Greetings Red Tory, I appreciate your participation in this thread (and it is always good to see another Canadian on this site).
My main point in this thread was to deal with the definition of the word "equality" that the homosexual movement used (and continues to use) in order to attain marriage rights. When I raised my fourth point that "I as a heterosexual never had the right to marry another man" I meant that historically in Canada's history. Right now men have the right to marry other men in Canada, but that is only a recent development. Before homosexuals were allowed to marry in Canada, their main argument to gain marriage rights was to use "equality" with heterosexuals in which to further their cause. I was attempting to critique their logical use of the word "equality" because for them to gain the right to marry other men, they were not getting equal rights with everyone else (since no other social group historically had the right to marry within the same sex) but rather they were attempting to gain a brand new right for themselves.
So in my opinion, the homosexual movement purposely misused the word "equality" to build public and government support in order to gain a right that never existed before in Canada's history. And in this thread I wanted to hear other people's opinion as to whether or not this is a legitimate critique of the homosexual movements use of the word "equality." In an earlier post, Traderjane mentioned a court case in the U.S. called "Loving vs Virginia" in which they apparently dealt with this one particular issue. But I have not yet had a chance to check out that case and the arguments used during the proceedings.
I re-read my initial post and I see I could have stated my argument much more clearly. I apologize for any confusion I may have caused.
In Christ, Matthew
