(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: 2004-01-29 03:44 am (UTC)I think they stand a chance, though. With the right spin and publicity on the gay issue, I can see them getting in power. What is it? Around 50% of the population doesn't want gay marriage?
You can't forget that vote splitting won't be happening in the election. That could attract more people to the Harpers, too.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-29 01:01 pm (UTC)I'm not sure I really believe the '50%' statistic in terms of how it will effect an election result.
I don't think that the gay issue is near and dear to enough people, to make it an election decider- not that I don't think it will have any impact.
It is pretty much just the religious right and the gay community that cares enough to cast a vote solidly on that issue (probably not 50% of the population).
There has been alot of media spin, and alot of politics around the issue, but at the end of the day, people will likely cast their votes based on the things that they usually do. That is, paying no taxes, and getting endless amounts of services.