Let's take a look at what Stephen really said, shall we?
"I don't see reopening this question in the future," he told reporters who asked whether same-sex marriage would return to the table if the Conservatives won a majority government.
Uh huh. "I don't see" is a far cry from "I will not". It subtly leaves the door open for Stephen to weasel this topic back onto the agenda when he gets that majority he's been lusting after.
Nor does he intend to introduce a "defence of religions" act to allow public officials, such as justices of the peace, to refuse to perform same-sex marriages.
"If there ever were a time in the future where fundamental freedoms were threatened, of course the government would respond to protect them," said the Prime Minister, who voted for the motion. "The government has no plans at this time."
Now, I happen to agree with one point - SGM does not threaten religious freedoms. It never has.
It's the phrase about "having no plans at this time" that worries me. Harper has basically signalled two things here - one that he's going underground on an issue that he knows will torpedo any chance for re-election, and second that the topic can - and likely will be - tabled in the future.
What Harper has done with his comment about "If there ever were a time in the future where fundamental freedoms were threatened" is leave open a door for the anti-gay organizations of the country to write their case about how SGM creates a lethal threat to "religious freedoms".
In the short term, if we do see a "DORA" act tabled, you can expect it to come in as a "private member's bill" - something that has a much lower profile than if a government minister happens to table it. However, it's no secret that Harper micromanages every aspect of this government. I'd put pretty good odds that a private member's bill has at least got the tacit approval of the cabinet. It may come in as a piece of legislation from one of the Liberal members of the so-called "Social Conservative Caucus" lurking in the background on Parliament Hill.
1 comment:
Yep, that's exactly how it sounded to me. And before the private member's bill shows up, I think we'll see a whole lot of ground work trying to create the impression of a vast multitude of concerned citizens clamouring for these protections as if without them the sky would fall and the earth gape beneath our feet.
You could almost look at it as a prophesy. Harper the Anointed has set the conditions: "If there ever were a time in the future where fundamental freedoms were threatened", and when, lo, the people look about them and are affrighted, and beseech him for rescue, he can intone "It is even as I foretold, wherefore now I shall grasp my righteous sword to my breast and smite the evildoers in my people's name."
And, uh, amen.
Post a Comment