Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

100,000's Protest Gay Marriage in France


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#1 DonLever

DonLever

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,184 posts
  • Joined: 11-December 08

Posted 17 November 2012 - 11:39 PM

Hundreds of thousands of people protest against Gay Marriage in France.

http://www.theaustra...6-1226518933096


The Socialists plan to legalize Gay Marriage but not everyone seem to be on the same page.

This is certainly surprising since Europe, France in particular, is known for its liberal views. We are not talking about the Middle East, Asia, or Eastern Europe here where people are not so enlightened.
  • 0

#2 Buddhas Hand

Buddhas Hand

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,828 posts
  • Joined: 19-December 11

Posted 17 November 2012 - 11:46 PM

Posted Image Friday, August 17, 2012
Vatican backs French bishops on anti-gay marriage stance



The French Catholic Church is right to defend traditional family values, a top bishop told Vatican Radio yesterday, a day after rights groups criticised a prayer focused on families and children as homophobic.
The prayer, read out in French churches to mark the Assumption holiday, said children should “fully benefit from the love of a father and mother”, underscoring the Church’s opposition to a commitment by French President Francois Hollande to allow gay couples to marry and adopt children.
“French bishops are right to insist that children ‘grow up with a father and a mother’,” Bishop Vincenzo Paglia, head of the Vatican’s families committee, told Vatican Radio.
“No one wants to deny people their individual rights, absolutely not.
“But marriage is something else, and family is born of marriage.
“I believe that preserving this network which is cultural – and for us also religious – is a real challenge that we have to take up in every corner of our planet.”
Bishop Paglia blamed the pursuit of individual rights on a “cultural trend that idolises the rights of the individual”.
“When you start destroying the ‘we’ that is found in the family, you question the structure of society as a whole,” he said.
In Italy, Bishop Paglia said strong family links and financial support from parents had saved young people affected by the economic crisis.
The prayer, which was first read at Paris’ Notre Dame cathedral and later to pilgrims in Lourdes, angered several gay rights groups.
Michael Bouvar, one of the leaders of the group SOS Homophobie, told AFPTV: “The message sent out by the church is a mask for discrimination and homophobia.”
  • 0

The Real war is not between the east and the west. The real war is between intelligent and stupid people.

Marjane Satrapi

tony-abbott-and-stephen-harper-custom-da

That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach.

Aldous Huxley.


#3 Drybone

Drybone

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 12

Posted 17 November 2012 - 11:53 PM

Hundreds of thousands of people protest against Gay Marriage in France.

http://www.theaustra...6-1226518933096


The Socialists plan to legalize Gay Marriage but not everyone seem to be on the same page.

This is certainly surprising since Europe, France in particular, is known for its liberal views. We are not talking about the Middle East, Asia, or Eastern Europe here where people are not so enlightened.


The people I talk to here in the US who are against gay marriage are generally afraid that it will then force churches to start marrying gay people.

If they dont, then the gay couple will sue under the equal protection clause.

I am a Christian, and gay marriage doesnt offend or bother me in the slightest. Jesus has no problem with gay people at all. Anyone who is in a loving a relationship with another is an EXCELLENT thing in Jesus's world.

unfortunately, I am in the minority.

I think it offends most people who need the religious dogma around them to feel secure.
  • 2
Posted Image

#4 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,087 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 17 November 2012 - 11:59 PM

If it doesn't hurt anyone, then what the hell do you care? And if they're not part of your religion then you have no right telling them what they should and shouldn't be doing.

Morons.
  • 0
Posted Image

#5 Kamero89

Kamero89

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 790 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 12

Posted 18 November 2012 - 12:11 AM

For the love of god, forms of marriage pre date Christianity. What gives that church the authority to tell people different forms of it are wrong??
  • 0

#6 Remy

Remy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,066 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08

Posted 18 November 2012 - 12:13 AM

If it doesn't hurt anyone, then what the hell do you care? And if they're not part of your religion then you have no right telling them what they should and shouldn't be doing.

Morons.


I completely understand what you're saying, but I think it needs to go one step further. It's not simply okay because it doesn't harm anyone else. It's okay because it is intrinsically a part of the human condition and, fundamentally, there is nothing "wrong" with it. Being gay is being gay: if that's who you are, it's not for others to decide the right and wrong of it (although, I suppose the root of that argument also comes down to "it doesn't harm others", but I'd like to think it goes deeper than that).

