OTTAWA, July 18, 2002 (LSN.ca) – Tom Wappel, one of a handful of pro-life Liberal MPs, said he expects the Supreme Court would overturn last week’s Ontario Divisional Court ruling that grants homosexual marriage the same significance as traditional marriage—but only if the government decides to appeal the provincial court decision. “Who’s going to vote for a government that destroys the traditional definition of marriage?” said Wappel. “I wouldn’t want to go into the next election wearing that.” Wappel criticized Ontario Premier Ernie Eves for saying he has no “personal” objection to same-sex marriage—a view which he is effectively imposing on the province. Wappel said: “It’s fascinating that when somebody like me says I’m personally against abortion, then I’m told my personal views have no business in the public arena,” Mr. Wappel said. By contrast, Eves, as premier, is simply imposing his personal view as Ontario’s position. If the Court does not overturn the ruling, then Wappel said he wants the government to invoke the notwithstanding clause, section 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, to override the Court. Justice Minister Martin Cauchon, a Chretien loyalist, says his department is “carefully reviewing” the Ontario court’s decision. To read national post coverage (link valid for only a few days) see: https://www.nationalpost.com/national/story.html?id={8B4D3507-D093-492F-A7F2-8548981E23BD}
News
WAPPEL URGES GOVERNMENT TO FIGHT GAY MARRIAGE RULING
OTTAWA, July 18, 2002 (LSN.ca) – Tom Wappel, one of a handful of pro-life Liberal MPs, said he expects the Supreme Court would overturn last week’s Ontario Divisional Court ruling that grants homosexual marriage the same significance as traditional marriage—but only if the government decides to appeal the provincial court decision. “Who’s going to vote for a government that destroys the traditional definition of marriage?” said Wappel. “I wouldn’t want to go into the next election wearing that.” Wappel criticized Ontario Premier Ernie Eves for saying he has no “personal” objection to same-sex marriage—a view which he is effectively imposing […]
$