[Flashpoint]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Homosexuals want equal rights as heterosexuals. And that is a two way street.

Exactly. They want the same right you do. Just like you want the same rights they do. That's equality. Everyone has the same rights.

They have an equal right to marriage as I have an equal right to upholding the traditional definition of marriage.

You are looking to deny a right to someone else. You both have the right to free speech. You both have the right to marry. If you say - "I have the right to prevent your free speech" - then you aren't talking about equal rights anymore. Ditto for the right to marry.

Nobody is taking advantage of homosexuals.

Really? After an entire thread about how they shouldn't be allowed to use the word "marriage" to describe their marriages.

While I agree things change over time, others do not. Maybe Christmas becomes international gift giving day, the tooth fairy deemed a pedophile, and we have our New Years in Feb just so we don't piss off the Chinese? What the eff is this passage about?

First - relax. We're just talking here. No need to get angry.

The passage was addressing the argument that homosexuals shouldn't use the word "marriage" because traditionally they haven't been allowed to. Just like traditionally white people could own black slaves, and traditionally it was ok for 9 year olds to get jobs. My point is that society changes with time and in this case "traditional values" don't hold much water when applied to modern day problems.

I'm not breaching anyone's rights. This is a debate about the fundamental definition of marriage which in my opinion is a heterosexual union. Like I said in my previous post, the homosexual community needs to come up with their own term.

By saying gays need to come up with their own term, you are saying they don't have the right to use the word "marriage". My argument is that gays have just as much right as heterosexuals to use it - we live in a society where people are treated equally. If you told someone they couldn't play for the Flames because they were gay, or that they couldn't sit in the front of the bus before they were gay, it would be discrimination. Why is the ability to use the word marriage any different?

If there was a cadre of people saying "Albertans can't use the word "marriage" to describe their uinions", wouldn't you feel discriminated against?

I believe that homosexuals, the homosexual community, trans-gendered people, and almost anything else most especially deserve equal rights, in Canada, in 2008.

I completely agree.

Using the term "marriage" to describe a union is a heterosexual term.

Says you. I think it describes anyone who wants to enter a union with their partner. If you are going to start pointing out groups and saying they can't use it (be they White, black, short, Oiler fans, or gay) then you are discriminating.

What would happen if the next rally call was we couldn't call them gay? At some point there has to be labels and boundaries!

What would happen if the next rally call was that we couldn't call black people the N word?

If they're gay, then it would be the same word as I have been alluding to. Its not meant to be derogatory. Its not different in any way, shape, or form except for the title of the institution (ie, not marriage, but something else).

I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are saying here.

Marriage is a heterosexual term.

Why? Because you say so? Sorry, but you don't get to treat people differently just because you feel like it, and then claim you aren't discriminating against them.

Besides, is pretty clearly isn't a heterosexual term at this point. And California, just agreed with me.

In Canada we don't profile by race or sexual orientation. We also don't blurr the lines of common sense to appease minorities, although we tend to fail miserably in this regard.

That is exactly what you are doing - you want to prevent a group of people from using a term precisely because they are different.

No problem, and they will be treated completely equal in their union that is not titled as a "marriage."

I have yet to hear a reason that holds any water why every couple in Canada shouldn't be afforded the right to describe their union as equal to every other. Marriage is what it is, and marriage is what it should be called.

I agree, which is why in Canada we allow legally recognized bonds between two persons of the same gender. It gives them all the rights and privileges of traditionally defined heterosexual marriage.

Which is why it should be called "marriage". If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck...

For the last time, I am not suggesting homosexuals be treated differently.

Yes you are. You don't think they should be allowed to use the word "marriage" to describe their unions. That is treating them differently than everybody else.

And before anyone acuses me of any kind of bigotry, I lived for a year in the gay nexus of Canada (Jarvis and Gerard St. in Toronto)...

But again I say, "marriage" is a heterosexual term. I know plenty of very gay people that feel the same too.

I'll go back to my original post. If one doesn't support the idea of gay marriage, it means one doesn't support equal rights. That means one wants to discriminate against a group of people (i.e. they shouldn't have the same rights as everyone else - the right to use the word "marriage" for example). If one discriminates, that makes one a bigot.