Sunday, June 04, 2006

Peevey Stevie reprises SSM vote - nation groans

CathiefromCanada knows the score. For what it's worth, this is what I said when Harper first promised to re-open the Same-Sex Marriage debate last November:
I'm sure a lot of Canadians miss the family squabbles over this as much as I do. For the upteenth time: Gays' existence is a reality. Gay marriage is a reality. Gays deserve equal treatment, which means they cannot be barred from marriage. It's protected under the charter. Seven Supreme Courts and the majority of Canadians agree.

This is not an issue that needs re-opening, and surely not a priority. It was part of the party platforms of the Bloq, the NDP, and the Liberals for the last two federal campaigns. It was hashed-out in Parliamentary commissions and debates for years. This dog is done hunting and should wile out the rest of its days with the Death Penalty dog.

Yep. Still applies in spades six months later.

One question though: how come non-life threatening things require Parliament to debate and vote on them again and again, while others that do involve life and death consequences need none at all? Oh right, I keep forgetting: it's because the Right are a bunch of shameless hypocrites. How silly of me to forget.

(Thanks for reminding me, Simon)

- 30 -


ivan said...

Oh Scott, you've got to read some D. H. Lawrence.
The gay lobby is out of proportion to its numbers, it is not based in Canada and has become something of a cabal.
Leave something in San Francisco?

Gazetteer said...


I would go one further - this is an issue that they just want to raise but never win.

It's all about shoring up the base and as long as it's out their they can keep using it and using it and using it and using it and using it (see Rovianism: Atwater/AilesVille).



Anonymous said...

I think re-opening the SSM debate is hilarious. I personally hate the Supreme Court and think that Berverly McClaughlin should be tarred and feathered. Oh silly me! I forgot we had the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. If Canadians had the right to vote down this shameless bit of constitutional gerrymandering we wouldn't be having the SSM debate would we! And that suits me just fine.

ivan said...

How gay all this is.
I thought you guys thought stratetically and with purpose.
What a silly goose I am.

Anonymous said...

I just think that the Ontario Superior Court ruling legalising gay marriage was a sham! what a dishonest bit of judicial activism! I think judges like Beverley McClaughlin (am I spelling her name right?) should be impeached. What a sneaky way to deal a contentious issue. For the sake of all Canadians I hope Parliament shuts down SSM just to piss off the legal community!

Scott in Montreal said...

Nothing like anonymous posters. Spout off some borrowed Right-wing claptrap without even a hint of anything to back it up with, and be sure to be outraged and vindictive. You don't even know why you're saying this shit, do you? Sheesh.

ivan said...

I think anonymous is right.
We are suddenly aware of the absurdity of Canada, especially its judiciary. This is an unreal place. Enough to turn you into an existenialist, that is, to suddenly realize the absurdity of your society, let alone the madness of the self. The only common thing we have is our passports, and even those have a lavender tinge.
Five hundred years of history and we can't get it togther. So we give it to a Trudeauesque Supreme Court.
Generation of weasels for sure.
...Sorry Scott but the social engineers seem to have done a job on everybody.
Progressive as in Ellen?