scigirl

Hedwig,

Scroll down to near the end of the 8th page, and continuing on the 9th page, to see what yguy is talking about.

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...5&pagenumber=8

scigirl

Hedwig

Thanks, scigirl.

yelyos

I just heard on the radio that Ernie Eves, the current Premier ( = Governor) of Ontario is quite peeved about this decision, claiming he will not give out marriage licenses.

A) Many have already been issued.
B) He cannot do this until legislation is tabled with the notwithstanding clause. (special clause that must be added to laws that violate the Constitution Act)
C) Issuing marriage licenses is a municipal matter.
D) This is a federal law being challenged.
E) It's up to the (federal) Justice Minister to decide to appeal. (Ultimately up to the Prime Minister).

Hopefully we'll see some more developments on this soon.

winstonjen

So it's immoral for women to work in factories and for men to raise kids and look after them at home?

yguy

And nothing cries out to be oppressed so much as a populace which mistakes license for liberty.

The survival of the nation is irrelevant?

Would a governmentally declared Lesbian Father's Day be evidence of gender confusion?

Since you evidently don't understand what gender confusion is, the question is irrelevant. If you don't think tolerance of cross-dressing, transsexualism and the like is evidence of gender confusion, there is no basis for communication on the issue.

yguy

That's not what I said, and you know it.

sodium

So, do I understand the process as follows (based on your comments about Holland),

1) Acceptance of gender confusion.
Leads to
2) Acceptance of bad things in general.
Leads to
3) Acceptance of Muslim immigration.
Leads to
4) Acceptance of Lots of Muslim immigration.
Leads to
5) Destruction of society by Muslims.

Is that more or less the argument?

Fr.Andrew

(yguy): If you don't think tolerance of cross-dressing, transsexualism and the like is evidence of gender confusion, there is no basis for communication on the issue.
(Fr Andrew): What does any of that have to do with gay marriage?
I mean...do you honestly believe that one partner in (for instance) a male gay relationship wears a dress? Undergoes a sex change?
What in the world are you talking about?

keyser_soze

That was pretty much his argument the last time it reared it's ugly head...

Dr Rick

I see you have a couple of problems.

First, you're having difficulty distinguishing people when they do not follow you're stereotypical notions. Apparently, you believe that a persons gender is in part determined by what they wear or with whom they are married, a condition you call gender confusion.

You can trust me on this, yguy, I'm a doctor; a person's gender is unaffected by what they wear or whom they marry,

If that doesn't work for you, remember that this gender confusion thing is your problem, not someone else's, and that's something you're just going to have to work-on. Contrary to your prior assertions, your confusion about gender, though scary, does not threaten the survival of the nation, and just because your scared and confused is no justification for oppressing innocent people.

Your other problem is that you are having difficulty distinguishing same-sex marriages, transexualism, and transvestitism, but don't worry; I may be of help for you here, too.

Let's begin by reminding you that these three things are all very different. The first is a civil process founded in law, the second is a medical and surgical procedure, and the third is a fetish. They are not related; in deed, a person living in a free society could be part of one, two, all three, or none. That's the beauty of freedom.

See your medical provider if symptoms persist...