I found a piece of information that I find very interesting, that one of the newer bills, federally, regarding the Modernization of Benefits and Obligations has passed. Now in Canada, same sex couples are considered a couple and can recieve the same benefits as a common law couple.
Of course this bill had and still has oppostion. IN the vote of the bill, what surprised me was that the ENTIRE Bloque Quebecois voted yes, 17 Liberals voted against it, (which is around 1/3) and of course Reform or the Canadian Alliance ALL voted against it. (hmmm, and this is probably going to be the party from which are next pm is going 2 be from)
Of course the Christian Organizations and people backing them agree with them.
Here is an article of what focus on the family thinks of Same Sex "marriages"
Focus on the Family Position Statement on Same-Sex "Marriage" and Civil Unions
Marriage is a sacred union, ordained by God to be a life-long, sexually exclusive relationship between one man and one woman. Focus on the Family holds this institution in the highest esteem, and strongly opposes any legal sanction of marriage counterfeits, such as the legalization of same-sex "marriage" or the granting of marriage-like benefits to same-sex couples, cohabiting couples, or any other non-marital relationship. History, nature, social science, anthropology, religion, and theology all coalesce in vigorous support of marriage as it has always been understood: a life-long union of male and female for the purpose of creating stable families.
Stable families !!! There can be unstable heterosexual couples. Just because your in a same sex marriage, doesn't necessarily mean its unstable. Its just new.
History and Marriage
Marriage is not an American invention. It has existed as an institution since the beginning of civilization, and thus supersedes our modern laws. Every long-standing society has viewed marriage as a union of male and female. Studies of previous civilizations reveal that when a society strays from the sexual ethic of marriage, it deteriorates and eventually disintegrates.1
I dont think marriage will ever disentegrate. There will always be religion and people seeing as a symbol of devotion. Common law may be easier and bluring the lines of our strict definition of marriage is good. It shows that our society is changing, with the morals and values of the times. Change is good.
Nature and Marriage
Even a casual observation of nature reveals the vital distinctions between male and female and the need that each has for the other. Gender distinctions are not simply an artificial social construct. Men and women are uniquely designed to complement each other physically, emotionally, and spiritually. Marriage is the means for melding the two sexes into a stronger and more complete whole. Thus while marriage has intrinsic value of its own, a primary purpose of marriage is procreation. Marriage is the natural and best means for the propagation of the human race.
"Propagation of the human race" hmmm, I dont think that will ever really be an issue. I think any 2 people can form a bond, a strong bond does not necessarily derive itself from a one male and one female relationship. We can see this clealy by observing a gay/lesbian couple. They are not void of love or emotion nor the ability to give/recieve and function in a long term relationship.
Children and Marriage
The optimal environment for raising a child is one in which the child's mother and father are married to each other. Deliberately depriving a child of a mother or a father is not in the child's best interest. On average, when compared with children raised by both parents, children in single-parent homes fare worse in virtually every measure of well-being.2 The sparse research regarding children raised in same-sex couple households reveals that such children are comparable in well-being to those in single-parent households.3 In addition, children raised by homosexuals are significantly more likely to develop a homosexual orientation themselves.4 Men and women are distinctly different. Each gender brings vitally important - and unique - elements to a child's development. Research reveals that the presence of a father in the home affects children's cognitive and verbal skills, academic performance, involvement in or avoidance of high-risk behaviors and crime, and emotional and psychological health.5 A wealth of research and information has been published about the power and importance of the mother-child bond.6
Perhaps OPTIMAL , it may be, however the studies, I would question the validity of them. I would question who did the study and who participated. I highly doubt that due to a lack of a male or female "role model" or parent will psycologically damage children development. The Focus on the Family does not mention that there are children who's parents die or get seperated at a very young age. I could mention single parent "families" of in which children may be may have more problems adjusting and living, but that would be mainly due to poverty and the state of womyn.
Discrimination and Marriage
We elevate marriage in our laws over other relationships because marriage has proven over millennia to be an obvious societal good. Marriage is open to any two individuals provided they meet certain criteria regarding age and blood relationship, and provided the individuals are of the opposite sex. Homosexual activists seek not to end discrimination, but rather to completely redefine - and thus undermine - the foundational institution of marriage. Indeed, some prominent gay activists have gone so far as to state this as their goal.7 This powerful,advantaged, vocal special interest group is seeking not to be left alone, not to be simply tolerated or even respected, but to force its views on the rest of society.
</font> ummm, what do u think your doing. Do you not support the Black movement or the Womyn's movement. Of course, its not about forcing ideals down people's throats, its about exceptance and equality, but all equality movements suffered great persecution.
Love and Marriage
Those who would redefine marriage often insist that the only necessary qualification for marriage is "love." Yet if one accepts that rationale, then there can logically be no boundaries as to what constitutes marriage; any combination or number of consenting individuals must ultimately gain the same legal and societal sanction as traditional marriage. While love is vital, it is not the definitional element of marriage. We love many people we do not marry.
This is the dumbest argument I have heard due to the illogical defence being used. I refuse to comment to such anti-christian beliefs (of which they are christian organization)
Questioning someone's love is ridiculous as there is no strict definition. Of all people who should grasp this notion it would be christian's and their "undying love for god"
Religion and Marriage
The five major world religions, Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism recognize and uphold the natural, heterosexual understanding of marriage. By contrast, these religions teach that homosexual behavior is sinful or wrong.8
The Bible and Marriage
Marriage is the first institution ordained by God and has served from the beginning as the foundation for continuation of the human race. Genesis tells us that shortly after the creation of the first man, God acknowledged Adam's incompleteness. God then created Eve as Adam's partner, his completer, and blessed their union.9 Jesus underscored the importance and sacredness of marriage in His own teachings.10 The apostle Paul taught that the marital relationship is to be an ongoing demonstration of the sacrificial love that Christ showed His church. In contrast, the Bible clearly proscribes any form of homosexual behavior as sinful.11 As such, it is not and cannot be the basis for a sacred marriage relationship.
people have different religions and belief systems, to use this argument, is inconsequential. The people you wrote this for are usually not christian, and there are christians who actually disagree with the notion of Christianity being opposed to same sex marriages
Marriage is unquestionably good for individuals and society. It deserves respect and protection. Any efforts to redefine marriage destroy the institution. Thus we oppose any government recognition or endorsement of marriage counterfeits, including same-sex unions.
1 See J. D. Unwin, Sexual Regulations and Human Behavior (London: Williams & Norgate, 1933).
2 See, for example, D. A. Dawson, "Family Structure and Children�s Health and Well-being," Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53:573-584 (1991).
3 See F. Tasker and S. Golombok, "Adults Raised as Children in Lesbian Families," American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 65:2: 203-215 (1995).
4 Ibid. See also, T. J. Dailey, "Breaking the Ties that Bind." Family Research Council Insight, February 18, 2000.
5 See D. Blankenhorn, Fatherless America. (New York: Basic Books, 1995). See also, K. D. Pruett, Fatherneed. (New York: Free Press, 2000).
6 See for example, B. Hunter, The Power of Mother Love. (Colorado Springs: Waterbrook Press, 1997).
7See, for example, Michelangelo Signorile, "Bridal Wave," Out, January/February 1994, at p. 161.
8 "Major World Religions on the Question of Marriage," Marriage Law Project, April 2000, at http://marriagelaw.cua.edu.
9 Genesis 2:24.
10 Matthew 19:6.
11 Leviticus 20:13; Romans 1:18-32; I Corinthians 6:9-11.
I guess its all a matter of opinion. Perhaps the rest of the population wil truly be able to accept other members of society and not try to impose their value system upon others.
Copyright � 2000 Focus on the Family.
All rights reserved. International copyright secured.