Also, just another reason that I find myself intrinsically opposed to religion.
  • 0

#7 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,517 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 18 November 2012 - 12:34 AM

A lot of crying by the vocal minority this week.
  • 0
Posted Image

#8 CanucksSayEh

CanucksSayEh

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,311 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 12

Posted 18 November 2012 - 12:49 AM

Not everyone against it is religious.
  • 1

#9 Vapourstreak

Vapourstreak

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,213 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 07

Posted 18 November 2012 - 01:57 AM

Not everyone against it is religious.

That's important to remember. A lot of people seem to use these incidents to discredit religion.

Edited by Vapourstreak, 18 November 2012 - 01:57 AM.

  • 1

#10 G.K. Chesterton

G.K. Chesterton

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,036 posts
  • Joined: 19-June 06

Posted 18 November 2012 - 08:44 AM

Marriage is a social institution and that social institution has existed for thousands of years because it has certain qualities to it (i.e. producing the next generation of children, providing these children with a paternal and a maternal figure). A same-sex couple marrying may not affect my marriage personally, but it does undermine the very institution of marriage and its original intention.
  • 0
“Reason is itself a matter of faith. It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all.” - G.K. Chesterton

“Unbelief is as much of a choice as belief is. What makes it in many ways more appealing is that whereas to believe in something requires some measure of understanding and effort, not to believe doesn't require much of anything at all.” - Frederick Buechner

“All human nature vigorously resists grace because grace changes us and the change is painful.” - Flannery O'Connor


“My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust?” - C.S. Lewis

#11 Hobble

Hobble

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,630 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 07

Posted 18 November 2012 - 09:22 AM

Yeah, because kids with homosexual parents become total messes 100% of the time. Marriage may have been traditionally between a man and a woman, but that is why that was the way it was acceptable. Restaurants also only accepted black or white patrons through segregation, but societies change and cultures adapt.
  • 0

#12 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,517 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 18 November 2012 - 10:20 AM

As soon as divorce became possible, the 'institution of marriage' and it's original intention became extinct. How many divorced or seperated couples do you know? I rest my case.

Gay marriage is here to stay. (And so is gay divorce. Lawyers rejoice.)
  • 0
Posted Image

#13 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,338 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 18 November 2012 - 10:30 AM

They have every right to protest just as they have every right to look ignorant and stupid.

It won't change anything other than getting it out there that gay marriage is a controversial topic. Who knew?

Oh and as for the sanctity and original intention of marriage thing. Really? Does that really make any sense at all? Being against gay marriage is fine; we are all allowed to have our opinions but that is just an awful argument.

Just for you Blister soul...the original intention of marriage.

When did people start marrying?
The first recorded evidence of marriage contracts and ceremonies dates to 4,000 years ago, in Mesopotamia. In the ancient world, marriage served primarily as a means of preserving power, with kings and other members of the ruling class marrying off daughters to forge alliances, acquire land, and produce legitimate heirs. Even in the lower classes, women had little say over whom they married. The purpose of marriage was the production of heirs, as implied by the Latin word matrimonium, which is derived frommater (mother).

Edited by EmployeeoftheMonth, 18 November 2012 - 10:36 AM.

  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#14 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,575 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 18 November 2012 - 11:10 AM

I've never understood why people care about gay marriage.
Does 2 members of the same sex getting married in anyway affect your day to day life? Does it somehow cause a burden to you?
Let other people live their own lives, gay marriage doesn't change your life, but it can make 2 peoples lives a lot better.
  • 0
Posted Image

#15 Kamero89

Kamero89

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 790 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 12

Posted 18 November 2012 - 11:20 AM

I've never understood why people care about gay marriage.
Does 2 members of the same sex getting married in anyway affect your day to day life? Does it somehow cause a burden to you?
Let other people live their own lives, gay marriage doesn't change your life, but it can make 2 peoples lives a lot better.


Even worse,the people aren't religious, and are against it, are even worse, and just straight up bigots.
  • 0

#16 Special Ed

Special Ed

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,392 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 18 November 2012 - 11:50 AM

'Haters gona hate'. Talk a about a pathetic waste of time. Those people need to get a life and get with the times.
  • 0

If you like looking at statistics to determine who's better, you're just a casual fan.

2.41 season GAA isn't very impressive. Let's not get into playoffs and his SV%.

Cory Schneider is the next Patrick Roy.


