反对的举手...同意的也行..

[oread]

For some people, "gay marriage" will always be "gay marriage", not equal to a "traditional marriage", just as the Klansmen will always view blacks as "niggers".

Mentality does change. 10 years ago, this proposal would not have been made possible to be worthy of parliamentary discussion. We have come from anti-gay to accepting-gay to perhaps someday welcoming-gay to indifferent as it's so normal just like having a black co-worker.

I'm curious to know what non-religious Chinese think about this.

BTW, your "we" does not include me, so I'm not sure who you were referring to as "we".

最初由 ottawa248 发布


That sounds good but irrelevant. I'm not a big fan of the BOOK.

Concept of marriage is similar in different cultural, because marriage is a way that civilians organize their society for good reasons.

Stealing the words "Marriage" doesn't make any sense. Call it something else please.

Why bother to steal the words "Marriage" if homos are so proud of their lifestyle? Their family right can be legalized and protected under "Civic Union", which is clear. What happened is just a dirty political game.

No matter what the law says, we all know it's different. Nobody can deny the fact.

Ironically, the word "guy marriage", which is used by everybody today, clearly indicates it's different.

BTW, let them get married. I will tell you I have a "traditional marriage", my wife is a woman. OK?

 

[oread]

"Dyeing black to white"? I'm going to take your words literally, and take a wild guess: if I'm not mistaken, you don't approve the actions of the KKK, but is your disapproval of gay people's right, their consititutional right, that much different from the Klansmen? By "you", I don't particularly mean you, just those of you who are anti gay marriage.

I'm confused, wasn't it yourself who doesn't want to recognize difference, and to grant equal right to different people?

I didn't think that this gay marriage issue would spark any kind of interest among Chinese, simply because the majority are non-religious. I guess I was wrong.

最初由 ottawa248 发布


Dyeing black to white is not respect. Difference does not mean bad.

Hopefully the word does help them.

 

[young]

支持同性恋结婚:glowface:

 

[z.z.]

I support the same-sex marriage in Canada. One reason is that I have the empathy for the human right of a minority group as being a minority Chinese myself.

 

[z.z.]

I support the same-sex marriage in Canada. One reason is that I have the empathy for the human right of a minority group as being a minority Chinese myself.

 

[z.z.]

I support the same-sex marriage in Canada. One reason is that I have the empathy for the human right of a minority group as being a minority Chinese myself.

 

[haoren1]

There are many brand of wines, but they are all called wine.

What did people drink before cola was invented? I am sure they had other beverages. Also, a large number of people buy diet coke for its health benefits.

最初由 ottawa248 发布


If you put new wine in a old bottle, does the old label make sense?

The right is not protected by a word. Using same word causes confusion and doesn't help.

From now on, the word "marriage" is blur. when I talk about my family, I need to say: my wife is a woman, or you don't get it.

Let them use "marriage" anyway. I will use "traditional marriage" or "Classic marriage" for myself instead.

Coca is not Coca. People don't buy it. People buy "Classic Coca". That's the real coca.

 

[haoren1]

Eloquently put

最初由 渐渐 发布
For some people, "gay marriage" will always be "gay marriage", not equal to a "traditional marriage", just as the Klansmen will always view blacks as "niggers".

Mentality does change. 10 years ago, this proposal would not have been made possible to be worthy of parliamentary discussion. We have come from anti-gay to accepting-gay to perhaps someday welcoming-gay to indifferent as it's so normal just like having a black co-worker.

I'm curious to know what non-religious Chinese think about this.

BTW, your "we" does not include me, so I'm not sure who you were referring to as "we".

 

[oread]

I respect your opinion, and it's not much differnt from my Christian faithed friends and colleagues: they are not anti-gay, they just don't like the word "marriage" to be used on gay, because "marriage" is such a sacred word, and the change of definition would be in conflict with their religious belief.

I'm still a bit curious though: what is in your "non-religious Chinese conservative stone head."? Because for an atheist like me, I really can't see the big fuzz about this word "marriage".

最初由 ottawa248 发布


You may notice what happened to Michel Jackson's skin. It's getting more and more white. It's not rare for minorities to make themselves less different from the majority.

I belive in individualism and natural force. I don't like hokey. It s has negative impact on my social life. But, I don't bother to live the exactly same way as so called majority.

I support legalizing and protecting those people's family right. But, it's not necessary to use the same word "marriage" as majority, because the relationship is different.

