Anti-gay bias taints first impression | Editorial | Kamloops Daily News


Saturday July 31, 2010

subscription options


Print Edition»

  • Includes free
    digital edition
  • Digital Edition»

  • Print format with
    enhanced features!


  • Editorial

    Anti-gay bias taints first impression

    The federal government was criticized when its recently overhauled study guide for new immigrants failed to make mention of gay rights or same-sex marriage.

    At the time, Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney dismissed queries about the omission, suggesting it was not possible to include “every policy of the government of Canada” in the manual.

    And when Egale Canada, a prominent gay-rights group, raised the issue with Kenney last year, he said the issue had been “overlooked” when the new guide was being prepared.

    Unfortunately for Kenney, an access to information request made by The Canadian Press has uncovered documents that show Kenney himself — or somebody in his office — ordered references to gay rights stripped from the document, despite pleas to do the opposite by well-intentioned bureaucrats.

    Remember, Canada has been at the forefront of the recognition of gay and lesbian rights for years. Homosexuality was decriminalized 40 years ago and same-sex marriage was legalized in 2005. But none of this appears to have fazed Kenney — an outspoken critic of gay and lesbian rights — whose office ordered the sections removed after it had been sent a draft of the new guide, which was released in November.

    While Kenney has denied direct responsibility for the short-sighted bit of editing that threatens to give immigrants a politically skewed impression of the inclusive, compassionate nation we love to call home, there’s no doubt that those who work under him reflect the stridently anti-gay bias that has been and continues to be shown by their boss.

    Sadly, while most of us have come a long way toward understanding homosexuality as something that should be embraced rather than feared, some of our elected representatives have failed to keep step with societal change, refusing to accept gay and lesbian Canadians as equal partners in the great democratic enterprise that is Canada.

    Kenney is entitled to his own opinions, but as an agent of the Crown he must abide by Canada’s laws and not let personal beliefs or political dogma stand in the way of celebrating — and protecting — the rights of all Canadians, be they new or old, male or female, gay or straight, black or white.

    Canadians expect nothing less.


    Comments

    0
    0

    jim wise says...

    As a straight guy who has gay friends i would like to add my observations.They gay guys I know are responsible harmless citizens who knew they were gay as soon as they began to be sexually mature.It was not a choice they made.While sraight guys sometimes label them as perverts I would like to explore who are the real perverts here.Many men acess pornography which deals with rape, bestiality, degradation and child abuse. Rapes with violence are common in our society and many women are killed or dissapear because of some men's unhealthy desires.Straight men who feel uncomfortable around gays have the arrogance to think they are objects of gay desire. If they do feel uncomfortable then they might then know how a woman in a workplace might feel surrrounded by their leering male co-workers.The gay men I know have always acted with discretion in my presence and have kept their expressions of sexuality in their private lives.Good god hockey and sports coaches who are sometimes married prey on their charges using their positions of influence.Hopefully all members of our society in this age have gotten the message that promiscuity is dangerous and unhealthy with lasting consequences.Porno is more ingrained and sexually transmitted diseases are on the rise.All responsible members of our society notwithstanding race, religion or sexual orientation should be allowed full rights and respect.

    Posted on March 11, 2010 @ 8:43 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3445365 

    0
    0

    jim wise says...

    As a straight guy who has gay friends i would like to add my observations.They gay guys I know are responsible harmless citizens who knew they were gay as soon as they began to be sexually mature.It was not a choice they made.While sraight guys sometimes label them as perverts I would like to explore who are the real perverts here.Many men acess pornography which deals with rape, bestiality, degradation and child abuse. Rapes with violence are common in our society and many women are killed or dissapear because of some men's unhealthy desires.Straight men who feel uncomfortable around gays have the arrogance to think they are objects of gay desire. If they do feel uncomfortable then they might then know how a woman in a workplace might feel surrrounded by their leering male co-workers.The gay men I know have always acted with discretion in my presence and have kept their expressions of sexuality in their private lives.Good god hockey and sports coaches who are sometimes married prey on their charges using their positions of influence.Hopefully all members of our society in this age have gotten the message that promiscuity is dangerous and unhealthy with lasting consequences.Porno is more ingrained and sexually transmitted diseases are on the rise.All responsible members of our society notwithstanding race, religion or sexual orientation should be allowed full rights and respect.

    Posted on March 11, 2010 @ 8:40 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3445364 

    0
    0

    liloldlady says...

    Why such a heated debate? One of the reasons men are afraid of gay guys is that they are afraid the homosexuals will do to them what they do to women...They would have to say to them:"NO means NO"

    Posted on March 10, 2010 @ 1:01 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3437993 

    0
    0

    Darrell Ward says...

