1 I thought you were from Texas, now after all this time I find out you are a Canadian!

In the US, there has not been a law even once suggested that didn't SPECIFICALLY protect churchs from having to affiliate with those they hate.

Instead of using baseless scare-tatics and fear-mongering why don't you find examples that actually support your hypothesis under US law, unless you in fact do live in Canada in which case I retract and agree that churchs in your country should be abel to hate whoever they want.

2 Excuse me, but the last time I checked, this was MY site. As such, you will not tell me what I can and cannot discuss, nor will you tell me what examples I use to make a certain point.

But let's explain why I site this.

First, the Supreme Court has been citing the laws of other nations to interpret our own -- and our Constitution.

Second, there has been a tendency on the Left to point to European and Canadian laws and practices to support their policy preferences in certaina reas -- including those related to homosexual rights. What is going on in other countries is therefore a relevant consideration for determining where the issue may go.

Third, one of my issues is the persecution of religious believers. That is what is currently happening with restrictions on the free speech rights of religious Canadians with regard to homosexuality, and this is simply one more step on the road to oppression in the Great White North of Soviet Kanukistan.

And, as we have seen, the demands of the homosexual rights movement have progressed over the decades. I'm speculating where this intolerant movement will head next -- to a stripping away of religious freedoms supposedly guaranteed under the First Amendment (as they are supposedly guaranteed under the Charter in Canada).

Oh, and by the way, dolphin -- we don't hate you -- we simply disagree with you and believe that certain conduct is immoral. That is a long way from hate. The fact that you don't see the difference tells me more about YOU and YOUR ATTITUDE towards those with whom you are in disagreement -- with you as the hater.

3 I did not in ANYWAY tell you what you could or could not discuss but you are right, this is your site. Enjoy it. I'm not wasting my time since you've replaced intelligent discussion with hate and bickering. I've been VERY careful not to say anything that was in the slighest way inflammatory and yet you've shown time and time again that you care nothing about discussion and only about insulting and attacking. I'll leave and not come back since I refuse to engage you in your hateful nonsense. I can at the very least be given comfort that you cannot reporduce.

4 Now there's a kind, considerate, non-hateful and non-inflammatory comment.

I offered an explanation of why I cite developments in other countries. You celebrate the multiple miscariages experienced by my wife and I. Yeah, that's the ticket, dolphin.

5 Boy, for someone who "won't waste his time" here, I sure see a lot of dolphin comments! LOL!!

Good riddance. You were quite the catharthis for even borderline simian IQs (usual present co. excepted, of course!)

6 No, I'm actually sorry to see him go. He can make a good contribution, when he isn't making infallible statements without evidence or fabricating positions and quotes for the other side of the issue.

7 And all we want to see is an intellectually honest debate.