babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » Restore Marriage

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Restore Marriage
Gir Draxon
leftist-rightie and rightist-leftie
Babbler # 3804

posted 30 March 2006 01:35 AM      Profile for Gir Draxon     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Received via email
quote:
Dear Fellow Canadian:

United Families Canada is launching the Restore Marriage Canada Project with the goal of restoring traditional marriage in our nation. This will not be easy, and we will need the help of hundreds of thousands of concerned Canadians like you to accomplish it.

You are receiving this invitation to join in this effort because you have participated on the marriage issue in one or more of the projects or activities that United Families Canada has sponsored in recent years. If you do not want to receive future alerts and updates from us on the marriage crisis, you can easily “unsubscribe” from our list by clicking here, but we hope you will decide to join us in this effort to restore traditional marriage in Canada.



quote:
With the recent election of a Conservative Government, we have a chance—probably our last chance--to revisit the legalization of same-sex “marriage” that the Liberal Government rammed through Parliament last year without holding fair, balanced, honest and adequate hearings to consider all of the consequences of this radical redefinition of this fundamental institution.

quote:
One critical thing each of us can do to help is to sign the new, on-line National Restore Marriage Petition we will be sending to Parliament. Click here to go to the Restore Marriage Canada Website to sign it. It is essential that our MPs know that the majority of us still feel strongly about restoring marriage and receiving this petition with tens of thousands of signatures on it will help!

quote:
We do not know when the Prime Minister will try to revisit the same–sex “marriage” issue. He has said only that he will do it “sooner rather than later but not right away.” That means we could be having this critical vote within the next couple of months, so we must act urgently!

Thank you for joining us in this vital effort!

Sincerely,


Jill Cahoon
President, United Families Canada


Guess where Ms. Cahoon can stick her "invitation" ...?


From: Arkham Asylum | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Grape
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12275

posted 30 March 2006 01:37 AM      Profile for Grape     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
Received via email

Guess where Ms. Cahoon can stick her "invitation" ...?


Well "where the sun don't shine" wouldn't work... she has a few choices.


From: Quebec | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 30 March 2006 02:49 AM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
"this radical redefinition of this fundamental institution"

Funny how it's a "fundamental institution", but not a human right.

"the Restore Marriage Canada Project"

Wonder what would've happened if they'd re-arranged the name slightly, and ended up with the acronym "RCMP"...?

And what do they want to "restore" marriage to? The days of chattel and bride-prices? Or arranged marriages? Or perhaps the one where the fellah comes in, attacks and slays as many of her family as possible and carries her off to live with his group?

Gee whiz, I can hardly wait.

[ 30 March 2006: Message edited by: Hephaestion ]


From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
'topherscompy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2248

posted 30 March 2006 03:41 AM      Profile for 'topherscompy        Edit/Delete Post

[ 02 May 2006: Message edited by: 'topherscompy ]


From: gone | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gir Draxon
leftist-rightie and rightist-leftie
Babbler # 3804

posted 30 March 2006 06:13 AM      Profile for Gir Draxon     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by 'topherscompy:

you mean england?

[ 30 March 2006: Message edited by: 'topherscompy ]


No, I think he's talking about Vancouver.


From: Arkham Asylum | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
homes
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11298

posted 30 March 2006 11:48 AM      Profile for homes     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
In 2004 the Australian government passed legislation defining marriage as between a man and a woman and Prime Minister Howard has steadfastly refused to consider national civil union legislation. Australia's federal government threatened on Wednesday to bring in legislation to block any attempt by The Australian Capital Territory to legalize civil unions with all of the rights and benefits of marriage.
http://365gay.com/Newscon06/03/032906ozUnions.htm

I previously travelled to Austalia and considered returning, but now refuse to visit. I am also boycotting Australian wines. I have written the Australian High Commission to inform them of my decisions. I'm sure they don't care, but at least I feel I'm doing something.


AUSTRALIAN HIGH COMMISSION
7th Floor, Suite 710
50 O’Connor Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 6L2


From: Three bad reasons for believing anything - tradition, authority & revelation. | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 30 March 2006 11:59 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
homes, that sounds like an effective action, actually - boycotting Australian wines. It would be sad, since so many Australian wines are now very good, but then that would be the point: a lot of people, really a lot, have now started drinking them, so a boycott would have an effect.

yrs, Watson


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
West Coast Tiger
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10186

posted 30 March 2006 12:03 PM      Profile for West Coast Tiger     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Thanks for info, Homes.

As for the rest of United Families Canada "project":

They are going to fail miserably. They'll get the usual number of freaks signing up, but nothing much will come of this, I'm sure.

I feel *almost* sorry for Harper these days... He's about to get SO MUCH PRESSURE from these kinds of groups. His cabinet is likely going to open their big-fat-mouths pretty soon, too. And even if they don't, the press is going to have a field day on him with his gagging of the ministers. This was posted on another thread.

Moreover, the Canadian military has taken some serious hits in the last few days in Afghanistan (another one today)... If that keeps up, I think the Canadian public is going to take a long, hard look at Harper all over again.