    I'm curious... I usually stay away from GAY debates, because quite frankly, I just don't care. I have gay friends, relatives, have had gay teachers, instructors, professors, etc.
    So, what I'm curious about is - why does it draw such a heated debate? Any takers??

    Posted on March 10, 2010 @ 12:42 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3437432 

    0
    0

    Chris Kempling says...

    It's ironic that most gays don't want to marry (there were some interesting anti marriage editorials in Extra newspaper prior to the law change), mainly because they see it as a hetero institution foreign to their lifestyle choices. Not only that, in places where they've had ss marriage for a while (Sweden, Holland) the divorce rate is higher than for heterosexuals. Canadians never had a chance to vote on this issue. In all 31 states, even "liberal ones" like Oregon, California and Michigan, ss marriage proposals have been defeated. I wish Canadians would have had the same chance.

    Posted on March 10, 2010 @ 11:31 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3437424 

    0
    0

    J J says...

    Menthelius,

    I'm moving so I won't dedicate more time to this. When you read the critique of Bruce Bagemihl's work you'll see that the critic doesn't disagree with his positions on homosexuality in nature. He disagrees that animals have sex for pleasure and procreation is an unexpected. I suppose for homosapiens it's more unwanted ya? So good try dismissing a gentlemens life work by skimming through an article.

    I truly think that in this case, respectfully, you're dodging my question. You're sticking to "prove it." Well since one can't ask one of the numerous animals whom have been observed to display homosexual tendencies "hey..you gay?" We're at an impasse.

    You mention that Bagemihl's work goes against Darwin and his theory one of the most respected.

    Well how could you, or anyone, beleive Darwin? His ideas about Evolution are also not proven, they are based off of his observances on the Galapogos Islands.

    You're using the same arguement against me that skeptics use against Darwins Theory of Evolution, but then tell me how great Darwin is (which he is, BTW!)

    It's still just a theory and no one can prove it. We trust his observances in nature.

    Even more puzzling is the fact that in one breath you mention religion and another Darwin and Evolution. These can not coexist peacefully for any devout beleiver. The word is either sufficient, or it is not.

    I am not going to discuss religion as that would take this subject much further off track than it already is.

    I'm in my 30's for the record (oil of olay twice a day) and prefer to use ebsco host and through a friend Lexus nexus which search through full text stories in print.

    In a debate I'd be sure to use only print materials.

    I must work. You've been the most entertaining one I've exchanged with here.

    Ciao

    Posted on March 10, 2010 @ 7:20 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3437378 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    "JJ" this is why I have a problem with people who constantly refer to their sources on the internet, expecially Wikipedia since I just entered the definition of menthelius there, now it's a FACT since it's on the internet....

    Posted on March 9, 2010 @ 8:48 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3428145 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Just a curious question for ya "JJ", why do you discount religion when it comes to this topic? Over 90% of the WORLD POPULATION BELIEVES, who are you to tell them they're all wrong?

    Some form of "god" is worshipped by several billion people around the world, yet you seriously expect to prove them all wrong?

    My, my, I forgot what it was like to be 20-something and know everything! The sheer arrogance of the statement amazes me...

    Posted on March 9, 2010 @ 8:40 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3428143 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    "moonriver" I read your post with interest, in fact so much so that I reviewed your previous posts and find a great fallacy in your statement of "valid, rational facts and thoughts", I refer to the posts you made at 6:22pm, 12:31 pm, and 10:28pm.

    In none of those posts do I read any actual FACTS, I do see a lot of opinions, which is a world apart from your later statement...

    Posted on March 9, 2010 @ 8:21 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3428134 

    0
    0

    Colour Me Curious says...

    How curious that an editorial sparks such a "debate" in comments. Some interesting points made by almost all contributors.

    My main concern then would be what steps the government intends to take to ensure that all citizens are provided information regarding their rights, whether these citizens be long time residents or new-comers to Canada. I was under the impression that those in political power should be there to represent ALL the peoples within this great country.

    Times do change, change is inevitable. Even after perusing the comments left previously, the changes are demonstrated. We see opinions from several generations which is always good because we cannot change unless we know different ways of thinking and seeing things. Unfortunately I also see a demonstration of resistance and a mix of a sort of arrogance in some people's desires to attempt to share their viewpoint.

    Sharing and exchanging ideas and opinions is fine, but name-calling and attempting to manipulate by pushing buttons should not be part of the exchange. A debate is not a debate if there is no common sense shown on common ground, it then becomes akin to a game of King of the Mountain complete with immature taunts.

    On a completely different note I am not entirely clear as to why JJ choses to compare homosexuality with gay penguins. It was mentioned in the editorial itself homosexuality was decriminalized about 40 years ago and I'm faaairly certain homosexuality was around (if not as vocal as today) a lot longer than 40 years ago. Instead of debating what is natural or not, perhaps a look into human history would be in order as I fail to see how gay penguins reflect human society.

