According to the Globe and Mail today:

The Conservative government is planning measures, including a Defence of Religions Act, to allow public officials, such as Justices of the Peace, to refuse to perform same-sex marriages.

The measures are also intended to protect the free-speech rights of religious leaders and others who criticize homosexual behaviour or refuse to do business with gay-rights organizations, The Globe and Mail has learned.

Any legislation would be brought forward only if the government loses the motion this fall to reopen the debate on same-sex marriage.

Although the former Liberal government claimed “existing laws and court rulings already protect the rights of religious groups not to be compelled to perform same-sex marriage”, there is “acknowledged uncertainty about the rights of individuals to publicly criticize homosexual behaviour” such as “advertisements that quote scripture demanding that homosexuals be put to death”, according to the Globe.

This law ranks among the most cynical ever proposed in Canada and clearly demonstrates the Conservatives’ determination to subvert the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Its title, “The Defense of Religions Act”, is absurd. Clearly chosen to appeal to religious people on a gut level, it narrowly and incorrectly frames the issue of gay rights as a war against religion.

If anyone needs defending, however, it is homosexuals. I can’t think of many cases where a Christian was attacked by a group of gays and beaten to death. I can’t recall the last time a Gay Pride parade turned nasty and ended with a Christian tied to a truck, getting dragged down a road.

This would seem like an extreme analogy if it wasn’t for the idea that we need to examine whether or not ads quoting doctrines that advocate murder are okay. Short answer: they’re not.

Less severe than calls for their murder, but far more pervasive, is discrimination against gays who are seeking employment or housing. But Harper believes the real concern is the persecution of religious Canadians, a vulnerable minority comprising 84% of the population in 2001.

Harper’s Conservatives are seeking to shore up support among their Christian base, but they are also seeking support from religious groups that are not among the Conservatives’ typical supporters, like Jews and Muslims.

Since the Act will “defend” the beliefs of these religious groups as well, will it be lawful for Jewish or Muslim extremists to take out ads advocating attacks on Christians or on each other?

Will it be lawful for a Muslim clerk at city hall to refuse to issue a marriage license to a Muslim and a non-Muslim who wish to marry, on the grounds that interfaith marriages are against his religion?

Many great evils have been committed in the name of religion. Rather than defend these evils, we should defend against them.

[tags]gay rights, gay marriage, homosexuality, religion[/tags]

The Liberal Party of Canada has granted 30% of its leadership convention delegates to candidate Michael Ignatieff. The delegates are heading to the party’s leadership convention this December.

This is nothing close to a victory, and it probably says little about Iggy as a political leader. What does this number tell us? For starters, it tells us that 30% of Liberals just don’t get it.

Iggy may win a Liberal leadership convention, but he will not win the next federal election. You can swoon all you want about his intellect, his worldliness, his looks, and his shoe size. It does not make a difference. He will not win.

The fact that Iggy has lived most of his life somewhere other than Canada is a big deal. Some Liberal insiders, drunk by the prospect of his candidacy, are willing to tell you otherwise, but they are wrong. It will be a very big deal for many Canadians. What’s worse is that Iggy’s supporters have to try and create an answer to this little problem.

A friend of mine is supporting Iggy. She knows some of the spin-doctors and Liberal champs in Iggy’s backroom. I told her what I thought: “Many Canadians won’t vote for a Prime Minister who has lived most of his life outside of Canada.”

She answered, “Yes, but I also think many Canadians realize that, if you want to be successful, you have to leave Canada at some point in your life.”

Wow. This rebuttal has absolutely no appeal to me. It is as cynical as it is ironic. Could you imagine a candidate for Prime Minster campaigning, even vaguely, on that notion? If that’s what Iggy’s supporters have come up with, then they are in more trouble than I thought.

———
This post was written by alevo.

[tags]politics, Canada, liberals, liberal leadership, ignatieff[/tags]