Theo-Conservatives in Canada

Recently, in the Globe and Mail, there have been a few articles that once again raise the question of the Theo-Cons and their role within the Conservative Party of Canada. Rather specifically, it is the apparent rise in visibility, where people who are known Theo-Cons are achieving prominence through the candidate nomination process. A recent Leger poll makes it quite clear that many people are decidedly uncomfortable with the amount of influence that the Theo-Cons seem to have with Stephen Harper and his advisors.

When affiliations with Focus on the Family Canada emerge, Canadians must become somewhat suspicious of the motives of these people. Dobson's "Focus on the Family" organization is hardly "Christian" any more. It has become a political entity designed to propogate Dobson's unique ideas about how society should function. Their presence in Canada, and apparent involvement in Canadian politics is essentially an export of American politics. No big surprise here. The Conservative positions on so many issues sound disturbingly like a "mimic-the-Americans" stance - whether that is health care, human rights, justice, foreign affairs or whatever else you can think of. To hear US-style Theo-Cons making their arguments.

I remember an article that then-newly minted MP Jason Kenney wrote for community newsletters in his riding. In it, Mr. Kenney quoted precepts and concepts that have their roots in American law, and the American Constitution as if they applied in Canada.

The blind assumption that "Canada's Just Like The US" appears to similarly afflict the Theo Cons now trying to assert control over the Canadian Conservative party. The assumption that the legal constructs in Canada are the same as they are in the United States is deeply flawed. The Canadian Constitution is a document that is new and unique in the world. In spite of a few words in its preamble, it makes no assertion of a foundation in any one faith, and further goes so far as to protect the rights of all, regardless of their faith. Further, subtleties in the wording of various "lists" in the document make it quite clear that those lists are not to be interpreted exclusively, but rather inclusively.

It is the elasticity of those clauses that causes the Theo-Cons a great deal of distress. It is virtually impossible to create sustainable legislation of the nature that they demand. Legislation that would marginalize or limit the rights of anyone would indeed be difficult to write (and applying the "Notwithstanding Clause" would be unwise indeed - for that merely defers the debate a few short years).

Unlike the United States which was forged from the fires of revolution and civil war, Canada was formed by consensus and compromise. The 1983 Constitution similarly is the result of consensus and compromise as well, and makes compromise and consensus much stronger than mere will of the majority, but also ensures that the minority groups in the country must also be protected at the same time.


The current black-and-white world view of the Theo-Cons in this country is doomed to the reality of a constitutional framework that demands compromise. Until they learn to quit playing absolutes, Theo-Cons are doomed to frustration in Canada.