Harper reopens same-sex marriage debate

CBC News ^

[Sam Gamgee]

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper reopened the hot-button issue of same-sex unions on his first day on the federal election trail Tuesday, saying he would hold a free vote on changing the definition of marriage if he becomes prime minister.

Harper made the remark after Prime Minister Paul Martin announced Canadians will go to the polls on Jan. 23.

Harper, who has long promised that if elected he would hold a free vote on marriage, raised the issue himself during a news conference Tuesday in Ottawa.

"We were committed at the time of the convention and through the last debate to put a free vote to the next Parliament on this issue," he said. "It will be a genuinely free vote when I am prime minister. I will not whip our cabinet. Cabinet can vote as they want."

He said if the House votes against changing the law to allow same-sex marriages, the matter would be settled.

Harper, who believes same-sex couples should be recognized through civil unions, promised to preserve the gay marriages already performed across Canada.

Some observers say the Tory stance against gay weddings cost the party crucial support in urban Ontario and among younger voters.

But Harper may have raised the issue to pre-empt his critics, who say he's intolerant and has a secret agenda.

[Sam Gamgee]

I'm wondering if this is such a good idea. There already was a vote, and Harper could be criticized for having a second vote to just get the result he wants.

Maybe the strategy was to get this issue out of the way to stop the Liberals from accusing him of having a secret agenda?

[sageb1]

hmmmmmm...it's possible, but if I were a Canadian voter, I'd have a problem with him, even though getting rid of Martin would be well worth it - for now.

[ncountylee]

Equal Right for Sodomites, eh.

[TheMole]

Harper, who has long promised that if elected he would hold a free vote on marriage...

Since this is a well-known part of the party's platform, in what sense can he be said to be "re-opening" the issue?

[Sam Gamgee]

I am against gay marriage; however, I feel that campaigning on it again could lose some votes. I can just see Martin taking this and hammering Harper on it day after day.

[Pikamax]

Argh. Harper better make this a one day issue and not a constant topic because between the media and the liberals they will use it to drown out everything else.

[Blind Eye Jones]

"Some observers say the Tory stance against gay weddings cost the party crucial support in urban Ontario and among younger voters."

To convince the youngsters all he has to do is hold up a 12' cucumber and tell them that they will be trained in how to safely insert this up their ass as part of the new sex education program that comes with gay marriage.

[JNL]

He won't and can't make this a one day issue. The Libs are going to toast him with this. I think I predicted that it would take about a week before Harper inserted foot in mouth, even I'm shocked at how quick he was.

[Heartofsong83]

Polls consistently show a majority of Canadians oppose gay marriage...and they were NEVER given a say in the decision.

Also, the Liberals never had gay marriage as a campaign promise in the last election...

[Sam Gamgee]

I'd be interested to see some of those polls. I find that surprising.

[Sam Gamgee]

LOL.

[Sam Gamgee]

I really like Harper. He is a smart man and a man of integrity. But he needs some better strategists.

Time will tell how the Liberals react. Will they spend less time now on selling Canada's economic record and more on the fear of "homophobic" Harper?

Let's hope that Harper can start talking economic policy.

[JNL]

Well to be honest I'm not a fan of Harper, I like Mackay alot more and truly believe he should lead the party. Harper has proven time and time again that he just can't stay on message. He leaves the door wide open to attacks like this and I hesitate to blame his handlers.

[Sam Gamgee]

I just worry that Mackay is part of the old Tory establishment - like the Joe Clarks and Mulroneys, whose only real ideology is to get power for the sake of power.

I'm a Reformer at heart and was disgusted by the Tories throughout the 90s.

Belinda was part of that establishment and proved where her heart was. How do we know Mackay is any different?

[JNL]

I think you hit the nail on the head. While you may dislike MacKay for being like or for truly being "old guard", he is the best hope for a majority Conservative government.

