I don't think most people consider it to be the most important issue, either, Ben. If not the most important, equality is one of the important issues though. I think the eason it was dealt with was to ensure passage of other bills, the two budgets, in particular. That is how minority government works, and voters gave us a minority government, and presumably expect MPs to make Parliament work. It has been said that minority government produces the best legislation. Personally, I think this is an example of that, the Reformed-Allied-Conservatives notwithstanding.

There appears to be no end to the gong shows that come form those who are to govern our country. God help us.

I did not condemn those who preferred the same sex as partners, but I do not appreciate it being thrown in my face now!!! And who the hell does??? Does the public here appreciate those who parade down the streets on their so called "Gay Pride" days, flaunting themselves like disgusting exhibitionists??? Do we really need this??? Guys kissing guys, women kissing women--to me it is disgusting, revolting and I could "throw up" when I see them tossing in our faces THEIR sexual preference. I really do not give a damn who beds with who, but I do not require it publicized in the manner they choose. They might be GAY and filled with PRIDE at their choice of a same sex partner, but keep it out of my face, and I do not see the heterosexuals insisting on having a day set aside for them to parade through the streets.
I actually believe the press is responsible for the notoriety these same sex couples receive. Stop making it a big news story, and learn to "leave it alone." It really does make me sick-and I am glad they only make up 8% of the population, and let's hope we do not breed any more. I do not want to condemn them, but in my old fashioned mind I am thinking, "It just ain't normal."

If 8% or less of a population has some type of characteristic, it is most certainly not "normal" by one definition.

Thus it is not "normal" for Canadians to be confined to a wheelchair, it is not "normal" for Canadians to live in Prince Edward Island, it is not "normal" for residents of Prince George to live in houses with 3 car garages.

So why are you picking on a particular type of personal relationship and speaking against it on the basis of it not being "normal"? Do you have similar thoughts on interracial marriages as well? How about marriages between two individuals where there is a considerable age difference?

Have you ever wondered whether a homosexual couple gets turned off every time they see a heterosexual ramance unfolding on the screen in front of them, or a heterosexual couple walks arm in arm in a park, or sit on a park bench embracing each other? ...

As always, change comes easier to some than to others. However, I am fairly sure of one thing. Life on this earth is continually changing, with one possible expception. I cannot foresee a time when everyone will simply accept change and move on. Then again, that may be a good thing on occasion.

Resistance to abolishing slavery, to interracial marriages, to women voting, to rule by the majority, to not showing women's ankles in public, to getting rid of hanging convicts on the side of public roads, to no longer putting the poor into prison ..... etc. etc ....

So, let us simply add this one to the list, and let those living 100 years from now chuckle at how cruel people must have been up to the 20th century .... ;-)

Mercy sakes, Owl, I hope that 100 years from now people are not so unfeeling they would "chuckle" at cruelty.
I, personally, have no axe to grind with homosexuals and lesbians. I am not cruel to them, nor would I ridicule them.I think I actually pity them. I just do not know why they are so intent on attracting so much publicity, and make such spectacles of themselves given the opportunity. We can do away with the human race in 100 years by not reproducing, as I have yet to see 2 guys making a baby-or two women. Maybe that is what should happen. God may think it is perhaps time to start over, as the world becomes more corrupt, and evil erodes and takes over destroying truth and decency. (only my opinion). Perhaps I am totally wrong, as modern day technology brings to the fore almost immediately what takes place in this world. Perhaps it has always existed, but I, for many years, had no means of being informed.
I would never promote cruelty, nor am I a "holier than thou art." I never knew there were gays and lesbians until I was in my late 20's. I was repulsed then, and I remain so. But then-I do not like garlic either, and I sure don't like smelling people who do. Guess we all have our hang ups. Do not judge me too harshly. I had a Mom and Dad, thankfully, so that is what I thought a family consisted of, Mom, Dad and the kids. I obviously did not live in your world. Too late to change now!!!!

From my view point this is an attack on not only the family, but more importantly the church and religion in general by those who are anti-christ and wish to break down the church values that bind us together as a society.

It should be clear that this law violates the Charter of Rights in its interferrence with the religious term of marrage, and the clear discrimination it creates to other dependents that are not declared gay.

Its wholly unconstitutional and is an affront to everything the Charter of Rights stands for.

Why should a declared recreational 'gay person' have more rights than a family member taking care of an elderly parent? Where is the logic in this? Where is the equality in this? Where is the Charter of Rights in all of this?

IMO the government should not be in the business of marrage and it should be left to religious institutions. If gay people want to marry they can create the church of gay and be married under that name.

