Law School Discussion

“Man and Woman”, “Wife”, “Husband”, “Widow”, “Widower” Banished From Ontario law

pico135

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/feb/05022511.html
Pretty soon you won't be able to legally refer to someone as a man or woman. Maybe we should just identify ourselves as XX and XY.
Pico Abides

Shira

  • ****
  • 202
    • View Profile
    • Email
Even that wouldn't be accurate.

Good for them. This article is an obvious attack on same-gender couples, and words like "husband" and "wife" should be left to the religious institutions that created them.

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/feb/05022511.html
Pretty soon you won't be able to legally refer to someone as a man or woman. Maybe we should just identify ourselves as XX and XY.
Pico Abides

pico135

But what about words like man and woman..come on people put down the kool-aid for a second a think about it...you cannot legally cite someone as being a man or woman, and you wonder why the vast majority of people do not support gay marriage.
Pico Abides
Yes the XX XY thing was a joke. But i dont think that we should legally abolosh these terms because .0001% of the population is a SRY negative XY sex-reversed female(genetic term for a defect resulting in XY females)

! B L U E WAR R I O R..!

  • *****
  • 7267
  • "make a friend who was once a stranger" br.war.
    • View Profile
first of all this is in canada...are you in canada?...second of all...when one person marries another there are "proper names" involved...you know..."john and mary"...etc...so don't get your panties in a bunch about that one...


name: ...as far as aye know is still a line which one must fill out...along with address:
and telephone number:...

get it... :)

px.o.rsta

giffy

  • ****
  • 1578
  • Mo
    • View Profile
It is not that they banned the use of the words only that they changed the changed the law to refelct that marrige is no longer a gendered institution. It seems easier the changing to say "marrige will be between a man and man, a women and a women, a women and a man, a transexual and a man, a transexual and a women, and so on. By simply saying spouces, etc it is really much easier.

Shira

  • ****
  • 202
    • View Profile
    • Email
But what about words like man and woman..come on people put down the kool-aid for a second a think about it...you cannot legally cite someone as being a man or woman, and you wonder why the vast majority of people do not support gay marriage.

You can only not cite them in respect to marriage, and only because it is more efficient to say "spouse." Not too many people are arguing for the abolition of gender in general, and those people are definitely on the fringe of the fringe, although they are lovely people (with a few exceptions I can think of based on personal experience). What people want is a change in the definition of marriage, not in the definition of gender. I really don't think it's too much to ask. I mean, honestly, how many laypeople actually sit around looking at the code on a daily basis anyway, for them to be "affected" by the change in terminology?

A change in terminolgy is EVERYTHING. We HAVE to look at terminology to determine if we are in violation of laws. When laws are vague they are open to intrepretation and THAT is when violators go free on loopholes. I know we are only talking about marriage licenses, but dont ever think that terminology is not important.