    After all, let us not forget in far ancient times it was not uncommon for warriors to take on same sex partners for companionship and can be found referenced in historical records in countries such as Japan, Greece, Sparta too I believe. Thousands of years of history and same sex relations were around and the human race continued...Strange eh?

    Well that's my but...I may or may not check this thread again...but until then...color me curious.

    Posted on March 9, 2010 @ 12:15 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3428116 

    0
    0

    Moonriver says...

    Menthelius, I try to argue my points of view with valid, rational facts and thoughts, if you care to present a counter, please do, I would be very interested and not at all intolerant. However, I find juvenille rants and silly name calling counterproductive and hard to take seriously.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 11:38 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3428110 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Just a last thought before I try to crash for the night, "JJ" you mentioned on another post that you're the host of a radio show (like Leo?), so my question is really simple (and lazy when I think about it): what station, what show, and what time?

    If you've got the "sand" for it.

    I'll give your show a listen, if I like what I hear then sure we can have a debate.

    Night.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 11:12 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3428107 

    0
    0

    J J says...

    You're referring to Gert Korthof's critique no less of said book.

    Ok, I'll go into research mode.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 10:52 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3428106 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Checked out your link "JJ", highly informative for the national enquirer crowd, the scientist responsible for the study is not highly reputed and disbelieves the Darwin theory of Evolution which is the most widely accepted theory in the civilized world.

    You spoke earlier of your extensive travels and life experiences, care to offer some details?

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 10:37 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3428103 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    My point comparing the 2 topics "moonriver" is that you are intolerant yourself towards people who disagree with you on topics close to your heart, you demand to be heard, your opinion voiced.

    I also have an opinion and I use my democratic rights to voice that opinion, I do not preach hate towards others and I believe in the principles of civilization (talk first, fight later, ugh).

    I try not to be intolerant towards others, I do certainly disagree with ideas and will attempt to disprove their theories, but that does not mean I'm attacking the person. I think if you really look at past posts, I almost never open an attack on a person or insult that person first, occasionally yes if I think the person is way off base, but generally speaking I will answer an insult with an insult, QUID PRO QUO. Don't attack me and I won't attack you is an unofficial guideline I use.

    When you get right down to it, all of us are expressing our opinions. You cannot prove or disprove a single theory yourself, unless you have personally experienced the event you are talking on (touch, taste, hear, see), everything else is pure heresy.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 10:30 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3428102 

    0
    0

    J J says...

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg16321985.000-queer-creatures.html?page=1


    The offer stands to anyone who would like to have a debate regarding equal rights in Canada.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 10:12 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3428100 

    0
    0

    Moonriver says...

    Actually Mentalithius, I have read ALL information concerning ACC including their info and MOE, including the permit, plus independant info from other scientists and cities, and attended forums and writtens letters, have you?
    Yes, you are correct (not sure why you equate these 2 topics?) I oppose the ACC incinerator and I am in favour of equal rights for gay people.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 9:26 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3428095 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Actually "JJ" reminds me of this wet-behind-the-ears 19 year old that I used to work with, telling me how to raise my children because somehow he knew everything about raising children. The guy couldn't keep a girlfriend longer than a couple weeks because he couldn't keep the old p****r in his pants, but somehow he knew everything about everything.

    Funny thing is he lived with a couple of pretty cool gay guys (couple), I got along pretty good with them (very emphatic), but was always turned off when they started necking in front of me. I mean I understand their sexual orientation, but thought it slightly rude to be so blatant in front of guests. A kiss is one thing, groping and sticking tongues down throats is something you save for the privacy of your own bedroom!

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 8:43 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3428093 

    0
    0

    noidear says...

    Blah-blah-blah "JJ". You're like a one-man army of insults for anyone who doesn't agree with you completely. Just for the record, since you obviously can't read between any lines, I have no problem with gay marriage or any type of gay rights afforded to gay couples. Whatever. Each to their own, which, uh, would be nice. No, I have a problem with the flaunting of the sexuality, any sexuality for that matter. What are we, animals? One reason I probably haven't checked out MTV in about 20 years or a pride parade ever. Cheers.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 8:09 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3428090 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    I hope that's an old photo of you on Facebook "JJ", otherwise I feel pretty silly arguing with some 20-something that doesn't have a clue beyond the point of his nose.

    A wannabe rockstar, eh?

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 6:56 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3426491 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    "moonriver" makes some pretty amazing arguments (not) considering the fact you're adamantly opposed to ACC before even hearing the pitch.

    Pretty close-minded.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 6:41 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3425422 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Well "JJ" you've made a lot of accusations and constantly refer to your "sand", yet you have changed your user name on more than one occasion which leads me to believe you are a little facetious yourself.

