|
From CatholicInsight.com Political On December 7, Canada’s Parliament formally voted not to reopen the debate over the question of marriage. The vote closed a judicial and legislative process that may be said to have begun with the release in 2001 of the federally funded Law Commission of Canada report, Beyond Conjugality, which backed same-sex ‘marriage.’
The 175-123 vote came on a poorly worded motion that confused some MPs and left others ambivalent about which way to vote. A number of legislators who took a position against same-sex ‘marriage’ when Bill C-38 was passed in June 2005, chose not to re-examine the same-sex ‘marriage’ issue any further.
Is the issue closed?
Mainstream media and the pro-homosexual lobby say the debate over marriage is now closed and settled. But for practising Catholics and other active Christians, this cannot possibly be the case. They will never come to terms with illegitimate forms of marriage. Why not?
The principal point is that such measures insult and disobey God. A second point – an immediately practical and physical one – is that Canada will not survive as a wholesome community if it continues on the path it has trodden over the past few decades, with the acceptance by this country’s ruling classes and institutions of abortion, divorce, pornography, prostitution, homosexual activity, sexual indoctrination of the young, in-vitro fertilization, stem cell experimentation on embryos, euthanasia of the sick, disabled and elderly, immoral media programming and more. The contraceptive society is bound to implode.
Implosion
Canadian society’s implosion will be ensured by the secular, relativistic, amoral and multi-cultural philosophy that is at the source of the above-mentioned evils. The gravest weakness is that it no longer recognizes the existence of objective truth.
Politically, Canada is headed for tyrannical government disguised as democracy. Economically, the country will stagger from crisis to crisis, precisely because of the three million lives snuffed out by surgical abortion since 1969 and the contraceptive revolution that has plunged Canada’s birthrate to an unrecoverable decline in population. Massive, non-Christian immigration will not bring a solution; rather, it will further divide and shatter the unity of the country.
Divine versus Canadian law
When considering our future options, let us first compare divine and Canadian law, and separate truth from falsehood:
These evil practices, developed from the mid-1960s to today, form a road to death and decay. The individual Canadian has his mind and soul polluted, and Canadian society has its foundations in law, politics and education warped and deformed.
The Catholic position
For faithful Catholics, there is no room for vacillation over issues that affect the physical and spiritual good of human beings. Our marching orders in this regard are found in the Word of God, made clear by the Church time and time again.
Once again, in December 2006, Pope Benedict XVI spoke to cardinals, archbishops, bishops and members of the Roman curia at the Vatican, in an important address largely ignored by the world’s media. Speaking about homosexuals, he declared that they end up destroying themselves:
"In seeking to emancipate himself from his body, (man) ends up by destroying himself. Against those who say that ‘the Church should not involve herself in these matters,’ we can only respond: does man not concern us, too? The Church and believers must raise their voices to defend man, the creature who, in the inseparable unity of body and spirit, is the image of God" (WorldNetDaily, Dec. 30, 2006).
In his New Year’s Day address, the Pope sent a message to politicians who support immoral causes on the basis of “human rights” by noting that while there is currently much talk about such rights, “it is forgotten that they need a stable – not relative or debatable – foundation” (Zenit, Jan. 1, 2007).
Elections
When it comes to elections, it is now an obligation of Christians to find out the voting records of candidates for public office. All the way back in 1978, the then Bishop of Saskatoon, James Mahoney, made his own the conviction of the pro-life movement that to be in favour of abortion disqualifies a candidate from public office (Pastoral Letter, 1978). He was immediately joined in this conviction by the Bishop of Kamloops, B.C., Adam Exner, who later became Archbishop of Winnipeg and then Archbishop of Vancouver. What was true in 1978 is still true 30 years later.
Where to find the voting record?
The most relevant vote for today is the parliamentary vote on December 7, 2006 on the motion to re-examine the disastrous same-sex ‘marriage’ legislation of 2005. An MP’s vote on SSM closely parallels his or her views on abortion, with the exception of a small group of Liberal MPs who voted against the December 7 motion – in protest of its wording – after having opposed SSM in 2005.
The marriage vote by party
Liberals: 13 in favour of re-examination
After Liberal leader Stephane Dion decided not to coerce his MPs, only 13 Liberals – all but two from Ontario – voted in support of the Conservative government’s motion. (This motion read: “To call on government to introduce legislation to restore the traditional definition of marriage without affecting civil unions and while respecting existing same-sex ‘marriages.’”) These Liberal MPs were:
All other Liberal MPs voted against the motion. Sue Barnes (London West, ON), John Cannis (Scarborough Centre, ON) and Raymonde Folco (Laval-Les Isles, QC) were absent. Whajid Khan has now joined the Conservatives. Why so few?The number opposed to same-sex ‘marriage’ was down from the 36 who voted against Bill C-38 in 2005. Some retired or were defeated in the January 2006 federal election. But fourteen Liberals switched their votes from opposition in 2005 to refusal to examine SSM again:
These 14 should not be automatically classified as pro-abortion. In the past, some have indicated their opposition to abortion. A few MPs like Szabo and Zed truly worried about the text of the motion as duplicitous. (Note: Liberal leader Stephane Dion is not pro-life. See C.I., Jan. 2007, p. 35. According to the late, former head of Campaign Life Coalition Quebec, Dion exhibited “no sign of sympathy for the pro-life cause.”)
Conservatives
Conservatives were the main supporters of the re-examination motion. However, 13 of them voted against it. They were:
Six of the 13 Tory “No” voters – Baird, Cannon, Emerson, MacKay, Prentice and Verner – were cabinet ministers at the time of the vote. They are leaders in the Conservative party.
Some political observers blame the greater support among Conservatives for same-sex ‘marriage’ in the latest vote either on the wording of the motion or on a growing social liberal sentiment in a Conservative party that has moved further away from its Reform and Alliance roots (LifeSiteNews, Dec. 8, 2006). This needs to be counteracted.
NDP and Bloc Québécois
NDP and Bloc Québécois MPs willingly accepted the command of their leaders to vote against the motion. We have not listed the BQ MPs.
Was there a free vote?Although, in the end, both Conservative and Liberal MPs supposedly had a free vote, there is some question over whether this was actually the case. The Liberals were reportedly subjected to political pressure from their party to vote against the motion. And Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro said he was told by some MPs from his own party that those voting in favour of the Tory motion would be “assassinating their own careers.” This may be an ominous sign for the future.
REGIONAL BREAKDOWNOF THE MARRIAGE VOTEThe Maritimes
The Maritimes are proving to be a major liability for pro-traditional marriage forces, as all but six MPs, out of 32 from those four provinces, refused to re-open debate. Among Liberals, only one Maritime MP voted to re-open debate, while the other 19 voted against. Our magazine draws special attention to the anti-life MPs who are Catholic. From time to time they can be seen going to Church. Voters should learn to see through this façade.
LegendÖ – Voted in favour of December 7, 2006 re-examination motion X – Voted against December 7, 2006 re-examination motion C – Catholic MP X – Voted against Bill C-38 in 2005, but also against re-examination on December 7, 2006
Newfoundland and Labrador
Nova Scotia
Prince Edward Island
New Brunswick
Quebec
A sliver of good news was provided by the fact that, although Quebec is generally regarded as a socially liberal area, seven of the 10 Conservative MPs from that province voted in favour of reopening the marriage issue.
Bloc Québécois MPs were all ordered by party leader Gilles Duceppe to vote against the government motion and all did. Their names are not shown here. Dissenting Catholic priest and MP for the riding of Repentigny, Father Raymond Gravel, abstained. Liberals and Conservatives only:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||