Canadian gay married couple denied entry to US

[melon]

Gay people were not enslaved, denied the right to vote, denied an education, segregated ect.

I suggest you do some reading on the subject, because they were, for instance, sliced in half during the Inquisition. Up until 1972, in the U.S., they were also regularly abused in "aversion therapy," which included electric shock. Let us also not forget sodomy laws.

I know you didn't intend this, but I think that this statement perfectly echoes why people think it is alright to marginalize gay people. They certainly know the struggle that Jews and blacks endured, but people know nothing about what gays have endured for decades, if not centuries.

I find this statement to be utterly repugnant.

Melon

 

[iacrobat]

Congratulations on your upcoming wedding iacrobat! All the best to you both on your wonderful day

I feel as you do that no matter who anyone else wishes to marry, it will have zero impact on my own. With homosexual couples I give them the same best wishes I would give anyone else as it is a union which is a wonderful wonderful thing. How it impacts on anyone personally, I can only hazard a guess at and that is it will be the beginning of the unravelling of all that is considered sacred by the church and to a large part of society. Which, excuse my language, is bullshit. Religion in this context is an unprovable point as no one here on earth can interpret the will of God etc etc with any absolute certainty. Any interpretting an individual does for the sake of his or her own faith is their right and choice but cannot and should not attempt to dictate to another individual. I am all for people following their faith and spreading the word regarding that if that is their choice. It cannot though infringe on another's rights. And using it to restrict marriage which at the end of the day is a union between 2 people (+ God if that is your belief) is well...wrong.
As for how it will affect greater society...I couldn't even guess. It would be ignorant to assume it will have an adverse effect on our views of the family unit and to imply it will encourage homosexuality is as naive.

This is all my take on it and in no way meant to offend anyone or their beliefs. If it has, I apologise.

Thanks! My family is flying over to Barcelona from Toronto, it's going to be chaos!!

What you said is good. After all, gay marriage will be civil only. Most churches won't marry homosexuals. In that light, I really don't see why it matters. For many christians I suspect a civil wedding would not be good enough anyway. Not being married in the eyes of god and all.

Though I don't think this is the beginning of the unravelling of what the church considers scared. That began with the Enlightenment. It's more of an example of how out of touch the church can be with modernity.

 

[iacrobat]

If this was happening to interracial couples or Arabs, well, we certainly wouldn't be this forgiving.

Double standards? I think so.

Melon

mmmmmmmm....this is true. Good point.

That may have to do with this being a more recent issue. Something new in the mainstream. Though it's not an excuse.

But if it gets you in, and you can subvert from inside, spread the word, maybe it's worth it? Perhaps.

 

[Dreadsox]

I suggest you do some reading on the subject, because they were, for instance, sliced in half during the Inquisition. Up until 1972, in the U.S., they were also regularly abused in "aversion therapy," which included electric shock. Let us also not forget sodomy laws.

I know you didn't intend this, but I think that this statement perfectly echoes why people think it is alright to marginalize gay people. They certainly know the struggle that Jews and blacks endured, but people know nothing about what gays have endured for decades, if not centuries.

I find this statement to be utterly repugnant.

Melon

Melon,

1st thank you for recognising that my statement was not intended for that. I in no way shape or form believe that what happened to gay people throughout history be marginalized. I just do not agree with the premise that here in the United States it is the same thing as the civil rights struggle. I think that was the point Bonoman was making.

The government was not rounding up gay people to my knowledge and subjecting them to shock therapy. If I am wrong on this please let me know. The government was making no laws saying straight people only at drinking fountains. THe governement was not taking students out of classrooms and putting them into seperate but equal schools. If I am wrong on this, I am open to be educated. Then I might begin to agree that there is a parallel with the Civil Rights movement here in the US. I have not heard of someone being denied the right to go to school, vote, get a job ect.

Again I am not marginalizing the way gays have been treated, but I do not see a parallel in the history of this country.

 

[melon]

The government was not rounding up gay people to my knowledge and subjecting them to shock therapy. If I am wrong on this please let me know. The government was making no laws saying straight people only at drinking fountains. THe governement was not taking students out of classrooms and putting them into seperate but equal schools. If I am wrong on this, I am open to be educated. Then I might begin to agree that there is a parallel with the Civil Rights movement here in the US. I have not heard of someone being denied the right to go to school, vote, get a job ect.

Again I am not marginalizing the way gays have been treated, but I do not see a parallel in the history of this country.

1) The government didn't need to. The medical and psychiatric world was already doing it for them.

2) No, but don't we have plenty of "straight people only" benefits? Like...erm....marriage (not to mention the various legal benefits and simplicities that come along with it)? Or how about our "straight people only" military? In many states, as well, you are perfectly free to discriminate against homosexuals from job placement to housing discrimination.

3) Gay students have been, in many instances, openly humiliated and even expelled at the hands of homophobic school administrations, although the latter these days will get you a nice little lawsuit.

4) Why must every movement be the same? The Black experience is not the same as the Jewish experience, which is not the same as the feminist movement. I would hope that you would agree that all are about equality and civil rights.

Melon

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Congratulations on your upcoming wedding iacrobat! All the best to you both on your wonderful day

Ditto that! Hope you have a fantastic wedding day and may you have many happy years together. .

Originally posted by Angela Harlem
I feel as you do that no matter who anyone else wishes to marry, it will have zero impact on my own. With homosexual couples I give them the same best wishes I would give anyone else as it is a union which is a wonderful wonderful thing. How it impacts on anyone personally, I can only hazard a guess at and that is it will be the beginning of the unravelling of all that is considered sacred by the church and to a large part of society. Which, excuse my language, is bullshit. Religion in this context is an unprovable point as no one here on earth can interpret the will of God etc etc with any absolute certainty. Any interpretting an individual does for the sake of his or her own faith is their right and choice but cannot and should not attempt to dictate to another individual. I am all for people following their faith and spreading the word regarding that if that is their choice. It cannot though infringe on another's rights. And using it to restrict marriage which at the end of the day is a union between 2 people (+ God if that is your belief) is well...wrong.
As for how it will affect greater society...I couldn't even guess. It would be ignorant to assume it will have an adverse effect on our views of the family unit and to imply it will encourage homosexuality is as naive.

.

My thoughts exactly.

Very nicely said, Angela.

Angela

 

[iacrobat]

Ditto that! Hope you have a fantastic wedding day and may you have many happy years together. .

Thanks!!

 

[BVS]

you are asuming that everyone thinks your way. Well guess what, they dont. Alot of Canada doesnt even support this marriage. Its not even fully finalized! You dont live in Canada and dont know the uproar this is causing. People are outraged about this, myself included. You comparing this to Black rights is outragous, in my opinon, this has nothing to do what skin color you are it has to do in what you believe inreligouly and otherwise.

I assume nothing. Many felt the same way about ending segregation. Just because people are outraged still doesn't make it right. And I don't give a shit if I don't live in Canada, this is not just a Canadian issue, it's a human issue.

You say its about principel, well i disagree. If you lived in Canada and knew what these two have been doing you would understand. They are media whores who center their lives around controversy. I have no problem with anyone sexuality but when you are doing what these two have been doing it makes me ask what about heterosexuals rights. What ever happened to the defintion of marriage. We through that right out the door and change it! Whats next allowing a person to be married to 10 people or having a father and daughter be married. The defintion of marriage has been in tact for many many years and to tarnis that because homosexuals want equal rights is not right in my world. I have asked many gays what they thought about this and they resent alot of what people have done, they think it will hurt the homosexual community in the long run, for what, a word!

This is just laughable! What about heterosexual rights? What is it that you don't have the right to do? Have you ever thought about the fact that the definition of marriage may be wrong? Why can't the definition of marriage be a unification of two people who love each other? History has proven that definitions have been wrong. Segregation, public executions, voting rights, etc. Maybe you should really question your outrage?

 

[Orange333]

These Fuck-Head US Goons! God I can't believe the shit that goes down in USA. I've been here since 1630 too. Christ almighty.

This story makes me sick

 

[Orange333]

EVERYBODY IS BISEXUAL, some just choose diff ways.

When will we EVOLVE!

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

You're welcome, iacrobat. .

I assume nothing. Many felt the same way about ending segregation. Just because people are outraged still doesn't make it right. And I don't give a shit if I don't live in Canada, this is not just a Canadian issue, it's a human issue.

Exactly. I mean, call me crazy, but when did people wanting equal rights become something that people would actually be outraged about? Did I miss something there?

Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
This is just laughable! What about heterosexual rights? What is it that you don't have the right to do? Have you ever thought about the fact that the definition of marriage may be wrong? Why can't the definition of marriage be a unification of two people who love each other? History has proven that definitions have been wrong. Segregation, public executions, voting rights, etc. Maybe you should really question your outrage?

Once again, exactly right. What rights have us heterosexuals been losing here? We're allowed to legally profess our love, we're allowed to be affectionate without being harassed for it or possibly killed for it. We don't have to deal with cruel words of intolerance for our love. I'd say we've got it pretty good, wouldn't you, bonoman?

And also, bonoman, you talk about the definition of marriage being altered and how upsetting that is to you.

I suggest you look at the millions of heterosexual couples that are divorcing like mad here in America. The divorce rate here in America is over 50%. I wonder what their defintion of marriage is-something tells me it probably doesn't match yours.

If you want to yell at someone about altering the definition of marriage, go yell at those divorcing couples (unless, of course, there was a justifiable reason for ending the marriage, such as spousal abuse-in which case, I'd also suggest yelling at the abusive spouses out there, 'cause they're certainly not living up to what your definition of a good marriage is). I'd say a couple divorcing for the stupidest of reasons and causing their kids to be caught up in their petty crap and arguments, or a person abusing their spouse, is a hell of a lot more harmful to the definition of marriage than two men or women marrying is.

It seems like the time has come to redefine marriage to allow it to simply be "the union of two people who love each other". What, is that gonna kill anyone if that becomes the definition of marriage?

And I really hate this whole "What's next-allowing a person to marry a bunch of people, or family members marrying (which, by the way, has been happening long before people even thought about giving homosexuals equal rights-anyone remember Jerry Lee Lewis marrying his cousin?), or people marrying animals" bull.

Contrary to popular belief, homosexual marriage being legalized will NOT lead to some "slippery slope" that would allow that kind of thing. All that would happen is that homosexual couples would be allowed to express their love for each other legally, just like heterosexuals are able to. There's areas in the world where homosexual marriage is legal, and look, their societies aren't falling apart at the seams! Hmmm.

It's just frustrating me to no end, this concern about homosexuals marrying. All they want is to be able to legally express their love the same way heterosexuals do. Why is that so looked down upon? What "harm" exactly will legalization of this cause anybody else?

Angela

 

[melon]

A thought...and please take it for that: a thought.

I have to think that there is a compromise out there: one that preserves the traditions of heterosexual marriage, while giving the same dignity that same sex unions deserve. Ultimately, I think that is what many gays are clamoring for; something that means more than a legal contract. Technically speaking, yes, we can reduce heterosexual marriage to a legal contract, but, clearly, we don't do that.

However, if it is "tradition" and "dignity" that one is clamoring for, the late Yale historian, John Boswell, actually wrote a whole book on the subject: "Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe." The book lists the original texts and English translations of a number of religious ceremonies:

--Office of Same-sex Union, (and similar names), 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th & 16th century translations, Greece Office of Same-sex Union, 11th century, Christian church in Greece.

--The Order for Uniting Two Men, 11-12 century, Old Church Slavonic Office of Same-Gender Union, 12th century Italio-Greek.

--An Order for the Uniting of Two Men [or Two Women], 14th century, Serbian Slavonic Order of Celebrating the Union of Two Men, prior to 18th century, Serbian Slavonic.

Overall, I think the allure same-sex marriage versus a "civil union" and a "domestic partnership" is the allure of having a history and a tradition. And, truthfully, can you blame people for wanting that?

Melon

 

[Dreadsox]

Melon,

Excellent post....

This issue hits very close to home with me in many ways. My mother's sister and my father's sister are both in same sex relationships (different relationships), that have now lasted for close to 30 years each. The relative that I am closest to in this world does not have the same legal rights as my wife and I have. They are the healthiest relationship that I have seen in my lifetime. If I look at the divorces that my parents bring to the table, I am looking at 9 Marriages between them. My aunt is my stability and my role model for relationships.

That said, even though I lover them very much, I am very very much stuck on this issue. It hurts to say it and admit it. Your post above, makes a lot of sense to me.

 

[bonoman]

Heterosexual rights isnt something i should have said. Heterosexual views might of been what i thought. By that i mean a view like my own. Someone who doesnt look down on any gay person for their sexuality, because its none of my business, but someone who doesnt agree with what they do. I personally think that homosexual activity is wrong, but is my view. I dont hate anyone for it, just like i wouldnt hate you for not agreeing about the same politics as me. I dont nned to explain my personal view to have people i'm right or wrong, its my view and i think it is right.

I legal Union is a Marriage in my opinon, and if it isnt then it should. I never said that Homosexuals shouldnt have any rights but Marriage to me is between a male and a female. I think this because a Marriage to me represents to me a pledge to make a family and have this world continue on. I just cant get past the question: If everyone were to be gay, would the world end in a 100 years? That question was posed to me by my Uncle who is a missionary. That question always stuck in my mind. You can attack me again, but that is what i think at this time. It is something i feel strongly about.

