Just returned from QP. The news of the day, of course, is the media report today that Ottawa is preparing a Ã¢â‚¬Å“defend religionÃ¢â‚¬Â bill to accompany the coming free vote on same-sex marriage. Should the SSM vote confirm the status quo, and not re-open the issue (which will happen, believe me), then the rumour is the Harper Administration will take some action through this new law.
I read this morning in the Globe that itÃ¢â‚¬Ëœs an attempt by the government to ensure, should same-sex marriage remain the law of the land, that religious leaders have the right to dump on homosexuality without fear of legal action, or to refuse to rent out church hall for gay marriages.
Since I was the poster boy for action by the righteous right a few months ago, the media is unhealthily interested in what I might have to say in this regard. But, of course, it is just speculation. In QP a few minutes ago the justice minister said there is no new law, and the PM said he had not seen one. And that is all I could have responsibly said to the cameras.
If such a defend-religion action does materialize, of course, I will be very interested that it allows for religions freedom without fostering intolerance or discrimination. Churches and temples and synagogues should not be compelled to marry anyone, but does that same principle apply to justices of the peace, for example? And with any such law, it will always be useful to substitute the word Ã¢â‚¬Å“blackÃ¢â‚¬Â for the words Ã¢â‚¬Å“same sexÃ¢â‚¬Â and see if it still passes the smell test.