The best you will get with Harper (and I hope I'm wrong)is a minority government. And, if you didn't like the old Tories you'll hate the watered down, cling to whatever vestiges of power we have minority conservative government.

As a minority, nothing and I mean nothing will get done without the liberal boogeyman crawling up from the parliament floor.

To regain a majority the old guard and reformers like yourself have to come to a truce. Much like how the conservative christians and moderate repubs took the house, senate and POTUS. Not everyone likes it (heck half the time even this board can't agree on anything), but it worked.

[Sam Gamgee]

That’s a good point. Part of my repulsion of the old Tory guard was how the party was infiltrated by socialists when Charest took over. Maybe they were always there and Charest gave them a voice, I don’t know. Hopefully most of the reds are by now gone.

I guess the question always is, is it worth getting a party elected that is a watered down version of conservatism? Running John Kerry gave conservatives no choice but the hold their noses and vote Republican. But in this case it could be even more watered down than the US version. I remember researching and almost voting for one of the minor parties that are true conservatives. I didn’t get far enough in my research to see if they ran candidates in my riding.

In short, I’m not too excited about a truce with the old guard. I don’t think McKay or anyone could get us a majority. Canadians are far too married to the status quo – that is probably a trait that is more ingrained in Canadians than any other people on the face of the earth.

Mulroney was an embarrassment for conservatives and a rallying cry for liberals as he took the national debt and added to it like no liberal ever could. I do give him credit though for being a fighter. He took the media and stuffed their liberal campaign down their throats.

[concrete is my business]

RE: "Mulroney was an embarrassment for Conservatives and a rallying cry for Liberals as he took the national debt and added to it like no Liberal ever could. I do give him credit though for being a fighter"

Sam, it was Mulroneys GST and Mulroneys NAFTA accord that eased Ottawa's debts.

PM Paul Martins Liberals have taken the credit through a Liberal owned media while easily breaking both Liberal Red Book campaign promises to rid Canadians of the hated GST and NAFTA.

The Liberals enjoy the large increases in federal revenue and large overruns in EI, for instance, from taxes a Conservative government would have lowered long ago.

This tax money all goes into general revenue and the Liberals can buy lots of Canadian votes with Canadians own money.

Also if the Meech accord had gone through there would not have been an Adscam scandal.

Also as a Conservative, I do not want the definition of marriage changed.

It is an important Conservative issue and I do not believe the push polls from the CTV and CBC on this issue.

IMHO, Canadians and Americans are more alike than most will admit and the USA state votes on marriage in 2004 are more convincing and reliable polls.

Political leaders like Sven Robinson are terrible role models for young people and IMO should be disciplined and defeated by the voting public.

[concrete is my business]

Todays other joke besides PMPM:

Smart Bartender

A man enters a bar and orders a drink. The bar has a robot bartender.

The robot serves him a perfectly prepared cocktail, and then asks him, "What's your IQ?"

The man replies "150" and the robot proceeds to make conversation about global warming factors, quantum physics and spirituality, biomimicry, environmental interconnectedness, string theory, nano-technology, and sexual proclivities

The customer is very impressed and thinks, "This is really cool." He decides to test the robot. He walks out of the bar, turns around, and comes back in for another drink. Again, the robot serves him the perfectly prepared drink and asks him, "What's your IQ?"

The man responds, "about a 100."

Immediately the robot starts talking, but this time, about football, NASCAR, baseball, supermodels, favorite fast foods, guns, and women's breasts.

Really impressed, the man leaves the bar and decides to give the robot one more test. He heads out and returns, the robot serves him and asks, "What's your IQ?"

The man replies, "Er, 50, I think."

And the robot says... real slowly... "So............... ya gonna vote for the Liberals again?"

[Sam Gamgee]

Wasn't Meech a disaster? Why did Mulroney have to stoke the embers that had been dying since the 1970s?

As far as the rest of what you said, I agree.

[Sam Gamgee]

LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL. :)