Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm sure everyone is aware that Ralph Goodale Posted to Twitter a 2005 video of Andrew Scheer, then 25 years old addressing Parliament as a Conservative M.P. In it he speaks to his opposition of gay marriage. He goes on about the sanctity of marriage and the importance of the union for procreation.
It should be noted that back in 2005 there were also Liberal M.P's who voted against Same Sex Marriage including Goodale himself. He says his views have evolved on the matter and now supports it. Scheer's office has clarified that Mr. Scheer "Supports Same-sex marriage as defined in Law" not exactly a full throated support of gay marriage, just a statement that he supports the law. He has also said he wouldn't try to re-open debate or try to repeal it if PM.
What do you think about this? Does this video and the resurfacing of it impact the way you are going to be voting this October?
I mean there's several sides to this (and before anyone mistakens my view I'm a huge LGBTQ rights advocate and actively participate in our local pride events and community groups):
1. It was, afterall, 14 years ago. A lot of people said a lot of discriminatory things back then including the democrats and liberals (remember how Hillary Clinton flipped back and forth several times on her support for gay marriage). Hence, I do genuinely believe that people can change overtime, and that people's views on LGBTQ issues can evolve. Whether Mr. Scheer genuinely did that I do not know, but we should give him the benefit of the doubt.
2. This is an election year, and this is politics. The liberals didn't just dig this out of the archives as a public service announcement. It has a clear political agenda - to ensure that Liberal Party leads the votes when it comes to LGBTQ voters. It's just politics in a parliamentary democracy like Canada, and each political party does this on a day to day basis, so one shouldn't attach too much moral significance to them.
3. I've heard some voters say that they could never trust Mr. Scheer or the Conservative party ever again after this video. I mean, do they honestly trust the Liberals or NDP or Green or Bloc Quebecois?
Once again, for us voters, this shouldn't be about trust (how much you trust so and so), or morality (who has the moral high ground), or who's right and wrong. I think for the voting public, the biggest take away is to use these situations to the public's advantage and push for things that can benefit the country as a whole. For example, for LGBTQ advocates, this video is a perfect opportunity to put pressure on moderate-leaning Conservative MPs and candidates to openly declare their support for LGBTQ issues, such as better funding for local community projects or initiatives that you care about. Again, we should never pledge total allegiance or "trust" towards any political party or individual, but rather use them as our tools to push for greater political gain that can benefit the community/country in the long term. Steady political pragmatism always wins in the end.
I don't believe leopards change their spots unless they do it begrudgingly by disguising them to gain favour for their ambitions.
It doesn't impact the way I'd be voting in any case since I don't like the guy because he's smarmy and too ambitious. Besides which, he's only been the leader of the Conservative party for 2 years and I think he's too young and inexperienced for that, let alone to hold the position of prime minister. Give him another 10 years and then see how he proves his mettle.
I am curious about what his attitude was about the decriminalizing of marijuana.
I mean there's several sides to this (and before anyone mistakens my view I'm a huge LGBTQ rights advocate and actively participate in our local pride events and community groups):
1. It was, afterall, 14 years ago. A lot of people said a lot of discriminatory things back then including the democrats and liberals (remember how Hillary Clinton flipped back and forth several times on her support for gay marriage). Hence, I do genuinely believe that people can change overtime, and that people's views on LGBTQ issues can evolve. Whether Mr. Scheer genuinely did that I do not know, but we should give him the benefit of the doubt.
2. This is an election year, and this is politics. The liberals didn't just dig this out of the archives as a public service announcement. It has a clear political agenda - to ensure that Liberal Party leads the votes when it comes to LGBTQ voters. It's just politics in a parliamentary democracy like Canada, and each political party does this on a day to day basis, so one shouldn't attach too much moral significance to them.
3. I've heard some voters say that they could never trust Mr. Scheer or the Conservative party ever again after this video. I mean, do they honestly trust the Liberals or NDP or Green or Bloc Quebecois?
Once again, for us voters, this shouldn't be about trust (how much you trust so and so), or morality (who has the moral high ground), or who's right and wrong. I think for the voting public, the biggest take away is to use these situations to the public's advantage and push for things that can benefit the country as a whole. For example, for LGBTQ advocates, this video is a perfect opportunity to put pressure on moderate-leaning Conservative MPs and candidates to openly declare their support for LGBTQ issues, such as better funding for local community projects or initiatives that you care about. Again, we should never pledge total allegiance or "trust" towards any political party or individual, but rather use them as our tools to push for greater political gain that can benefit the community/country in the long term.
Let's keep the U.S out of this discussion ie Hillary Clinton etc and just stick to Canada. I agree with you that people can change, and Scheer's office did confirm he will support same sex marriage by law. I don't think he has really evolved on the issue though. It Is in his political interest to maintain status quo. That all said, I disagree with the notion that the PM shouldn't be held to a higher standard. He is the leader of his party and country. He/She sets the tone. Especially in our Parliamentary democracy whereby M.P's are far more likely to fall in line with the leader than to dissent.
I did like what you said about those who are more socially progressive putting pressure on Conservative M.P's and candidates. I still feel like the Conservative party is not socially progressive enough and this is hurting them. After what happened with Trudeau and SNC, you'd think this should be in the bag for the Cons but it is not. Part of it is because voters like me, who would be inclined to vote Conservative probably won't simply because they are almost always living half a century behind in terms of social values.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoisite
I don't believe leopards change their spots unless they do it begrudgingly by disguising them to gain favour for their ambitions.
It doesn't impact the way I'd be voting in any case since I don't like the guy because he's smarmy and too ambitious. Besides which, he's only been the leader of the Conservative party for 2 years and I think he's too young and inexperienced for that, let alone to hold the position of prime minister. Give him another 10 years and then see how he proves his mettle.
I am curious about what his attitude was about the decriminalizing of marijuana.
.
I agree with this. I think he does so begrudgingly. His social conservatism does make me feel uncomfortable inherently uncomfortable. I feel more comfortable with the other major parties in terms of social values and progressivism, but ofc trust is a major issue for Trudeau these days.
I thought the name “Progressive Conservative” was an oxymoron.
Federally the Progressive Conservative party of Mulroney is dead. Joe Clark tried to revive it and couldn't get it up. It is now simply the Conservative party which is kind of an amalgam of the old PC and Reform/Canadian Alliance parties.
When that party existed as a federal party, the name was apt. They were fiscally conservative, but not socially conservative.
The present day Conservative party took on more of the Reform/Canadian Alliance approach to social conservatism. The odd thing is, I think it is hurting them and will hurt them more as time goes by. By and large, Canadians are not socially conservative.
The present day Conservative party took on more of the Reform/Canadian Alliance approach to social conservatism. The odd thing is, I think it is hurting them and will hurt them more as time goes by. By and large, Canadians are not socially conservative.
Yup, I totally agree.
I also think the Liberal party is swinging too far to the left, to NDP territory. That leaves a centrist with no choice.
I prefer a balanced political pendulum that gently swings back and forth on either side of centre where Canadians can see some merits and some things they dislike in both parties. That way, when the political power changes, no one is too upset. Compromise is possible. In contrast, extremes mean a wildly swinging pendulum because every strong swing in one direction will probably result, when the governing power gets stinky as it always does with time, in a violent swing in the opposite direction.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