To the people who think i compared gays to incest i take that personally. I have been posting here for years and was never so insulted. Who the fuck do you think i am, the Devil. You dont have a fuckin clue about incest and what it does to people (unless it has happened to someone close to you) I wouldnt do that and it boils my blood to think anyone would think that. I am disgusted with the comments. I had a g/f who was raped by her father for years and you dont have a fuckin idea. Fuck gay right hetero rights i cant even begin to tell you how mad i am. I thank the two, Dread and Angela, who knew me better. i cant stand to be here anymore. Bye.

 

[melon]

I just cant get past the question: If everyone were to be gay, would the world end in a 100 years? That question was posed to me by my Uncle who is a missionary. That question always stuck in my mind. You can attack me again, but that is what i think at this time. It is something i feel strongly about.

That question is a ridiculous one, because it'll never happen. Even if gays cannot marry, they will never go away. Pushing the dust under the rug doesn't change the fact that the dust is still there. Period....

....and I still don't get the (il)logic that, somehow, somewhere, people are all suddenly going to "convert" to being gay, unless they are openly discriminated against. Now that Canada is poised to allow gay marriage, are you suddenly going to "turn gay" yourself?

To the people who think i compared gays to incest i take that personally. I have been posting here for years and was never so insulted. Who the fuck do you think i am, the Devil. You dont have a fuckin clue about incest and what it does to people (unless it has happened to someone close to you) I wouldnt do that and it boils my blood to think anyone would think that. I am disgusted with the comments. I had a g/f who was raped by her father for years and you dont have a fuckin idea. Fuck gay right hetero rights i cant even begin to tell you how mad i am. I thank the two, Dread and Angela, who knew me better. i cant stand to be here anymore. Bye.

I have no problem with anyone sexuality but when you are doing what these two have been doing it makes me ask what about heterosexuals rights. What ever happened to the defintion of marriage. We through that right out the door and change it! Whats next allowing a person to be married to 10 people or having a father and daughter be married. The defintion of marriage has been in tact for many many years and to tarnis that because homosexuals want equal rights is not right in my world.

Then you'd better choose your words more carefully in the future, because, if you reread precisely what you wrote here, that's precisely what you implied. I wouldn't take it too harshly. If I took even a fraction of the crap said against gays in here over the past three years personally, I'd have left as soon as I came in here.

Melon

 

[TylerDurden]

I just cant get past the question: If everyone were to be gay, would the world end in a 100 years? That question was posed to me by my Uncle who is a missionary. That question always stuck in my mind. You can attack me again, but that is what i think at this time. It is something i feel strongly about.

Umm... what's that got to do with marriage?

 

[iacrobat]

Heterosexual rights isnt something i should have said. Heterosexual views might of been what i thought. By that i mean a view like my own. Someone who doesnt look down on any gay person for their sexuality, because its none of my business, but someone who doesnt agree with what they do. I personally think that homosexual activity is wrong, but is my view. I dont hate anyone for it, just like i wouldnt hate you for not agreeing about the same politics as me. I dont nned to explain my personal view to have people i'm right or wrong, its my view and i think it is right.

I legal Union is a Marriage in my opinon, and if it isnt then it should. I never said that Homosexuals shouldnt have any rights but Marriage to me is between a male and a female. I think this because a Marriage to me represents to me a pledge to make a family and have this world continue on. I just cant get past the question: If everyone were to be gay, would the world end in a 100 years? That question was posed to me by my Uncle who is a missionary. That question always stuck in my mind. You can attack me again, but that is what i think at this time. It is something i feel strongly about.

To the people who think i compared gays to incest i take that personally. I have been posting here for years and was never so insulted. Who the fuck do you think i am, the Devil. You dont have a fuckin clue about incest and what it does to people (unless it has happened to someone close to you) I wouldnt do that and it boils my blood to think anyone would think that. I am disgusted with the comments. I had a g/f who was raped by her father for years and you dont have a fuckin idea. Fuck gay right hetero rights i cant even begin to tell you how mad i am. I thank the two, Dread and Angela, who knew me better. i cant stand to be here anymore. Bye.

eeek...love the sinner, hate the sin right?

As for your question about if the whole world was gay...we might as well postulate if the world would end in a hundred years if it was invaded by space aliens from the dark side of the moon. Because that is more likely than the whole world being gay.

Melon is right. You should choose your words more carefully. Not all of us know you as well as Dreadsox or others who realised "what you were trying to say".
To me, it seemed that you were lumping homosexuality in with incest. And I don't think anyone ever lightly dismissed incestual rape at anytime.

What happen to your friend sickens and angers me. I understand how feel as well, I am in same position as you bonoman.

