Josh: Victory is mine! Victory is mine! Great day in the morning people. Victory is mine!
Donna: Good morning Josh.
Josh: I drink from the keg of glory, Donna. Bring me the finest bagels and muffins in the land.
Donna: It's going to be an unbearable day.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TEXT OF ORIGINAL CANADIAN ALLIANCE MOTION
"That, in the opinion of this House, it is necessary, in light of public debate around recent court decisions, to reaffirm that marriage is and should remain the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, and that Parliament take all necessary steps within the jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada to preserve this definition of marriage in Canada."
"The Canadian Alliance's motion asking MPs to reaffirm the heterosexual definition of marriage was defeated by a vote of 137 to 132 Tuesday night.
During a heated six-hour House debate prior to the vote, many politicians offered emotional testimony as to why they were either in favour or opposed to the motion.
"Nobody is forcing the leader of the Canadian Alliance to marry a man if he doesn't want to. . . . I think this motion does display a very homophobic attitude," said New Democrat MP Libby Davies.
Equally biting were words from Bloc Québécois MP Real Menard who said, "It's like a father who tells his daughter, 'I'm not a racist but I don't want you to marry a black person,' or a husband who says to his wife, 'I'm for equality but I don't want you to have the right to work.' Isn't there a point somewhere when you have to walk the walk?"
Tuesday's motion was similar to one passed by a vote of 216 to 55 by the House in 1999, in which many Liberals voted to preserve the traditional definition of marriage.
Earlier in the day, Canadian Alliance Leader Stephen Harper said the motion was not about human rights, arguing that rights to civil unions had already been extended to gays and lesbians.
"It is about democracy," he told the House. "It is about the right of the people to make social value judgments and, more specifically, the right of judgments to be made by the representatives of the people rather than by the judges appointed by the government."
"Marriage has from time immemorial been firmly grounded in our legal tradition," said Harper, quoting a 1995 Supreme Court of Canada ruling on the issue.
Harper said allowing the courts to change the definition of marriage is "wrong in law, universally insulting, dangerous as far as rights are concerned."
Harper said the Liberals' plan to legalize gay marriage would eventually force religious groups that oppose gay marriages to perform them.
Justice Minister Martin Cauchon said religious groups now have, and would continue to have, the right to refuse marriage to anyone who does not meet the faith's requirements for marriage.
"I believe it is about equality, dignity and respect for all Canadians," said Cauchon.
"We are at a historic moment in time. We have the opportunity to challenge our simple assumptions and beliefs and do what is right in terms of equality," he added.
The Liberal government announced plans to legalize same-sex marriages after an Ontario Superior Court ruled on July 12 in favour of recognizing them under the law.
The Court ruled that prohibiting gay couples from marrying is unconstitutional and violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The federal government has said it plans to introduce same-sex marriage legislation some time next year. If passed, Canada would become the third country to legally recognize same-sex marriages."
Donna: Good morning Josh.
Josh: I drink from the keg of glory, Donna. Bring me the finest bagels and muffins in the land.
Donna: It's going to be an unbearable day.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TEXT OF ORIGINAL CANADIAN ALLIANCE MOTION
"That, in the opinion of this House, it is necessary, in light of public debate around recent court decisions, to reaffirm that marriage is and should remain the union of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, and that Parliament take all necessary steps within the jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada to preserve this definition of marriage in Canada."
"The Canadian Alliance's motion asking MPs to reaffirm the heterosexual definition of marriage was defeated by a vote of 137 to 132 Tuesday night.
During a heated six-hour House debate prior to the vote, many politicians offered emotional testimony as to why they were either in favour or opposed to the motion.
"Nobody is forcing the leader of the Canadian Alliance to marry a man if he doesn't want to. . . . I think this motion does display a very homophobic attitude," said New Democrat MP Libby Davies.
Equally biting were words from Bloc Québécois MP Real Menard who said, "It's like a father who tells his daughter, 'I'm not a racist but I don't want you to marry a black person,' or a husband who says to his wife, 'I'm for equality but I don't want you to have the right to work.' Isn't there a point somewhere when you have to walk the walk?"
Tuesday's motion was similar to one passed by a vote of 216 to 55 by the House in 1999, in which many Liberals voted to preserve the traditional definition of marriage.
Earlier in the day, Canadian Alliance Leader Stephen Harper said the motion was not about human rights, arguing that rights to civil unions had already been extended to gays and lesbians.
"It is about democracy," he told the House. "It is about the right of the people to make social value judgments and, more specifically, the right of judgments to be made by the representatives of the people rather than by the judges appointed by the government."
"Marriage has from time immemorial been firmly grounded in our legal tradition," said Harper, quoting a 1995 Supreme Court of Canada ruling on the issue.
Harper said allowing the courts to change the definition of marriage is "wrong in law, universally insulting, dangerous as far as rights are concerned."
Harper said the Liberals' plan to legalize gay marriage would eventually force religious groups that oppose gay marriages to perform them.
Justice Minister Martin Cauchon said religious groups now have, and would continue to have, the right to refuse marriage to anyone who does not meet the faith's requirements for marriage.
"I believe it is about equality, dignity and respect for all Canadians," said Cauchon.
"We are at a historic moment in time. We have the opportunity to challenge our simple assumptions and beliefs and do what is right in terms of equality," he added.
The Liberal government announced plans to legalize same-sex marriages after an Ontario Superior Court ruled on July 12 in favour of recognizing them under the law.
The Court ruled that prohibiting gay couples from marrying is unconstitutional and violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The federal government has said it plans to introduce same-sex marriage legislation some time next year. If passed, Canada would become the third country to legally recognize same-sex marriages."
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home