News

OTTAWA, September 18, 2003 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Federal Liberals are giving indications that their successful outmanoeuvring of the Alliance Party over the marriage motion and Bill C-250 this week has encouraged them to push a marriage redefinition bill through the House soon after the Oct. 2nd Ontario election.  As well, the Liberal Party, especially many of Mr. Martin’s supporters, are said to be anxious to rid themselves of the contentious same-sex marriage issue well before the federal election next year.  Gwen Landolt, vice-president of REAL Women of Canada told LifeSiteNews.com Thursday that any bills that do not pass in this session will die. Chretien will therefore be determined to push through any remaining legislation in this his final session as Liberal leader. This present 37th Parliament is expected to end at the time of the Liberal Party National Leadership Convention November 12 to 15th. The marriage redefinition bill, says Landolt, could conceivably be passed after two weeks in the House of Commons and promulgated into law after another two weeks in the Senate.  She and other pro-family leaders are urging renewed efforts to oppose the impending bill. REAL Women is urging the opposition Alliance Party to force the bill to go to the Justice Committee for review and is calling on pro-family witnesses to make requests to appear on this issue before the Justice Committee.  Pro-family targeting of every MP who voted on Monday against the marriage motion is said to be critical as is congratulations to every MP who voted in favour of the motion. As well, the MPs who were absent will be targeted to be present next time and speak and vote against the marriage redefinition bill. It is expected that Liberal Party will at the same time be placing intense pressure on the same MPs to instead do its bidding.  Landolt also says that the group of organizations that have requested leave to appeal the activist court decisions mandating same-sex ‘marriage’ are having their request heard on Oct. 6 by five judges of the Supreme Court. This unusual level of response to a leave to appeal request, she says, indicates that the Court is taking the request very seriously.