We already know what Paul Martin thinks, "we simply cannot have two classes of Canadians".
And we know what gay-rights advocates must think. They argued that society must sanction same-sex unions so that the children of same-sex couples do not feel discriminated against. The same argument applies to polygamy.
And we know what the swinging Courts must think, (what, "a one night stand is fine, but commitment is immoral?).
And we know what the Christians who laid the moral foundations of our country think -- but they don't count.
So, it sounds like the next great, unanticipated outcome of the Charter Code in the hands of its secular high-priest interpreters is polygamy.
The only thing left is some fresh celebrations of Canada's tolerance, diversity, and generosity.
It does give fresh meaning to the phrase "a woman's right to choose", though, doesn't it?
2 comments:
While I understand what you're getting at, I'm unclear as to the meaning of this:
"And we know what gay-rights advocates must think -- yes, so that polygamists' children are "equal" to everybody else. "
Sorry, don't get it.
Thank you for a heads-up on a confusing statement.
Same-sex marriage advocates say that children involved in a same-sex relationship suffer if society views a same-sex relationship as less than fully equal to a heterosexual one. They say that society must recognize gay marriage to protect the children associated with a gay relationship.
Logically, the same argument can be used as a reason why society should also feel compelled to recognize polygamy -- so that the children associated with a polygamous relationship do not feel discriminated against.
I'm going to go back into the post to update it. If you read this, let me know if you think I've expressed it clearly. Thanks.
Post a Comment