I just don't like the word. If the word dose help them live better, I have no more objection. Minorities do need more help.

This kind of decision should' be made by supreme court. There are many ways to recognize people's rights. Radical movement is not good for everybody.

I have a none-religen Chinese conservative stone head.

I Can't speak for "we" or "they", no such word in my vocabulary any more.

 

[oread]

The definition of marriage is restricted to a "union between a man and a woman" solely in the context of Christianity (perhaps other religions as well). Like law, such definition must be narrow by nature, to avoid confusion and to impose absoluteness. That's why I'm less lenient on people without a religion who still oppose gay marriage. As I keep asking for the reason from those who aren't religious but who are indeed opposed to the gay marriage issue to come forward and clarify on their rationale but got no answer so far, I have to conclude that there is a difference, a difference between a religion person whose belief constrains him/her from accepting the new definition of marriage, and a non-religious person who's flat-out anti-gay.

If your father can't understand your hypothetically gay son, then it's your father's problem, not your son's, correct? You can't place blame on someone for who they are, and gay people are born gay, it's not a lifestyle, that's simply who they are. Then why would you want to impose the burden on your son? There are far more dangerous problems facing our youth than being homosexual, problems like drug addiction, alcoholics, smoking have far greater nuisance on the well-being of the youth than being homosexual, if you'd call that a nuisance at all.

If I tell you today that you can't be "married" simply because you are Chinese, you can be "civic unioned" though, but cannot be "married", how would you feel? Is this minority (Chinese) that much different from that minority (the gay people)?

Really think about it, what exactly are you asking for?

 

[FallColor]

Very Funny!!!
I am for equality and equal rights for everybody!!!
Exactly for this reason I am opposed the changing of the definition marriage.
Gay people have their own definition of marriage. So do I !!! My definition of marriage is between a man and a woman. Our definition of marriage are different.
Since, me and gay people are equal, then why should I change my definition of marriage to accomadate their definition of marriage???
It's absolutely unfair!!!Think about it!!!

 

[oread]

Nobody forces you to participate in this discussion, right? I asked a fair question, and if you don't want to or unable to answer it, that's fine with me. I just wanted to give you a chance to properly explain your reasonings before passing my judgements. If this question is too hard for you to answer, then I'll just pass on my judgements.

I used "law" to compare to religion, because of its narrow definitions and the assumed nature of absoluteness. Although Chinese culture is complex, and no one is denying that, it is however loosely defined. In other words, we do not have a set of clearly defined "rules" if you will at our disposal. The word "culture" refers to the "totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought." (dictionary.com). If you allow me to continue my example of comparing law to religion, then a culture is more like morality, a loosely defined common understanding, subject to each person's interpretation.

Society is changing indeed, but why shouldn't the traditional definition of marriage change accordingly?

 

[oread]

Unfortunately, in a democratic country, the majority rules. And that's a problem with democracy: like any system, it cannot satisfy everyone, only the majority of people, therefore minority rights are often being ignored.

Again back to my question: should the constitution supersede religion?

最初由 FallColor 发布
Very Funny!!!
I am for equality and equal rights for everybody!!!
Exactly for this reason I am opposed the changing of the definition marriage.
Gay people have their own definition of marriage. So do I !!! My definition of marriage is between a man and a woman. Our definition of marriage are different.
Since, me and gay people are equal, then why should I change my definition of marriage to accomadate their definition of marriage???
It's absolutely unfair!!!Think about it!!!

 

[FallColor]

最初由 渐渐 发布
Unfortunately, in a democratic country, the majority rules. And that's a problem with democracy: like any system, it cannot satisfy everyone, only the majority of people, therefore minority rights are often being ignored.

Again back to my question: should the constitution supersede religion?

Yes, I understand that nothing is perfect. I am for democracy and majority rules.

But, in this case, is it really majority rule??? It was decided by the court. It wasn't decided by the Canadian people.There wasn't a referendum! It was a fallout of political parties trying to gain a favorable image of being progressive.

On issue like this, let's have a referendum, let the people decide.
Let the majority rule, let a democratic country be Really democratic!!!

It is not rational, not fair and not democratic!!!

 

[FallColor]

最初由 渐渐 发布

Society is changing indeed, but why shouldn't the traditional definition of marriage change accordingly?

Yes, there are things that can be change and need to be change.
However, should everything be change???
Let's say, we as human must eat, can we change to not to eat or change to like animal...to eat grass?
Not everything is changeable.