January 29, 2005
The liberals have become arrogant, imperial and dictatorial in their view of the stewardship of the ship of state, which they as political party were entrusted, by although only a minority of Canadians, in the last federal election.
Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew, arrogantly tells the Catholic Church to essentially shut up, and extricate itself from the debate on the most important legislative changes in the history of this country affecting the foundations of society and marriage in Canada.
Marriage is not some line item in a public accounts allocation, which the federal government has responsibility for. Marriage is the most important and fundamental religious institution for all society, its social organization, and continuation of life itself. For a Minister of State to say to the highest ranking officials of the Roman Catholic Church to "keep its nose out of federal legislation" is an insult of gigantic proportions.
Mr. Pettigrew not only insulted all the Bishops of the Catholic Church, but also all other religious leaders of such faiths as the Sikh, Muslim, Orthodox, Anglican, Evangelical, and Protestant denominations telling them essentially that he and his liberal band of colleagues know better what is good for Canadian society. Yes, the Canadian people have been affronted.
This is the elitist liberal view of social progress, which is rooted in their view of moral relativity, and secular humanism. They claim they are promoting some arcane human rights for a suppressed homosexual minority. However all Canadians already have the same human rights such as political rights, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, mobility, religion, etc. under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. So what human right are they lacking?
Marriage is not akin to some political or human right. It is an institution based on a biological and natural reality. It requires members of the opposite sex in order to meet the criteria of its definition. Its function is procreation and the structure for families and the rearing of children. Not some arrangement based upon unnatural dangerous and unhealthy sexual practices, which is what defines homosexual behaviour and the sexual identity of those engaged in such practices.
Given the above attributes of homosexual behaviour CCIC cannot endorse civil unions as a legal concept, since these are being promoted as being completely equal to marriage with all rights and responsibilities attendant thereto including the right to adoption and foster care of children.
Stephen Harper would be well advised to revisit his position on this, as Canadians don't wish to be a deceived by his Party with "homosexual marriage" under a different name (civil unions) still coming in through the backdoor since the only difference between "civil unions " and "marriage" appears to be the spelling of the words as both wil have the same rights and responsibilities.
CCIC is not opposed to private legal contractual arrangements between two adults of the same sex when these do not contain such aspects as adoption rights and foster care of children. Homosexuals it should be noted are already free to make any private contractual arrangements they wish at this time under Canadian law.
Canadians of any religious persuasion have cause to be extremely weary of a government so fanatical in its pursuits of radical social change, which by any objective analysis is doomed to become a social catastrophe for any nation where these experiments have been implemented in the past.
Societies that have implemented homosexuality as major way of life in history have all self destructed. Saying nothing of the judgement of the Almighty upon the ways of sin.
The moral witness provided by leaders of Canada's major religions in a free and democratic society is every bit as acceptable as the rights of individual citizens on major contentious political issues. Separation of church and state originally conceived in the United States never envisioned members of religious faiths being ostracised from participating in the political process, or not being able to publicly express viewpoints based on their religious beliefs and understanding.
What separation of church and state was meant to denote was the absence of state control over religion and the church. Churches were always allowed to participate in politics in the early years of the American independence.
The time has come that left-wing political leaders shut up about telling the church that it has no business speaking out on issues of a religious and moral demeanour.
The time has also come to let the people speak on this issue of marriage. In a national referendum the Canadian people will decide this issue. The government's job is merely to carry out the wishes of the people, for the people, and by the people. The overwhelming majority of Canadians are saying: yes to natural marriage, and no to homosexual marriage. Let Canada Vote !

FREDERICTON - The Roman Catholic Church should keep its nose out of the government's same-sex marriage legislation, Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew suggested yesterday.
Asked about plans by church groups in Quebec to launch a campaign against same-sex marriage, Mr. Pettigrew said the government and churches should not get involved in each other's affairs.
"I find that the separation of the Church and the state is one of the most beautiful inventions of modern times."
While some Liberal MPs have said they will oppose the legislation or have yet to make up their minds, Mr. Pettigrew said there is no doubt in his mind that he will support the bill to be tabled when Parliament resumes.
"It is a question of principle for me. I will support the government's legislation on the marriage of same-sex couples."
Prime Minister Paul Martin has already ordered all members of Cabinet to vote with the government although backbenchers are free to follow their consciences. Last week, Catholic archbishops voiced their opposition to the bill, echoing the concerns of Muslim and Sikh religious leaders.
And yesterday, Catholics were outraged at Mr. Pettigrew's suggestion they keep silent on an issue of moral significance such as the same-sex legislation.
