|
BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
TURBULENCE CAUSED BY SAME-SEX MARRIAGE LEGISLATION
At the press conference on July 17, 2003, during which Minister
of Justice Martin Cauchon made public his proposed same-sex
marriage legislation, his remarks were immediately followed
in another press conference by a speaker from the homosexual
lobby group, EGALE. The presence of the latter on the heels
of Mr. Cauchon's press conference, was not by mere chance.
Prior to Mr. Cauchon's press conference, REAL Women had tried
for several days to pin down the date and time it was to take
place, but we were persistently advised by Department of Justice
officials, even an hour or so before the press conference
took place, that the date and time was still "uncertain."
One might conclude from this, that Justice Minister Cauchon
and EGALE have entered into a "marriage" all of
their own and are now appearing publicly together as a "couple!"
During EGALE's portion of the press conference, its spokesperson
claimed there was a "consensus" in Canada in support
of same-sex marriage. This statement, however, was too much
even for the sympathetic media, which questioned EGALE on
this point. EGALE's spokesperson hedged the supposed consensus
on the issue, explaining instead that there was perhaps a
"growing" consensus in support of same-sex marriage
in Canada. On this point he was wrong. In fact, if anything,
there is a growing consensus against same-sex marriage in
Canada.
When the question of same-sex marriage first emerged on the
political agenda, the polls indicated that Canadians were
evenly divided on the issue. An example of such a poll was
that conducted by Focus on the Family in the spring of 2002,
by The Strategic Counsel, the company of Toronto pollster,
Allan Gregg. This poll indicated an almost even split on the
issue. According to this poll, 46% were in support of same-sex
marriage, and 44% opposed.
An Ipsos-Reid/CTV/Globe and Mail poll conducted in early
June 2003 apparently found a slim majority (54%) of Canadians
in favour of same-sex marriage, while 44% were opposed.
However, after the combined rulings of both the BC Court
of Appeal in favour of same-sex marriage on May 1, 2003, and
the Ontario Court of Appeal on June 10, 2003, when Canadians
faced for the first time the real possibility of same-sex
marriage becoming the law, they began to withdraw their support.
JMCK Polling Group in Calgary conducted a national poll on
the issue in the last two weeks of July, and found that the
figures on same-sex marriage had reversed, with 52.4% opposed
to the legalizing of same-sex marriage, while 42% supported
it.
This trend against the acceptance of same-sex marriage was
confirmed by an Ipsos-Reid poll conducted for the Globe and
Mail and CTV in late June, which indicated that support for
same-sex marriage had dropped 5% since its previous poll,
with 49% for and 49% against allowing homosexuals to marry.
A poll conducted by SES Canada Research between August 24
and September 2, 2003, however, again found Canada evenly
split with 47% in support and 44% against, with both Quebec
(as usual) and BC [53%] in support. What is particularly significant
for the Liberal government about this poll, however, is that
60% of those who oppose same-sex marriage would vote against
his/her MP if he/she favours same-sex marriage, but 63% of
those who support same-sex marriage stated this issue would
not affect their vote.
Another poll around the same time (August 25 - 31) by NFO
CFgroup, a public opinion and marketing research firm, found
Canada evenly divided with 46% for and 46% against same-sex
marriage. In Quebec there were 60% in favour followed by 51%
in BC, while majorities in the Prairies and Ontario opposed
it. Interestingly, however, Globe and Mail Quebec columnist,
Lysiane Gagnon, in an article published on September 22, 2003,
claims that the 60% figure in Quebec is not accurate, and
that resistance to same-sex marriage there is much deeper
than the polls indicate. According to Ms. Gagnon, people tell
pollsters that they are in favour of same-sex marriage because
they are afraid of being seen as "homophobic", which,
she claims, is an ugly aspect of this whole debate as it is
an unfair accusation towards those who support opposite-sex
marriage
Liberal Government's Concerns About Same-sex Marriage
Legislation in Multicultural Communities
A concern for the Liberal government on the same-sex marriage
issue is that it may have a detrimental effect on the Liberal
party's traditional hold on the multicultural communities.
Many of the multicultural communities, such as the Chinese
and Sikh communities, are conservative on moral issues. They
have always been supportive of the Liberal party. However,
the same-sex marriage issue may change that.
Few polls on the same-sex marriage issue, however, have broken
down opinions according to the views of ethnic groups. A poll
in 2000 of 2,000 persons by the Centre for Research and Information
on Canada (CRIC), did find that only between 53% - 55% of
those identifying themselves as immigrants or visible minorities
would be "comfortable" with a family member being
a homosexual, whereas approximately two-thirds (66%) of those
who identified themselves as either white or non-immigrant,
said they would be comfortable. However, this does not mean
that ethnic groups will be willing to make the jump into acceptance
of same-sex marriages, which is quite a different matter.
The Liberals are not overreacting, therefore, to the possibility
that same-sex marriages will not resonate with ethnic groups
in Canada, and may have a detrimental political spill-over
effect.
If this highly divisive issue is not soon settled, Liberal
leader-in-waiting, Paul Martin, will face problems in the
federal election campaign in 2004. That is, it appears that
the longer the debate on same-sex marriage continues, the
less support it will receive from the Canadian public. Consequently,
to avoid same-sex marriages becoming an albatross around Mr.
Martin's neck in the expected 2004 federal election, he would
like a rapid settlement of this issue. Certainly, Mr. Martin's
supporters are itching to have the same-sex marriage legislation
introduced, debated and voted on as soon as possible. Much
will depend on whether the Supreme Court of Canada grants
an appeal to the Faith Coalition and the pro-family groups,
REAL Women and Focus on the Family. If the court case allows
an appeal, the government will find it more difficult to press
on with its same-sex marriage legislation, since the issue
will then again be before the courts for resolution. The Liberals
also will then no longer be able to argue that they were "bound"
by the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal. However, with
this Liberal government, anything is possible.
The Appeal Application
REAL Women was advised that a panel of five Supreme Court
of Canada judges would hear our application to appeal on Monday,
October 6, 2003. The Court also requested that all the lawyers,
both for and against the appeal, present oral arguments on
the issue in addition to the written arguments already filed
with the Court. Usually, an application to appeal is heard
only by a single Supreme Court judge who bases his/her decisions
on written arguments only. These changes in the procedure
indicate that the Supreme Court was taking the application
to appeal very seriously. The Supreme Court panel did not
hand down its decision on the appeal application immediately,
but rather "reserved" its decision for several weeks.
REAL Women is monitoring the situation closely.
BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
|