For all others the appropriate thing is a dependents bill of rights that does not discriminate against minority dependents and the rights of religion. This dependent bill of rights should provide equality no matter if it is a religious marrage or a family member taking care of parent, son, daughter, brother, or sister.

Its a set back IMO for equality in Canada, as wells as freedom of religion.

There has been no atttack on any church nor any religion, except in the minds of people who are opposed to true equality. This kind of nonsense argument is used to try to turn around the concept of equality into a form of "me too" discrimination. Well, it doesn't work. No church is affected. They will still exist and be able to worship exactly, and I mean EXACTLY, as they did before the law was passed. There is no change whatsoever.

Marriage is not just a religious concept. It is a legal one. Why else do church ministers have to get permission from the state to perform marriages in the first place? If it were just religious, the state wouldn't care who performed marriages. The state does care, because marriage is fundamentally a social matter affecting the Nation' most basic structures for the religious and the secular alike. For that reason the state determines who can perform marriages. Without a license to marry, any religious leader who tries to perform one is breaking the law. The state's rights in this matter have superceded those of religions for decades.

Incidentally Chadermando, if the government gets out of the marriage business, does that mean it stops giving tax breaks to married people? Does it mean all children are "illegitimate" from then on?. Does it mean spouses no longer have legally mandated access to pensions? Does it mean a surviving spouse no longer has rights to a deceased one's property? Would you still want the government to pass laws about those aspects of marriage? How could they if they are not in the marriage business? Think it through. Knee jerk reactions to issues you don't like might spill more coffee that you want spilled.

Most of you have missed the point,"why has same sex marriage become the most important issue in our parliament".
Who cares who is sleeping with who. This is a subject for a tabloid not well meaning citizens of our country.
Yes the Media is having a field day but we don't have to read the stuff.
Have a nice day

I agree that this should not be the number one issue in parliment. However, maybe it is time to end the media circus and allow the goverment to move on to new issues. I am constantly hearing in the news, and from a local MP, that most canadians are agaist same sex marriage. If so many people are agaist it why are they not up in arms and taking to the streets. While there have been protest, they are not in such numbers that would indicate that the majority of people are agaist it. Society ditates what is acceptable and it appears that gay marriage is. Though maybe not in the "Land of the Hockey Enforcers". Just turn on the television if you what to see what is acceptable to society. With programs like "*** eye for the straight guy," "My big gay wedding," "*** as folk," and "Will and Grace" it is quite obvious that society accepts gays and lesbians. We do not live in a fascist state and if enough people oppessed this issue it would not have past.

Ammonra writes,

"if the government gets out of the marriage business, does that mean it stops giving tax breaks to married people? Does it mean all children are "illegitimate" from then on?. Does it mean spouses no longer have legally mandated access to pensions? Does it mean a surviving spouse no longer has rights to a deceased one's property? Would you still want the government to pass laws about those aspects of marriage? How could they if they are not in the marriage business? Think it through. Knee jerk reactions to issues you don't like might spill more coffee that you want spilled."

My response: I have thought it through, it is you who is ignorant. I called for a dependents bill of rights which you conveniently did not read. That is the solution to all those questions you posed. Also the government has no right to tell a church who can and can not be married in the church.

Sorry but your wrong and miss guided on all fronts.

Nelson the facts are that 6 people control all the redio stations, TV stations, and 80% of the Newspapers in America.

Those 6 people who are all zionist political agents decide what is popular culture in America. They have decided that the gay culture is to be our culture and anyone who goes to the street to say otherwise loses their job in shame brought on by the media.

In Canada its a little different, but the same political group holds power over our media as well.

Welcome to the New World Order my friend. It has arrived.

Allstate terminates manager over homosexuality column
On own time, man posted anti-'gay' article insurance giant says didn't reflect its values
By Ron Strom

A former manager with Allstate has sued the insurance giant, alleging the company, which financially supports homosexual advocacy groups, fired him solely because he wrote a column posted on several websites that was critical of same-sex marriage and espoused his Christian beliefs.

J. Matt Barber was a manager in Allstate's Corporate Security Division, its investigative arm, at the Fortune 100 company's headquarters in Northbrook, Ill. Besides working for the insurance provider, Barber was and is a professional heavyweight boxer, a jazz drummer and a Web commentator. His columns have appeared on TheConservativeVoice.com, MensNewsDaily.com and others.

Though the column in question was written and posted in December, it wasn't until Jan. 31 that Barber was called into a meeting with two human resources officials, one of whom Barber says "slapped down" a printed copy of the column in front of him and asked if he had written it.