Without the press supporting him 100%, and a few loose cannons in his group of Tories, I forsee many issues arising for Harper.

Depending on how his 'talks' go with Bush, we will know even more about the direction PM Harpoon plans to take this country. But so far, the deck seems stacked against him.


From: I never was and never will be a Conservative | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Albireo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3052

posted 30 March 2006 12:20 PM      Profile for Albireo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
United Families Canada is launching the Restore Marriage Canada Project with the goal of restoring traditional marriage in our nation.
I am a bit confused about this. Did somebody take away "traditional marriage" and not tell us about it?

I do know that the courts and Parliament broadened the legal definition of marriage to include same-sex couples. But I don't recall anybody restricting marriage to exclude opposite-sex couples.

If these "United Families" people want to get married, man and woman, or stay married, then they have always been able to do that, and are still able to do that. Their right to have a "traditional marriage" is completely unaffected by two women down the street getting married.

Why are these people fighting to restore something that was never taken away?

[Of course, that was a rhetorical question. The answer is that they are not fighting to restore anything. They are fighting to take something (aka "equality") away from others. I think that these are petty, small-minded, mean-spirited people who are intellectually and morally deficient. But I would still allow them the right to marry.]

[ 30 March 2006: Message edited by: Albireo ]


From: --> . <-- | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 30 March 2006 12:38 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Albireo:
Did somebody take away "traditional marriage" and not tell us about it?

Interesting use of words.

It might appeal, and might be intended to appeal, to one group of women who have reason to feel threatened by any derogation from "traditional marriage:" stay-at-home wives. In family law the term "traditional marriage" always refers to a marriage where the wife is economically dependent on the husband and is, therefore, entitled to substantial spousal support when the marriage ends. To those women "stand up for traditional marriage" could sound like "stand up for women's rights."

If that's one intent behind the use of the phrase, it's remarkably sneaky.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 30 March 2006 12:48 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post
I don't know if that's it. "Traditional marriage" started to be used by the media after Bill C38 passed and they could no longer talk about changing the definition of marriage.
From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 30 March 2006 04:50 PM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Reality. Bites.:

"Traditional marriage" started to be used by the media after Bill C38 passed...



By the media, yeah, but the freak-a-zoid bigots have been using the term for far longer than that...

From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
marzo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12096

posted 30 March 2006 05:24 PM      Profile for marzo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I have heard of some of these social conservative types blathering about threats to their "religious freedom" while they are campaigning to take away freedom from SSM partners. The church-heterosex militants are afraid of being forced to have gay weddings in their churches, but as it stands now, any religious cleric can turn away any couple that asks to be married. In the Catholic church it is against the rules for divorced people to get married again, so here is the precedent. Religious organizations are permitted by law to refuse to marry couples who are not members or who don't fit in with their rules.
From: toronto | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 30 March 2006 05:31 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post
They are not (at least the tiny percentage of anti-marriage activists who aren't blithering idiots, but merely shrewd out-and-out liars bilking gullible idiots of their money) afraid of being forced to marry people.

They know as well as you do that's not on in law. And they also know that no decent person would even want to set foot in one of their filthy "churches," let alone desecrate the institution of marriage by having it performed by one of their so-called clergy. I'd no more consider getting married by Tristan Emmanuel than I'd have a meal catered by Jeffrey Dahmer.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 30 March 2006 05:54 PM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Reality. Bites.:

merely shrewd out-and-out liars bilking gullible idiots of their money



As distinct from shrewd out-and-out liars bilking gullible idiots of their votes.

From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 30 March 2006 05:58 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Hephaestion:

As distinct from shrewd out-and-out liars bilking gullible idiots of their votes.


Given the Conservative Party's fundraising success compared to the other parties, not so distinct. More like inseparable.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
andrean
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 361

posted 30 March 2006 07:09 PM      Profile for andrean     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I received that same notice at my work email address and I work for a gay men's magazine. You'd think they'd be a little less careless about leaking their strategies to the enemy.
From: etobicoke-lakeshore | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
greenie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11988

posted 31 March 2006 06:15 PM      Profile for greenie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Albireo:
[Of course, that was a rhetorical question. The answer is that they are not fighting to restore anything. They are fighting to take something (aka "equality") away from others. I think that these are petty, small-minded, mean-spirited people who are intellectually and morally deficient. But I would still allow them the right to marry.]

Yes, but would you still allow them the right to procreate?


From: GTA | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
CWW
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9599

posted 01 April 2006 02:06 PM      Profile for CWW     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Found her contact information:

Technical Contact

Name: Mrs Jill Cahoon
Job Title:
Postal Address: Box 108 Site 1 RR 2
Tofield AB T0B4J0 Canada
Phone: 780 662 2785
Fax:
Email: smoawad@telusplanet.net

Tofield Alberta. Crikes. Another social conservative gives all of Alberta a bad name


From: Edmonton/ Calgary/Nelson | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca