I previously announced when Manitoba legalized Same Sex Marriage. Today,The Gazette reports “Nova Scotia becomes sixth province, territory to allow same-sex marriages”
A major step towards solving this problem is the Housing First model (as opposed to Treatment First). A Review of…
Thanks for the catch! And, I have no idea whatsoever what a rubric's cube would be or would do. But…
Much as I like the idea of a rubric's cube, it's spelled Rubik's cube. (Now what would a rubric's cube…
Great response to the Mace bill by AOC (video at link).
@bcb: Sometimes I think the whole election was an elaborate murder-suicide plot that the entire country is carrying out.
The title of the old student song sums it up:
Gaudeamus, Igitur…
Our book entitled Uncle Dubya’s Jihad Jamboree will be published by the Howling Dog Press in October.
Differing from other political fare that is fast filling the virtual and
online bookshelves, this book is as visual as it is informative. It is a
collection of humorous essays accompanying by political cartoons chronicling
the Bush years (circa 2000-2004). We call the genre a “graphic chronicle”.
Would you be interested in reviewing the book for your site?
Regards,
Ron Callari
==================================================================================
COMING SOON TO STORES & WEB SITES NEAR YOU: “UNCLE DUBYA’S JIHAD JAMBOREE”. Kidd millennium chronicles the life and times of our nefarious leader and his crusade to rid the world of evil, life, liberty and the pursuit of any errant Democrat that gets in his way. Check out dozens of incendiary essays, cartoons and jolts of insight that are guaranteed to scrub, spindle and wring out wry. Ask how you can obtain your copy today!
==================================================================================
This is the first time I’ve posted here, but I have to say that I’m thrilled that NS has joined the band and legalized same-sex marriage. I am a Canadian, and this makes me incredibly proud to be one.
Quite frankly, though, I was more proud when Manitoba legalized it because I’m from Manitoba. It tickled me pink to read the article in the paper. Thanks for writing about it!
I’m assuming you’re an American. In which case, and I apologize for my presumptiousness if I’m incorrect, I’m even more ecstatic that you know about it! I could hug you. Seriously. Canada tends to get ignored by Americans because we’re just the people who live in igloos…
Yay! (again)
Yes. I’m American. I have visited Canada though, and never noticed any igloos!
I’m glad to see the positive changes in Canada. I just hope we imitate them in this regard soon.
I’m from Nova Scotia (I live in Ontario now), and I’m pleased as punch about this development. I know a few of the people involved in the effort to get the NS government to accept SSM, and at the time it seemed like it would be a long time coming, despite NS’s general habit of doing whatever Ontario did, just later.
Now if we can only get them to extend Human Rights protections to transsexuals…
This American has visited Montreal in January. I only *wish* there were igloos – would have been warmer than walking aboveground. Seriously, congratulations! I might have to change that disputed two words in our Pledge of Allegiance to “under Canada” ;)
Well, I’m glad I wasn’t wrong about (“aboot”..) you being an American. I would’ve felt like such an ass.
The likelihood that the United States will follow in Canada’s footsteps is unlikely. In fact, I’m personally surprised that Canada took a step away from American ideology to legalize same-sex marriage (granted, same-sex marriage has only been legalized provincially rather than federally, but it’s a step in the right direction). More often than not, I find that Canada tends to mimick the States when it comes to its political ideologies and laws. The only opposition Canada has posed to the United States was/is the “Iraq situation” and same-sex marriage.
As for igloos, they look pretty neat, but I really doubt it would be that warm. How would heat it without melting it? ;)
Damnit! Typing error:
I meant to say, “How would you heat it without melting it?”
There goes my attempt to be even remotely funny..
…same-sex marriage has only been legalized provincially rather than federally
Keep in mind that the feds have already said quite publically that they will not appeal any desicions on SSM, nor are they planning on really fighting it. So it’s now just a matter of letting things take their course. If it’s not federally accepted within 5 years, I’d be very surprised.
I think you’re a little more optimistic than I am. Alberta opposes the legalization of same-sex marriage, and would invoke the notwithstanding clause in order to counter it. Of course, this year and a half old article (forgive the age, I’m sure you’ve seen it before) also says that this argument probably wouldn’t hold up in court, but because of this strong opposition, I think five years may be an early estimate.
Incidentally, Klein has been under attack from gay protestors over his stance on same-sex marriage. The whole pie-in-the-face thing really cracks me up. In my opinion, ol’ Ralphie deserved it, as he is really just a discriminatory, money-mongering, self-indulgent, arsehole who really doesn’t care about the welfare of all of Albertans, just a select few (ie: christian, middle class, white families).
I migrated from Manitoba, whose government is run by the NDP, to Alberta, whose government is run by conservatives, to go to school, and I still can’t get over the political, economic, and social differences between the two provinces when they’re only two provinces apart from each other. I love living in Alberta, but I hate the government and the political/social ideologies of most Albertans. Maybe my cynism towards when SSM is going to be legalized federally has to do with my bias (and loathing attitude) towards Alberta.
Neither Canadian Members of Parliament nor present-day Canadian judges are the ultimate authority on the lawful definition of marriage in Canada.
The Lawful Definition of Marriage in Canada
http://www.ocii.com/~dpwozney/marriage.htm
Ooo, troll!
Anyway, the latest news is that the Supreme Court ruled SSM constitutional (it declined to say whether not having SSM is unconstitutional).
Alberta’s MPs can vote on it, but if the law is passed federally, they have to honour it. Provinces can’t invoke the notwithstanding clause on the definition of marriage — it isn’t their jurisdiction. (I’m not clear on whether they would have to solemnize gay marriages themselves, since that is a matter of provincial jurisdiction…)
The Supreme Court of Canada document “R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., [1985]”, available at http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/1985/1985scc15.html , states: “If one now turns to the preamble of the Charter we see that, ‘Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God’. Bearing in mind that the preamble may not carry the force of law, it still shows that the Charter does not recognize any particular denomination and (noticeable by its absence) it does not refer to a Christian God.”
Do you believe Alberta MPs have to honour the statement that “…the preamble of the Charter…does not refer to a Christian God”?
The Supreme Court of Canada document “R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., [1985]”, available at http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/1985/1985scc15.html , states: “If one now turns to the preamble of the Charter we see that, ‘Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God’. Bearing in mind that the preamble may not carry the force of law, it still shows that the Charter does not recognize any particular denomination and (noticeable by its absence) it does not refer to a Christian God.”
Do you believe Alberta MPs have to honour the statement that “…the preamble of the Charter…does not refer to a Christian God”?
I’m afraid you’ve lost me. Probably just as well.
The “preamble” of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the supreme law of Canada, the Constitution of Canada, states that “…Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God…”.
Do you believe Queen Elizabeth II would agree that the “God” in “supremacy of God” “does not refer to a Christian God”?
Do you believe Queen Elizabeth II would agree that the “God” in “supremacy of God” “does not refer to a Christian God”?
1) The Queen is a figurehead. I don’t especially care what she or her descendants think.
2) Notwithstanding the preamble, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms grants “freedom of conscience and religion.”
3) The Biblical case against same-sex marriage is by no means clear, certainly no clearer than the case against, say, working on the Sabbath or allowing women to preach.