Recognizing the piece, Barber confirmed he had written it on his own time, at his home and on his own computer. Barber claims he was told, "Here at Allstate we have a very diverse community."

Barber says the human resources assistant vice president told him the column didn't reflect Allstate's view and that he was suspended with pay. Barber was immediately ushered off company grounds – "which was humiliating," the former employee said.

"I explained to Allstate that the article was a reflection of my personal Christian beliefs, and that I had every right to both write it and to have it published," Barber told WND. "I further explained that I had written the article while at home on my own time, that I never mentioned Allstate's name and that I neither directly nor indirectly suggested that Allstate shared my Christian beliefs or my views on same-sex marriage."

Three days later, on Feb. 3, Barber, who had worked for Allstate for five years, says he got a call informing him he was fired "for writing the article," he said. Now, with the help of the Christian Law Association and David Gibbs III, who represented Terri Schiavo's family in the final weeks of her life, Barber is challenging Allstate in federal court.

According to an investigation by the state of Illinois' Department of Employment Security related to Barber's claim for unemployment benefits, an organization – likely a "gay"-rights group – complained to Allstate about the column. But how did the group connect Barber to the insurance company? It turns out one site that posted the column, MensNewsDaily.com, added to the bio line on the article the fact that Barber worked for Allstate.

Barber says he did not include that fact in the original column submission but that the site "disclosed that without my knowledge or consent." According to Barber, he is somewhat well-known in the boxing field in Chicago, and Allstate would sometimes tout the fact that he worked for the company.

The columnist told WND even if he had included a reference to Allstate in his bio, "I wasn't intimating that I was representing Allstate or that these were the views of Allstate."

Barber stressed to the unemployment office that he did not intend for the affiliation to be included in the bio. Allstate argued to the agency that Barber should not be given unemployment, but upon investigation, the agency agreed with Barber's contention and ruled he was entitled to the money.

Said the agency's report: "The claimant was discharged from Allstate Insurance Company because an outside organization had complained about an article he had written while on his own time."

The state agency also ruled Barber did not engage in misconduct, saying, "The term misconduct means the deliberate and willful violation of a reasonable rule or policy of the employer. … In this case, the claimant's action which resulted in his discharge was not deliberate and willful."

Homosexuality a violation of 'natural law'

In the commentary piece, which Barber refers to as "the article that got me fired," he makes several arguments against same-sex marriage.

Wrote Barber: "Marriage between one man and one woman, and the nuclear family have forever been cornerstones of civilized society. Regrettably, there are at present, many within the militant homosexual lobby who wish to take a sledge hammer to those cornerstones – many who hope to undermine both the historical and contemporary reality of marriage and family – many who, through judicial fiat, aim to circumvent the Constitution, the legislative process, and the overwhelming will of the people in an effort to redefine marriage. Accordingly, the unsolicited, oxymoronic and spurious expression 'same-sex marriage' has been forced into popular lexicon."

Barber, who holds both a law degree and a masters in public policy, uses anatomy to argue against homosexual behavior.

"For one to believe that homosexual behavior, the act of sodomy in particular, follows the biological order of things," wrote Barber, "one must ignore the fact that sodomy violates natural law – you know … wrong plumbing … square hole/round peg. The whole thing really is a testament to man's creativity. Give us something good, and we'll bend over backwards to twist it into something else."

'Diversity and inclusion'

Barber – known in the boxing world as Matt "Bam Bam" Barber – says Allstate has a decidedly "pro-homosexual" philosophy, requiring employees to undergo "diversity training" and offering domestic partnership benefits.

The training, Barber says, "is really indoctrination hostile toward thousands of employees' Christian beliefs."

The insurance company's foundation has donated money to homosexual-advocacy organizations, including the Gay and *** Alliance Against Defamation and the LAMBDA Legal Defense and Education Fund. A notice about the Allstate foundation says funds are given to "nonprofit organizations that are related to tolerance, diversity and inclusion."

Barber says he hopes consumers who hold traditional values will stop patronizing Allstate.

Addressing those who do, Barber said, "You are helping to support an organization that brazenly and illegally discriminates against religious employees who do not blindly and silently toe the extremist, liberal line on official company policy – policy that is not just overtly pro-homosexual, but is demonstrably anti-family."

Gibbs is the lead attorney on the case.

"To have Fortune 100 companies like Allstate firing people for expressing their sincerely held religious beliefs and even their personal viewpoints on their own time demonstrates just how out of kilter things have gotten," Gibbs told WND.