    Regarding your "question" on "gay penguins", I ask again where is your proof? I know from reading and researching the issue myself that many of the studies conducted were based on false grounds, biased observation, and general appeasement of the masses (using doctored information to fit the study's predetermined results before researchers even hit the field).

    You accuse me of name-calling, but you forget your own quotes are on record, your constant derogatory comments, your insulting method of changing others' user names, etc, etal.

    You don't like the current method of debate? Why? Because you want to forcefully impose your views in a shouting match?

    I've been to debates before, don't waste my time with your rooster struting. See you at the ACC debate Joey if you have the "sand" to do it, I've got a big bucket...

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 6:39 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3425231 

    0
    0

    Moonriver says...

    I hear ya J.J., and of course you are perfectly correct that archaic, homophobic arguments based on fear, insecurity, resentment and religious dogma would fail miserably in a education-based setting against a factual, well-presented, cited argument. Child's play. But of course the ridiculous thing is that in this day and age in an educated, developed country, there would even be a need for such a debate.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 6:22 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3423405 

    0
    0

    J J says...

    A debate would be between you and I.

    There can be questions from the audience. They are allowed to ask questions regarding your beliefs and you'll be expected to respond. The same would be for me.

    Regarding name calling, i've noticed that you, more than anyone else from what I've read, tend to use foul language. 

    Regarding proof... I am not going to get into research mode for this forum anymore If you're not willing to follow up with it yourself, as it's a waste of my time. You've yet to address my question regarding homosexuality in nature and whether you feel that gay penguins make the choice to be that way. (we'll just say that more than one species of animal which has been studied in great detail has been shown to exhibit homosexual tendencies.)

    Just because you don't know the information or trust, or beleive it...doesn't make it false. What you've been doing is the equivalent of plugging your ears and going "lalalala." 

    Noidear... What a perfect name you've chosen. It leaves no doubt for any of us reading how you contribute to forums. Our whole society revolves around genitals have you not turned on Muchmusic abd watched all the pop-tarts (straight, no less) gyrate and moan wearing similar outfits you'd find at any gay pride parade? Furthermore, if you don't want to go a pride parade, don't go. 

    Sheesh. 

    So I'll challenge anyone here to a debate regarding equality or other gay related issues. Remember there are no gay rights (which I know of) that aren't already afforded to heterosexuals.

    Gay people having equal rights doesn't take away anyone elses rights.

    Life experience and travel have given me the thirst to learn more about people and my surroundings and seek to include more people...not exclude.

    I've made the challenge. Naturally you'll want the last word.

    It appears the balls are in my court.

     

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 6:05 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3423334 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    By the by "ross" you can't have it both ways, if natives standing up for their rights are according to you "not whining", than why do you slam the hetrosexual institutions and way of life? You've been quite vocal in the past about the matter, maybe you and "thinkly" have something going?

    You're both hypocrites who change your user names regularly it seems.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 5:51 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3422693 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Let's see how the debate on ACC goes, if half the crazies show up there that regularly post here, there would be no point.

    Informed opinions are like common sense, not very common and trust me I have more important things in life to do than listen to someone rant and rave endlessly (most debates I've actually attended end up in name-calling and insults with little results after 3 or 4 hours).

    As for anecdotal stories, those are called "life experiences" and you don't learn them out of books (school of hard knox).

    Where exactly did "JJ" post all of his proof? Where did "JJ" list all his information, his scientific evidence?

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 5:41 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3421864 

    0
    0

    noidear says...

    Yep, Skyrocket nailed it. Being gay seems to mean that one has a license to commit lewd acts in public and have their entire life revolve around their genitals. And we're just supposed to accept that. Okay, whatever floats your boat, but I'm sure if being gay weren't about being so overtly sexual by nature then more people would be more tolerant. I should mention that gay people in long term monogomous relationships are totally cool in my books.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 5:34 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420792 

    0
    0

    J J says...

    The point of debate is to provide the audience two perspectives on a given topic and allow them the chance to make their own informed opinion.

    If there are people who agree with you, they may get a chance to see an alternative viewpoint which will be carefully researched and footnoted.

    Anyone who agrees with my position will be able to hear your thoughts and I've not seen you provide more than anecdotal info so perhaps you might want to do some research as well.

    I'd even provide a list of works cited so they could do their own research.

    Also it would give people a chance to put a face to the name.


    What do you have to lose? Besides the debate?

    It could be anyone who reads this. I'll be glad to go toe to toe intellectually.

    I have the sand to do it.

    Any takers?

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 5:31 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420791 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    What would be the point? People will trot out the same tired arguments based on half-cooked science, skewered studies, etc.

