Full Equal rights!

[oggbashan]

Depends on the Church. The angelican Church was founded primarily cause the pope wouldn't let henery get another divorce.... -Colly

As a part-time Henry VIII I don't agree with that simplification.

Divorce was a problem for Henry but more significant was the power and influence of the Church in England. The Church OWNED a third of the country and was only responsible to the Pope in Rome who wasn't always England's ally.

Henry (and others) were upset about the corruption of the Church at that time. It helped that changing the temporal leadership of the Church from Rome to the English King removed a challenge to the King's authority and provide him with significant assets.

The major reasons for splitting from Rome were:

1. Rome was a temporal power who could (and did) interfere with other authorities.
2. The Church was seriously flawed at that time. It reformed itself later.
3. Anything owned by the Church NEVER came back into the community - it was the world's largest multinational corporation and eternal and more corrupt than any current or recent multinational has been.
4. The lawyers in Rome wanted more than Henry was prepared to give for a divorce. Divorces were possible. The price was negotiable but Rome's price was power.

If Henry had paid the price Rome demanded for his divorce he would have been Rome's puppet. He (and the country) could not stomach that.

Og

 

[Colleen Thomas]

As a part-time Henry VIII I don't agree with that simplification.

Divorce was a problem for Henry but more significant was the power and influence of the Church in England. The Church OWNED a third of the country and was only responsible to the Pope in Rome who wasn't always England's ally.

Henry (and others) were upset about the corruption of the Church at that time. It helped that changing the temporal leadership of the Church from Rome to the English King removed a challenge to the King's authority and provide him with significant assets.

The major reasons for splitting from Rome were:

1. Rome was a temporal power who could (and did) interfere with other authorities.
2. The Church was seriously flawed at that time. It reformed itself later.
3. Anything owned by the Church NEVER came back into the community - it was the world's largest multinational corporation and eternal and more corrupt than any current or recent multinational has been.
4. The lawyers in Rome wanted more than Henry was prepared to give for a divorce. Divorces were possible. The price was negotiable but Rome's price was power.

If Henry had paid the price Rome demanded for his divorce he would have been Rome's puppet. He (and the country) could not stomach that.

Og

Hmmm.

I had always read that Henery was a staunch defender of the Catholic church, even being awarded the title defender of the faith by the pope for a mongram he wrote.

I was under the impression that the Pope desperatly wanted to give henery his divorce, but that Phillip, Henery's brother in law had troops in the country and wouldn't hear of it.

To my understanding the pope's hands were tied by Phillips troops being there.

-Colly

 

[minsue]

Yes, yes it is.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

Oh, Canada!


Nova Scotia legalizes same-sex marriages
Fri, 24 Sep 2004


HALIFAX - Same-sex marriages will be allowed in Nova Scotia following a ruling Friday morning that said banning them is unconstitutional.

Applause broke out in the Halifax courtroom as the Nova Scotia Supreme Court ruling made the province the sixth jurisdiction in Canada to allow same-sex couples to marry.

Earlier this month, a court in Manitoba made a similar ruling. Ontario, British Columbia, Quebec and the Yukon all allow gay and lesbian couples to marry.

Nova Scotia is the first Atlantic province to allow the marriages.

Justice Heather Robertson's ruling effectively changes the definition of marriage in Nova Scotia to "the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others."

After the ruling was delivered on Friday, the Garnett-Doucettes walked into a provincial office to file for a marriage licence. Confident the ruling would go in their favour, the couple had picked up wedding bands on Thursday.

"I can't express how excited I am," said Ron Garnett-Doucette, who's ready to plan his wedding.

To his partner Brian, the ruling means more than "just having what everyone else has and not having to fight for your rights all the time ... We are equal now."

Neither the federal nor Nova Scotia government opposed the challenge.

"We certainly did not want to waste taxpayers' money," said Nova Scotia Justice Minister Michael Baker.

The federal government tried to convince courts in British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec in 2003 not to change the definition of marriage, which Ottawa has jurisdiction over. It failed in all three cases.

In the Yukon case heard in July, the government didn't oppose the constitutional challenge, but asked for the challenge to be adjourned pending a Supreme Court of Canada review of draft legislation that would change the definition of marriage.

The court rejected that request, and ordered the federal and territorial governments to pay the plaintiffs' legal costs.

Nova Scotia has given gay and lesbian couples some marital rights since 2001 through a domestic partnership registry.

Premier John Hamm said on Thursday he would abide by the court's decision, but wouldn't say whether he supports same-sex marriages.

In New Brunswick, meanwhile, Attorney General Brad Green says his province won't recognize any marriage other than those between a man and a woman until the federal law is changed.

Written by CBC News Online staff