Argh

[garran]

"...Paul Martin wants to impose same-sex marriage."

No, he doesn't. How does he want to do that? I've seen no indication that the proposed legal change would make such marriage mandatory; not even for religious institutions, which (certainly according to the Supreme Court) will continue to have to right to refuse to perform marriages to whomever they please. It's not even like the legality of smoking, which forces me, every once in a while, to take some of someone else's unhealthy choice into my lungs; the extent to which it will probably chafe a few people that the government acknowledges the validity of a moral standard other than their own can only be termed an imposition in the loosest sense. Are they being intentionally misleading?

This entry is about how Stephen Harper made me politically grumpy enough to complain about it in my weblog.

Comments

[http://users.livejournal.com/_quinn/]

[Incidentally, that link is well-hid. Did you mean only to make it that opening quote mark?]

I was going to ask if the Canuckistani Supreme Court -equivalent was actually called the Supreme Court (in a clever attempt to confuse your southern neighbors), but now that I found the link to the article, I won't.

[garran.livejournal.com]

I did mean so, but I forgot to take into account those I know with friends page colour schemes that make even larger links nearly impossible to see. Ellipsis now added for some sort of clarity.


-Garran

[countalpicola.livejournal.com]

I hadn't even noticed until _quinn said something. But that's just me being imperceptive; my color scheme is as clear as it gets.

[tanetris.livejournal.com]

"You there! Yes, you two! You're of the same gender! You will marry, or face dire consequences!"

[bubbleteagirl.livejournal.com]

ugh. that makes me grumpy. you should cheer me up with pictures of myself! wee!

[garran.livejournal.com]

Oh, right! Soon.


-Andy

The secret meaning of everyday objects

[(Anonymous)]

I think he means, "...impose the existence of a same-sex marriage on the universe."

Do I dare
Disturb the universe?

Or maybe he means "impose on every province," which would result in being married except in Alberta. Such a piecemeal approach is not very Canadian.

(cola)

[garran.livejournal.com]

I can't parse your last paragraph at all. Is there a word missing?


-Garran

[bubbleteagirl.livejournal.com]

agreed. twice.

[elyscape.livejournal.com]

I think he means that it would impose acceptance of the marriages on all the provinces, which would result in said marriages being recognized everywhere except in Alberta.

cola

[(Anonymous)]

Yesh, elyscape is correct. I meant that the result will be "We're married! Except in Alberta."

cola

[(Anonymous)]

Oh, wait. No! There's a whole concept missing. I meant that, if the federal government doesn't require the marriages to be recognized everywhere, the result will be "We're married! Except in Alberta." Which would be silly.

[garran.livejournal.com]

My understanding is that the Federal Government isn't capable of not requiring a marriage they choose to legitimize to be recognized nationwide, because marriage is actually entirely under federal jurisdiction (except, I think, that the provincial governments get to decide who has marriage licenses). So if the definition under federal law is changed, the law in Alberta can be no exception, and it would be illegal and possibly unconstitutional for that province to ignore this (unless, of course, they invoke the notwithstanding clause, which would be... Kind of yucky).


-Garran

[masamage.livejournal.com]

Maybe it means he himself wants such a marriage! And shall impose this on us.

But probably not.

Grumpy 2: Grumpening

[garran.livejournal.com]

Impose it on us how? By marrying (some of) us? By demanding that we attend his wedding?

If I eat some peanut butter - or - even better! - meat - I don't think that's an imposition (except perhaps on what I'm eating). Even if I'm a celebrity, and someone reports it as news.

He almost certainly doesn't (Watch me ignore the lighthearted tone of your comment in every way possible! Sorry); there was a really interesting exchange on one of his CBC appearances while he was campaigning for reelection. Someone asked him: last decade sometime, you said you were against same sex marriages, yet now you say you support their legality. Are there any depths of inconsistency to which you will not sink? And PM P.M. replied, well, I've wrestled with this a lot, because the it's a practise that makes me pretty uncomfortable personally (and probably religiously), but the courts have ruled that it's a Charter of Rights and Freedoms issue, and I think that abiding by that document is very important for our country. I (I'm Garran again now) was pretty impressed by the ethical honesty there, for all that it may have been faked to win votes.


-Garran

[masamage.livejournal.com]

(Hooray! That had nothing to do with me, so I'll stay over here.)

[bubbleteagirl.livejournal.com]

i wonder if we get to choose the same-sex partner to whom we have to marry. or will it be a magical lottery, and Martin will just put all the boys into one box and all the girls into another box and pull out two names at a time from each box and we will be paired up in that fashion. oh, teehee. i hope my new wife is pretty.

[tanetris.livejournal.com]

I wonder if it'll apply to tourists... If I visit Canada, will I be assigned a temporary husband for the duration of the trip? Of course, I suppose that all the Canadians will already hafta be married, so will I hafta bring a guy along from America and be married to him? Or will Canadians institute polygamy? Will the marriage have to be consumated even if he isn't cute? So many questions to wonder...

Alternatively, going back to what Sorcy said, he may be imposing it on the people by making everyone try to figure out who the Mr. and who the Mrs. is, or at least making everyone henceforth refer to him as Mrs. Whomever-he-chooses-to-marry, or his husband as Mrs. Martin... Or even both, leading to mass-confusion! That bastard...

[bubbleteagirl.livejournal.com]

After watching more of this on the news last nite I have concluded that we live in a very scary world. Growing up in such a loving, accepting and sheltered community... this realization is always quite a shock. For years, though, I always thought that I was somehow protected in Canada. Even lately, I've been taking joy in looking over at our neighbours to the south and gleefully exclaiming "at least I live in Canada!" But, Harper is just as terrifying as Bush and Canada can be just as terrifying as America.

[masamage.livejournal.com]

Heh. ^^; Yeah.