LifeSiteNews.com Life, Family and Culture News

Email: "Lobbying of Liberal MPs Key to Possible Defeat of Canadian Gay ‘Marriage’ Law"

Your Email:

Your Name:

Send To Email:

Subject:

Message:
BY LifeSiteNews.com OTTAWA, December 10, 2004 (LifeSiteNews.com) - With almost every member of the socialist Bloc Quebecois and NDP parties certain to vote for the Liberal government’s bill to legalize gay “marriage,” and all but four of the 99 Conservatives known to be opposed to the upcoming marriage re-definition, the main focus of lobbying by pro-family Canadians will be on influencing individual Liberal MPs across the nation. There is a slight chance they could succeed. Pro-family leaders are mindful that the 1999 defense of marriage motion passed by a whopping 216-55.  The September 16, 2003 vote on an identical motion lost by a slim 137-132. However, for that vote, 29 MPs were conspicuously absent, 19 of them Liberals. The vote on the very controversial C-250, which added “sexual orientation” to Canada’s hate crimes law, passed by a close vote of 141-110. It was considered close because, again, 39 MPs did not show for the crucial vote. Most notably, 33 of them were Liberals. Liberal leader Paul Martin, mimicking previous leader Jean Chretien’s authoritarian practices, which Martin promised he would change, has stated that the vote on the marriage bill will be subject to a two-line whip. That means Cabinet Ministers must vote for the government legislation or risk losing their jobs and status and especially risk losing the substantial extra income and perks Cabinet members receive. For the past few decades, the threat of losing that income and those perks has proven to be sufficient bait for Cabinet Members to dispose of their principles and consciences and their obligations to the voters and the nation. That is another challenge for social conservative Canadians - to change that Ottawa political culture of elected Members of Parliament being subservient trained seals to authoritarian party leaderships, in all parties.  The Globe and Mail reported today that of the 42 non-cabinet Liberal MPs it contacted, 31 have indicated they will support the change to the definition of marriage, 10 are opposed and one is undecided.  Canadian Press reported yesterday that Northern Development Minister Joe Comuzzi indicated he would vote against the marriage redefinition bill. Comuzzi, CP reported, said he can’t break an election promise he made to constituents to fight same-sex marriage. The Toronto suburb of Scarborough gives an indication of what might become possible in some parts of the country. In Scarborough, which has a high immigrant and middle class family population, five, and maybe all six of its Liberal MPs will likely vote against same-sex marriage.  The Dec.10 Scarborough Mirror community newspaper notes that prior to the election, a survey by Scarborough Centre Liberal MP John Cannis found that 94% of respondents favoured retaining the traditional definition of marriage. Cannis says he will vote according to the wishes of his constituents.  Similarly, Scarborough-Guildwood MP John McKay said there is “absolutely no question” where his constituents stand and that his vote on the marriage issue will reflect that. He told the Mirror, and was seen on national media stating, “I’ll be supporting the traditional definition of marriage”. Scarborough Southwest MP Tom Wappel and Scarborough Agincourt MP Jim Karygiannis both also told the Mirror they will be voting against the marriage definition change. Pickering-Scarborough MP Dan McTeague was not available for the Mirror report. However, he is also likely to vote against the bill, despite his cabinet position, since he has been a consistent and outspoken defender of both life and family. Scarborough-Rouge River MP Derek Lee is the odd man out in Scarborough. Lee told the Mirror it was “premature” to say how he would vote on the bill although he has consistently voted in the past to defend traditional marriage Tom Wappel expressed disappointment that Martin has gone back on his previous promise to allow a completely free vote on this issue. Wappel said, “As far as I understand it’s going to be a limited free vote,” referring to the fact that Martin is attempting to force the almost 70 members of Cabinet to vote for the government bill, regardless of their personal consciences and constituents’ wishes on the issue.  See LifeSiteNews.com’s MPs voting record http://www.campaignlifecoalition.com/fedvotes/  Sj http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/lobbying-of-liberal-mps-key-to-possible-defeat-of-canadian-gay-marriage-law/

Please enter the word you see in the image below: