Posted on 02/02/2005 10:17:42 AM PST by youngtory
Most want referendum Canadians back gay rights but want marriage preserved as is, National Post/Global National poll finds
Tom Blackwell National Post
Wednesday, February 02, 2005
1 | 2 | NEXT >>
CREDIT: David McNew, Getty Images Wedding cake.
As MPs begin debating the government's same-sex marriage bill, a healthy majority of Canadians would actually prefer to see the contentious issue decided by a country-wide referendum, a new National Post/Global National poll suggests.
More than two-thirds said they would prefer a direct say on the gay marriage question, rather than a free vote in Parliament that lets politicians act according to their conscience, the survey indicates.
And the poll suggests the same-sex legislation might go down to defeat in a plebiscite, with 66% saying they support keeping the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman.
However, about half that number do favour creating a new category of "civil union" for same-sex partners. A similar percentage favour full same-sex marriage. The breakdown of support has changed little in the last year.
Respondents to the COMPAS Inc. poll also indicated same-sex marriage should be far down on the government's list of priorities. And a strong majority said government comments suggesting religious groups do not belong in the emotional debate are a threat to freedom of speech.
Irwin Cotler, the federal Justice Minister, said the poll does not persuade him that a referendum is needed to decide the issue.
"You don't want a public-opinion snapshot at a particular point in time deciding fundamental rights protected under the Charter, that have been affirmed by the courts," he said in an interview.
"In effect, this began with a parliamentary enactment -- the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.... It's now going back to Parliament where the process began."
Lobby groups on both sides of the question indicated yesterday they would prefer to see parliamentarians pass judgment on whether gays should be able to marry.
"We don't generally agree with referendums to deal with moral issues," said Aidan Reid of Campaign Life Coalition, which has fought vigorously against gay marriage.
"A referendum is one of those things that can be more easily manipulated by different groups, whereas if it's the parliamentarians, they will take their responsibility as elected representatives seriously."
The issue is one of recognizing rights for a minority group and that should not be left up to the will of the majority, argued Gilles Marchildon of Egale Canada, a gay and lesbian advocacy group.
"To subject minority rights to a popularity contest, I don't think that's a way to lead a country."
Conrad Winn of COMPAS said the support for a referendum on the issue is unusual and much higher than the company generally finds, perhaps because it is a subject many people feel they understand and can offer a reasonable opinion about.
Also surprising, he said, was that the poll found public opinion on same-sex marriage had barely changed in more than a year, despite the extensive public debate over it.
Of those polled, 66% said they would strongly or somewhat support keeping the existing definition of marriage as a union between a man and woman exclusively. Another 34% said they would oppose preserving the status quo.
When given more choices, 29% said the marriage law should not be changed at all, 36% favoured maintaining marriage as a heterosexual institution but creating a "civil union" category for gay couples, while 35% said gays should get full marriage rights.
The poll also hinted at what Mr. Winn calls a "civilizational" divide between the spiritually devout and others. Among the one-third who said religion was very important to them, 80% opposed opening the doors to same-sex marriage, compared with 35% among those for whom religion was not important.
Of all the parties, the Conservatives were most united on the issue, with 83% saying gay couples should not be able to marry.
It could be a helpful issue for the opposition party if it chose to seize on it, Mr. Winn said.
Still, just 6% of respondents said same-sex marriage should receive the greatest attention from the federal government among a number of listed issues. Health care, at 48%, the economy and taxes, honesty in government spending and the environment were all rated as greater priorities. Only foreign policy and terrorism fell below same-sex marriage in the poll.
At the same time, when asked about reasons for supporting gay marriage, most respondents said they agreed that protecting gays against discrimination is long overdue.
Questioned about politicians who say religious groups have no right to express opinions about moral issues, close to two-thirds of respondents indicated they would consider such statements a threat to freedom of speech.
Pierre Pettigrew, the Foreign Affairs Minister, appeared to suggest last week that the principle of the separation of church and state meant religious organizations should stay out of the debate.
The poll also asked for views on polygamy, which some critics fear could end up being legalized in the wake of the same-sex marriage legislation. A surprising 14% said they believe any tolerant society must allow people to have more than one spouse, even though it is now barred by law.
The poll of 885 people was conducted between Jan. 28 and 31. It is considered accurate to within 3.4 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
Unfortunately we would get overruled by the majority, heck the Lieberals are governing with the minority.
Kansas are going to get to vote on a constitutional amendment! This is hot off the press. The legislature just voted to let us have a say on how marriage is to be defined!
I think in the long run, the SSM issue will be the end of Martin and his socialist government. Then again there's always the ad-scandal, or better yet, the oil-for-food scandal. The meltdown has begun.
Sad to say you get what you vote for. In this case the libs know they'd lose a referendum vote so they won't even offer one. They want to enact their agenda and when it runs contrary to the majority you just flat out shut out the majority. The only way to change it is kick them out of power. I don't see that happening in Canada anytime soon.
As Ken Coppland said on his morning preach show
"a terrible evil has entered the government of our Canadian friends to the North"
Martin is just a plain idiot. Corrupt, and unable to govern.
Just 3-4 years ago he was dead against gay marriage.
Now he's all for it, the UN's global government plan,
and the Islamic Umma. A few weeks ago he was trying to patch up relations with Bush, but yesterday he was screaming how proud he was of Creatin, by not supporting Bush in Iraq. He's a double talker, a complete idiot,
and he stutters too much, but only when he's lying.
He's not the only one. I was watching the inquiry into the ad-scandal this morning during Gagliano's testimony and this is an actual quote from him when confronted with invoices regarding his signature: "uh, something's missing here..." I've got the popcorn stocked for Chretien's turn next week.
"A referendum is one of those things that can be more easily manipulated by different groups, whereas if it's the parliamentarians, they will take their responsibility as elected representatives seriously."
ROFL. SURE THEY WILL!
The issue is one of recognizing rights for a minority group and that should not be left up to the will of the majority, argued Gilles Marchildon of Egale Canada, a gay and lesbian advocacy group.
Of course not. It should be left up to the minority. That's why the polygamy law will pass in a few years. And bestiality laws a few years after that.
"You don't want a public-opinion snapshot at a particular point in time deciding fundamental rights protected under the Charter, that have been affirmed by the courts," he said in an interview.
Of course not. Much better to have a few make the decisions for the majority. This is a democracy????
And the poll suggests the same-sex legislation might go down to defeat in a plebiscite, with 66% saying they support keeping the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman.
Sure it would. Why do you think the Professional Politicians don't want a referendum on it? They're afraid that the SSM will get the same reception that it has here in the states. 70%+ of people DON"T WANT IT!
Jeez. Talk about cradle to grave socialism. Govt knows best. The people are just an inconvenience to the politicians making decisions about what kind of country they want to live in. That's not democracy. that's an hmmmm...an oligarchy?
Canada deserves the govt it has.
The degraded successors of the Family Compact and Chateau Clique who govern us dare not repeat the mistake Brian Mulroney made of holding a referendum to decide an issue on which it has staked its credibility.
The governing classes exhorted us, to a man, to vote for the Charlottetown accord or lose the country.
They outspent the NO side 13-1, and still lost.
They won't let such an embarrassment happen again to them.
How dare people want a voice in their own affairs! The little people just don't know what's good for them.
Canadians will do what the Liberals tell them to do.
Always have, always will.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.