"Allstate aggressively pushes and promotes the homosexual agenda in the name of tolerance, but the minute someone speaks up with what would be considered the traditional moral-values viewpoint, the tolerance disappears and it results in a termination."

Gibbs rhetorically asked if Allstate would take the same action against someone who put forth a pro-homosexual viewpoint.

"The answer is absolutely not," he said. "The tolerance is only running one way."

Such discriminatory action violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, Gibbs contends.

Said Gibbs: "The law was intended to make sure people of faith didn't have to leave their religion or viewpoints at the workplace stairs."

Gibbs compared the situation to that of racial discrimination.

"Just like Allstate can't go in and say, 'We've discovered your ethnicity and we're going to fire you,' I don't believe Allstate should be able to go in and say, 'We've discovered your anti-homosexuality viewpoint and we're going to fire you.'"

The complaint claims Barber was "terminated from his employment and discriminated against by Defendants, with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment because he expressed during non-work hours his sincerely held religious beliefs."

Whistleblower retaliation?

Part of the complaint filed in court discusses a 2003 business trip to Lisbon, Portugal, Barber took to attend the annual Chairman's Conference with hundreds of other Allstate employees.

According to the suit, Barber witnessed on the trip his boss' boss, Ben Tarver, assistant vice president for corporate security, "engaging in various public displays of affection with a young female physician who had been hired by Allstate to serve as the on-call physician for the conference team."

Following Barber's report of the assistant vice president's alleged behavior to his immediate supervisor, the ex-employee says Tarver began harassing him and treating him in an "abusive manner."

Barber eventually filed a sexual harassment/retaliation complaint against Tarver with the human resources Department at Allstate.

Barber pointed out the irony of the head of the agency that investigates company-policy violations and fraud allegedly breaking the rules of sexual conduct.


"He was a married man," Barber explained. "It made me very uncomfortable, especially because we investigate sexual harassment."

Barber believes the whistleblower action was a motive in his being fired and that officials were looking for a reason to terminate him. It was the very people to whom he had reported Tarver's alleged misconduct who confronted him about the online article.

'Allstate is very fair'

Marissa Quiles, media relations spokesperson for Allstate, told WND the company could not comment on a lawsuit its lawyers have not yet seen. According to Barber's attorneys, the company was to be served with the suit today.

"Allstate is very fair and has a very good reputation for being inclusive," Quiles said.

"It's the company's policy to maintain a working environment free of any type of discrimination and harassment that may affect an employee's terms or conditions of employment."

Continued Quiles: "We cannot disclose or discuss details related to the former employee's termination, nor can we comment on a lawsuit we have not yet received."

Barber says his termination from Allstate came at a stressful time in his life with his wife just having given birth after a problem pregnancy.

He recently described the situation in a narrative:


To add insult to injury, about two weeks before I was fired, my wife, Sarah, and I delivered our third child in four years following a highly stressful at-risk pregnancy. Allstate was fully aware of our new arrival and that Sarah was still recovering from her C-section surgery when they callously snatched away both our medical insurance and our means of providing for our young family.
All of this notwithstanding, my personal faith and optimism remain intact. I always knew that people were persecuted in the workplace for their religious beliefs, but I never imagined it would happen to my family and me. We’re losing our home, and we may be forced into bankruptcy; but I know that somehow, God will provide. I believe it’s crucial to take a stand for truth, even if that stand results in suffering in the short term.

The lawsuit, which was filed May 26, seeks compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorneys' fees.

An initial status hearing on the federal lawsuit is set for July 5 in the Illinois Northern District Court.

Related stories:

Corporations proud of 'gay' politics

Kodak fires man over 'gay' stance

Allstate terminates manager over homosexuality column

On own time, man posted anti-'gay' article insurance giant says didn't reflect its values
By Ron Strom

A former manager with Allstate has sued the insurance giant, alleging the company, which financially supports homosexual advocacy groups, fired him solely because he wrote a column posted on several websites that was critical of same-sex marriage and espoused his Christian beliefs.

J. Matt Barber was a manager in Allstate's Corporate Security Division, its investigative arm, at the Fortune 100 company's headquarters in Northbrook, Ill. Besides working for the insurance provider, Barber was and is a professional heavyweight boxer, a jazz drummer and a Web commentator. His columns have appeared on TheConservativeVoice.com, MensNewsDaily.com and others.

Though the column in question was written and posted in December, it wasn't until Jan. 31 that Barber was called into a meeting with two human resources officials, one of whom Barber says "slapped down" a printed copy of the column in front of him and asked if he had written it.


Recognizing the piece, Barber confirmed he had written it on his own time, at his home and on his own computer. Barber claims he was told, "Here at Allstate we have a very diverse community."