    My POV will remain the same on the subject as it has for the past 40 years, you know, "can't teach an old dog new tricks" (no offense to the dog lovers and trainers out there who know better). Plus I think it's too late for me to come out of the closet, I've lost the key and someone turned off the lights in here! Help! I'm trapped in a closet and can't find my way out!

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 4:26 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420783 

    0
    0

    J J says...

    I'll propose a debate on this if anyone would like? We could see if a department of the University would host it. I'm sure we could find a suitable moderator.

    Any takers? This way someone would have to do actual research and present their points in a fair and moderated way and allow for rebuttal and counter points.

    Let me know.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 3:13 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420754 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Ya know, I should have left before the crazies showed up.

    "skyrocket" you hit the nail on the head!

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 2:53 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420751 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    "ross" got beat up by a bunch of nerds in school, explaining the inferiority complex he has, feel pity for the wittle man...

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 2:51 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420750 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Hey "ross", hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahhahahaha (so sorry the keyboard must be stuck).

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 2:44 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420749 

    0
    0

    Skyrocket says...

    I had to do a maintenance job inside a non-heterosexual bar. At the front door was a sign informing me that this was a "lesbian and gay" bar. The words of caution that came attached with that.."Events which occur inside may prove to be Offensive to some persons. Please do not enter if you will be offended!" Not knowing exactly what they might be talking about, I entered,.so to speak! Now inside were mostly women,.pretty sure,..who appeared to be involved in various stages of amorous contact, fondling, touching,..you know,..generally sexual contact. Now,..if we,..that being heterosexual customers were to become involved in the same type of contacts,..we would be told to get a room or be asked to leave, as this was a public place! Talk about your double standard,..and you want and demand our "respect?"

    Just as they do on "gay pride" parades, these folks appear to take pride in exposing their genitalia or as close as they can get to exposing their genitalia in public, no matter who is watching, and in particular children.

    What is with that? We are constantly hearing the stories about these folks afraid to come out of the closet!

    My advise to you folks,..you should never have gone into the closet!

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 12:33 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420732 

    0
    0

    Moonriver says...

    This editorial is right on, and I hope embodies the beliefs of the majority of Canadians (which polls show it indeed does). Most educated, rational citizens do embrace equality and do not feel fear, hatred or resentment towards fellow human beings based on their sex, race, age or sexual orientation.
    Kenney was wrong and should be held accountable.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 12:31 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420731 

    0
    0

    Ross says...

    Here's a link for you, but make sure your die say it's favorable.

    http://www.kamloopsnews.ca/article/20100306/KAMLOOPS0302/303069991/-1/KAMLOOPS0302/anti-gay-bias-taints-first-impression#art_comments

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 12:30 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420730 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Ignorance is your strongpoint, stay with it "ross" and I'll keep laughing AT YOU! LOL!

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 12:21 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420727 

    0
    0

    Ross says...

    It is you Mr D&D that has misunderstood just about everything in existence.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 12:16 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420726 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    "ross" you either can't read OR just prefer to ignore the natural order of life/nature...

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 10:59 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420701 

    0
    0

    Ross says...

    menthelius says...

    Nature made me the way I am, evolution chose my course, morality guides my mind.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 10:02 am PST

    So, you didn't choose to be straight?

    Then why would you think anyone chose their sexual orientation? Why would anyone choose to be ridiculed and treated like a pariah?

    Probably because, they didn't have a choice.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 10:55 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420700 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Y'all want a ref-erundum on ACC, but there was never one on "gay rights", "gay marriage", "gay adoption", etc, etal.

    You preach quite regularly on the "rights" of everyone and on democracy, but yet the hetro population is denied this basic right when our way of life is attacked.

    You call people bigots, racist, prejudiced and deny them their voice when "gay" issues come up. Where are my rights to protect my way of life? Oh I forgot I'm a white male hetrosexual and don't qualify!

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 10:36 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420695 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Oh that's rich coming from you "moonriver"!

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 10:30 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420694 

    0
    0

    Moonriver says...

    It's an interesting phenomenon, how most homophobics are either religious zealots or very insecure in their own sexuality. I just don't get why they are so threatened. No one is saying THEY have to be gay. It in NO way erodes their way of life. If you find a gay parade offensive, don't go. If 2 people who are in love want to marry, why should you feel so angry?

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 10:28 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420693 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    "irem22" I have never tried to hide my disdain for the homo-choice, I simply stated that I have observed a gay-pride parade and not prevented my attitudes from keeping an open mind.

    Of course I find the homo-lifestyle to be distasteful and I disagree with it, as well as, a dead-end on the evolutionary chain.

    As regarding families, I live in a normal family by my definination, and that's the only one that matters in my family!

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 10:25 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420692 

    0
    0

    lrem22 says...

