By Stephen Gray
“In sum, using the section 33 Notwithstanding power is a perfectly legitimate response to the courts’ usurpation of the legislative responsibility to make laws—in this case, the law of marriage. This is especially true for homosexual marriage, as the courts have added new meaning to the Charter that was explicitly rejected when the Charter was being written.” [1]
The not-withstanding clause was put in the Charter as a check against the judiciary usurping the powers of parliament by imposing laws that were never in the Charter. The Charter would never have come into being without this clause being put there. Yet today we have seen the courts expropriating the powers of our elected representatives and imposing their will on the country. So called “same-sex marriage” is only one of a number of judicial forays into judicial nonsense land. This figment of judicial imagination was never in the Charter. If ever there was a time for the not-withstanding clause to be used it should be on the “same-sex marriage” issue. Yet politicians of all political stripes are abdicating their responsibilities by allowing this imposed judicial jargon to stand as a “right.” Ted Morton who has taught constitutional law and is also a well known writer and author, had this to say, “…the idea that homosexual marriage is a right is a judge-made affair from start to finish.”[2] So what is going on? Do we have some sort of elitist and political conspiracy out there determined to impose their sick will on the country even to the extent of abolishing the not-withstanding clause to get their way?
"The first act of a new Liberal government is going to be to strengthen the Charter and we will do that by removing . . . the possibility for the federal government to use the notwithstanding clause, because quite simply I think governance says that the courts shouldn't be overturned by politicians," Mr. Martin said. [3]
Prime Minister Paul Martin is going “to strengthen the Charter” by abolishing the not-withstanding clause. Wow, is this liberal doublespeak or what? To “strengthen” by abolishing? Only dictators use that kind of language and is that where we are headed if the Liberals’ are returned to power? What if the Conservatives win power what would they do about this nonsensical lie called “same-sex marriage?”
Stephen Harper has said if he comes to power he would “allow a free vote” on same-sex marriage. This sounds nice, democratic and reasonable, except for one thing. This judge imposed claptrap was never in the Charter and a “free vote” is a diversion away from the reality. Firstly it would be a vote on a lie. Secondly it probably would not pass, and if it did it would be challenged in the Supreme Court by the usual suspects who seem to have important friends in positions of power. The only way to bring the Supreme Court back to sanity would be for a new government to use the notwithstanding clause. But Stephen Harper said this on using the clause regarding “same-sex marriage.”
“I will never use the notwithstanding clause on that issue,” Harper said.[4]
This raises a serious question: Why would Mr. Harper not use this clause, when the evidence is available that the Charter is being subverted by the judiciary? Surely he can see what the judges and unprincipled politicians have done? The not-withstanding clause is there to protect the people from judicial tyranny. Mr. Harper says he “supports’ the not-withstanding clause in the Charter according to this report:
“Harper replied that he thinks the charter provides a balance between Parliament and the courts and that he supports it the way it is.”[5]
So he “supports” it but won’t use it on this imposed lie called “same-sex marriage.” What is the matter with these politicians that they all run for cover when asked to take a stand?
On one hand we have democratically challenged Paul Martin determined to rid the country of the one safe guard against unscrupulous judges, the use of the not-with standing clause. We have Jack Layton, also enthusiastic about “same-sex marriage.” We have Gilles Duceppe a separatist whose party supported and helped pass this vote on “same-sex marriage” in parliament; (and this is a party that wants out of Canada helping to impose an aberration within Canada!!! ) Can it get any crazier than this? And finally we have Stephen Harper who has a chance to restore democracy and curtail the power of the Supreme Court of Canada by invoking the not-withstanding clause on this aberration called “same-sex marriage,” and he states he will “never use it.” If Mr. Harper will not use it on this lie, he is in fact allowing non-elected judges to impose their will upon elected representatives of the people. Think about it people, judges rule.
Stephen Gray
January 12, 2006.
graysinfo@yahoo.ca website http://www.oocities.org/graysinfo
Endnotes:
[1] F.L. (Ted) Morton National Post, A14, Sept. 4, 2003) http://www.marriageinstitute.ca/pages/morton.htm
[2] F.L. (Ted) Morton National Post, A14, Sept. 4, 2003)
3] January 10, 2006, Globe and Mail)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060109.wdebate0109a/BNStory/specialDecision2006/
[4] http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/CanadaVotes/2005/12/14/1352977-cp.html
[5] http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonist/news/comment/story.html?id=377efc40-5cec-4c39-b616-12bab6ca3ddf