Politic, Sex & Whatnot: Canada: A squall of Homo-newsbits to go with the Novembroid weather & the Fall of LibGovt Canada

I found a site, referred by an Evangelical site, with this salient but, for me, ambiguous post, I am not heterosexual, says Berek.net. What Berek doesn't contain within his Net is the direct affirmation, "I am a homosexual." So, while I can say what Berek says, in the interest also a full disclosure, I am not a homosexual: I find it less satisfactory than what I do say from time to time: I am homosexual. (Notice the absense of an indefinite article "a." I am a Christian, and to me that is the most important thing, at the same time a responsilibity I wish I had fulfilled much better all thru my longish life (65 years now). I'm taking it for now, that Berek is telling us his sexual orientation is heterosexual, but he is not "a heterosexual." He is a much more fully-aspected, splendidly-rainbowed diversity of dimensions as one of God's human kind of creatures.

Now we make a turn to politics. The political scene in Canada is portentous: just yesterday the minority Liberal government has fallen, with all three opposition parties in the Federal House of Commons lining up to fell a government for sheer Non-Confidence for the first time in Canadian history (as against the rejection of a hi-order piece of govt-proposed legislation.
Paul Martin is out of office, or rather reduced to some caretaker functions, like decidingt the actual date of the election within constitutional parameters. But essentially out. And that's for the good, I say, on the basis of a litany of reasons I won't recite here.

But, in any case, we are bracing ourselves for a bitter election campaign in the bitter cold of a global warming of Season's Greetings, over the Christmas Holidays, past New Year's Day, and into the new year as far as said Martin determines. In that time, we expect a program of demonization on the part of candidate Martin to get himself re-elected with sufficient Commons to return at least to largest minority status in that Chamber of Parliament, and hence acquiring the privilege of forming the govt once again. All thru the campaign, out or covert, sex and marriage and religion will be political themes. Here's some specifics to indicate why.

Let's start with the once-Tory turncoat who turns up as Liberal tyro. Scott Brison, Member of Parliament, could be said to be homo but adheres to a particular ideology of his sexuality, and that ideology's political agenda, and thus prefers to be designated as "Gay" (an terminological important point, to me). True to that ideology, in his parachuted capacity as Minister of Public Works (a post he received in exchange for crossing the floor from the Tory seats to the Liberal government's side), announced that his Ministry would no longer hire white men, as he'sa devota ta quota. Of course, the hue and cry arising from the public, not least of all Canadian white males without jobs and seeking employment, perhaps in Public Works, forced Brison to bison. He rescindeth! And goes to dinna.

Well, one day or evening at dinna, presumably properly inscribed on his Ministerial expense account, a longtime Liberal loyalist spotted him in the restaurant and gave him in dulcet but in no-uncertain terms a piece of her mind. Being full already, Scott let loose on her in a most Gaughty manner ( = a manner most Gay, naughty, and haughty). Again, the lady's fury led to another hue and cry, and again the Minister Most Gay rescindeth! Longtime Liberal loyalist demands Brison apologize after restaurant spat.

But, as trouble is folklorickly said to come in threes, Scot the Bison of Gay Bull run amok in the Cabinet, tried to surmount the leader of the Official Opposition (who moved The Fall Motion), B outdid himself: Brison attacks Harper as anti-Charter, anti-Gay. The Charter here is the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (not "and Responsiblities," note) which is appended to the repatriated former British North-America Act of the British Crown. This appendage nowhere says that there is a rite to demote the traditional definitoin of marriage, to make it just another indistinct something-or-other alongside all sorts of other kinds of intimate unions (and we don't know yet how many kinds the courts will ultimately find there; but it must be said that Stephen Harper acceded to claim for some recognition of "same-sex unions" in the alternative legislation he proposed, while trying to maintain the traditional defintion, the distinctness of 1woman1man unions, and the priority standing of the latter from the stanpoint of the interests of the Canadian state. Harper is obviously neither anti-Charter, nor legal recognition of 2women or 2men intimate unions for purposes of property transmission, insurance and pension benefits, etc., but separately from the distinctiveness of traditional marriage. I can't recall for sure as I write whether the the braying Brison triplicated - did he again rescindeth? Oh yes, Owlie Scowlie has brawt me the URL in our research collection, Brison apologizes to Harper. So, for the third time, he rescindeth!

On another related note, Owlie Scowlie (full discolusure: a relative, to be exact - a nephew and a very helpful researcher hatched from the egg of nepotistic fictojournalism), That the social conservatives on the issue Traditional Marriage vs Generic "Marriage" (gmarriage) do not seem to be able simply to drop what Scott and Paul hath wrought (spelling should be "wrawt," if we're serious about the inner reformation of English orthography). Paul is said to have asked Scottie, now that the law is in place, when is the Public Works Minister going to get married? Think of the photo ops offered where Paul Martin in his campaign could wrap himself not only in the flag and the Charter, but also in gmarriage wedding cake. Well, as a matter of principle and perhaps also as a matter of extreme distaste, two former Members of the Commons, one a Liberal and one a Conservative, have announced their formation of a Marriage Defence Committee to campaign against the parties of destruction of the uniqueness and priority before the law of traditional 1woman1man marriage. Politicians to fight same-sex marriage (but oh how I dislike the faux terminology of "same-sex marriage" for its abstractness to the point of fictionalization of what actually are two distinct phenomena, either a 2woman intimate union, or a 2male intimate. "Same-sex" linked to "marriage" is logical basket-case, an avoidance of facing two distinct kinds of societal realities, and an info-deprived cover-up (but, be that as it may). I notice how the Defence Committee's campaign is styled after that of the Boat Vets campaign against Sen John Kerry in the last American Presidential election, altho on a much smaller scale.

