SSM: It's official, Next: Affirmative Adoption? Legislation: "Art" or Porn?

It's official: we now have gay marriage

We've already had gay pride in evidence here: this seems to pass muster with Toronto city fathers though it does seem rather phallo-centric to me: I knew these guys were interested in the arts and in decorating -- but street art? Or is it an artistic and public expression of hope that this is what our society will become?

Now, consider this: Leave crown at home, Glebova told -- Toronto mayor apologizes after Miss Universe snubbed

[. . . . ] The city's special events office blocked Miss Universe from participating in the event on Saturday, citing municipal guidelines that ban activities degrading to women from the square outside City Hall. [. . . . ]

Rules prohibiting events that objectify women -- as well as men -- were created in 1990, at the urging of Marilyn Churley, a city councillor who is now a provincial politician. At the time, Ms. Churley was attempting to block an annual bikini contest from taking place in the square.[. . . . ]

Some things are just so acceptably PC for your child!

-- Kate McMillan: Miss Universe photo



In a Canada of affirmative action and assymetrical . . . decisions, think about this.

Next: Adoptees as tokens for gay affirmative action

"Sex-ed in school should be about pro-creation...not lifestyle."
Same-sex couple targets school system -- They say it fails to give a positive and accurate portrayal Ian Mulgrew Vancouver Sun

On their first marriage anniversary -- the 34th of the first day they met -- Peter and Murray Corren found themselves at a B.C. Human Rights Tribunal hearing Monday for the latest round of their fight to rid the school system of what they say is systemic sexual discrimination.

After hours of legal arguments about the scope of their long-standing complaint, the two gay men emerged frustrated and angry at what they perceive as the continuing refusal of the B.C. government to "do the right thing." [. . . . ]

I like and admire--perhaps am related to--too many gay individuals and couples to not be bothered by the whole issue of homosexuality and a claim to rights, belief, sin/not sin, acceptance, the slippery slope arguments . . . the whole issue. There is no right answer for everyone. This is one of those divisive social issues where the polity must be able to speak through a referendum. I have already expressed my stance on children and gay adoption . . . but there are always caveats because of individuals I know and like. Still . . .

What Canadians did NOT want was Paul Martin canvassing votes from the homosexual community on the backs of the wishes of the rest of Canadians. I'll take my chances on the electorate allowed a free vote in a refendum, not on coercion of Canadians' representatives by the PMO.

Paul Martin demeans the office as he grasps at anyone and anything for votes. He will pay any amount of your money and your good will to remain in office. Paul Martin has diminished our perceptions of him in office; he has became smaller, not larger, petty in his quest to remain in a chair he does not fit. He will never make a statesman; he has not the long-term best interests of the country nor the family and children at heart. What he has done to democracy will be remembered.




Committee sends child porn bill to Senate with 'observations' -- "concern the bill tramples artistic freedom and constitutional rights."

[. . . . ] Liberal Senator Serge Joyal. Mr. Joyal has repeatedly expressed strong reservations about the bill's expanded definition of child pornography and its narrowing of the existing "artistic merit" defence to also require an artist to prove that he or she had a "legitimate purpose" in creating the artistic work. [. . . . ]

Just how would you prove you had a "legitimate purpose"?

Does anyone else think that this is a "community standards" thing that should be decided by a community? I know what I consider unacceptable for children. So do you. You should be able to decide for your own community.

---