Talk about stirring a hornet's nest.

Source 1

Source 2

This is wrong on so many levels.

Got to be quick...

The law is being amended to remedy this loophole.

The US is the most bass-ackwards industrialized nation on this topic. And I fear that if Obama doesn't get off of his ass, or if he loses re-election, and/or if he is succeeded by a Republican, that the US won't see equality until 2025 - 2030 at the earliest.

This is disgusting, totally! Heterophobia gone completely awry!

Why do gay couples get a free divorce, no lawyers required and heteros get to lose half their income on a messy separation that sometimes takes years?

I'm going to take this out on a seal on the coast, rats, a Newfie beat me to that too ...


That's a lot of "asses" on this thread....

Darn Newfies That calls for a "Mooshaed Beer"

While I couldn't care less about the pelt, seal is GOOD eating, especially "chicken fried" as it's called in the US!

Tom

One of my neighbors has a black/white newfie, one of the biggest I've ever seen (and the only bicolor I've seen).

Tom

P.S. I prefer Molson Brador or Labatt's when I drink ethnic beer!

I wonder what Justin Bieber has to say about all this? Isn't he Canada's spokesman these days?

More news, or non-news, from Canada.

Justice dept says everything is just fine.

Me think ,those palface in big TeePee on hill talk with forked tong,Me think

Isn't it a bit of a "much ado about nothing"?

To start with a clarity: I do not mean to say (or imply) that I think in any way that fighting for the rights of everyone to marry if they wish is something other than a worthy fight, but rather the hoopla about whether the marriage was legal or not, and blaming it on Canadian laws.

Two people who are NOT Canadian, who are from someplace where same-sex marriage is not legal, go to Canada to get married. These two individuals do not MOVE to Canada but rather, return someplace to live where same-sex marriage is not a legally recognized union - something which hasn't "magically" changed in the interim either.

So, the question is, if they're NOT legal residents of Canada, and they ARE legal residents of someplace which does not legally recognize same-sex marriages, ARE they legally married? The sensible answer should be no.

And that's where the trouble starts.

YO!! This one is about the Canadians !!!! What's with the rant about the US when it's the friggin' Canadians pulling the reversal. The US Justice Dept. issued that statement BECAUSE the Canadians are now saying they were never legally wed in CANADA. Which is correct, if they were never legally wed then there are no grounds for getting a divorce.

Now then, once the CANADIANS get their act together and decide if those people are or are not legally married in Canada, and IF the CANADIANS decide to pull their heads out of a very dark place and get it right by not reversing all of those weddings AND the US Justice Dept. still says they can't get divorced THEN you have a right to rant about the US

Until then rant about the right friggin' country dude

No! everyone is . But wile Brien Adams is in CH in march ask him

[QUOTE=Dantesheaven;1457648]YO!! This one is about the Canadians !!!! What's with the rant about the US when it's the friggin' Canadians pulling the reversal[/QUOTE"
"Eh" Are you looking for trouble ??

[QUOTE=cannut;1457652] Damn straight...I'll take my lumps when it's deserved, but dang it those Canucks gotta take theirs too

I'm from Michigan...Do you know what the alternate motto is for the State of Michigan ??? "The first line of defense against the Canadians"

[QUOTE=Dantesheaven;1457661] But where moving in from the south ,Florida and California .January or February

actually... not true

http://m.ctv.ca/topstories/20120113/...0113.html#menu

True. But then changed.
Subtle difference.

Gäh.

First off, to those slamming the Canadians, did you not see the links posted earlier? The situation has been clarified, the loophole closed. I've read reports attributing the whole tempest in a teapot to a rogue lawyer acting out of accordance with the current administration's views. Hence the almost-immediate clarification of the issue.

Second, to those wondering why this should even matter to the non-Canadian, non-resident couples wed in Canada - and this is very important:
Many countries and US states recognize marriages performed elsewhere, but do not perform them themselves. Such couples, married in Canada and living in Washington state (for one example) would suddenly be unmarried. As Canada is one of the only places couples can go to be legally married without a permanent residency requirement, this loophole and the original ruling invalidating the marriages would carry enormous consequences for countless couples.

Sure, that is what they would say. "Oh, it was some rogue lawyer." I'll believe that when I read the book. The only reason it was dealt with so quickly isn't because of the so called rogue lawyer, but rather the outrage of so many well connected gay people and their "non gay" friends. It is amazing how fast things move when the pressure mounts quickly.

The other problem with the "rogue" interpretation is that it would invalidate other interesting marriages. One article that was linked to in these posts observed that certain Jewish/Arab marriages would also be illegal according to the "new interpretation." I don't think they, the government, really wanted to continue heading in this direction.

Nice to hear the situation was just a "misunderstanding." Now we can all go back to feeling warm and fuzzy about Canada.

Now what was that about chicken fried sealed something or other?