#17 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 18 November 2012 - 12:02 PM

The people I talk to here in the US who are against gay marriage are generally afraid that it will then force churches to start marrying gay people.

If they dont, then the gay couple will sue under the equal protection clause.

I am a Christian, and gay marriage doesnt offend or bother me in the slightest. Jesus has no problem with gay people at all. Anyone who is in a loving a relationship with another is an EXCELLENT thing in Jesus's world.

unfortunately, I am in the minority.

I think it offends most people who need the religious dogma around them to feel secure.

In Canada we have an eminently sensible solution balancing the right to equality without discrimination and religious freedom set out in the federl the Civil Marriage Act passed in 2005. It is a very brief piece of legislation with a Preamble and three simple substantive sections and some consequential amendoments with existing legisation
http://www.canlii.or...-2005-c-33.html

For civil purposes we defined marriage at Section 2:


2. Marriage, for civil purposes, is the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others.


And religious groups are not compelled to perform marriage services for same sex couples although they may do so if they wish as with some churches:

3. It is recognized that officials of religious groups are free to refuse to perform marriages that are not in accordance with their religious beliefs.


And just to make sure that a province could not pass laws purporting to act under its concurrent jurisdiction over formal validity of marriage (yes we are looking at you Alberta):

4. For greater certainty, a marriage is not void or voidable by reason only that the spouses are of the same sex.


No polygamy, no marrying pets or trees and the prohibitions on incest, consanguinity and age of consent (no child brides) remain in place. Twelve years later the foundations of Canadian society have not crumbled.

And the underlying law, legal history and philosophy is set out in a detailed Preamble that is much longer than the operative sections of the Civil Marriage Act:


WHEREAS everyone has the freedom of conscience and religion under section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms;


WHEREAS nothing in this Act affects the guarantee of freedom of conscience and religion and, in particular, the freedom of members of religious groups to hold and declare their religious beliefs and the freedom of officials of religious groups to refuse to perform marriages that are not in accordance with their religious beliefs;


WHEREAS it is not against the public interest to hold and publicly express diverse views on marriage;


WHEREAS, in light of those considerations, the Parliament of Canada’s commitment to uphold the right to equality without discrimination precludes the use of section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to deny the right of couples of the same sex to equal access to marriage for civil purposes;


WHEREAS marriage is a fundamental institution in Canadian society and the Parliament of Canada has a responsibility to support that institution because it strengthens commitment in relationships and represents the foundation of family life for many Canadians;


AND WHEREAS, in order to reflect values of tolerance, respect and equality consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, access to marriage for civil purposes should be extended by legislation to couples of the same sex;


  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#18 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 18 November 2012 - 12:05 PM

Not everyone against it is religious.

However the overwhelming majority of the opposition to same sex marriage comes from religion and the churches.

Edited by Wetcoaster, 18 November 2012 - 12:05 PM.

  • 1
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#19 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 18 November 2012 - 12:17 PM

As soon as divorce became possible, the 'institution of marriage' and it's original intention became extinct. How many divorced or seperated couples do you know? I rest my case.

Gay marriage is here to stay. (And so is gay divorce. Lawyers rejoice.)

Divorce has been possible for centuries. As in ancient Rome:


Roman divorce was as simple as marriage. Just as marriage was only a declaration of intent to live together, divorce was just a declaration of a couple’s intent not to live together. All that the law required was that they declare their wish to divorce before seven witnesses.


Because marriages could be ended so easily, divorce was common, particularly in the upper classes. When she divorced, a wife could expect to receive her dowry back in full and would then return to patria potestas – the protection of her father. If she had been independent before her wedding, she would regain her independence upon divorce.


Under the lex Julia, a wife found guilty of adultery in a special court – known as the “quaestio” – might sacrifice the return of half her dowry. However, the law did not recognize adultery by husbands. Roman society was very much a man’s world.

http://www.pbs.org/empires/romans/empire/weddings.html

The consequence of gay marriage is that the laws on dissolution of marriage now apply to same sex couples and it is no longer necessary to sue under the complex regime of trust law. That was where long cases and huge legal bills were racked up.

If anything it is now much easier for a divorce without a lawyer and property division rules are set out quite clearly with specific formulas.
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#20 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,357 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 18 November 2012 - 12:28 PM

They have every right to protest just as they have every right to look ignorant and stupid.