Barber says the human resources assistant vice president told him the column didn't reflect Allstate's view and that he was suspended with pay. Barber was immediately ushered off company grounds – "which was humiliating," the former employee said.

"I explained to Allstate that the article was a reflection of my personal Christian beliefs, and that I had every right to both write it and to have it published," Barber told WND. "I further explained that I had written the article while at home on my own time, that I never mentioned Allstate's name and that I neither directly nor indirectly suggested that Allstate shared my Christian beliefs or my views on same-sex marriage."

Three days later, on Feb. 3, Barber, who had worked for Allstate for five years, says he got a call informing him he was fired "for writing the article," he said. Now, with the help of the Christian Law Association and David Gibbs III, who represented Terri Schiavo's family in the final weeks of her life, Barber is challenging Allstate in federal court.

According to an investigation by the state of Illinois' Department of Employment Security related to Barber's claim for unemployment benefits, an organization – likely a "gay"-rights group – complained to Allstate about the column. But how did the group connect Barber to the insurance company? It turns out one site that posted the column, MensNewsDaily.com, added to the bio line on the article the fact that Barber worked for Allstate.

Barber says he did not include that fact in the original column submission but that the site "disclosed that without my knowledge or consent." According to Barber, he is somewhat well-known in the boxing field in Chicago, and Allstate would sometimes tout the fact that he worked for the company.

The columnist told WND even if he had included a reference to Allstate in his bio, "I wasn't intimating that I was representing Allstate or that these were the views of Allstate."

Barber stressed to the unemployment office that he did not intend for the affiliation to be included in the bio. Allstate argued to the agency that Barber should not be given unemployment, but upon investigation, the agency agreed with Barber's contention and ruled he was entitled to the money.

Said the agency's report: "The claimant was discharged from Allstate Insurance Company because an outside organization had complained about an article he had written while on his own time."

The state agency also ruled Barber did not engage in misconduct, saying, "The term misconduct means the deliberate and willful violation of a reasonable rule or policy of the employer. … In this case, the claimant's action which resulted in his discharge was not deliberate and willful."

Homosexuality a violation of 'natural law'

In the commentary piece, which Barber refers to as "the article that got me fired," he makes several arguments against same-sex marriage.

Wrote Barber: "Marriage between one man and one woman, and the nuclear family have forever been cornerstones of civilized society. Regrettably, there are at present, many within the militant homosexual lobby who wish to take a sledge hammer to those cornerstones – many who hope to undermine both the historical and contemporary reality of marriage and family – many who, through judicial fiat, aim to circumvent the Constitution, the legislative process, and the overwhelming will of the people in an effort to redefine marriage. Accordingly, the unsolicited, oxymoronic and spurious expression 'same-sex marriage' has been forced into popular lexicon."

Barber, who holds both a law degree and a masters in public policy, uses anatomy to argue against homosexual behavior.

"For one to believe that homosexual behavior, the act of sodomy in particular, follows the biological order of things," wrote Barber, "one must ignore the fact that sodomy violates natural law – you know … wrong plumbing … square hole/round peg. The whole thing really is a testament to man's creativity. Give us something good, and we'll bend over backwards to twist it into something else."

'Diversity and inclusion'

Barber – known in the boxing world as Matt "Bam Bam" Barber – says Allstate has a decidedly "pro-homosexual" philosophy, requiring employees to undergo "diversity training" and offering domestic partnership benefits.

The training, Barber says, "is really indoctrination hostile toward thousands of employees' Christian beliefs."

The insurance company's foundation has donated money to homosexual-advocacy organizations, including the Gay and *** Alliance Against Defamation and the LAMBDA Legal Defense and Education Fund. A notice about the Allstate foundation says funds are given to "nonprofit organizations that are related to tolerance, diversity and inclusion."

Barber says he hopes consumers who hold traditional values will stop patronizing Allstate.

Addressing those who do, Barber said, "You are helping to support an organization that brazenly and illegally discriminates against religious employees who do not blindly and silently toe the extremist, liberal line on official company policy – policy that is not just overtly pro-homosexual, but is demonstrably anti-family."

Gibbs is the lead attorney on the case.

"To have Fortune 100 companies like Allstate firing people for expressing their sincerely held religious beliefs and even their personal viewpoints on their own time demonstrates just how out of kilter things have gotten," Gibbs told WND.

"Allstate aggressively pushes and promotes the homosexual agenda in the name of tolerance, but the minute someone speaks up with what would be considered the traditional moral-values viewpoint, the tolerance disappears and it results in a termination."

