OTTAWA, February 2, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The introduction of the Canadian government’s same-sex marriage bill Monday has exposed Canadians to what will undoubtedly be viewed by some as an assault on their intelligence and principles by the government, media and even the opposition party.
Most notable is that no one in the establishment seems to have mentioned anything about the morality or ethics of same-sex relationships or about the conscience rights of anyone opposed to homosexual relations for other than religious reasons. The forcing of gay sex-ed programs on children or the protection of non-religious organizations such as Boy Scouts who might oppose their facilities being used by same-sex couples was not considered. The main focus appears to be on whether or not religious officials or organizations are actually protected by the bill.
Justice Minister Irwin Cotler, in his impassioned defense of the bill Monday vigorously claimed that a few phrases inserted into the bill will protect religious freedom. He stated, “what this bill does is reaffirm and restate the express protection for freedom of religion, which has been given an expansive interpretation by the courts”. Prime Minister Paul Martin stated during a media scrum, “No church, no temple, no synagogue, no mosque, no religious official will be asked or forced to perform a marriage that is contrary to their beliefs.”
Cotler continued “the minority rights of gays and lesbians does not in any way undermine the rights of, as the court put it, religious groups or opposite sex couples. Their rights are not taken away. Only rights are being added. This is a value added approach, if you will, to equality rights. It does not detract or diminish from anyone else’s right at the same time it respects, freedom of religion.”
Conservative opposition spokesman, Vic Toews, during another press conference, exposed Cotler’s and Martin’s claims to be fraudulent and calculatingly limited in scope. Toews noted the government has no right to make the claim that anything in its bill would protect religious freedom since, once the marriage definition is changed, that authority is constitutionally in the provincial realm. The provinces, he emphasized, have repeatedly trampled on religious freedoms when expansion of the “rights” of homosexuals have been at issue.
Toews pointed out, “We have seen over the number of years, a consistent pattern of both court decisions and human rights decisions that when religious rights come up against equality rights, the equality rights trump religious freedoms.” He gave examples of:
* the Ontario Catholic school forced to allow a student to bring a gay partner to the school prom despite the special constitutional status of the Ontario Catholic school system
* Marriage commissioners in three provinces who were fired for refusing to perform same-sex weddings after activist judges in the provinces ruled in favour of same-sex marriages
* A multi-denominational youth camp in his home province of Manitoba that has been taken before a human “rights” tribunal by a gay choir, “whose object is to promote homosexuality”
* The Knights of Columbus Hall in British Columbia that has been taken to a human “rights” tribunal for refusing to allow its hall to be used for a lesbian “wedding” reception
Toews could also have mentioned numerous other cases and the rampant judicial activism of Canada’s government appointed judges. That creative, law-making licence by Canadian judges now almost makes moot decisions or laws drafted by parliament.
See The Real Pierre Trudeau: Father of Canada’s Permissive Society