It won't change anything other than getting it out there that gay marriage is a controversial topic. Who knew?

Oh and as for the sanctity and original intention of marriage thing. Really? Does that really make any sense at all? Being against gay marriage is fine; we are all allowed to have our opinions but that is just an awful argument.

Just for you Blister soul...the original intention of marriage.

When did people start marrying?
The first recorded evidence of marriage contracts and ceremonies dates to 4,000 years ago, in Mesopotamia. In the ancient world, marriage served primarily as a means of preserving power, with kings and other members of the ruling class marrying off daughters to forge alliances, acquire land, and produce legitimate heirs. Even in the lower classes, women had little say over whom they married. The purpose of marriage was the production of heirs, as implied by the Latin word matrimonium, which is derived frommater (mother).


As usual, you are being way to logical for CDC .. especially when discussing gay marriage on a Sunday .. B)
  • 1

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#21 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,517 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 18 November 2012 - 12:32 PM

Hey the Romans also persecuted Christians, so maybe they knew something was gonna be up 2,000 years later.

Maybe the point is that the 'institution of marriage' is a myth, and certainly less important to lawyers than the prospect of cashing in on more divorces, world-wide.

I'm wondering what the catholic stance is on a potential decision of letting a gay married couple adopt, or having that baby aborted instead.
  • 0
Posted Image

#22 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 18 November 2012 - 12:41 PM

Hey the Romans also persecuted Christians, so maybe they knew something was gonna be up 2,000 years later.

Maybe the point is that the 'institution of marriage' is a myth, and certainly less important to lawyers than the prospect of cashing in on more divorces, world-wide.

I'm wondering what the catholic stance is on a potential decision of letting a gay married couple adopt, or having that baby aborted instead.

As I pointed out there is much less of a role for lawyers in contentious divorce issues since same sex marriage has been brought under the federal and provincial laws in respect of divorce, dissolution of marriage separation and division of assets.
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#23 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,517 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 18 November 2012 - 01:28 PM

Agreed. There are so many divorces now that the process needs to be streamlined. Sign here. Sign here. And that'll be...

Next?


This will allow us to focus on more important matters. Such as a haircut not being performed promptly.
  • 1
Posted Image

#24 Ghostsof1915

Ghostsof1915

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,652 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 18 November 2012 - 01:40 PM

Meanwhile, people are dying from disease, and hunger, and violence....


Seriously, this is even a story? Just allow it and get on with more important things.
  • 0
GO CANUCKS GO!
"The Canucks did not lose in 1994. They just ran out of time.." Barry MacDonald Team1040

Posted Image

#25 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 18 November 2012 - 01:44 PM

Agreed. There are so many divorces now that the process needs to be streamlined. Sign here. Sign here. And that'll be...

Next?


This will allow us to focus on more important matters. Such as a haircut not being performed promptly.

The issue was equality and access without discrimination to a service provided to the public.
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#26 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,517 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 18 November 2012 - 02:30 PM

If there was only a way to streamline those petty disputes too. A way to ensure that they never reach court in form of a lawsuit? Like, um, maybe using some common sense to determine what is lawsuit-worthy and what's not?

The key of course would be the implementation of common sense.
  • 0
Posted Image

#27 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 18 November 2012 - 02:48 PM

If there was only a way to streamline those petty disputes too. A way to ensure that they never reach court in form of a lawsuit? Like, um, maybe using some common sense to determine what is lawsuit-worthy and what's not?

The key of course would be the implementation of common sense.

We do streamline and take them out of the hands of the courts... that is why we have specialized tribunals that will attempt to reach a mediated settlement where possible. And such tribunals have the power to dismiss complaints that are not considered "worthy" without the need for engaging the civil courts while employing much more simplified rules of procedure than would be found in the civil courts so persons are able in the vast majority of cases to be self-represented.

The triumph of common sense, eh?
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#28 kurtis

kurtis

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,388 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 06

Posted 18 November 2012 - 10:42 PM

Who the heck cares...
  • 0
Posted Image

#29 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 18 November 2012 - 10:51 PM

Who the heck cares...

You must as you took the time to open the thread and post a response.
  • 1
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#30 Buggernut

Buggernut

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 32,524 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 03

Posted 18 November 2012 - 10:58 PM

Posted Image Friday, August 17, 2012
Vatican backs French bishops on anti-gay marriage stance


Hasn't the Catholic Church lost all moral credibility yet?
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.