News

OTTAWA, September 17, 2003 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Canadian Alliance Leader Stephen Harper expressed disbelief yesterday at the “astounding dishonesty of the Liberal party on the issue of same-sex marriage” following a vote in the House of Commons on an Alliance motion to affirm the traditional definition of marriage and to take all steps necessary to protect it in Canada. The motion was defeated by a vote of 132-137, despite the fact that a nearly identical motion passed, with Cabinet and backbench support from the Liberals, by a vote of 216-55 in 1999.  In what is being called the best speech Harper has ever delivered he blasted the Liberal Government on their failure to protect marriage.  “They have chosen to make change without social consensus, and in doing so they have articulated a position which I believe is wrong in law, universally insulting, and very dangerous as far as real rights are concerned,” said Harper.  The following points delivered by Harper express clearly the undemocratic manipulations which led to the current threat to marriage:  “First, this is wrong in law. Regarding sexual orientation, or more accurately, sexual behaviour, proponents of same sex marriage have argued that this is analogous to race and ethnicity. This position was not part of the Charter of Rights when it was passed by Parliament in 1982. It was omitted, not by accident or oversight. It was omitted deliberately and explicitly by all sides of the House of Commons.  “Sexual orientation was later read-in to the Charter.  The courts, in effect, amended the constitution, and amending the constitution is not a power for the courts. At some point, the House is going to have to declare where its powers begin and where those of the courts end.  “However, even if we accept sexual orientation being read-in to the Charter, that does not automatically mean that traditional marriage should be deemed illegal and unconstitutional.  “The Supreme Court of Canada itself, when it has been asked to address this question, has defended the traditional definition of marriage. I read from Justice La Forest’s judgment in the Egan decision of 1995. This is one reason why the Government has been eager to hear from all sorts of courts, except the Supreme Court. It has been anxious not to hear from the Supreme Court of Canada because it doubts the Supreme Court of Canada would actually agree with it on its position on same sex marriage.”“The Liberals say today that they will not touch the ability of churches, temples, mosques and synagogues to determine their own definition of marriage.  But I remind you that these are the same people who said, in the last election, that they would never consider touching the definition of marriage itself.  “I ask the members of the Liberal Party who agree with us in principle to think very carefully about this. If the Liberals now say that the traditional definition of marriage is illegal, immoral, discriminatory and racist, why will they ever tolerate those who, through their religious institutions, believe otherwise?  “Bill C-250 is also before this House.  It is, in our view, just another step down this course of criminalizing opinions on this subject that are simply not accepted by the Liberal left.”  See Harper’s full speech on LifeSite at:  https://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2003/sep/030917a.html