"I had such a crush on her. Until I met you Lois. You're my silver medal."
-- Peter Griffin

Gay Marriage Mudslinging

The leader of the aptly named federal “Reform… er, Alliance…oh yeah, Conservatives” (good one, Kaveman) seem so desperate to thwart the gay marriage issue that he is now trying to cloud the issue by dredging up pre-Charter history. The Globe and Mail reported on the gay marriage debate today. (I haven’t figured out how to make handy-dandy links in my posts, but the article can be viewed here: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050217/SAMESEX17/National/Idx)

The PM stated that you cannot revert to the traditional definition of marriage without overriding the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. Harper responded that ” ‘The Liberal Party of Canada is simply in no position – either past or present – to lecture anyone about Charter rights or human rights.’ ” To support this, Stephen Harper reminds us of all the atrocious, unconstitutional things the Liberal party has done in the past; that it was Liberal governments that interned Japanese Canadians during WWII, that closed Canada’s borders to Jews fleeing Nazi Germany, and that implemented the War Measures Act in 1970.

First of all, I have a hard time believing that a Conservative government would not have done exactly the same thing in the first two cases had they been in power, and so I don’t think he’s going to win any moral points there. (I concede, however, that invoking the War Measures Act in response to the October crisis is probably uniquely Trudeauesque).

More importantly, thought, Harper conveniently forgets that it was actually the Liberal Party of Canada that brought us the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms in 1982. Maybe the Liberals ARE in a position to do a little bit of Charter rights lecturing?

5 Responses to “Gay Marriage Mudslinging”

  1. Not to mention that bringing those incidents up as an argument for a current issue is tantamount to insinuating that they would do the same today – quite insulting. Or is that how he justifies his stance on social issues? By comparing them to the reactionary populist policies of 60 years ago?

    It’s a brave new world Stephen, feel free to join us.

  2. Yeah, he’s basically saying “You did something wrong in the past, therefore you’re never allowed to do something right!” :-)

    BTW, Homewrecker, you can linkify text in your post by just highlighting the text and clicking the little ‘link’ button above the textbox. In the dialog box that opens up, just paste in the URL and hit ‘OK’. I already did it for this post, but now you know for next time!

  3. Not even…
    Harper: “You did something wrong in the past.”
    Martin: “Wasn’t me, pal.”

    Can we really expect party allegiances to be ideologically consistent over a 60-year period (or more), to say nothing of social norms?

  4. Good point…we have a hard enough time getting them to be ideologically consistent over a 60 day period… :-)

  5. hahaha…
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050217.wxsame18/BNStory/National/

Leave a Reply