    Wow, how a comment on the charter of rights can lead to this.
    As the world evolves and changes so do rights, charters and constitutions that were written at a time when we still said doth and thou. And so they should.
    Grouchy, there was a time, not to long ago when even common-law, heterosexual couples did not have the same rights as married couples. It had to be enshrined in law before changes were made and when we consider that half of the country is now in common-law, it is a good thing it was.
    There was a time when Chinese citizen, born and raised in this country were taxed differently because they were Chinese, until it became enshrined in law, it wasn't changed.
    Women couldn't vote or attend univeristy in our country until it became enshrined in law that they could and things were changed.
    Methelius, love is what constitutes a family, whether that family has one parent, or four, or gay or straight or bi-racial or same race, as long as their is love. Furthermore, if one of your children was homosexual, would you love them any different. Also, having gay friends and seeing a gay parade does not hide your obvious disdain for homosexuality.
    JJ, I totally agree with you. As the world changes so must the rights and freedoms.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 10:14 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420689 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Nature made me the way I am, evolution chose my course, morality guides my mind.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 10:02 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420686 

    0
    0

    Ross says...

    So menthelius, when did you choose to be straight?

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 9:50 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420679 

    0
    0

    J J says...

    Hahaha

    awesome.

    The well has gone dry on this one.

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 7:58 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420656 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Of course everyone KNOWS that everything you read on the internet is the gospel truth.

    Everything you watch on tv is real too!

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 7:55 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420654 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Yes I guess if you have no proof you might as well tell people to do their own research, waste their time instead of your own.

    First it's 400 species, then it's 1500 species, next you'll tell me the whole world is really just waiting to come out of the closet...

    It is SO obvious to me now, really I've just been searching for the right soulmate to see my species die out, I'm a woman trapped in a man's body, somebody help me!

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 7:52 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420653 

    0
    0

    J J says...

    Respectfully emperor, you can do your own research.

    Don't be afraid to learn.

    Google search terms:

    homosexuality in nature

    when you read about it (one source states that actually over 1500 animals have shown homosexual tendencies) I'd like to know if you think gay animals choose to be gay because they hate Jesus?

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 7:30 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420643 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Certainly NOT! Regarding your suggestion concerning homosexuals being a seperate species, they are quite obviously human (homo sapien). I still stand with my comments earlier however, stating that homosexuality is a CHOICE made by people and having nothing to do with genetics (false claims made by homosexuals in an attempt to gain wider acceptance).

    Again about the animals? Where is the proof? Where is the well-documentated studies and case examples, who are the scientists? An unproven theory does not a fact make...

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 7:16 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420637 

    0
    0

    J J says...

    Menthelius,

    What you're suggesting is that homosexuals are a species unto themselves. Profound indeed. My feeling is that homosexuality is a genetic variant like left handedness or web toes, albinoism etc.

    That said, back to my question:

    since homosexuality has been observed in wild animals, do you think gay penguins are a product of an over beating mom and a distant father? Is the bi sexuality observed in primate a case of free will gone awry? Or just a case of "monkey see, monkey do?"

    e tu Emperor?

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 7:10 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420634 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Yeah I've been tempted to say many "not nice things" to several people, usually my better sense prevents me...

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 7:01 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420630 

    0
    0

    Joe says...

    Well put, JJ. I was tempted to say not nice things about someone that had better things to do umpteen posts ago, but thought better of it.....

    Posted on March 8, 2010 @ 5:49 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3420622 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Interesting point about nature creating homosexuals to curb the population expolosion, I doubt there is any proof to such a thing mind you.

    As for the state of marriage, I agree, too many people think of it as a piece of paper to be ripped up when times are tough! Personally I've been with the same woman for almost 20 years, we've had our ups/downs, our fights, the nights on the couch, we've also been blessed with healthy children (thank GOD) who are somewhat accident prone (aahhhh!) and many good times.

    We work through our problems and keep going on the same track together, as we promised each other when we were married and pray to God that neither of us falls off!

    Again though, it raises my point that homosexuality cannot procreate to ensure the continuation of the species, thus nature is not involved with the lifestyle of homosexuality as it is entirely a fabrication of mankind/womankind.

    Posted on March 7, 2010 @ 11:37 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420581 

    0
    0

    liloldlady says...

    Hey guys, look at the big picture. We are living a population explosion on this planet. We might be having a food shortage in our lifetime... Maybe nature is creating more homosexuals to curb over-population? Then there is the question of the sanctity of mariage. What is so saintly as to make a solemn promise to God and all your friends to stay with your spouse till death and then a few years later they might say:"We've had enough, we were only kidding we're splitting." Did Jesus not say: between a man and a woman and also "what God has united, man should not seperate" You seem to forget that part when speaking of "the sanctity" of mariage.

