Selection Of Your Comments
|January 2003||December 2002|
September 2, 2002
"Just Married" was absolutely wonderful. I laughed, I cried, and at the end I wanted more. Here are your marching orders, boys: After your Supreme Court victory, write another book.
I never hesitate to underline or highlight passages in books that I want to refer back to. But in this case I guess I'll have to buy another copy and reread it. This is a first edition, signed copy, and the first book I've ever read where I've met the authors before reading it. I am not about to mark it up. It is amazing the effect knowing the authors had on me. Absolutely thrilling.
You guys made me laugh several times. The one that comes to mind first was the chapter Joe authored (I think), where you saw yourselves on TV for the first time, and you exclaimed, "We looked so fat!" Believe me, been there, done that. I've never been a skinny guy in the first place, and the camera automatically adds ten pounds to you on a good day. And of course there is not a drop of vanity in our veins, now is there?
The crying part. None of it was sad. I'm a crybaby. My tears were tears of pride. I'd read some of those passages and think, "I know these guys, and I'm so proud of them, and I wish I could hug them right now." I was sitting at the dining room table wiping my eyes one night while reading 'Just Married,' while John was doing a crossword puzzle across from me. "What now?", he asked. It was the chapter where Kevin was describing going down the aisle on the day of your wedding, staying focused on Joe, and knowing that the church was full of love and support, but still being in kind of a haze. I felt like I was right there. Wow! What an experience. How can you read that and not cry?
Thanks for writing 'Just Married' and sharing your experience with the world. I'm so proud of you two that I can just burst. You've really made a major difference in the lives of so many people, not just in Canada, but around the world.
September 6, 2002
Don't get me wrong, I really love your website, and I think it's a worthy cause, but aren't you excluding a significant proportion of the population by only having your website in English? Remember that many Canadians speak French as a first language and are uncomfortable reading this material because they aren't proficient enough in English to understand it. Isn't Canada officially a bilingual country anyway? Common sense should tell you to have a French version of the website to have a wider reach in the Canadian community. I live in Quebec where I am one of the few people who is proficient enough in English to read your information comfortably, (since I was raised in Connecticut). Some of my young friends who are learning English really interested in this cause but don't feel confident enough to read this stuff in it yet.
Just a suggestion.
It's a great suggestion Raymond. Can you help us implement it? We have trouble enough keeping up with the English content. Will you translate for us? We would be happy to pay for the extra space, if someone can take ownership for creating the French language content.
Likewise, we would welcome volunteers to act as correspondents from the various regions of Canada, to help us keep our site up-to-date.
September 19, 2002
Mr Bourassa and Mr Varnell,
I saw you speak at the Chapters in Vancouver and bought your book as soon as my paychecks could allow. I just finished reading it and I have the same praise and critism as I did for the evening at Chapters. The contents got a little dry as the political stuff was going on but it was necessary for the overall understanding, otherwise I thought it was fantastic. More than once I found myself brushing away a tear. Some for your courage, some for your heartbreak, some for your sense of humor. I have recommended your book to strait and gay friends alike and hope that my parents will read it as well.(I think my father is a lost cause but Mom seems open minded!)
I want to thank you both. I am still quite young and still in the dreaming phase when it comes to love and life time commitment and it's nice to know that when I do fall in love that marrying the one I love will be a possibility regardless of their sex. I am fully confident that this fight will be won. I would love to help. I am not Christian so I can't help through the Church, I have no money so I can't help there, I'm not in a relationship so I can't bring that up in the courts. But I am out. I do not fear discrimination by sexual orientation, I don't even have a good job to loose. But as you can tell, I have a voice that can't be stopped. If their is any way my voice can help, It will
Please consider writing letters to your local paper, your local politicians (federal and provincial), and your federal representatives like the Prime Minister and the Justice Minister. Make some noise to demand your rightful place!
September 23, 2002
I believe same sex marriage is a HUGE mockery of marriage. Marriage is a legal binding commitment between a MAN and a WOMAN! I also think it is appalling to believe that in some places, queers and lesbiens can adopt. Could you imagine a same sex couple getting a child over a straight marriage. I think it is totally wrong, and if someone makes the disgusting choice to be gay then deal with the fact you can't have children. Also, straight people do not wear shirts that say "I am straight" and do not have straight parades. So I want gays to shut up, if they want to be the way they are keep it to themselves because no one normal wants to hear it!
For years, gays and lesbians have been adopting babies that were difficult to place (due to health problems, ethnicity, age, etc.). Often, these "unwanted" children were placed in loving homes by agencies run by faith groups that now oppose our right to marriage. How can such groups allow gays and lesbians to adopt children as co-parents (as we have in Ontario since 1995), and yet promote the lies that you believe about marriage being for opposite-sex couples only?
We received the following (edited) email in response to coverage of Liberal MP John Bryden's attack on gay and lesbian families.
Editor Dundas Star News,
Mr. Bryden says in his report: "Right now same-sex couples can adopt and lesbian mothers can win custody of their children. However, the authorities and the courts can and do sometimes see parents in open same-sex relationships as less beneficial to a child than opposite sex parents.I believe the authorities and courts should continue to have that discretion. I am not prepared to accept that it makes no difference to a child whether his parents are same-sex or opposite sex."
What's especially concerning about Mr. Bryden's public position on same-sex marriage and parenting (and single parent adoption), re-quoted in part below, is that he doesn't even seem to understand or acknowledge that there are already provincial laws in place in at least Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, Manitoba and Alberta providing same-sex couples and single homosexuals - and single heterosexuals - to singly or jointly adopt children (biologically related or not), without "discretion", prejudice or discrimination based on sexuality or marital status. In Ontario, Family Act reforms providing and recognizing same-sex parent and single parent parenting and adoption rights have been law for the past 2 years.
Do we want an MP for our riding that appears to be out of touch with his constituents, out of touch with conventional wisdom and ethics, and who can't even take the time to research his own province's laws before making such a disparaging public statement on such an important issue?
Mr. Bryden is quoted in the Dundas Star News from August 7, 2002 article:
"presumably you have to be married to adopt children".
"If we allow marriage to be defined as including same-sex relationships, same-sex couples, then you can bet your boots that there will be a flood of people wanting to adopt children just to prove the point."
"I'm not opposed fundamentally to same-sex parents, so long as they're sincere and the authorities have had an opportunity to exercise their discretion and take same-sexedness in as a negative."
"What I'm talking about is not bigotry. What I'm talking about - and you can't characterize it as bigotry in any way - I'm talking about whether the rights of the child are being compromised in any way. And I don't have to go into great detail. All there has to be is a doubt."
You may quote me also:
big.otry n. Attitudes, beliefs or actions characteristic of one expresses intolerance, as because of race, religion, politics, etc.
prej.u.dice n. A judgement or opinion formed beforehand or without thoughtful examination of the pertinent facts, issues, or arguments; especially an unfavourable, irrational opinion. The act or state of holding pre-conceived, irrational opinions. Hatred or dislike for a particular group, race, religion, etc. Injury or damage to a person or persons arising from a hasty and unfair judgment by others.
For the record, unaware of his position on human rights issues, I ignorantly put an 'X' beside Mr. Bryden's name on the ballot last election. I won't be making that mistake again.
W Powell Waterdown, ON