"Certainly those who are trying to bring about change have not been shy at engaging in debate," said Thomas Collins, Archbishop of the Diocese of Edmonton. "We have every right to make our voice heard as well."
Archbishop Collins says Ottawa should not try to stifle the views of any Canadians on issues of moral conscience. "This is an effort to try to remove moral comment from issues affecting the common good."
He also noted the Catholic opposition to same-sex marriage is shared by other Christian groups, as well as Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and Orthodox Jews.
Philip Horgan, the Catholic Civil Rights League president, said Mr. Pettigrew should be "ashamed" of himself for suggesting the Catholic Church does not have a role in a public debate. "Typically it's been my experience that when folks start talking about the separation of Church and state, what they are really talking about is the separation of conscience from politics."
"Any political decision is at its core a moral decision of what should be done, what ought to be done and what is the right thing to do."
Mr. Horgan also noted Canada's Constitution goes to great pains to protect the rights of religious groups and does not, as is the case in the United States, call for a strict separation of Church and state. The state has always funded Catholic schools, hospitals and other religious organizations, for example, he says.
Mr. Pettigrew's comments came as the Liberals wrapped up a three-day caucus meeting dominated by the question of the same-sex marriage legislation Justice Minister Irwin Cotler will table next week.
The spectre of an election has hung over the war of words on the issue between Mr. Martin and Conservative Leader Stephen Harper and yesterday, Gilles Duceppe, the Bloc Quebecois leader, announced he has put his troops on an election footing.
Also yesterday Liberal opponents of the bill conceded that it is a virtual shoo-in to pass in the Commons. However, many Liberal MPs are leery of getting drawn into an election in which same-sex marriage is a key issue.
Quebec caucus chairwoman Raymonde Folco says the government's support for same-sex marriage could cost some Liberal MPs their seats.
"I think that there will be a price to pay on the part of the members of Parliament, on the part of almost all the members of Parliament," she said. "There are always people who tell us if you do that, we won't vote for you."
Ms. Folco warned that Liberals can't discount the possibility the issue could help Conservative party fortunes in Quebec.
"Careful, we don't know where we are going with the Conservatives in Quebec," she said, pointing out that many people who vote Liberal or Action Democratique provincially have supported the Tories in the past.
"They aren't present, but they are trying to be present and Harper is doing everything to be present in Quebec. So will he present candidates? Will they divide [the vote] with the Bloc? Anything is possible."
The Toronto Sun reported yesterday that a new Conservative party poll showed that 58% of people in the Greater Toronto Area supported Mr. Harper's position of preserving the traditional man-woman definition of marriage, and allowing same-sex civil unions, while 34% backed Mr.
Martin's proposed legalization on same-sex marriage.
The poll -- reportedly a sample of 1500 -- said that nationally the results also favoured the Conservatives 42-35%. In Ontario, the Tories also came out ahead 57-38 %.
Meanwhile the leading caucus opponent of the same-sex legislation conceded yesterday that passing the bill is almost a done deal because there simply are not enough MPs in the House who support maintaining the traditional definition of marriage.
As the caucus retreat wrapped up, Ontario MP Paul Steckle said the "die was pretty much cast" in that the vast majority of his colleagues have already made up their minds to endorse the legalization of same-sex weddings across the country.
The Huron-Bruce MP warned, however, that Liberals may pay for this in the next election. He said legalizing same-sex marriage was never part of a Liberal election platform and the party may face an angry electorate.
"This will come back to bite you. We have to remember that at the end of the day, constituency representation is what it's all about," he said.
Mr. Martin attempted yesterday to shift the emphasis off same-sex insisting that his government had a very busy session coming up when Parliament resumes on Monday. However, he had a tough time explaining exactly what was on his legislative agenda when pressed.
"Um, um, certainly, among the first pieces of legislation will be the bill introduced by [Justice] Minister Cotler ... on the redefinition of marriage," he said. The only other item he mentioned was the budget, expected in late February or early March, and some housekeeping bills
that may accompany that.
MPs privately grumbled that the government has lost control of the Liberal agenda. They say PMO officials spend each day in a crisis management mode reacting to the headline of the hour and are failing to take a proactive approach by fulfilling the promises they made to Canadians during the election campaign.
(c) National Post 2005

Christian Coalition International (Canada) Inc.
P.O. Box 6013, Station A
Toronto, Ontario
Canada M5W 1P4
Phone nr. 1-905-824-6526
Media Relations: 1-416-622-1045