Gibbs rhetorically asked if Allstate would take the same action against someone who put forth a pro-homosexual viewpoint.

"The answer is absolutely not," he said. "The tolerance is only running one way."

Such discriminatory action violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, Gibbs contends.

Said Gibbs: "The law was intended to make sure people of faith didn't have to leave their religion or viewpoints at the workplace stairs."

Gibbs compared the situation to that of racial discrimination.

"Just like Allstate can't go in and say, 'We've discovered your ethnicity and we're going to fire you,' I don't believe Allstate should be able to go in and say, 'We've discovered your anti-homosexuality viewpoint and we're going to fire you.'"

The complaint claims Barber was "terminated from his employment and discriminated against by Defendants, with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment because he expressed during non-work hours his sincerely held religious beliefs."

Whistleblower retaliation?

Part of the complaint filed in court discusses a 2003 business trip to Lisbon, Portugal, Barber took to attend the annual Chairman's Conference with hundreds of other Allstate employees.

According to the suit, Barber witnessed on the trip his boss' boss, Ben Tarver, assistant vice president for corporate security, "engaging in various public displays of affection with a young female physician who had been hired by Allstate to serve as the on-call physician for the conference team."

Following Barber's report of the assistant vice president's alleged behavior to his immediate supervisor, the ex-employee says Tarver began harassing him and treating him in an "abusive manner."

Barber eventually filed a sexual harassment/retaliation complaint against Tarver with the human resources Department at Allstate.

Barber pointed out the irony of the head of the agency that investigates company-policy violations and fraud allegedly breaking the rules of sexual conduct.


"He was a married man," Barber explained. "It made me very uncomfortable, especially because we investigate sexual harassment."

Barber believes the whistleblower action was a motive in his being fired and that officials were looking for a reason to terminate him. It was the very people to whom he had reported Tarver's alleged misconduct who confronted him about the online article.

'Allstate is very fair'

Marissa Quiles, media relations spokesperson for Allstate, told WND the company could not comment on a lawsuit its lawyers have not yet seen. According to Barber's attorneys, the company was to be served with the suit today.

"Allstate is very fair and has a very good reputation for being inclusive," Quiles said.

"It's the company's policy to maintain a working environment free of any type of discrimination and harassment that may affect an employee's terms or conditions of employment."

Continued Quiles: "We cannot disclose or discuss details related to the former employee's termination, nor can we comment on a lawsuit we have not yet received."

Barber says his termination from Allstate came at a stressful time in his life with his wife just having given birth after a problem pregnancy.

He recently described the situation in a narrative:


To add insult to injury, about two weeks before I was fired, my wife, Sarah, and I delivered our third child in four years following a highly stressful at-risk pregnancy. Allstate was fully aware of our new arrival and that Sarah was still recovering from her C-section surgery when they callously snatched away both our medical insurance and our means of providing for our young family.
All of this notwithstanding, my personal faith and optimism remain intact. I always knew that people were persecuted in the workplace for their religious beliefs, but I never imagined it would happen to my family and me. We’re losing our home, and we may be forced into bankruptcy; but I know that somehow, God will provide. I believe it’s crucial to take a stand for truth, even if that stand results in suffering in the short term.

The lawsuit, which was filed May 26, seeks compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorneys' fees.

An initial status hearing on the federal lawsuit is set for July 5 in the Illinois Northern District Court.

Related stories:

Corporations proud of 'gay' politics

Kodak fires man over 'gay' stance

If I'm misguided on all points then tell me this, Chadermando. If the government gets out of the marriage business, and a man and a woman who have no religious faith want to get married, who will marry them? Will they be compelled to marry in a church? Will the government force them to take part in a religious worship service so they can be married? Wouldn't that violate their Charter right to be free of religion? What about the committment to religious freedom then?

I notice you ignored my major point. That is the one about the state licensing priests and ministers of religion to conduct marriages, and by doing so showing that government has the controlling rights in that area. The fact is that priests and ministers are nothing more than agents of the government when they marry people under licence. Our constitution gives control of marriage rights to the Provinces and the provincial governments, not to the churches.

You also talk about news media being under zionist control. What are you, an anti-jewish bigot of some kind? That comment shows what kind of Canada you want. They didn't like homosexuals either, did they?

ammonra ...

BINGO!!!! ..

