendment's equal application provisions as opposed to the more confederationist approach favored more recently by the politically conservative, will be the principle that prevails.

 

[Math Is Hard]

Another point is that blacks tended to favor prop 8, so the same blacks whose high turned out helped Obama also contributed to Prop 8.

see post #70.

 

[drankin]

Definitely - a lot of non-religous people vote Republican for economic prinicples and a lot of democrats are religous, especially in the black and mexican communites.

People also think that there are simple good and bad side guys in every issue.
eg. Gays ae oppressed, that's bad - Blacks are oppressed, that's bad - therefore blacks must support gays M'kay.

This is a good observation. Those in the black community tend to be very family oriented. More so than whites typically (IMO). They tend to feel that gay marriage threatens their idea of family values.

 

[drankin]

Did Obama say that he does not support gay marriage in one of the debates? I vaguely remember this as a debate question.

 

[wildman]

Did Obama say that he does not support gay marriage in one of the debates? I vaguely remember this as a debate question.

Yes, he said he agreed with McCain on the question of Gay marriage. It was near the end of the third debate.

 

[LowlyPion]

This is a good observation. Those in the black community tend to be very family oriented. More so than whites typically (IMO). They tend to feel that gay marriage threatens their idea of family values.

Except of course in the early days of the Republic slaves were not permitted to marry in any legal sense because they were property.

Kind of like the way the blacks would now treat the gays right to be legally married?

 

[CaptainQuasar]

People also think that there are simple good and bad side guys in every issue.
eg. Gays ae oppressed, that's bad - Blacks are oppressed, that's bad - therefore blacks must support gays M'kay.

Certainly that sort of sympathetic-magic type political reasoning would be invalid, but there can be a stark incongruity in some combinations of political opinions. Like McCain being in favor of the Iraq invasion but declaring "In the 21st century nations do not invade other nations" in response to Russian action in Georgia. Or when people are all against animal cruelty and avoid using inhumane mousetraps but chow down a hamburger with gusto as long as someone else slaughtered the cow.

(I would've come up with a countervailing example specific to something Obama said, for balance, but he is incapable of error. In fact, his farts smell like lilacs. I have this on good authority.)

⚛​

 

[WarPhalange]

Homosexual don't deserve to be happy. You see, th-- oh wait, they are people too. Human beings that are just trying to live a happy life and them marrying each other won't affect anybody besides them.

People who are against this because of some vague notion that their marriage will mean less are despicable.

The ultimate irony? Blacks saying that a minority group should be banned from doing something everybody else can do. Not that it's just blacks saying it, but they should see the connection between their own past and what is happening now. You can say fundamentalist Christians are bat**** insane, but these are regular people voting against it. Why?

 

[WarPhalange]

People also think that there are simple good and bad side guys in every issue.
eg. Gays ae oppressed, that's bad - Blacks are oppressed, that's bad - therefore blacks must support gays M'kay.

This isn't about oppressed vs. not oppressed. This is about banning a certain group of people from doing something everybody else can do. This is like not letting blacks vote or drink from the same water fountain that whites did. It's stupid.

Look, if I said today "Blacks shouldn't be allowed to marry." I'd get flamed to hell and maybe even assaulted on the street. Because that position is just bogus. So how do they justify saying "Homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to marry"?

 

[Cyrus]

This isn't about oppressed vs. not oppressed. This is about banning a certain group of people from doing something everybody else can do. This is like not letting blacks vote or drink from the same water fountain that whites did. It's stupid.

Look, if I said today "Blacks shouldn't be allowed to marry." I'd get flamed to hell and maybe even assaulted on the street. Because that position is just bogus. So how do they justify saying "Homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to marry"?

Because you can't criticize religion. Their religion says being Gay is bad, and marriage is between a man and a woman. The end. I'm write your wong. Argue with me and I'll put my fingers in my ears and scream scripiture at you until I'm blue in the face.


What do I care if two gay people want to get married? What the hell does it matter to me. I don't understand why religious people are so threatened by it. No one said a state merriage means the church has to recognize it.

 

[WarPhalange]

They're not allowed to have sex and fun of any kind is frowned upon, so they really have nothing better to do?

 

[NeoDevin]

I think the best solution is for all the homosexuals in California to start their own religion, which encourages gay marriage. Then argue it in court on freedom of religion grounds.

 

[drankin]

I think the best solution is for all the homosexuals in California to start their own religion, which encourages gay marriage. Then argue it in court on freedom of religion grounds.

The IRS has already stipulated what can be considered a religion and what cannot for tax purposes. There is a long list of requirements in order to be considered a religion, including historical evidence. Gay people will have a tough time declaring their own religion.

 

[WarPhalange]

Historical evidence? How did Scientology get past that?

 

[LowlyPion]

Or when people are all against animal cruelty and avoid using inhumane mousetraps ...

Excuse me? Are you suggesting that fly paper is inhumane too?

As far as I'm concerned with mice it's kill them however you can. If you have to make examples of a few of them along the way, the other mice get the message.

Same with flies.

 

[LowlyPion]

This isn't about oppressed vs. not oppressed. This is about banning a certain group of people from doing something everybody else can do.

Whatever you call it, it is an example of the tyranny of some majority against the rights some minority. This is supposed to be what The Constitution should protect against.

 

[WarPhalange]

Excuse me? Are you suggesting that fly paper is inhumane too?

As far as I'm concerned with mice it's kill them however you can. If you have to make examples of a few of them along the way, the other mice get the message.

Same with flies.

That's super. Too bad nobody was talking about you.