OTTAWA, Feb 18 (LifeSiteNews) – On Tuesday, the Liberal government stunned many MP’s in the House by beginning debate on the omnibus same-sex legislation only introduced three days before.  In their speeches, MP’s from three parties noted that this hasty call for debate was irresponsible especially since the bill requires amendments to 68 laws, thus requiring several weeks of research for a proper evaluation of all of the proposed law’s ramifications.

Interestingly, after she gave her introductory speech on the legislation, Justice Minister Anne McLellan left the House not waiting for any rebuttals. Official Opposition Critic for Families Eric Lowther gave the Reform response to the legislation calling for it to include a definition of marriage as the exclusive union between a man and a woman. He also stressed that if benefits were to be extended to other dependent relationships, the basis for those benefits should not be private sexual intimacies (as the bill now proposes) but simply relationships of dependence that could include for instance a daughter living with and taking care of her elderly mother.

In an act of principled courage, Liberal MP John McKay stood in the House to speak out in opposition to the bill. “I find myself in somewhat of an unusualposition, being opposed to this bill while being on the government side,” he said. The Liberal Member said he was against the bill since it did not define marriage traditionally, and did not provide support for all relationships of dependency. He also expressed concern over the forced restriction on debate.  Of note, he said “we are told that we will have about two weeks in which to put the legislation through the House.”

During the debate the gay MP Svend Robinson noted for his homosexual activism spoke for the NDP in favour of the bill. The BQ also supported the bill. Speaking for the Progressive Conservatives, Peter McKay took issue with the attempt of the government to ram through the legislation without time for ample debate and has officially “reserved” decision on the bill.  However, in response to the Reform suggestion to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman exclusively, the PC MP said he was against the idea of “defining family in rigid,  exclusive and exclusionary terms.”

See the full debate in Hansard.