By Daniel Timmons
The federal Liberal Party loves polls—only when they are in its favour. For example, Paul Martin and others of his caucus stated ad nauseam the poll results that Canadians don’t want a summer election. However, they repeatedly ignored all the poll results that the majority of Canadians are against same-sex marriage, or the latest Angus Reid poll (June 15, 2005) that revealed the issue is only important to 2% of the country’s citizens. Why then the furious haste to pass its same-sex marriage legislation?
All the vocal advocates for the legislation claim opinion polls don’t matter on this issue. Apparently, “It’s the Charter, stupid;” that is, the courts ruled the majority can’t deny the minority, in this case, homosexuals, the “right” to marry.
Being able to have a marriage shouldn’t fall under the provision that guarantees “life, liberty, and security of person.” In some cultures around the world, it is permissible and even normal to walk around naked in public. Should the Canadian courts grant the right for any nudist to stroll about in a shopping mall?
However, getting the government benefits of marriage is a right. Otherwise, discrimination would exist and violate the Charter. So, some sort of compromise seems in order.
Marriage is a unique human institution that was a cultural development long before it became a law. Initially, marriage was a blend of a procreative imperative, a social custom, and a sacred ritual. Then the people wanted the state to impose a legal structure on marriage, which subsequently created rights issues. The question that has been often asked in the same-sex marriage debate, but left largely unanswered, is why the state should sanction marriage at all?
Presumably, the state maintains its interest in marriage because it believes society is better off with the institution. Marriage laws help prevent the exploitation of the vulnerable, traditionally women and children. Also, marriage serves to stabilize human relationships, which fosters a safer and more prosperous society. The state reinforces these ideals because it provided benefits of marriage in the form of tax breaks and legal protections for the participants.
Herein lies the key. The government cannot circumscribe the culture of marriage because that’s not its mandate. The tradition of marriage belongs to the people. If the people want to retain the Canadian historical custom as the union of one man and one woman, then no court or government can change that by themselves.
Through their elected representatives, the people can choose to extend the benefits of marriage to any individuals. Therefore, Stephen Harper’s compromise of civil unions with all the rights of traditional marriage satisfies both the cultural integrity and legal requirements of the institution.
The precedent for this arrangement is the current legal recognition of heterosexual common-law spouses. By extending this legal framework to homosexuals through civil unions, the government would settle the “rights” issue. So, why do same-sex marriage advocates reject the Conservative Party’s compromise?
The reason must be that these advocates want to transform the prevailing cultural tradition of marriage. But such a transformation can’t be done by court or government fiat. It must arise from the people, over time, until it becomes part of the collective expression of society. Common-law arrangements were the first step; civil unions could be the next. And in the future, anything is possible, including polygamy in Canada.
At present, there is no unequivocal evidence that the cultural consciousness of the nation wants to redefine marriage. The same-sex marriage legislation is a product of judicial activism, special-interest lobbying, and political arrogance, with a dash of citizen apathy. There is no need to rush this legislation. A summer of reflection and more discussion can only help.
Daniel Timmons is a university instructor, writer, and script developer living in Toronto, Canada. For details on his documentary “The Legacy of the Lord of the Rings,” please visit his web site: http://scriptsandscribes.com/projTV.htm
- Small-C conservatives in BC form new young conservatives group - Friday June 8, 2012 at 7:11 am
- Theo Caldwell’s new kids’ book: Open Book has Ten Questions for Theo Caldwell - Saturday October 17, 2009 at 1:48 pm
- Russian Stanislav Mishin: America descending into Marxism: “American Capitalism Gone With a Whimper” - Saturday May 30, 2009 at 9:22 am
