unique visitors since July 27, 2005

« A Helping of Reality, Hold the Lobster | Main | Gay Bits »

February 02, 2006



The PQ is headed by a gay cokehead. Q: Was the issue of gay marriage in Canada settled by the voters, the legislature, or the courts?


Never mind, I didn't see the below the line post. It's early out here. I prefer the issue settled by the legislature or the voters to judicial fiat. Here in California, voters passed a law defining marriage between a man & a woman (despite Sully's idiotic lies that this only applied to out of state marriages). The entrenched Democrat assembly passed a law last year in complete defiance of this, & when Arnold vetoed it, gays screamed foul. But Arnold is elected too. If Californians really want gay marriage, they'll presumably vote for a governor who will allow it


The point, really, is this: Stephen Harper must be seen to be abiding by the will of his constituents. Given that Canada's voters are nearly equally divided on the subject of gay marriage, Mr. Harper must be seen to be making an attempt to satisfy both ends of the spectrum if he eventually wants to govern with a majority.

He has chosen a battle that he's knows he stands little chance of winning, but the point is, he has chosen to continue to engage in it, thusly mollifying the more conservative elements of Canada's populace. When he loses the vote to overturn the law as it stands now, and he will, he will be faced with a decision as to wether or not invoke the Notwithstanding Clause; he will not, and as a consequence will increase his power base by being seen, at least in this case, as a moderate.

We do in fact know Stephen Harper; he is not unlike most of the men who have held the office of Canada's Prime Minister. He is a follower, not a leader, and in a constitutional democracy where any government, no matter it's place in the spectrum, must pay heed to the voters and the courts, that might not be a bad thing.

The comments to this entry are closed.