RE: Harper vows free vote on gay marriage
I think not asks;”He can invoke the "notwithstanding clause". Or am I wrong?” ...
Jay replies; “He could, but he wouldn't do it. “
Both posters miss the point...
The issue is not whether he would either call for a vote, or invoke the not withstanding clause (he would) it is that Mr. Harper is so out of touch with mainstream Canada to think that we want to readdress this issue or that we should. I don’t know a single person whom thinks this is an important issue. But supposing it was… would a free vote be right?
Free votes are just great, it was a free vote in the past that kept women subjugated... not “persons” under the law. Free does not mean right, nor does being supported by a majority. But why not find out the “true” majority with a plebiscite instead and let all Canadians decide? If Mr. Harper feels this is so important as to warrant reopening the issue surely it is important enough to rate a plebiscite? Because that still wouldn’t make it right. We have another tradition here that means more to most Canadians, and that is equality, and human rights and freedoms. We have a charter of rights and freedoms to protect us from the tyranny of the majority. I find it very sad indeed that a national political leader would care so little for the charter of rights in what we call the age of enlightenment, but even worse that most of his “conservative” party share his low opinion of the charter.
If we re-open the issue where do we draw the line? Do you think Gay marriage is the only thing the conservatives pine to overturn? Dont count on it.
We might as well bring back the traditional definition of many other things such as "persons". Lets return to the age when women were not persons under the law as well. The old definition of a person was one honorable tradition held in high regard by conservatives of old. Hey they even had the backing of the Supreme Court on that issue. They fought long and hard to maintain that fine tradition too.
I believe Canadians are ready to accept gay marriage, and in fact we must accept it. Canadians are about progress, acceptance and human rights. I believe we value that more than our neighbors to the south.
Mr.Harper's values are those of a conservative dinosaur pre-dating even the 50s, he has no respect for educated urbanites nor the diverse ethic groups whom have immigrated here over the last quarter century bringing many differing values and cultures.
Earth to Mr. Harper, get back to the future buddy, you are out of step with reality.
You couldn’t even get your extreme makeover right (your haircut screams beaver cleaver), and the next time you get the urge to use gay in a sentence, why not wish Canadians a gay Christmas season filled with joy and goodwill… oh wait you ruined that didn’t you.
I think not asks;”He can invoke the "notwithstanding clause". Or am I wrong?” ...
Jay replies; “He could, but he wouldn't do it. “
Both posters miss the point...
The issue is not whether he would either call for a vote, or invoke the not withstanding clause (he would) it is that Mr. Harper is so out of touch with mainstream Canada to think that we want to readdress this issue or that we should. I don’t know a single person whom thinks this is an important issue. But supposing it was… would a free vote be right?
Free votes are just great, it was a free vote in the past that kept women subjugated... not “persons” under the law. Free does not mean right, nor does being supported by a majority. But why not find out the “true” majority with a plebiscite instead and let all Canadians decide? If Mr. Harper feels this is so important as to warrant reopening the issue surely it is important enough to rate a plebiscite? Because that still wouldn’t make it right. We have another tradition here that means more to most Canadians, and that is equality, and human rights and freedoms. We have a charter of rights and freedoms to protect us from the tyranny of the majority. I find it very sad indeed that a national political leader would care so little for the charter of rights in what we call the age of enlightenment, but even worse that most of his “conservative” party share his low opinion of the charter.
If we re-open the issue where do we draw the line? Do you think Gay marriage is the only thing the conservatives pine to overturn? Dont count on it.
We might as well bring back the traditional definition of many other things such as "persons". Lets return to the age when women were not persons under the law as well. The old definition of a person was one honorable tradition held in high regard by conservatives of old. Hey they even had the backing of the Supreme Court on that issue. They fought long and hard to maintain that fine tradition too.
I believe Canadians are ready to accept gay marriage, and in fact we must accept it. Canadians are about progress, acceptance and human rights. I believe we value that more than our neighbors to the south.
Mr.Harper's values are those of a conservative dinosaur pre-dating even the 50s, he has no respect for educated urbanites nor the diverse ethic groups whom have immigrated here over the last quarter century bringing many differing values and cultures.
Earth to Mr. Harper, get back to the future buddy, you are out of step with reality.
You couldn’t even get your extreme makeover right (your haircut screams beaver cleaver), and the next time you get the urge to use gay in a sentence, why not wish Canadians a gay Christmas season filled with joy and goodwill… oh wait you ruined that didn’t you.
