Gays can marry - just not other gays: Kenney (Cdn Conservative MP)

[Wat_Tyler]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1108343854403_15?hub=Canada

OTTAWA — Conservative MP Jason Kenney says gays have every right to marry whoever they want -- as long as it isn't someone of the same sex.

The Calgary MP made the remarks during a sometimes heated 40-minute discussion with members of the Toronto-area Punjabi language media, a recording of which was made available to The Canadian Press.

"The fact is that homosexuals aren't barred from marrying under Canadian law,'' Kenney said at the meeting of the Punjabi Press Club last month in Brampton, Ont. The group represents more than a dozen Punjabi-language newspapers.

[Bertha Venation]

1. a common bit of ignorance

The reply, of course, is that the MP should imagine himself marrying a man. That is the direct logical equivalent of a gay man marrying a woman.

What an idiot.

[Wat_Tyler]

4. The irony is, he comes over as quite the closet case.

On second thoughts, that's not ironic at all. Just common.

[davidinalameda]

16. why do you feel the need to call this guy a closet case

are you some expert on "closet cases"

there are some straight assholes out there as well

posts like this just perpetuate the myth that there are all these self-hating homosexuals out there

there are some but guess what--I don't think there are as many as people, especially some people on here, would like to think

to me, calling these people closet cases is just another subtle form of homophobia

[Wat_Tyler]

20. Nope. This guy is a bit of a closet case.

Sometimes they are, you know?

[readmoreoften]

28. I agree 100% dwick and moreover

This myth makes GLBT people 100% responsible for 'the problem.' What's all this racket about gays? Oh, it's just the 'closet cases' who can't accept themselves fighting with the ones who do. Heterosexuals have nothing to do with it. It's like black-on-black crime. Tragic, but not something 'we' are responsible for.

[u4ic]

30. He's definitely repressed

but it's because he's waiting for marriage to become sexually active. I read it a few years back in an interview he gave.

He knows he'll be waiting a looooooong time. Who would want to marry that ignorant f**k? :evilgrin:

[Wat_Tyler]

32. He's a professional virgin, or so he claims.

That points towards the closet for me.

[Canuckistanian]

45. Apparently he lost his virginity in 2003

The woman in question declined to comment but said the experience was "interesting".

[LinuxInsurgent]

2. and this is why

this guy will never be able to advance that agenda in Canada.

He might have better luck in that tolerant land of liberty...the U.S.

[Vladimir]

3. How very droll n/t

[bunkerbuster1]

6. so droll, I've been hearing this "logic" for a year or more.

Them queers IS FREEEE to marry... members of the opposite SEX!

a har har har har har!

Aren't I hilarious!

Repeat about a billion times. I just figured Canuckians, even the wingnut Canucks, had a little more class than that.

[Vladimir]

10. Scum is scum the world over n/t

[cascadiance]

17. I wonder what happens to hermaphrodites?...

Are they *not* allowed to marry because there is no "opposite sex" for them?

Can a hermaphrodite marry as a "hermaphrodite" and not a male or female or do they have to "declare" what sex they are?

If hermaphrodites are allowed to marry by "declaring" themselves of the opposite sex to their partner, then by that legal precedent, can a gay person "declare" themselves the opposite sex to their partner and get married in the same fashion?

What is the law on this? If it's not well defined, it seems like it would be worth a court challenge for someone to take up!

[TrogL]

31. How about eunuches?

Go read what the bible says about eunuches. Some interesting reading, especially the definition.

[Tyler Durden]

5. I understand Calgary is not exactly "Liberal Land."

To put it mildly.

PLEASE Canada, Stay the only nation in the Western Hemisphere where DIVERSITY is CELEBRATED! Convert the rest if you can, but PRESERVE THE CHARTER!

[Redstone]

7. "every right to marry whoever they want"

Does this mean that Santorum's "man on dog" fantasy might be legal in Canada? Somebody tell him quick so he can emigrate.

Redstone

[skippythwndrdog]

8. Technically, he's right.

And his quote is somewhat amusing in its arrogance. However, he's a butthead.

[rayofreason]

9. Canadian Opinion?

Any Canadians here? What is your take on public support for gay marriage?

[Spazito]

11. The legislation will pass, the vote may be close but it will pass...

All but three provinces already have gay marriages due to rulings by our Supreme Court.

The faux Conservative party is splintering over this issue, not all MPs will vote against and that is the same with the Liberals. The NDP will vote for it as will the Bloc (the other parties in our Parliament).

Canadians consider the issue of MDS much more serious than gay marriage and we are against MDS and would fight an election over Canada's participation in the MDS program but do not see gay marriage serious enough to cause an election.

BTW, Jason Kenney is typical of the dumb, big mouth, bigoted faux Conservative that exemplifies why Canada did not put them in power even with the Liberals having been embroiled in a big (for Canada anyway) scandal.

[C_eh_N_eh_D_eh]

12. I'm all for it.

Unless Falwell and his ilk turn out to be right about how God will burn us all off the face of the earth if gays are allowed to marry, it's really none of my business.

[Spazito]

13. Exactly!

Equal rights issue, full stop. Why should I be 'allowed' to marry only because I am straight? I was not married in the church yet I have a MARRIAGE Certificate, not a CIVIL UNION Certificate so mixing the church up in this is crap. Churches will decide whether they will participate in such, it is a separate issue.

[Lisa]

29. well, more than half of Canadians live in jurisdictions that have okayed

... same-sex marriage -- and since we haven't been turned into pillars of salt yet, I'm assuming there won't be any divine retribution. (The hockey lockout doesn't count!)

[Wat_Tyler]

21. 50/50, but it'll pass the house.

Give people 10 years, it won't even be an issue any more.

[Q3JR4]

37. Sooner than that.

Over 51% of Massachusetts-ites are comfortable with gay marriage and that ruling came down last year.

[Neecy]

14. well....

I've often thought that the impetus behind the opposition to gay marriage is fiscal - the usual suspect, big business, driving their agenda by turning the issue into a 'moral' one and letting the sheeple do their dirty work for them. Simply put, the corporations that don't currently pay domestic partnership benefits don't want to have to legally extend those benefits under a civil marriage.

Perhaps the only way to break the back of this corporate intransigence is for a massive 'marry-in' between gay men and lesbians. We'll have gay marriage of a different variety - one that's legal in all 50 states. And one that gives full benefits to both partners. The beauty of it is with a simple marriage license, there's no need to the married partners to even live together - they're legally married, right? Just rake in the benefits that the rest of the country enjoys, such as access to a partner's health care benefits.

There's more than one way to strike back. And it really *is* time to strike back.

[Arkana]

15. What a dumbass

Is he trying to be funny? Cause I'm not laughing.

[AllegroRondo]

18. So technically, its a gender discrimination issue

because you are not allowed to marry based solely on your gender.

[BattyDem]

27. That's how I've always looked at it ...

Why should the government choose the gender of your spouse? If the government told us what religion our spouse should be, or what nationality, or what race - we wouldn't stand for it! So why should they tell us what gender our spouse should be? ANY adult should be allowed to marry ANY other adult.

If two men or two women want to spend their lives together and be legally responsible for one another, it's nobody's damn business! Two gay people can enter into a business contract, so why can't they enter into a personal contract? WTF is the difference? Churches can marry (or not marry) whomever they damn well please - but without a license from the government, it means nothing. Marriage is a civil contract and it should be treated as such. So ... in a civil contract, how does the gender of the two people involved make any difference at all?

[GOPBasher]

19. Conservatives are fighting a losing battle over there.

Conservatism is so unpopular in Canada. Even gay marriage has started there. No wonder their few conservatives like this guy are all so scared. Why can't we be more like them?

[aikido15]

22. What an ass!

:eyes:

[applegrove]

23. Nay - sayer will likely not be affected/invited to the marriages

either. This is an issue that doesn't even affect their lives. Nobody is saying their church has to perform once ceremony or another. The Christins Right in this country is the same as the CEOs in the USA. All you have had to do in the last decade is throw money at them and they will think whatever you want.

[DFWJock]

24. Sounds like something

Chimpy would say.

[callous taoboy]

25. And Star-Bellied Sneetches may not marry those

without stars upon thars.

It's good to be the king.

[laundry_queen]

26. I live in a hardcore conservative area.

Well, they voted Conservative in the last election anyway, but they are no where near freepers. Anyhow most people I know don't give a crap about gay marriage. They just don't care one way or the other. Most comments are along the lines of "Does it affect me? No, let them be happy and marry who they want, what's the big deal". Of course most right wingers around here are NOT the religious type, more the "I want my tax break" type so that may have a lot to do with it.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

33. Can't we just SHUT the KKKonservative party down?!?

:argh:

[Wat_Tyler]

34. Never interrupt your enemy when he's shooting himself in the foot.

[rayofreason]

39. Progressive1...really?

I was reading through the posts and I was struck by your comment line, which, in the context of a discussion around freedom to marry as one chooses, seemed particularly ironic.

"Financially Boycott those who oppose us. They have decided to destroy us and we MUST do the same. I have no objection to denying Right Wingers the right to make a living."

May I ask, by how much does one need to disagree with you before you decide that they must be destroyed and denied the right to make a living?

[tanyev]

35. Heartless.

And for more than one reason. Yes, it's cruel to state that gays may marry-as long as it's someone of the opposite sex. But think about the flip side of that. Anyone who agrees with that logic also thinks it perfectly OK for a hetero to marry someone who can never really love them in a passionate, sexual way.

I wouldn't want to marry a man who longed to be with another man. It's not fair to him, and it's certainly not fair to me.

[malestripper4u]

36. A lot of truth in that!

and a lot of thought heartless.

MS

[HockeyMom]

38. I know a marriage just like that

Gay woman married to a man. Purely for business and family appearances. She goes out with women and HE goes out with women. They don't even TALK to each other. Even, their families now are telling them to "stop living a LIE." Ah, the SANCTITY of "traditional" marriage between one man and one woman.

[soaky]

40. Orson Scott Card mouthed off in this vein in an article last year

very dissapointing, I had enjoyed some of his books...

[Wat_Tyler]

41. Orson Scott Card? How bizarre.

[soaky]

42. link

found the link:

Homosexual "Marriage" and Civilization

[Wat_Tyler]

44. Thanks.

Man, the energy these people put into ruining the lives of others.

[Politicub]

43. Most moronic position ever

Who are these people? Do they really want a gay man to marry their daughter? Or for a lesbian to marry one of thier sons? How stupid.

People should be able to marry who they love.

[Canuckistanian]

46. Notice where he made the statement

These Conservatives are just blitzing the ethnic organizations, hoping to find support for their gay-bashing.
I thought I heard last night that the Sikhs he was talking to didn't think too much about that statement either.