(01-16-2012, 12:45 PM)k0ala link Wrote: basically the president of canadia said all gay marriages were now annulled.

some people think this is a big deal, which it is

and they're talking about it a lot

which annoys some people

who draw cartoons about it

Quote:To spare you an unwanted nap, here’s what I understand in the utmost of brevity: A couple from the UK got married in Canada and then later decided they wanted a divorce. When it comes to divorce and other matters of legal consequence, though, it turns out that Canadian law requires that the couple’s marriage be recognized in their country of citizenship. A lawyer with the Department of Justice, arguing on behalf of the government, thus declared that the couple’s same-sex marriage is not legally recognizable in this case, and was therefore never valid in the first place. This, he extended, means that virtually all other same-sex marriages issued to foreigners are likewise invalid.

A poo tempest followed.

Quote:Thus, the position of this one, faceless government lawyer was that a certain foreign lesbian couple — a Briton and an American — who had wed in Canada in 2005 and now wished to return to Canada to divorce, were not really married in Canada at all, since neither of their home countries’ recognized the validity of their Canadian marriage.

If this sounds like a fairly arcane, lawyerly argument, it’s because it is. But it’s also precedent, and has long been applied to couples of all nationalities, gay or straight, who trope around the world getting married under wildly different laws than their own countries recognize. This particular lesbian couple appeared to be pressing the point mostly for self-gain; they were demanding $30,000 in damages from Canada’s “discriminatory” marriage laws that had the audacity to demand they live in Canada in order to stay married in Canada and eventually gain the right to divorce in Canada.

Well, God help you if you were a Canadian on Facebook or Twitter this Thursday. Endless LGBT blogs seized on the Globe story, rephrased and summarized it a few times, and then churned out scandalous headlines about how “gay marriage was under attack in Canada” and how the Harper government was finally showing its true colours and eroding one of the hallmarks of the Canadian liberal order. Good old Dan Savage, who I am getting more than a little tired of, weighed in immediately, declaring that he and his partner — who had gotten married in Vancouver — were automatically “divorced last night” thanks to Harper. A Baltimore lesbian was apparently “in tears” over the news, according to a CBC story with a wonderfully behind-covering headline (“Is same-sex marriage at risk in Canada?”). Within hours, one guy had even churned out this website, apologizing to the whole wide world that Canada had allowed Stephen Harper to take charge. It now has over 18,000 Facebook likes.

Later that afternoon, the controversy eventually made its way to the Prime Minister himself, who repeated the same thing he’s been saying for years and years: his government is not opposed to same-sex marriage and has absolutely no plan to de-legalize it. In an act of good will, the Justice Minister even declared that he would soon introduce legislation to Parliament to undo eons of common-law precedent, and uphold the perpetual international legality of all Canadian marriages performed in Canada, even if the home country doesn’t recognize them and the partners don’t live in Canada. In the words of one legal blog, this is very much the “kind of xenophobic approach [that] offends the principles of international comity and is generally frowned upon.”

(01-16-2012, 07:45 PM)Saxxy link Wrote: You seem very outraged about the outrage.  Or, as the kids would say these days, "umad about theymad"

Anyways, this frog is so small!  How is this possible.

(01-16-2012, 10:10 PM)TheDarkChief link Wrote: [quote author=Saxxy link=topic=2632.msg236826#msg236826 date=1326761156]
You seem very outraged about the outrage.  Or, as the kids would say these days, "umad about theymad"

Anyways, this frog is so small!  How is this possible.

(01-18-2012, 02:59 PM)LT Crow link Wrote: Tuskegee Airmen.

 I can guarantee it has less George Lucas, which in this day in age means, it's better.  

(01-18-2012, 04:41 PM)Kirby the Dick link Wrote: [quote author=LT Crow link=topic=2632.msg237043#msg237043 date=1326916780]
Tuskegee Airmen.

 I can guarantee it has less George Lucas, which in this day in age means, it's better.  

(01-18-2012, 09:04 PM)Sogo Payne link Wrote: [quote author=Kirby the Dick link=topic=2632.msg237056#msg237056 date=1326922880]
[quote author=LT Crow link=topic=2632.msg237043#msg237043 date=1326916780]
Tuskegee Airmen.

 I can guarantee it has less George Lucas, which in this day in age means, it's better.  

(01-18-2012, 09:08 PM)Karth link Wrote: [quote author=Sogo Payne link=topic=2632.msg237090#msg237090 date=1326938672]
[quote author=Kirby the Dick link=topic=2632.msg237056#msg237056 date=1326922880]
[quote author=LT Crow link=topic=2632.msg237043#msg237043 date=1326916780]
Tuskegee Airmen.

 I can guarantee it has less George Lucas, which in this day in age means, it's better.  

(01-19-2012, 04:20 PM)LT Crow link Wrote: wow, mega upload has been busted.  I guess that catchy song didn't help too much. 

(01-19-2012, 04:56 PM)Caffeine link Wrote: [quote author=LT Crow link=topic=2632.msg237167#msg237167 date=1327008013]
wow, mega upload has been busted.  I guess that catchy song didn't help too much.