Saturday, June 27, 2015

Gay marriage - Some lessons from Canada for Americans on what to expect next

Brian Lilley breaks it down:



In stunning contradiction of his position a very short time ago, Obama was overjoyed with the US Supreme Court ruling, and even had the White House bathed in rainbow colors.  But his former senior adviser, David Axelrod, explained that there was no contradiction - Obama was lying.  Well, that's OK then!






10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Accept the gay hate machine agenda, or else. The irony of course is that the totalitarianism of progs and the homos they use to push their agenda of destruction and State control will only serve to backfire on homos, no matter what lawyers in robes demand. Make no mistake, changing the definition of marriage is all about control, state control. Nothing democratic about these decrees just totalitarianism, whether by Government fiat or so called "law" where an unelected unaccountable body of "judges" play the role of God. The destruction of marriage will serve no purpose other than to further the divide and create animosity where none existed before.

Anonymous said...

Discrimination is wrong and all the examples Brian Lilley referred to if those were applied to say Blacks, Asians, or any other minority, it would be banned. Individuals have the right to be homophobic privately, but they have no right to discriminate. Thankfully homophobia is rapidly disappearing and while in short time be a fringe minority like racism. What makes Canada great and successful is we are tolerant of differences and when you see the damage hate has caused elsewhere in the world, I am proud of the fact we are one of the most tolerant countries on earth. As for gay marriage, my only disappointment was that Canada wasn't the very first country to legalize it.

JR said...

"Individuals have the right to be homophobic privately ..."

Which of Lilley's examples involved "homophobia"? None. That's a label predictably used by intolerant radical activists to attack people they view as "enemies", to vilify them and shut them up.

Lilley's examples involved just such activists, "Christophobes" to use your style of labeling, who have no tolerance whatever for Christians' perfectly legitimate, long and deeply held beliefs. Christians basically minding their own business are often deliberately targeted for legal harassment or destruction. Trinity Western and the KCs were both targeted for this kind of abuse.

Anonymous said...

In the case of Trinity Western University, no one has said they cannot have the rules they do, however law societies have the right to refuse to recognize their degrees. Also in any public place, refusing to serve a customer based on any form of discrimination in the human rights code is illegal. As for religion, there has not been a case where any religious institution has been forced to marry gays or accept them, rather one cannot use religion as an excuse for discrimination. This would have happened gay marriage or not and I see this as a good thing. In Canada we take pride in tolerance. Also our system has always been based on helping traditionally disadvantaged groups as opposed to advantaged ones. That's why affirmative action is permitted in limited cases.

Anonymous said...

Good point JR... I might reiterate that the true agenda here is the destruction of marriage in the traditional and true sense... "Gay marriage" like "gay rights" are these absurd declarations based on nothing, it is not a "right" to destroy a tradition like marriage because of some minority position of sexual desires. Gay activists have stated clearly that their purpose and desire in their campaign of deception is the destruction of marriage, once again the "rights" of gays to destroy something they don't like. There is no "right" to marry your sister just as there is no "right" to marry a hot dog, these are simply the illogical conclusions of progressive ideology which has been correctly defined as a mental disorder. This is basically the Government (State) dismantling and re-defining true marriage and the intent of traditional marriage (the family). Essentially, "Gay rights" is the facade in front of the real agenda which is Statism or Cultural Marxism. In short, its not about "rights", its about destruction.

JR said...

Anon @6:22: "... however law societies have the right to refuse to recognize their degrees...."

Not according to the Supreme Court of Canada in similar cases and the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia in the TWU case. New Brusnswick and Ontario and eventually the SCOC will likely also uphold TWU's rights.

Anonymous said...

it does not matter how immoral a society becomes, sexual perversion will still be sexual perversion.

Anonymous said...

I'm allowed to make fun of Christianity, and religion in general, because they are beliefs. You can freely change them. You can't freely change sexual orientation, as can be demonstrated by the myriad of completely worthless gay conversion therapies.

The term is not "Christophobia", by the way. That implies fear. There is no fear. There is only ridicule. Even pity has long ago been abandoned.

JR said...

Don't be obtuse. As explained above, I used "Christophobia" in likeness to the way "homophobia" is intended. "Fear" is not a factor in those to whom the label "homophobe" is routinely applied by the lib/left. It's mainly a pejorative term used as a smear with the intent of shutting down debate.

While gays have no reason to "fear" Christians (mainly due to the gentle nature of Christian believers), there is another religious group that is known to be violently intolerant of homosexuals. You say "there is only ridicule" for Christians by (atheist?) gays. I'm guessing you have similar disrespect for Islamic beliefs. Can we expect to see those same gays ridicule Islam any time soon? Or, will your "Islamophobia" reign?

Anonymous said...

Straight and atheist, and yep, I similarly find Islam ridiculous.