Says Ralph "I don't want to be called a gay basher or anything like that". This is right up there with the old canard from the US during the early days of the civil rights movements - "I'm not a bigot, some of my best friends are black", inevitably followed by some idiotic bunch of tripe. I can just imagine the gay people that Ralph claims are his friends running for cover after hearing condescending statements like that. Ralph has directed the government to fight gay rights in this province tooth and nail ever since he was elected. Alberta has made few changes without being dragged through the courts repeatedly (and losing at every step of the way)
As others have assessed, this bill is rooted in the politics of fear and ignorance. Coming from Ted "Fire Wall" Morton, this doesn't surprise me.
A brief examination of this astonishing bit of homobigotry reveals some pretty evil garbage:
1) On the topic of Alberta's Bill of Rights legislation:
1.1 No person or organization shall be deprived of any benefit, or be subject to any obligation or sanction, under this or any law of Alberta, solely by reason of their exercise, in respect of marriage between persons of the same sex, of the freedom of conscience and religion guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Alberta Bill of Rights, or the expression or exercise of their beliefs in respect of marriage as the union of a man and woman to the exclusion of all others based on that guaranteed freedom.
Please note the utter lack of boundaries on it. Basically, it protects the rights of the anti-gay crowd to say pretty much anything they want, as long as they include some phrase about marriage in it. Further, it would allow the government to direct its agencies not to acknowledge gay marriages, and in theory this law would protect them.
2) On Alberta's Marriage Act:
3.1(1) Notwithstanding any other enactment, a member of the clergy or a marriage commissioner may refuse to solemnize a marriage where the marriage is between persons of the same sex where to solemnize the marriage would violate the person's religious beliefs or moral values.
(2) No action lies against a member of the clergy or a marriage commissioner who refuses to solemnize a marriage between persons of the same sex.
This is largely redundant, as the federal legislation already covers these topics. About the only question mark would be the notion of civil marriage, wherein, I argue that a civil marriage commissioner is in fact legally obliged under the tradition that all citizens of this nation are equal before the law.
3) On the Education Act:
3.1(1) No student shall be required to attend and no teacher shall be required to teach that part of a course that has in its curriculum that marriage may be a union between persons of the same sex.
(2) Where part of the curriculum for a course consists of teaching that marriage may be between persons of the same sex, the school must advise the parents of the students enrolled in the course prior to the material being taught.
(3) A student who does not attend for moral or religious reasons that part of a course where the subject of marriage between persons of the same sex is taught shall not be penalized.
(4) A teacher who refuses to teach for moral or religious reasons that part of a course concerning marriage between persons of the same sex shall not be penalized.
This is possibly the most offensive part of the legislation. Morton claims that it is merely protecting the "legal rights" of those that object to SGM. This is utter bullshit - it is a 'foot in the door wedge' approach to moral legislation. This is the same kind of "protection" that Pharmacists in the United States have been claiming so that they can avoid filling prescriptions.
For example, what about a course on civics which happens to cross the legal grounds of the definition of marriage with respect to Federal/Provincial responsibility? Such a course would no doubt end up touching on the topic of SGM since that is part of the current legislation.
While I suspect that Ted Morton's legislation would fail any challenge in front of the Charter of Rights in the Federal court system, it amazes me that this moron has the gall to propose such legislation. It's such a blatant attempt to legalize bigotry as to be utterly offensive through and through.
In case you haven't noticed, Canada hasn't crumbled because a few same-gender couples have gotten married in the last year. The quiet pair of lesbians that share a house at the end of the block haven't damaged society because they are now legally married. It's time for the Ridiculous Right to get over it, and move on. The legislation in the federal statutes protects their faith communities, and none of them are obliged to perform SGM ceremonies. I'm sure that there will be one or two challenges of this, but they are unlikely to get very far, since the legislation is clearly consistent with the Charter of Rights.
I can only imagine that Ted Moron is trying to play to what he perceives to be his "base of support" in the provincial PC party leadership race. Regardless, it is an offensive piece of legislation, and one that should be used to thoroughly castigate Morton throughout the coming campaign.
[Update]: As if reading my mind, CNN Publishes this article which shows definite biological differences between the brain responses of straight women and lesbian women. Although far from conclusive, evidence like this, along with the vast body of history which shows that homosexuals have been part of human society for as long as we have recorded history, suggests strongly that the bigotry and fear with which they are often treated is far from justified in any rational sense.
2 comments:
If this bill had referred to Mixed-Race Marriage, Morton wouldn't have dared propose it.
Instead, because it's about SGM, he figures it's just fine to give people the unbounded right to verbally bash/harass gay couples.
Nothing gets my dander up faster than some two bit bigot trying to self-justify their bullcrap.
"I don't want to be called a gay basher..."
Sorry King Ralph, your desires do not come into question - if you are a gay basher, we will refer to you as such.
All Heil His Royal Highness King Ralph GB!
Post a Comment