(no subject)
Jan. 28th, 2004 07:07 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
c9Today the Canadian government announced that they are expanding their reference to the Supreme Court of Canada on same-sex marriage: adding one question, asking whether the opposite-sex restriction on civil marriage is consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
This will have no effect on the outcome: same-sex marriage will be legal in Canada, nationwide, eventually. But it boils down to another year waiting; there will likely be no judgement before 2005, at the earliest.
This rots my socks, because it's the government chickening out on an issue of basic human rights. Because the original hearings were to begin during the expected election campaign in April, Paul Martin decided to hide the issue and win an election before it actually comes into the press again. I feel that Martin made a cowardly choice.
This also makes me happy, because if it had come up during the election, the Reform-Alliance-tories would have made hay (and major votes) with their campaigning against the idea, including threats to use the notwithstanding clause and other such tools of discrimination. I also feel Martin did make a logical choice.
Argh!![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
leapfish and I are getting married in Ottawa on May 23rd. It's awfully frustrating to have large portions of one's country really peeved by something that's none of their business.
This will have no effect on the outcome: same-sex marriage will be legal in Canada, nationwide, eventually. But it boils down to another year waiting; there will likely be no judgement before 2005, at the earliest.
This rots my socks, because it's the government chickening out on an issue of basic human rights. Because the original hearings were to begin during the expected election campaign in April, Paul Martin decided to hide the issue and win an election before it actually comes into the press again. I feel that Martin made a cowardly choice.
This also makes me happy, because if it had come up during the election, the Reform-Alliance-tories would have made hay (and major votes) with their campaigning against the idea, including threats to use the notwithstanding clause and other such tools of discrimination. I also feel Martin did make a logical choice.
Argh!
leapfish and I are getting married in Ottawa on May 23rd. It's awfully frustrating to have large portions of one's country really peeved by something that's none of their business.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-01-28 11:48 pm (UTC)In the long run, I think this will increase the chances of any new Bill passing to include same sex in the definition of marriage. On the current path, I think that any reasonable Bill would have been defeated, since even almost half of the Liberals would vote it down on a free vote.
If they truly feel they have the mandate, I think things will pick up speed again after the next election, when they are ensured to have a few years for any political scars to heal.
It's politics first, and then people second- and unfortunately this seems to be the common ideal across the political landscape in this country.
(Should I sign this as Walter :| ).