 

[BVS]

I legal Union is a Marriage in my opinon, and if it isnt then it should. I never said that Homosexuals shouldnt have any rights but Marriage to me is between a male and a female. I think this because a Marriage to me represents to me a pledge to make a family and have this world continue on. I just cant get past the question: If everyone were to be gay, would the world end in a 100 years? That question was posed to me by my Uncle who is a missionary. That question always stuck in my mind. You can attack me again, but that is what i think at this time. It is something i feel strongly about.

So are you for banning straight marriages between couples who don't procreate?

And I'm sorry but the question your Uncle posed to you is ridiculous and has nothing to do with marriage.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

So are you for banning straight marriages between couples who don't procreate?

Exactly. What about them? Are their marriages any less valid?

Sorry, but I don't want to think that I was put on this earth for the sole purpose of continuing the human race. I don't think that's the only reason we're here.

Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
And I'm sorry but the question your Uncle posed to you is ridiculous and has nothing to do with marriage.

Agreed.

Angela

 

[BVS]

But it's ashame that these and questions like them will never get answered by those who oppose this. It will always end up some distorted interpretation of the Bible and as long as people have hate in their hearts for those that think are wrong they'll be content on falling back on these distorted interpretations and myths.

 

[nbcrusader]

But it's ashame that these and questions like them will never get answered by those who oppose this. It will always end up some distorted interpretation of the Bible and as long as people have hate in their hearts for those that think are wrong they'll be content on falling back on these distorted interpretations and myths.

What distorted interpretations and myths are you referring to?

 

[BVS]

That there is a blantant, straight forward, from God's mouth answer on homosexuality.

 

[nbcrusader]

I guess a discussion on the inerrancy of Scripture would best be left to another thread.

 

[BVS]

I guess a discussion on the inerrancy of Scripture would best be left to another thread.

Probably so, but whenever one tries to point out scripture to me(it's usually the same one) about this subject they point out one part but when asked about the surrounding scripture and it's validity in today's world they write it off as being outdated. To me this is an example of one choosing bits and pieces to interpret for their own needs but ignoring those that don't make sence for their lives, therefore...distortion.

 

[nbcrusader]

I agree. Isolating Scripture is a dangerous method. I prefer comparing Scripture with Scripture. If the same message appears in many parts of Scripture, I'd say the message is that much stronger.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

regarding the question posed about a world full of gays, just as people have said, marriage isn't only about procreation. i've been married for a year and a half and omigor i'm on birth control. am i sinner for that? and what about pregnancies that don't come out of marriage?

it just brings me to the conclusion of the fact that if everyone was the same, the world would be pretty boring.

 

[FizzingWhizzbees]

I think this because a Marriage to me represents to me a pledge to make a family and have this world continue on. I just cant get past the question: If everyone were to be gay, would the world end in a 100 years? That question was posed to me by my Uncle who is a missionary. That question always stuck in my mind. You can attack me again, but that is what i think at this time. It is something i feel strongly about.

So should people who don't wish to have children be forbidden to marry? Should people who are unable to have children be forbidden to marry? If as you say, marriage is a "pledge to make a family" then you'd have to say that marriages which don't produce children are invalid.

And as for the "if everyone was gay..." argument, it's ridiculous. You're never going to have a world where everyone is gay, just as you'll never have a world where everyone is straight. Some people are gay, some are bisexual, some are straight, that's just the way it is. The world isn't going to end, procreation isn't going to stop simply because there are gay people in the world - if that were the case the world would have ended long ago.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

So should people who don't wish to have children be forbidden to marry? Should people who are unable to have children be forbidden to marry? If as you say, marriage is a "pledge to make a family" then you'd have to say that marriages which don't produce children are invalid.

And as for the "if everyone was gay..." argument, it's ridiculous. You're never going to have a world where everyone is gay, just as you'll never have a world where everyone is straight. Some people are gay, some are bisexual, some are straight, that's just the way it is. The world isn't going to end, procreation isn't going to stop simply because there are gay people in the world - if that were the case the world would have ended long ago.

Mmhm.

Exactly right.

Angela

 

[Pinball Wizard]

Customs forms turn into a religious debate.

Six degrees of spiritual posturing... the assumed forum sub-title.

 

[igloolik]

i, personally, don't see a problem with gay marriage. i mean, marriage should be diffined as 'the legal union of two people who love each other' we were just disscussing this while waiting for the bus after school. there is no reason why they shouldn't be married if they want to be. honestly, how are they that much different from heterosexual couples? tell me this. also, the whole thing about how homosexual couples can't adopt, but can be foster parents. how ridiculous is that? i know a person who has lesbian mothers, and he's perfectly normal as far as teenagers go. lol.
but we're just being ridiculous about not letting them in, as well. why not let them fill out one form? what harm would that do? they are legally married in another country, and we should recognise that. ugh.