Was listening to The Current on CBC Radio this morning. The hot election topic remains same-sex marriage and Tories leader Stephen Harper's promise to put it through Parliament votes again.
Those in favour of same-sex marriage argue that the old definition of marriage (that of the union between one man and one woman) was unconstitutional. Therefore, it needs to be scrapped for a new definition.
First of all, let me refer again to the point I made, incidentally, exactly six months ago. I said that the original definition of marriage was not discriminating to gays and lesbians because they were as free as the rest of us to marry straight, and as forbidden as the rest of us to marry gay.
Second of all, and I've already stated this point, as an insitution that predates government laws, legislations, and consitutions, holy matrimony is outside these jurisdictions and therefore its definition cannot be changed through any of these avenues. No governmental bodies wield any power over the definition of marriage.
Third of all, if marriage is deemed unconstitutional despite having been in place long before governments, what's next? Family is unconsitutional? Religion is unconstitutional? Chickens are unconstitutional? Give me a break. How long before government is unconstitutional? Or the constitution is unconstitutional?
A liberal government ventures forward, seeking to break all taboos and fight for rights and freedoms, blatantly ignoring all responsibilities and consequences that result. They grant the right to carry arms, then watch idly by as gang violence runs wild in the streets of Toronto. They encourage sexual freedom and promiscuity, then watch idly by while countless families fall apart. They promote a woman's right to control her body, then watch idly by as a perfectly healthy individual is flushed down the drain. They protect children from abuse, animals from cruelty, and the environment from pollution, but allow the unborn to be ruthlessly murdered. That's what a government does for us? Kill innocents, tear families apart, and take the right to life away from defenseless lives?
In a week's time, I'll be voting Conservatives. How about you?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I don't like the Liberal governmnet, but the Conservatives are very far from what I view as an ideal party.
Their strongest identity and platform right now is --- what? "We are not Libeals." And this whole gay marriage thing is going to be an utter sham. We saw how the United States used gay marriage to deceive Christians and buy votes - I can't help but feel uncomfortable that the Tories are doing something similar.
And to me, the missile defense, the environment, Kyoto, militarization, Americanization, are all VERY important issues. On these issues I vehemently disagree with Harper's vision.
We need a stronger Canada and we certainly need more Christianity/morality in the government, but I do not believe that they can provide it.
But who am I going to vote? I am still undecided.
"Ideal party"... does such a thing exist? I'd guess not.
Honestly, my political views stem from my religious convictions. Hence, Conservatives over Liberals.
And frankly, I have not had the luxury of fully comparing the platforms of all parties. But aren't all politics based on deception? Some voters remain naïve, while others become cynical. I'll be naïve and vote Tories.
In the end, until He returns, all forms of government are doomed to failure anyway. In the grand scheme of things, as long as we do our part, what will be will be.
Post a Comment