How 'bout this one?
I am against divorce, unless it is under the most extraordinary circumstances – such as if a man abuses his wife or a woman commits adultery.
Go ahead ... top that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Support Canadian snark!
Syndicate
Blog Archive
-
▼
2006
(2150)
-
▼
July
(190)
- Damian Penny: Just slightly behind the times.
- And by "we," I mean "people other than me."
- Neo-conservatism, in six panels.
- You're just NOW figuring out how this works?
- The entertaining dangers of home schooling.
- A little late to the party.
- Well, THAT didn't last long, did it?
- Religious freedom, in a nutshell.
- The things that happen when you're not paying atte...
- "And if you don't like THOSE principles, hey, I've...
- Well, NOW I won't have to feel guilty about it any...
- This just gets better and better.
- "Me? No, I'm not with those guys. Honest."
- The shamelessness of David Frum.
- The seven habits of highly effective sergeants.
- Blogging Tories Short Takes: July 28, 2006.
- Uh oh ... now things are going to get ugly.
- "Wankersphere! About ... FACE!!"
- "Plan B. We have a Plan B, right?"
- The right-wing love affair with history (relevant ...
- Sorry ... tell me again about the "Angry Left."
- Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
- It's just Damian being Damian.
- Only the names have been changed to protect the gu...
- No good deed goes unpunished.
- That's progress. I guess.
- The joy of having it both ways.
- All civilians are equal but, apparently, some are ...
- A man can only take so much of this, you know.
- You keep using that word "handled" ...
- Apparently, shit happens.
- Burning people alive and feeling good about it.
- Sometimes too stupid for words.
- I'm guessing this still counts as "measured."
- Mission freakin' accomplished!
- Oh, God ... I'm sooooooo confused.
- Oh, THIS should be delightful.
- Attention deficit disorder as a foreign policy.
- If you hate reality, well, there's always the Blog...
- Just slightly behind the curve, as they say.
- Canada tech news: AMD purchases ATI.
- The carping from the peanut gallery.
- The danger of conventional wisdom.
- Softwood victory smackdown! Whoo hoo!
- Hell, no, I don't mind the competition.
- Floyd rocks.
- 10 a.m. delivery, or they're free.
- Not what they meant by "winning hearts and minds."
- Afghanistan: Mission not quite so accomplished.
- Not quite the whole story.
- "You keep using that word 'measured', ..."
- Peter MacKay: Whiny-ass titty baby.
- Stephen. Plane. Anti-aircraft missiles. Some as...
- Oh, those wacky pro-choicers!
- Government surveillance humour, Canadian-style.
- It's just Ann being Ann.
- Don't worry -- that's just Stevie being Stevie.
- Too dumb to even make fun of.
- "You have the right to remain an imbecile ..."
- Then we can airbrush out all the dead people ...
- It's called "synergy." Don't waste it.
- And the creepy parallels continue.
- Another evangelical douchebag for Christ.
- Ironically, they don't even LIKE the Jews.
- Your right-wing line of the day.
- Today's example of terminal, fundy stupidity.
- Canada needs a Ralph Reed.
- Sometimes, a shoulder massage is just a ... hey! ...
- How can you tell when a wanker is lying?
- Those tax-and-spend Conservatives.
- Too-tired-to-give-a-crap open thread.
- Some straight-shootin' shit there, pardner.
- Is Damian Penny the worst blogger in Canada?
- What the f...?
- Anti-Semitism, AIPAC-style.
- That gosh-darned liberal media.
- Nuance? We don' need no steenkin' nuance!
- Oh ... this can't end well.
- Dead Canadians in Lebanon -- let the calls for pol...
- Conservative discourse, as it were.
- Blogging Tories Short Takes: Jul 16, 2006.
- Theological scholarship, as it were.
- You might want to hold off on that cheerleading.
- An affair to not quite remember.
- Gosh darn that liberal media.
- The stupidest man on the planet.
- When your doofusness is out there for all the worl...
- Well, this is timely.
- It's what dreams are made of, isn't it?
- Israel to Bush: Bite me?
- Thinking ahead, CPoC-style.
- There is a God after all, oh, yes.
- Right-wing snark, as it were.
- The fickliness of the trollosphere.
- Proud to be hermetically sealed.
- All animals are equal ...
- Some people have decidedly unhealthy obsessions.
- The thriftiness of the Conservatives ...
- America, I have a dream.
- What you call "unclear on the concept."
-
▼
July
(190)
7 comments:
He's against divorce? Well, at the age of 23, he clearly thinks he still has all the answers.
He's welcome to be against divorce - and not get one. As for the rest of us, he can STFU and stay out of our lives.
He's single right?
Poor little puppy.
Wait til he gets married.
Hang on, wait a minute.
Read the article. This kid is saying 3 important things (although I admit he needs to work on the wording.):
1. He disagrees with divorce, but he would never support legislation banning it.
2. He is using his disagreement with divorce as an analogy; he's showing that just because he disagrees with gay marriage, it doesn't mean he would support a ban on it.
3. He is also saying that until heterosexuals get their own house in order, they have no right to claim that homosexual marriage will 'destroy the institution of marriage'.
Given that the conclusions the kid reaches are ones that most progressives wish right-wingers could get their heads around, let's not be too hard on him. He's actually pointing in the right direction.
Yeah, but then he said in his comments:
Andrew Smith said...
OK, stop the nit-picking, obviously it's wrong if either gender commits adultery. I think adultery should be a criminal offense. I used a man as an example for abuse and a woman for adultery - I was giving equal time to each gender, not letting the other one off.
If he wants to criminalise adultery, I think he'd have no problem criminalising/banning a lot things that don't fit his conservative elitist *snick* world-view.
That boy jest ain't right. I smell home-schooling.
Deanna:
I agree with you to a point, that point unfortunately being the exact one Ti-Guy points out. If someone is willing to criminalize adultery it is not unreasonable to believe they will be in favour of criminalizing other moral/ethical matters based on his spiritual beliefs. Now, if we were in a theocratic society that would be acceptable, but we live in a secular society for our legal/governance structure where theology has no place being. This allows those of us of various Faiths and no Faith at all to be able to live side by side and receive equal treatment/consideration under our laws.
If this blogger had not added that last part in his comments I would not have had any problem with what he said.
It is very dangerous to try and legislate morality and religious doctrines/beliefs into common law, it is also an infringement on the right of each of us to believe or not believe as our own sense of Faith/Spirituality calls us. After all, if God calls to us we should be able to respond in whichever mode that call comes from, be it Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, Shinto, Taoist, Wiccan, whatever. When you legislate a particular religion’s morality as the law all must follow one clearly infringes upon that most basic gift of God (At least according to Christian belief) to man, free will.
Ah, mea culpa. I admit I couldn't be arsed to read the comments.
I thought I was doing well in reading the article.
Post a Comment