Today we heard Stephen Harper in the House of Commons calling for the country to have a closer relationship with George W. Bush. We all remember Stephen Harper's position on gay marriage in the last election. Now, under George W. Bush's mandate, eleven states have written bigotry into their constitutions.
Does Stephen Harper intend to do the same to ours?
Note: Background Link to this article

---
If you don't like what you got, why don't you change it. If your world is all screwed up, rearrange it - Trooper
---
Dave Ruston
As for bush anti-gay agenda, as much as I hate the man( what he is doing in Iraq, his tax-cuts and environmental policies and so on) I don't mind his views on homosexuals!
Let's not forget that Bill clinton, a democrat, also opposed same sex marriage. He brought in Defence of Family Act and he proposed "don't ask, don't tell" policy when it came to gays in the military. All those acts I fully support.
That is one of the reason I can't support New Democratic Party. To me they are way off-line in their view on social issues such as abortion, same sex and euthanasia. We need a mainstream, inclusive centrist alternative who would protect our Canadian soverignty save our environment and get us out of NAFTA. For me there is only one person who is qualified enough to lead it. That person is no other than David Orchard.
mind his views on homosexuals! ...We need a mainstream,
inclusive centrist alternative who would protect our Canadian
soverignty ...""
Well, how nice. Being a bigot is "centrist" now, is it?
This is unacceptable drivel; read a book.
Canada must not stoop to the fithly lies and dirty tricks going on in
the US right now; we must (and the real centrists in the US hope
we will) continue to defend human rights at home and abroad. As
for the US so-called 'election' -- stay tuned for the news of the
'election' being completely rigged,folks -- is widely acknowledged
as a terrible omen for the entire world ; more than a shift to the
right, it's redefining what 'right-wing' means, where what used to
be centrist is now seen as rabidly "liberal'.
"the lawfull union of two people to the exclusion of all others".
What the hell is so objectionable about THAT? I haven't seen a SINGLE piece of evidence that this change to the definition of marriage used in Canadian Law will lead to priests being forced to marry same-sex couples, against their religions' doctrine.
Gay people aren't that simplistic that they are a single issue constituency and the majority really don't give a fig about marriage it seems, just a vocal minority.
That being said, who cares, let'em get married, why should they be happier than anyone else...