    Posted on March 7, 2010 @ 11:24 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420580 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    And before anyone gets really upset, I'll confess that some people think my opinion is s**t and have said so to my face as is their right!

    Hell! Sometimes my opinion is full of it, that's the great thing about opinions, mine always smells like roses...

    Posted on March 7, 2010 @ 11:05 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420579 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    "definition of natural is: existing in or formed by nature"

    An interesting point to be sure, are you suggesting that homosexuality is natural? How do homosexuals ensure the survival of the species when they cannot create life?

    Nature abhors a vacuum, which is why homosexuality is not natural and is in no way part of nature!

    Can't argue with the facts jack.

    Posted on March 7, 2010 @ 10:58 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420578 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Yes and EVOLUTION has proven that homosexuality is most definitely a DEAD END, an inability to propagate means a death of species.

    As for all the examples of homosexuality in nature, it's a joke that has NEVER been proven scientifically (no matter what version of the national enquirer you read) as a racial trait in any animal species.

    As for telling the gays what to do, I have never done so, but I understand that you like to put words in other people's mouths so you can look morally superior (another joke). Standard practice from you and not unexpected, just disappointing.

    Regarding opinions, "Just like a**h***s, everyone has an opinion, and some of them are full of s**t" (not an exact quote, but I'm sure you get the point).

    Again however, you have the right to air your opinion just like me, more power to us all!

    Posted on March 7, 2010 @ 10:53 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420577 

    0
    0

    J J says...

    Ugh and why does my phone keep auto correcting you're in the wrong intended use!

    Posted on March 7, 2010 @ 10:10 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420576 

    0
    0

    J J says...

    The definition of natural is:

    existing in or formed by nature.

    There's over 400 species of animals which have exhibited all the characteristics of homosexuality (minus the penchant for fabulous parties.)  

    Is it your contention that these animals existing in nature are choosing to be gay? Are those gay penguins just a product of a distant father and overbearing mother? Are the gay dolphins living in sin because they hate Jesus? To say it's not natural to be gay is pretty close minded. You have the right to say it.

    If people want to have straight pride parades, fly at it. Do what those who got pride parades off the ground did.

    They thoughtfully lobbied governments in power and were granted their request. 

    You have the right under the charter to freedom of expression but you do not have the right to tell a gay person what they can or can't do, regardless of where they do it (provided it's not on your private property.) 

    To say so would mean that you feel you're more equal under the charter. The heart of the charter is that I'm just as good as you are and deserve all the rights and protections regardless of my race, creed, blah, blah, and blah.

    So all of your anecdotal pedantic ongoings about your experiences with the gays doesn't give your opinion any clout. You're opinions, menthelius, are the intellectual equivalent of hanging around the emperor as he shows off his new clothes.

    Sure you're confident...but everyone sees right through it.

    My knowledge comes from reading a lot of other sources but that's the only way people truly learn. I try and be sure that if I'm going to discuss a topic, I have an idea of what I'm talking about and a few footnotes.

    Posted on March 7, 2010 @ 10:06 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420575 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" is another quote of Voltaire (amongst thousands).

    The library has a quote up as well, sorry I can't remember it exactly, but something like letting you do your own thinking (could probably look it up online, but I have better things to do).

    I got a million of em folks and "JJ" just like facts, quotes can be taken any way you please, to say whatever you can't say out of your own knowledge...

    Posted on March 7, 2010 @ 8:57 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420572 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    And people, just save that crap about homos being genetic, it is NOT a fact and it has NEVER been proven by science!

    Posted on March 7, 2010 @ 8:51 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420571 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Well since people seem to be up in arms about this, let's stoke the fire...

    WHY should my tax-dollars go towards supporting a group that is trying to erode my way of life? WHAT you do in the privacy of your bedroom is your own business, when you do it in public it becomes my business simply because someone elses viewpoint is forced upon me! Anybody actually been to a "gay pride parade"? Go to Vanc and see what actually goes on, if it was me and my buddies doing a "hetro pride parade" we would be arrested doing the things that the gays do!

    As for equal rights, marriage is a union between a man and woman, all you nutcases out there can save your breath trying to reform me cause it ain't goin' happen!

    Same sex adoption? Looks like child abuse to me! How can any child anywhere grow up normally when they're exposed to such perversion?

    Really I have nothing against gays doing what they want, so long as they don't force me into their warped little world.

    Before the nutcases get here let me say that some of my better friends have been gay, I have viewed a gay pride parade, and gays have tried to pick me up before (kinda weird feeling there). So yes I have kept an open mind towards people of different lifestyles, I just don't accept that it's normal.

    Posted on March 7, 2010 @ 8:49 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420570 

    0
    0

    J J says...

