Skip to comments.Conservatives keep winning battles in their war on same-sex marriage (Canada!)
Posted on 05/31/2005 5:59:48 PM PDT by GMMAC
GLOBE AND MAIL , 2005.05.31
Conservatives keep winning battles in their war on same-sex marriage
Vic Toews was settling into the fifth hour of his filibuster yesterday when the Liberals conceded defeat. It was a very good day for social conservatives in Canada.
Bill C-38, the legislation legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide, has turned into a war of manoeuvres, with the Conservatives outmanoeuvring the Liberals at every turn. Yesterday, the Tories manoeuvred to virtually guarantee that the bill will not become law until at least October, if then.
The government wants same-sex legislation passed into law as quickly as possible, to get it out of the way and to heal the rift the issue has caused within the party. Thirty-five Liberal MPs have voted against the bill, and there are concerns that one or two cabinet ministers could join the rebels on third reading, even if it costs them their portfolios.
The Conservatives, on the other hand, want to delay the legislation, because they oppose it in principle and because they believe it is a wedge issue that can be used against the Liberals in an election.
Meanwhile, the Defend Marriage Trust, a coalition of religious and social conservative organizations, is pressing both the Conservatives and the dissident Liberal MPs to do everything in their power to delay passage of C-38 until Parliament dissolves for an election and the bill dies.
In their latest manoeuvre, the Conservatives tried to hold the bill up in committee by insisting that 22 additional speakers be added to the list of witnesses. When the Liberals refused and tried to force the committee to report on the bill by June 9, Mr. Toews began his filibuster, which wiped out two sittings of the committee.
Yesterday afternoon, Paul Macklin, the justice parliamentary secretary, met Karen Redman, the Liberal Whip, just before Question Period.
They agreed that Mr. Toews had them over a barrel, and some sort of compromise would have to be worked out. Two hours later, as Mr.
Toews launched into Day 3 of his filibuster, Mr. Macklin asked for a brief time out. All parties huddled together for a few minutes and, when the session resumed, there was a deal. Mr. Toews got his witnesses, and the committee will delay its report until June 16.
That leaves only three sitting days to debate the bill before Parliament is scheduled to rise for the summer. Some high-placed Liberals remain confident they can still push the legislation through before the summer break. They could invoke closure, or have the House sit round the clock, or extend the sitting.
If they try any of these tactics, however, they risk a backbench revolt. Pat O'Brien has already threatened to quit the caucus if the same-sex legislation is rammed through the House. Yesterday, he warned his party's leadership against any attempts at hasty action.
"I am less than satisfied that they are doing it at breakneck speed," he said in an interview. If the government tries to rush a vote on third reading, "I think there will be a major problem in the caucus. I know I would have a major problem." Unless the government, which still hangs onto the confidence of the House by a thread, is willing to risk this kind of internal rebellion, it will have to give up its June deadline, and let debate on the bill resume when the House returns in late September. Then it will be up to the Conservatives to decide how long to prolong the debate, before letting C-38 come forward for a final vote.
Even then, nothing is certain. The Senate must also pass this bill, and there is word coming from the Other Place that a few senators may take steps to delay passage.
Link Byfield, one of the leaders in the fight against same-sex marriage, once predicted: "The single factor that will do more to determine the outcome of this fight is which side lasts longer, and can keep up the momentum." Exactly.
I hate to tell you but the Muslims will kill you before the gays...take that from a fellow Scot.
Yes, but what if they are "gay" Muslims.
They either deep in the closet or deep in the ground. In Islam those are the only two options for someone who is "different".
...and I say this as an older person who has had gay relatives, employees, friends and neighbors. I don't much care what consenting adults do in private... but when you start dragging the rest of society ( to say nothing of the children ) into it, it's time to draw the line.
I think it may to time to invoke the poison pill that was quietly discussed about a year ago. If the government abolishes civil marriage then the pervs can be "equal" without forcing the rest of us to celebrate behaviour we consider repugnant.
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.