11.13.2005

pioneers

Two Israeli same-sex couples who were married in Canada are petitioning the Israeli high court to recognize their marriages.

In the Globe And Mail story about it, the couple credits Canada with lighting the spark in their quiet revolution.
It's a court fight that has already caused a kerfuffle in the more conservative corners of Israeli society and one that is sure to cause a much larger uproar should they win.

Thanks to the liberal leanings of Israel's Supreme Court, the two men expect to do just that, and they are looking forward to the fallout. They credit Canada for giving them the chance to battle for their rights.

The court challenge touched off a heated call-in debate on Voice of Israel radio last week, with all agreeing that Canada had set something big in motion.
Lawyers for both couples "praise Canada's decision to allow gays of any nationality to marry in Canada as "inspired" and something that will end up advancing gay rights around the globe."

8 comments:

Nigel Patel said...

Good for them!
Maybe some American same sex couples can try the same thing.
Good for Canada too!

James said...

Quiet revolutions are a local speciality. For another example, check out Canada's part in the international land mind treaties.

It's kind of funny seeing you citing the Globe and Mail so much, though, as it's considered a conservative paper... Though Tory-style conservative, not Reform-style.

L-girl said...

It's kind of funny seeing you citing the Globe and Mail so much, though, as it's considered a conservative paper

I was thinking the same thing! Their editorials are too conservative for me, but I don't look to them for that. (Goodness knows I don't need them for political commentary!)

I find the news and features very well written, and I like the national scope, where I can look at the Star online for more local news.

Strictly as a news source, I think it's a very good paper.

James said...

Their editorials are too conservative for me, but I don't look to them for that. (Goodness knows I don't need them for political commentary!)

Well, it is roughly equivalent to the Wall Street Journal in the US, so that makes sense. :)

L-girl said...

Well, it is roughly equivalent to the Wall Street Journal in the US, so that makes sense. :)

Editorially, compared to the WSJ, the Globe & Mail is the Village Voice.

L-girl said...

Well, it is roughly equivalent to the Wall Street Journal in the US, so that makes sense. :)

Though if this is true, it makes sense in more ways than one. The WSJ is also an excellent news source - reliable, well written, and as unbiased as a newspaper can be, similar to The Economist. Editorially, they're somewhere to the right of Gengis Khan, but that's a different story.

James said...

Editorially, compared to the WSJ, the Globe & Mail is the Village Voice.

Well, it's the Canadian equivalent. That means that, compared to the WSJ editorial board, the Globe's staff is made up of Karl Marx, Vladimir Ilich Ulyanov, Che Guevera, and Mao Zedong.

"Coventry City last won the FA Cup in what year? No? Well, I'm not surprised you didn't get that. It was in fact a trick question. Coventry City have never won the FA Cup."

RobfromAlberta said...

It's kind of funny seeing you citing the Globe and Mail so much, though, as it's considered a conservative paper

Out here in the hinterland, The Globe and Mail is not considered conservative, not even "progressive conservative".