News and Politics

Via morons.org headlines:

Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin addressed the House of Commons on February 16th in order to pledge his support for the federal law that would give the rights of civil marriage to all couples, regardless of sexual orientation.

A few excerpts from his speech:

We will be influenced by our faith but we also have an obligation to take the widest perspective — to recognize that one of the great strengths of Canada is its respect for the rights of each and every individual, to understand that we must not shrink from the need to reaffirm the rights and responsibilities of Canadians in an evolving society.

He brings up an issue that has apparently been raised: that it should be left to a referendum. His response to this also addresses something that has been seriously lacking in the political discourse in our country of late: the concept of the tyranny of the majority:

I reject this not out of a disregard for the view of the people, but because it offends the very purpose of the Charter.

The Charter was enshrined to ensure that the rights of minorities are not subjected, are never subjected, to the will of the majority. The rights of Canadians who belong to a minority group must always be protected by virtue of their status as citizens, regardless of their numbers. These rights must never be left vulnerable to the impulses of the majority.

Why can’t our government share this view?

I enjoyed my recent trip to Vancouver and I found the weather pleasant and not too cold. If I didn’t own a home and not have to go through the hassle of moving lots of large pieces of furniture & two cats, I’d move to Vancouver.

From Sun-Sentinel:

A campaign by conservative and religious activists to amend the state Constitution to ban gay marriage used Valentine’s Day to launch its petition drive.

At County Hall in Miami-Dade County, the Christian Family Coalition and other religious and community groups said that although Florida law already prevents two men or two women from getting married, an amendment to the state Constitution would prevent the courts from overturning those restrictions.

“This state law is being targeted for defeat,” said Anthony Verdugo, executive director of the Christian Family Coalition.

Joined by other groups throughout the state, the anti-gay marriage activists hope to collect more than 600,000 valid signatures by February 2006. That could set the stage for a statewide vote the following November.

In Orlando, the Florida Coalition to Protect Marriage, registered as a statewide political committee, announced that the amendment would define marriage exclusively as “the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife.” The group’s proposal emphasizes that “no other legal union that is treated as marriage” would be valid or recognized by the state.

How about this compromise: we agree not to challenge the current law and they agree not to push the amendment.

It looks like our wingnuts forgot that Canada is a separate country and decided to butt in there.

Via Gay Geeks.org: As the canadian MPs are on the way to look upon the “gay marriage” legislation. They are submersed by phones/fax/emails from theirs constituents, which is normal. But also by Americans who apparently don’t know there’s a border.

Now, the worse is hidden, the no same-sex marriage campaign is founded partly by US organizations and it starts worrying officials. Canadian organizations have not the funding sufficient to work effectively for the pro side and no law forbids the US funding.

Meanwhile, community leaders like Salah Bachir in Toronto run a counter campaign (Canadians For Equal Marriage) based on the defense of the Charter of rights. Salah heads Famous Players Media, the company that handles adverts in the Famous Players theaters on both screens and walls.

More details on CBC news

Via Plastic: After the elections in Iraq, the new Prime Minister wants Islam to be the official religion, use the Koran as the basis for the Constitution, listen to Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani when writing laws, and will be close to Iran. Um… oops.

It looks like we really improved things in the Middle East. Just what we needed, another Iran-style fundamentalist regime.

Once again the subject of Alberto Gonzales came up in WWDN. Isn’t it funny how the Republicans try to paint everything as a racial issue? They don’t see Gonzales as a man; they see him as a Hispanic and a representative of all Hispanics. Therefore, when anyone opposes him they oppose all Hispanics. The issue isn’t his race or nationality, but his advocacy of torture for prisoners. Of course the Republicans will never even let the real issue enter in the debate. The Republicans try to claim they’re inclusive, but they always insist on making race an issue and trumpeting every nomination of a token minority. The Democrats, on the other hand, ignore race and look at everyone as an individual, not as a representative of some group.

Maya Marcel Keyes, the daughter of Alan Keyes, a notoriously homophobic right-winger, is out of the closet. This is the same Alan Keyes who called Mary Cheney a “hedonist”, which her father found less offensive than Kerry simply acknowledging that she’s gay. It looks like he’s kicking Maya out of the house. Compassionate conservatism?

This image says it all:

(via Daily Kos)

Wil Wheaton: torture is not an american value

While it is vital that we defeat our enemies, we must not become them in the process. As a nation, we must stand united against Albert Gonzales and everything he represents. Torture is not an American value.

Are we becoming like the old Soviet Union? We attempt to intimidate the rest of the world with our military might. We’re now occupying a country where we’re not wanted and which we had no reason to invade. We’ve replaced their totalitarian dictatorship with an equally abusive and repressive regime.

This item at Daily Kos sums up my opinions perfectly:

I would cringe — and continue to cringe — when politicians and religous figures cite scripture to justify hatred towards gays or any other class of people. But I don’t cringe when scripture is used to justify poverty relief, or conservation (“protecting God’s creation”), or social security (“honor thy mother and thy fathers”), or oppose the death penalty, or oppose the war.

What we have in this country is the hijacking of religion by an ideological faction that is using their supposed moral authority on behalf of three narrow issues — abortion, stem cell research, and gay rights. Meanwhile, the Bible tackles myriad issues, most of which align with liberal/progressive thought. So when did “life” become just abortion, and not war and the death penalty and even associated issues like post-natal care (child mortality is still an issue of life and death)?

Another item at Daily Kos came up with the perfect name for abortion opponents: pro-birth. Most of the so-called “pro-lifers” support the war and the death penalty and avoid health care and other social services. Once a kid is born, they no longer care about it.

It’s the 21st century and the religious fundamentalists are still trying to force Creationism into schools. It’s OK if they want to teach it in a religion class, but creationism has no place in a science or biology class. Evolution is generally accepted by all scientists since there’s sufficient evidence to prove it. Only the religious crowd supports creationism or its variant, intelligent design.

I’m disgusted that the age of enlightenment is over and some people are trying to return to the dark ages. This country has always been a beacon of freedom, enlightenment, and tolerance. The fundamentalist crowd is trying to destroy what this country stands for by strictly enforcing their beliefs as the only valid ones. Nobody is trying to take their freedom of religion away from them. Religion is a completely personal matter. Forcing your own beliefs on others against their will is just plain immoral.