Tories plan to protect same-sex opponents
If government loses bid to reopen debate, Defence of Religions Act is next option
By JOHN IBBITSON and BILL CURRY AND BRIAN LAGHI
From Wednesday's Globe and Mail
John Ibbitson: E-mail | Read Bio | Latest Columns
OTTAWA — The Conservative government is planning measures, including a Defence of Religions Act, to allow public officials, such as Justices of the Peace, to refuse to perform same-sex marriages.
The measures are also intended to protect the free-speech rights of religious leaders and others who criticize homosexual behaviour or refuse to do business with gay-rights organizations, The Globe and Mail has learned.
Any legislation would be brought forward only if the government loses the motion this fall to reopen the debate on same-sex marriage. All indications are that the motion, which would authorize the government to introduce legislation to repeal the same-sex marriage law passed by Parliament last year, will be defeated by a combination of Opposition MPs supported by a few Conservatives.
Introducing a Defence of Religions Act would breathe new life into an issue that otherwise might have expired, and could become pivotal in an election expected as early as next spring. A solid core of Conservative MPs and socially conservative supporters are determined not to let the issue die without introducing some protections for those who are uncomfortable with same-sex marriage.
While refusing to discuss specifics, Justice Minister Vic Toews confirmed the government's intentions yesterday in an interview. “The nature of the concerns that are being raised with me are relating to freedom of religion and freedom to practice religion [and] freedom of expression,” he said. “The Prime Minister has indicated that he is bringing the matter forward — the issue of same-sex marriage — on a free vote. And there may be certain options open to the government as to what the response should be in either event, whether that opening is successful or not successful.”
Sources say the government is considering measures to protect individuals who oppose homosexual marriages or even relationships from human rights' complaints. The measures would seek to ensure, for example, that churches cannot be forced to rent their halls for same-sex marriage receptions, or that a justice of the peace cannot be compelled to marry a same-sex couple in violation of his or her religious beliefs.
Justice officials have also been told to search for ways to protect the rights of individuals to criticize homosexual activity because it contravenes religious teachings, or to refuse to do business with organizations whose purposes he or she disagrees with, without being brought before a human-rights tribunal.
The working title for the vehicle that could enshrine these measures is the Defence of Religions Act. The former Liberal government said that existing laws and court rulings already protect the rights of religious groups not to be compelled to perform same-sex marriage. However, there is acknowledged uncertainty about the rights of individuals to publicly criticize homosexual behaviour, to take out advertisements that quote scripture demanding that homosexuals be put to death, or to refuse to do business with groups whose views an individual or group finds objectionable.
For that reason, a Defence of Religions law could face challenges under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Rulings by human-rights commissions and courts across the country have sent mixed signals about the limits of freedom of expression and religious freedom when they conflict with equality rights and existing hate laws.
One source said the complexity of the subject has delayed the bill, which could also delay the timing of the motion on same-sex marriage. However, the source maintained that, while work on the new federal measure is not nearly finished, “the point is there. People have to have the right to say what they want.”
Without preventive legislation, some government members fear that church groups and individuals would be taken to court for uttering negative remarks about gays that other members of society view as discriminatory. That is why the measures are being considered in two parts: to protect individuals from having to perform same-sex marriage, and to protect free speech. Protecting the rights to freedom of religion and speech will be a key theme of the Conservative government, as it attempts to navigate the same-sex marriage issue without alienating either its social conservative base or more socially liberal supporters.
In response to allegations in the House of Commons yesterday of homophobic remarks by a member of the Conservatives' political staff, Prime Minister Stephen Harper repeated his government's determination to protect the rights of gay and lesbian citizens. “At the same time,” he added, “we also defend the right of people of religious faith to practise their religion and to express their religious views.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../BNStory/Front
Up till now, I had been thinking that the new conservative gov't under Harper was Ok.
Till now.
I read this in the Globe and Mail and immediately thought, "uh huh, so, here we have the "hidden agenda" that Paul Martin and the Liberals were speaking about.
It's crap like this that makes me think that Harper and his cronies are indeed a bunch of right wing nut bars right up there with their neocon buddies south of the border.
In reading the above, I was thinking to myself, "substitute the word "black" in for everytime they write "Gay", then re-read the article.
It's just descrimination pure and simple.
I don't know how much this crap will affect Harper with the voters, however, it makes me rethink ever voting for the Conservatives.