Harper Government on SGM

I don't think it's any secret that the HarperCreep's government is rabidly opposed to gay rights. Given what I've seen so far, I think you'd see a whole slew of legislation backed up with the "NotWithstanding Clause" (section 33) of the Charter of Rights if this lot had a majority to ram it through with (not just on marriage, either).

Remember back in October when Vic Toews started to rumble about a "Defense of Religion Act"? You can bet that the government will table that particular piece of legislation close to when the next election is likely to be triggered. Toews has freely admitted that they are considering "alternatives" should the current motion on SGM be defeated, and something based on homobigot Morton's Bill 208 in Alberta is a likely candidate. (It will play well to "the base" of religious "conservatives" who like to believe they are oh-so-persecuted, and would be fairly difficult for the Liberals to win votes on)

However, the debate over the current motion before the house (due to be voted on sometime today, I believe) is at least being addressed well by the Opposition parties:

"What is the crisis that the government is responding to?" NDP member Bill Siksay asked at the start of the debate in the House of Commons.

"Is there any documentation showing there is a crisis in marriage?"

However, as usual, the Conservatives are confusing the issue with past debates:

Conservative House leader Rob Nicholson was quick to contradict him, saying he made the same argument when the Liberal government moved to legalize same-sex marriage across Canada in 2005.

"I raised that point exactly one year ago," Nicholson said. "What was the rush to change the traditional definition of marriage?"

Another blogger I follow likened the current motion before the house (rather aptly) to having a debate over reopening the residential schools. (Not to diminish the impact of that particular little horror in Canada's history, by any means)

My guess is that Harper's trying to set the stage to polarize the next election so he can deflect criticism over his government's general dishonesty. If he can put forward something as polarizing as a "Defense of Religions" act, he'll get every religious body up in arms over a bunch of bogus talking points
that most people do not fully understand.

However, I return to a very fundamental point - since when did equality before and under the law ever become a matter of a "popularity contest" vote?

[Update 14:30]
The motion has been defeated - 175-123

Twelve Tories broke from party lines and voted against the motion. They included cabinet ministers Peter MacKay, David Emerson, John Baird, Jim Prentice, Lawrence Cannon and Josée Verner.

Most Liberals also gave the motion the thumbs down. Among them were Joe Comuzzi, who gave up his cabinet post in 2005 so he could vote against a same-sex marriage bill proposed by the Liberal government.

All Bloc Québécois and NDP members present voted against Thursday's motion, as directed to by their party leaders.

The vote should put an end to parliamentary wrangling about same-sex marriage, as Prime Minister Stephen Harper had said a free vote — promised during January's general election campaign — would settle the matter.

Next up, DORA, no doubt. I expect to see draft DORA legislation sometime early next year.
[/Update]