As far as I know homosexuals were the first ones to be interred in concentration camps .... along with those who were "mentally retarded".

http://fcit.usf.edu/holocaust/people/USHMMHOM.HTM

Ammonra,

I don't like the insinuations you make. I will challange you to a debate on the anti-semitism of the zionist political movement any day of the week if you had the conviction of your thoughts to defend your assertions. It takes a simple mind to call someone an anti-semite and quite another to back that up in a real debate about facts. If that is what you want I'm all up for it. After all this is the greatest issue of our day. Ditto for your friend Owl.

On your other inquireries:

"If the government gets out of the marriage business, and a man and a woman who have no religious faith want to get married, who will marry them?"

IMO an impartial third party. Not the government. Privatize the unholy marrages and let them make a discrace of marrage for profit in their own club not associated with the rest of us and our rights to be clean of potential endorsement of sodomy in our name.

"Will they be compelled to marry in a church?"

Only if they want a marrage based on the principles of religion.

"Will the government force them to take part in a religious worship service so they can be married?"

IMO a government should never force itself on free people. They have their own options noted above.

"Wouldn't that violate their Charter right to be free of religion? What about the committment to religious freedom then?"

Please explain I don't see how you came to this conclusion. I don't believe in forcing religion on anyone.

"I notice you ignored my major point. That is the one about the state licensing priests and ministers of religion to conduct marriages, and by doing so showing that government has the controlling rights in that area."

No, you missed my point. I'm saying the government should get out of religion and marrages. Maybe Ralph Klien will lead the way.

"Our constitution gives control of marriage rights to the Provinces and the provincial governments, not to the churches."

This is correct, yet it was a flaw in the BNA of 1867, because it was under the assumption at the time that Canada would always be a Christian country and also that sodomy would always be punishable by capital punishment. I don't think the framers could have envisioned a crime of capital punishment becoming law.

"You also talk about news media being under zionist control."

Fact

"What are you, an anti-jewish bigot of some kind?"

I never said a word about Jews (notice I used the capital letter and you did not). I wish people like you wouldn't victimize innocent Jews by linking them to the evil deeds of an extremist political movement like the zionists, of which are made up of Jews as well as Christians. The aparthide policy of slow genocide practiced by the zionists should appal everyone who stands for the dignity of man. The mainstream media has no conscience for a reason.

Owl,

Just because hitler did that doesn't mean it is right. I'm not sure what your trying to prove. Obviously your some kind of extremist that can't think for himself.

Owl,

Just because hitler did that doesn't mean it is right. I'm not sure what your trying to prove. Obviously your some kind of extremist that can't think for himself.

Owl I just read your article. What a brilliant piece of propoganda for the zionists and their gay marrage cause. That said I will take it as truth and condemn those actions as a very inhuman and morally corrupt chapter of human history.

IMO it is the zionists who use things like the holocaust and the Jewish religion as moral shields against criticism of their own extremist policies and actions. Since I have already said who I think the anti-christs are that are undermining the Christian religion with gay marrage (amoung other issues), it comes as no surprise to see this material promoted by a zionist organization so as to lable anyone as a nazi that disagrees with their progom of Christianity.

Brilliant, but still wrong and not relevant to the core issue of the role of gay unions in Canada.

As I have stated-I do not care-nor should anyone else. The queers must be loving it-getting all this attention-next they can cap it off with another parade. I hear when 2 females get married they are prounced "two married wives." I suppose two guys become "two married husbands."
We really are becoming a bunch of sick "puppies." Is it really such an issue?? I just do not think they should be allowed to adopt, and raise kids in a 2 mommy or 2 daddy household. Just leave them have their relationships, do not give them any notoriety, and let it go. I know many of them are well educated, holding professional positions, and believe me, a professor will hook up with a hairdresser, and the love is pretty evident, (and sickening). Yep, they have those May December romances too, which are again repulsive. I have seen old coots with young men, and it is rather repulsive. Once again, just my opinion, so do not jump all over me.
I would like to see priests, coaches, teachers , and anyone in a position of authority who takes advantage of young boys publically subjected to lashing, as they are committing an act of assault of great harm, both to the psyche and physically. They are of sick mind, or they would not force themselves on children. Now, how "normal" are these homosexuals???? Destructive animals is what they have allowed themselves to become.
I have met gays and lesbians. They have not verbally announced the fact. They have just been people, non abusive, friendly, informative, and generally nice people. They are surely the "staying in the closet" types. Suits me. Saves a lot of embarrassment .
Seems "straight" guys avoid "homosexuals" like they feel if they talk to them something just might "rub off." Almost funny!!!!!
We will move onto something new in a few days, and leave the deviates, from what we consider normal, to their marriages and subsequent divorces, (which may pose yet another bout of controversy-re support, dividing assets etc.) Would it be safe to say-the fun has just begun???? Keep tuned in for the continuing saga of the ins and outs of sodomy. Bet that remark gets me in trouble!!!!! Hope not!!!

