Conservative Party votes to end official opposition to gay marriage

[jayswin]

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada...cid=spartandhp

Just in time to be on the right side of history, too! Nailed it!!!!

Sarcasm aside, we need strong parties in this country, and I think it's great that the party is looking to become relevant again and sees no reason to continue fighting against a pretty progressive population where being against things like gay marriage get a pretty big eye roll from the majority of citizens, unlike our neighbors to the south.

Also interesting to note that Harper himself was apparently the biggest supporter of traditional marriage and fought really hard to keep opposing it.

I'm now starting to gain interest in the party again after this announcement (I know it's only one thing), as I had supported them in the past, as they actually gave a **** about the west. It was pretty surreal as a youngster in 2006 to see someone from Calgary running the country after so many years of being ignored by the feds.

Hopefully they pick a strong, progressive leader, and I really hope the next thing they do is distance themselves from the muzzling of scientists.

The federal Conservative Party shed its official aversion to gay marriage this weekend as rank-and-file members voted to remove the traditional definition of wedlock from their policy book – part of an effort to recast the Tories after bidding farewell to founder Stephen Harper.

“It’s about telling Canadians that you can love whom you want,” Conservative MP and leadership contender Maxime Bernier said.

“Welcome to a broad, national political party. There are always going to be different views on different issues but when we talk about unity it means unity in diversity.”

There were clear signs of how the Tories are changing without the influence of Mr. Harper, known for secrecy and distrust of the media.

The Tories opened all their policy debate sessions at their Vancouver convention to the media. It was a first for this party, which has less to lose now from such a move now that it’s longer in power

[V]

Haha, unfortunate typo.

[jayswin]

Where?

[jayswin]

Haha, screw you, V!!!

[FlamesAddiction]

It was a losing battle for them anyway. I think most Canadians either support it, or at least don't care enough either way to oppose it. It takes away a potential wedge issue that the Liberals and NDP could use in the next election.

[Ozy_Flame]

Now if only they would allow science to flourish instead of trying to muzzle it. They might be onto something.

[CaptainCrunch]

They had a majority government and didn't do anything to ban or restrict Gay marriage, on top of it they strengthened the laws in terms of supporting Gay marriage while they were in power, so this is grandstanding at the best of it.

[sun]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

Now if only they would allow science to flourish instead of trying to muzzle it. They might be onto something.

Scientists should be nuzzled, not muzzled.

[jayswin]

Hahaha, ninja edits are worthless on CP!!!

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

They had a majority government and didn't do anything to ban or restrict Gay marriage, on top of it they strengthened the laws in terms of supporting Gay marriage while they were in power, so this is grandstanding at the best of it.

Well, prior to Martin's enactment of the Civil Marriage Act, a judicial consensus had more or less formed. I suspect that the Justice Department advised Harper that significant changes to that legislation would not survive legal challenge.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Also interesting to note that Harper himself was apparently the biggest supporter of traditional marriage and fought really hard to keep opposing it.

I've never heard that. He had complete control of the country, with majorities in both houses and no internal opposition, for 4 years and did nothing to show it.

Harper was demonized for over 10 years but in the end he was a pretty moderate PM.

[corporatejay]

I had no idea this was Still a thing.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Jacks

I've never heard that. He had complete control of the country, with majorities in both houses and no internal opposition, for 4 years and did nothing to show it.

Harper was demonized for over 10 years but in the end he was a pretty moderate PM.

Only thing he really did wrong was the stupid crime bill.

Other than that we should be happy that we had the guy for 10 years considering the state of politics that our dear southern neighbors deal with.

That being said, I voted Liberal for this exact reason. To make the CP party go back to the drawing board and start fixing some of the things they got wrong. I can't find the exact list, but I'm following someone on Twitter that tweeted about some of the other stuff they voted on and it was nice to see.

Lots of optimism to be had for us former CP supporters. Hopefully they elect a good leader and get on their horse making sure the Liberals are always looking over their shoulder.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Well, prior to Martin's enactment of the Civil Marriage Act, a judicial consensus had more or less formed. I suspect that the Justice Department advised Harper that significant changes to that legislation would not survive legal challenge.

Harper never had any interest at all in trying to challenge it. But he tried to tip-toe around the argument of allowing his MPs and party members freedom of choice - knowing full well that no motion in the House would ever pass.

It is nice to see the grassroots itself move beyond, however.

[OMG!WTF!]

Now how can I be sure people won't marry zoo creatures? This is why we have asteroids hurling towards us as we speak.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

It's pretty surprising that they hung on this long. Not for the standard "no one agrees with you" reason, but more because it's a plank of the party platform that they've said forever forms no part of their legislative agenda and wouldn't affect in any way the manner in which they'll run the country if they're in government.

Ok guys... so... why's it there?

So yeah, good move for multiple reasons.

[Fuzz]

Why does it seam that whenever Conservatives do something like this, it is more about "how can we be appealing enough to get elected" than it is about principles? It just feels so forced.

[Kavvy]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Why does it seam that whenever Conservatives do something like this, it is more about "how can we be appealing enough to get elected" than it is about principles? It just feels so forced.

I think a great deal of the party supports this change as they feel it is the right thing to do.

Also, parties change rules all the time simply to help them get elected - that is definitely not limited to the con's.

[Fuzz]

That's the thing though. Do they feel its the right thing to do, or are they doing it because they know this battle is lost and it makes them un-electable? I'm sure some feel the former, but I get the feeling for a lot it is the latter.

[Flash Walken]

Nearly a third of convention voters voted against the measure. Not the strongest signal

The federal Conservative Party shed its official aversion to gay marriage this weekend as rank-and-file members voted to remove the traditional definition of wedlock from their policy book – part of an effort to recast the Tories after bidding farewell to founder Stephen Harper.

“It’s about telling Canadians that you can love whom you want,” Conservative MP and leadership contender Maxime Bernier said.

The 13-year-old party, now struggling to find its place in the political wilderness after nearly a decade in power, has yet to decide on who will lead the Conservatives against Justin Trudeau in the next election or precisely how to refashion their appeal to voters.

But a majority of delegates at a Vancouver convention agreed on what they don’t want: to be considered obsolete in a country that officially legalized gay marriage more than 11 years ago. The measure to effectively recognize gay marriage passed 1,036 to 462.