    I agree with this editorial.

    I had planned to write a letter about it but then Beth Johnson caught my attention with her tripe about our God
    fearing English speaking country being insulted.

    People who come to Canada will find out that they will attain freedom of expression under the charter. Depending on their country of origin, keeping in mind there are countries which still execute homosexuals, it's vital that our government keep these bullet points in the paperwork.

    I enjoy a good alternative viewpoint as much as the next guy. It pains me when said alternative viewpoint comes from a lack of understanding and a cold shoulder to rational thought.

    It's cliche now to say it but if these were different times and we wanted to remove references to the role that women played in securing their own rights would grouchy, ben, and menthilius be spouting off about how these broads pushing their agenda should stop?

    We live in a changing world and really..in the long run we will move a more accepting society. However it's striking that there is an arguement in play with one side fighting to exclusivity...rather than inclusivity. What's more
    striking is that the context is immigration. We want to include new people into our country and by doing so they need to understand that we include everyone as equals.

    These boards remind me of my favorite Voltaire quote:

    "I have never made but one prayer
    to God, a very short one:
    'O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.'
    And God granted it."

    j

    Posted on March 7, 2010 @ 7:53 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3420566 

    0
    0

    Moonriver says...

    Ben, I will gladly defend your right of free speech to declare your homophobic views. I just don't believe it should be in any government literature, or rather views on equality removed from.

    Posted on March 6, 2010 @ 10:54 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3413377 

    0
    0

    missprint says...

    I happen to agree with this editorial too. Does Kenney think he can change reality by omitting things he doesn't personally agree with? I suspect if this information was in the previous version of the study guide his remarks that there is no longer any room is completely bogus.

    Grouchy - as for suggesting that homosexuals and same-sex couples don't require legislation to protect their rights, give your head a shake. Of course they require and deserve that kind of protection, perhaps moreso than many other segments of the population. Homophobes like Kenney would love to backtrack and take those rights away.

    BenDover - I don't know what it is but you seem to love to denigrate anyone that disagrees with YOU. Moonriver hardly comes across as a "queen" given the fact she makes it pretty clear she is typically on the side of the underdog and all for equal rights and freedom of speech. Have your say Ben, but must you resort to dismissing those you happen to disagree with not to mention the name calling? Keep it up and maybe you will become a lone voice in these forums. What fun would that be?

    Posted on March 6, 2010 @ 9:20 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3413374 

    0
    0

    BenDover says...

    Give it a rest, moon. Who died and made you Queen. Apparently there isn't room in YOUR Canada for a difference of opinion. Menthellus is right.(btw, is their any mention of Freedom Of Speech in that Charter ?)

    Posted on March 6, 2010 @ 5:53 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3409835 

    0
    0

    Moonriver says...

    I agree 110% with this editorial. There is no room for bigotry, sexism, racism or homophobia in our government. Kenney should be removed. We have a Charter of rights and freedoms, perhaps all members of government should read it.
    This is an embarrassment.
    A separation of church and state is paramount.

    Posted on March 6, 2010 @ 5:39 pm PST | Report post to Editor | 3409325 

    0
    0

    menthelius says...

    Way to go Kenney!

    That comment will either
    a) really set the crazies off
    b) condemn me to hell

    Oh well, sucks to be straight hetrosexual sometimes (no pun intended, but funny anyway).

    Posted on March 6, 2010 @ 9:44 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3409066 

    0
    0

    BenDover says...

    People agree on certain things or they disagree...isn't that what a democracy and freedoms are about ? So why are you, the politically correct and activists always trying to push your views and beliefs as the only correct way to see things ? Seems to me that you only view your side as correct and anyone who disagrees is a homophobic dinosaur and is put down as "intolerant". Rather than go after Canadians, maybe these activists should look at changing the attitudes of other countries and cultures around the world. let me know how that works out for you.

    Posted on March 6, 2010 @ 8:51 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3409053 

    0
    0

    Grouchy says...

    This thing about gay rights has gone to far. If you are gay , then fine, thats what you are. This need of ours to enshrine everything into law has to stop.Why does everyone have to have a piece of the pie once reserved for regular heterosexual marriages ?

    Posted on March 6, 2010 @ 8:26 am PST | Report post to Editor | 3409047 

    Post a comment

    You must be Registered and logged in to post a comment.

    Register or

    The Kamloops Daily News welcomes your opinions and comments. We reserve the right to edit comments for length, style, legality and taste and reproduce them in print, electronic or otherwise. For further information, please contact the editor or publisher.



    About Us | Contact Us | Sitemap / RSS   Glacier Interactive Media: Information and Other Glacier Websites    © Copyright 2009 Glacier Interactive Media | User Agreement & Privacy Policy

    LOG IN



    Lost your password?