| Author |
Message |
sjc
Thinker
Joined: Nov 12, 2006
Posts: 423
|
 Posted:
Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:34 am |
 
|
There was a vote in the Canadian Parliament just this hour on a motion to revisit issue on defining marriage as a un_ion between a man and a woman. It was defeated with 175 against and 123 for. |
|
|
|
|
Xeon-The-Mg-Pony
Graduate Thinker
Joined: May 18, 2006
Posts: 777
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 09, 2006 4:34 am |
|
Good hope fully that twit harper can crawel back between the popes legs and stay there! |
|
|
|
|
sjc
Thinker
Joined: Nov 12, 2006
Posts: 423
|
| Posted:
Sat Dec 09, 2006 6:53 am |
|
| Xeon-The-Mg-Pony wrote: |
| Good hope fully that twit harper can crawel back between the popes legs and stay there! |
He knew that it would fail, that is why he made a promise that he could easily back out of. In that he took a page from Bush's book. |
|
|
|
|
|
SilkyShrew
Graduate Thinker
Joined: Dec 02, 2005
Posts: 886
|
| Posted:
Mon Dec 25, 2006 12:36 pm |
|
Is there still a
union bug on this forum - I would have thought the new forums would have eliminated that problem?
Note: obviously, there is ... lol ... how very odd. |
|
|
|
|
Norm_uk
The Learned
Joined: Jun 13, 2005
Posts: 111
|
| Posted:
Tue Feb 05, 2008 6:39 pm |
|
| sjc wrote: |
| There was a vote in the Canadian Parliament just this hour on a motion to revisit issue on defining marriage as a un_ion between a man and a woman. It was defeated with 175 against and 123 for. |
Funny how Christian fundamentalists are all for one man one woman marriage when their own founder gave parables based on one male multiple female marriage!
I hate this sort of thing....marriage doesn't need to be defined by the number of gender of people involved!
N. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* You can syndicate our news and blog using the file