So Chadermando denies being anti-Jewish. Right, it ain't so because he said so! Zionism was a Jewish political movement which led to the creation of modern Israel. It may have been supported by non-Jews, but its aspirations were wholly and completely Jewish. Why on earth would you use a use a term which has been hijacked by bigots like the Aryan Nations and *** who use it as a code for ignorant racist insults to a whole culture. By using the word "Zionist" in the same way as they do you voluntarily link yourself to that filth, and bring to a screetching halt any rational debate on Israeli Palestinian issues (if that was what you were referring to). Mind you, I can't see what Zionism has to do with same sex marriage, but I guess you must see some connection.

You miss my point about the opposite sex couple who want to get married without being forced to do so in a church. In order for that to happen, the Province must pass enabling legislation - make law on marriage - something you previously said you want them to stop. Not passing such legislation would discriminate against heterosexual atheists and violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Marriage is a Provincial RESPONSIBILITY, and responsibilities are something that must be taken care of.

To Gypsy: Priests, coaches, teachers and others who rape girls are not homosexual. Rapists are heterosexual by definition. It might also be relevant, since you introduce the subject of sex crimes, to point out that Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka are both heterosexual. The sex murderer in Prince George 25 years ago was heterosexual. The Green River Murderer was heterosexual, there is currently a court case in BC in which a heterosexual has been charged with multiple counts of sex murder of Vancouver prostitutes. Far more rapes by heterosexuals occur daily, than homosexual assaults. It is a fact that heterosexuals commit far more sex crimes than homosexuals. If you want to keep your kids safest, sir, it would seem to me you should avoid heterosexuals!

Any large group will contain criminals. Of course there are criminal homosexuals, as there are criminal heterosexuals and criminal asexuals. It is equally true that Churches of all stripes have had ministers convicted of sex and non-sex crimes. It is equally true of all races and nationalities. Why single out one particular group and then exxagerate criminal activity as if the behaviour is exclusive to them? To promote bigotry about that group, that is why?

Finally, denying that you hate gays does not prove you do not. The content of your posting and that of Chadermando makes both of your attitudes crystal clear.

The word asterisked in my post above is:
n.a.z.i.s

ammonra-20 lashes to you for surmising I "hate" gays. I have not allowed myself to "hate" in all my years, as it is a self destruct emotion which is not, and never will be, a part of my feelings. You have become excessively angry over this subject, and terribly abusive when it is uncalled for. I think perhaps you are becoming rather "unglued" and perhaps should not get so involved. What kind of bug is biting your butt???? Time for you to "chill out," and go to another subject which does not upset you to such a degree. Must be pretty close to home for you to become so nasty!!!! It is the priests and coaches who bring so much publicity to this subject, and they are involving "BOYS', not girls. You really are allowing yourself to wallow in a state of confusion. Let it go!!!!I will say it again-I "hate" no one. Does not mean to say I "love" everyone either!!!!!!

Yes, Gypsy, I argue with passion, but that is a passion for freedom and true facts. I do find distortion, innuendo and false accusations repellant. However, nothing I said was abusive, just straight and plain.

As to wheher you hate gays or not - well, I suggest you read your own posts objectively. You may change your mind.

Read and watch-and perhaps you will catch a glimpse of Homolka's female lover she had for years in prison. Obviously many people are also bisexual, and that is why we see husbands of many years, rearing children of their making, leaving their wives and kids to go live with another man. They obviously had sex with a woman to impregnate her and fathering 3 or 4 children, and I suppose they are just "good buddies" with the same sex friend. Give me a break!!!!!
I can reread over and over what I have written. Does not change the facts. I do not care who beds with who. Just do not feel we are at all interested in it being publicized. For 8% of the population they surely manage to get a lot of press. Makes me think, Right on, the minority gets heard, loud and clear.
Objective, subjective, rejective, is it of little consequence if I am a "live and let live" individual?
Methinks you have ground your axe sufficiently.
This will never become a so called "pressing issue" with me. I must say I do not personally condone homosexuality, nor do I condemn it. I am just glad they only make up 8%of the population and at least 92% may continue living what I consider "normal" lives. I would hope the 92% of which I am included are of the same opinion. I actually believe we really do not care and just do not understand the Government making such a big issue for this minority group. You really are not that important to me!!! Sorry.

Well Ben now you see why same sex marriage is so important to the Federal Government. It certainly is important to some to get 26 post on 250. Where's the hand basket?