When he introduced Bill C-38, Paul Martin opened parliamentary debate by declaring, “This bill protects minority rights.” Likewise, his Justice Minister and everyone else within his government, has supported the same-sex marriage bill with the justification that marriage is a basic right, and so denying it to gays and lesbians would be a violation of the equality provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The idea of minority rights sounds noble. But it leaves open a question that Liberals have till now evaded: What about the rights of minorities within Canada who value the traditional meaning of marriage as part of their cultural and religious beliefs? Canadians deserve an answer—especially given the way the Liberal party has traditionally presented itself as the main protector of all minority communities in the country. Indeed, Martin himself calls Canada “a nation of minorities.”
Notwithstanding the Liberals’ moral posturing, what they seek to do on same-sex marriage is advance the alleged equality rights of one minority group by diluting the rights of other minority groups. On what principled basis is this judgment being made? Explicit protections for multiculturalism and freedom of religion are both contained in the text of the Charter. Gay rights are not. So why would the Liberals’ privilege the latter over the former?
The Liberals’ preference seems especially arbitrary given that the issue of gay marriage is a poor fit for the equality protections contained in the Charter. The notion of equality requires that similarly situated people be treated in a similar way. But heterosexuals are very different from homosexuals in the manner implicated by marriage.
Religions and cultures are different, too, of course. But observant members of traditional faiths and immigrant cultures are united in their rejection of same-sex marriage. What Bill C-38 would do, essentially, is impose on Canada’s complex cultural mosaic a one-size-fits-all standard plucked from the country’s secular political establishment.
Does that sound like a good way to protect “a nation of minorities”? Stephen Harper’s response on this matter was trenchant: that Liberals “blather about protecting cultural minorities, but the fact is that undermining the traditional definition of marriage is an assault on multiculturalism and the practices in those communities.”
The Islamic community, to which I belong, is a case in point. While there is no single designated authority who speaks for all Canadian Muslims, just about every Friday prayer leader in Muslim communities across the country has expressed dismay or outrage over Bill C-38. This should not come as a surprise, for the legislation runs counter to the teaching of Islam on sex and marriage. Most Hindus and Sikhs, as I have found in my conversations, are similarly opposed to Bill C-38.
There is a simple solution that would be respected by almost everyone in Canada: As in France, we could institute civil unions for homosexual couples while maintaining the opposite-sex requirement for marriage. This would give gays and lesbians all the substantive rights they would enjoy under C-38. But Liberals, apparently out of a dogmatic desire to impose their secular social vision on Canada, have refused to consider such an arrangement.
This arrogance is an insult to every minority in this country, save one.
He is a member of the Board of Directors for the Center for Islamic Pluralism based in Washington, D.C., a Senior Fellow with the Canadian Coalition for Democracies, and an academic-consultant with the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C. He has been a consultant with CIDA on development issues and has published widely in academic journals on foreign policy matters and area studies of the Middle East and South Asia.
Mansur is featured on the documentary Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West produced by the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He also unsuccessfully ran for the Canadian Alliance party in 2000.
Mansur has been accused by Canadian Islamic Congress of using "provocative, self-serving rhetoric", and for "promoting an anti-Arab and anti-Muslim agenda".
He is an Ismaili Muslim.
At a press conference on October 2, 2008, Mansur stated that "Islam is my private life, my conscience...[but] my faith does not take precedence over my duties...to Canada and its constitution, which I embrace freely;" "I am first and most importantly a Canadian;" "only in a free society will you find Islam as a faith and not a political religion." Mansur also criticized New Democratic Party Leader Jack Layton, whom Mansur said "has gone to bed with Islamists", because he is running candidates in Ontario and Quebec who are closely identified with the push for Sharia law.
- Israel: Decades-old conflict not about to cease - Saturday November 24, 2012 at 1:56 pm
- The better man lost the U.S. election - Saturday November 10, 2012 at 9:16 am
- The puzzle in U.S. presidential elections - Saturday November 3, 2012 at 8:43 am
