Electing to be Concerned.

[c9]

The other night on the phone, I happened to mention something about the election getting interesting. My dad, who in the past has voted Reform and Canadian Alliance, and is pretty much guaranteed to vote Conservative this time around (all this despite my being out to him and him being ok with it, he's just more economically focused than my rights focused, not trying to sound bitter cause I'm not), took the opportunity to ask me if I was scared of Stephen Harper or the Conservatives, or if my friends were.

I told him yes, sometimes. I sorta stumbled over my reasons, my dad has always made me nervous -- he was the typical domineering 50's style dad, who won arguments by being bigger and louder. I thought I'd post about it though to get my thoughts in order.

What is there to be worried about? Well, beyond the *fact* that Harper would have sent troops to Iraq in a front-line role, many in his party have very regressive social agendas around abortion, bilingualism, equal rights for minorities, immigration, and social programs.

But my Dad was asking about gay rights specifically. I'm legally married, and I know that taking my marriage away is not something that Harper would attempt -- he's too smart to go down that road. There's some question as to whether it's even possible, so we'll set that aside. But currently, only three provinces allow legal same-sex marriage, and all because of court cases: the federal law has not yet been changed, and it must be before all provinces and territories will be equal in their treatment of same-sex couples.

The federal government has submitted a reference to the Supreme Court to confirm what they already officially believe, that equal marriage is the only constitutionally valid option. It's sort of a pre-emptive strike against those who (a) might say "we didn't actually have to go all the way, and (b) might appeal court cases all the way to the Supreme Court (Egale Canada, Alberta government, etc) to accomplish their goals. Strategically, it makes sense, although it's frustrating that over 25% of Canadians do not have legal equal marriage available in their hom province or territory.

Who controls the reference? The Prime Minister's Office. Not the House of Commons, and not even the Supreme Court. So if the man in the PMO changes, the reference could be pulled.

Possible outcomes of election: Liberal Majority, Liberal Minority, Conservative Minority, Conservative Majority.

Plausible outcomes of election: Liberal Minority, Conservative Minority, Conservative Majority.

If Martin gets back in, the reference will stay, and the SCC will say that equal marriage is the only option. The bill will eventually show up, but sadly will take a while to get through the House. Luckily the Bloc and NDP are strongly on-side on this issue.

If Harper gets into the PMO, the reference will be pulled (he has stated this), and a bill will be introduced to make marriage legally opposite-sex nationwide. Not only divisive, anti-equality, counter to the constitution, and evil, but this is actually a stupid quagmire that would cause conflicts in judge-interpreted and House-legislated law. Ugly, to say the least.

Additionally, this bill would likely get a free vote, which would mean it would only get full support from the NDP (who think human rights aren't optional, funny that). The Liberals would vote around one-third against equality, and the Bloc better than that. But it would be close, and might even pass.

Then we'd face another 3-5 years of court cases for the Supreme Court to declare the law unconstitutional, and another several years until we had a moderate government willing to actually pass a law for equal marriage.

My marriage is not at stake. But my friends' plans are. Stephen Harper, and many of his colleagues, really don't consider me to be worth as much as they are. They consider me a second-class citizen deserving of unequal treatment under the law.

His economics are not my style, but they don't personally threaten me. His social policies are destructive in my view, but again, they don't personally threaten me. But his plans to legislate discrimination and use my relationship as a weapon in the election does, personally, threaten me. And if I'm not good enough to get married in Stephen Harper's Canada, what else am I not good enough for?

Comments

Kudos to Cam

[adamos.livejournal.com]

Good for you Cam, pretty much summed up some of my feelings. Dave and I are in a real quagmire, considering we are in the middle of Conservative Party heartland, and don't know what we can do to influence our (conservative) voting family and friends. I live in Stephen Harper's riding and Dave lives in Jason Kenny's riding...the two M.P.'s that Cdns. for Equal Marriage singled out for supporting Focus on the Family (GRRRRRRR). The most frustrating part is that a lot of people will vote Conservative because the anger over Liberal mismanagement is so high, and little else seems to matter here. This is especially difficult for Dave, seeing that he is pretty much a right-wing boy, but is torn about voting for a homophobic Conservative party candidate!!! We tried to volunteer for Cdns. for Equal Marriage, but were told that the only thing left to do was to talk to family and friends, or work on select Calgary Liberal and NDP campaigns. I was going to support a promising Liberal candidate in Calgary South-Centre, until the sponsorship scandal occurred. Its just rubbed salt in old western wounds, and I'm not eager to have people brush me aside or scream and yell at me for campaigning with the liberals.

Sigh....anywho, best to talk to the family and vote my conscience. By the way, as you can see I now have a (limited) livejournal account. Can't wait to do some more political ranting. Its quite therapeutic :-)

Re: Kudos to Cam

[c9.livejournal.com]

I understand your situation too, Adam. Elections are always a pain in the butt.

I read a great column yesterday by...um... shoot. In the Globe, anyway. It basically explained that Canadians rotate the government every ten years or so not because there's a serious problem, but just because we can.

Now, in Alberta I know it doesn't seem this way, but realistically speaking most of the country was mostly satisfied with the Liberals, the economy was mostly doing well, etc. The gun registry, the sponsorship scandal -- they're actually small potatoes historically speaking -- are certainly concerns, but people don't seem to want a different philosophy (so no sharp right turns), they just want a different team in charge for a while. Which explains why the PCs existed, while every other country has actual polarized parties.

Bleh. I think a Liberal minority would actually work out OK, since the policies that I care about (left-wing crap mostly) would be supported by the Bloc and NDP). And a Conservative minority would be next-most-tolerable (even though it would be followed by a Conservative majority a year later, unless Harper does something stupid). "Grrrr" is right.

And welcome to lj! I look forward to your rants -- it *IS* therapeutic.

[ratonil.livejournal.com]

It's interesting how different is the political scenario in Canada now, compared to one year ago. Even though a conservative like Harper could win the election, all the advances and profits you have already are so huge compared with the situation other gay guys (including myself) in other parts of the world.

Most of the extreme speaches of the candidates often change to moderation. Just see what happened with Brazil's president. During his campaign he was against free trade and "capitalism", now he is trying to open Brazil's market and he didn't do all the reforms he planned. One thing is to be on campaign and make promises... another thing is to finally fulfill them once you are the leader.

You canadians are lucky. Remember that. Even though a conservative could stay at Parliament Hill you have built an equal and multicultural society you must be proud of.

[ratonil.livejournal.com]

Or as we say in Spanish: "El pasto siempre es mas verde en el jardin del vecino", which means: "The grass is always greener in the neighbor's garden".

If you don't want the Conservatives in Parliament Hill... just vote. It's the best weapon.

Just a last silly question. Do you have MSN messenger or AIM?

[ratonil.livejournal.com]

Merci beaucoup. I just added you :)

[gueny.livejournal.com]

Most of the extreme speaches of the candidates often change to moderation.

I agree that this tends to be true most of the time, however, I question it in the case of the Conservatives. There has been much talk of a "secret" socially conservative agenda of the Conservatives. Although much of tis is born out of pure political campaigning, it is the one allegation that I think is true.

Even if Stephen Harper himself is more of a moderate, just wait until the flood gates open if he wins an election. There have been enough quotes from Conservative extremists already, to indicate what will happen. And since Harper is such a supporter of free votes on social issues, then he will have little control of the evolution of these policies by rogue members.

The good thing, is that a minority government may stop this from happening.

[gueny.livejournal.com]

I'm not endorsing a free vote. I don't believe that minority rights should be defined by the majority.

On the contrary, I'm saying that I believe a free vote will lead to a regression of social issues.