I hope the Opposition candidates and particular that of the Official Opposition, as well as the Marriage Defense Committee, are all thick-skinned and steady on course and sufficiently financed, because we've already gotten word of the Martin Libs' strategy and tactics thru the Winter of our discontent: PM plans super-negative election campaign.

This will have special meaning in Quebec where the populace is appalled at how the Libs tried to buy public opinion, while systematically misappropriating funds, slushing some out outright and receiving some government-originated money in kickbacks to the federal Liberal Party in Quebec (what's this called in the entertainment industry? - payola?).

Well, now the payolateers will be aiming their dollars, from whatever misbegotten sources, at a Quebec provincial party in order to smear the federal sister party that is close to the former in ideology. Le Parti Quebecois has just elected a homo (doesn't seem much straitjacketed by the Gay ideologies) who has also acknowledged that earlier in his career he had snorted cocaine sometimes. Now, this is exploitable, right? Yes, if Martin can transfer over from an independent separatist party on the provincial level there the inevitable moral concerns of some (mostly outside Quebec, where mores are different from those prevailing in English-speaking Canada) to the federal Quebec-separatist party Le Bloc Quebecois and its leader Gilles Duceppe, who joined the other two opposition parties in axing the government. Take a gander at this: Demonizing new PQ leader is a doomed strategy, New Brunswick premier warms.

If you read French, also gander these two entries in blog Polyscopique which are most informative evaluations of the Quebec situation: Andre Boisclair et la cocaine and Boisclair, le PQ et les gais, plus a set of three froncophone blog entries, this time in Le sphere des idees de J. H. [Jacques Hamel] which together are quite a must-read. Hamel's three I list in chronological order - Boisclair, l'elu! [Boislcair, he's elected!, Nov15,2k5]; [Boisclair, a dynamic speaker, Nov19,2k5]; and the third in the set, one that raises questions of the more mainstream kind, Boisclair dit: "Le PQ doint etre a la gauche" [Boisclair declares: "The Parti Quebecois must be on the Left!," Nov19.2k5]. What's involved here is the fact that the provincial Liberal Party of Quebec under former Fed Tory leader Jean Charest has moved to the Right somewhat, so in appeasing PQ members of the Left and scrambling to position the PQ coalition in provincial politics on all matters other than separatism, Boisclair is doing the typical pragmatic thing in his call for a move to the Left somewhat. It's all a matter of how much, how far.

Now, again, if you read French and you do get to Hamel's blog, look up a fourth blog-entry of his [A Republic deprived of moral values?, Nov20,2l5] in which he interestingly raises the question of what a separatist government of Quebec would do (should it be able to transform the society's state from a province of Canada to that of an independent Republic) in regard to its own moral tone, and the impact of such a state's moral tone on the wide ranges of the society and its various societal spheres of life. This question does carry some weight perhaps, in the light of recent events, in directing at least a few votes away from the provincial Bloc Quebecois to the Conservatives in the upcoming Federal election (for some the motivation to change voting pattern would be guilt by association, no doubt). Byt a more thawtful approach to vote change is also possible. At least, so I would think and hope. Yet:

Yet #1 - Gay ideology seriously mispresents Boisclair when an American Gay ideologue to whom Hamel informatively links in his November 20 blog-entry, where the Gay imperialist fantasist says the following:

My normally hyperactive imagination has gone into overdrive. Surely the election of an openly gay man to head Quebec's Separatist Party must be sending shock waves through the White House and other parts of this increasingly intolerant and backward country.

Andre Boisclair's triumph puts him on a fast track to be Quebec's next Premier, and if, against the odds, Quebec voters ultimately decide to separate from English-speaking Canada, we would actually have the first openly gay head of state! Yikes. Unlikely, but well within the realm of possibilities.

Imagine a gay country on our northern border. A sort of North American Gay version of Israel.

Regardless of how it turns out, Boisclar has just shattered yet another barrier in the history of gay liberation.

Yet #2 - I do take seriously the New Brunswick premier's warning not to demonize the Bloc in the vote for the Commons in reaction to the PQ's new leader Boisclair (in Quebec, the cocaine use is more disturbing to more people than is his nonideological homo status). Nevertheless, the stained fed Libs' leader is out there now trying to demonize the Bloc which seems not to have any scandal of its own to shame it. So, how will Martin make this stick, except by taking a Holier Than Thou attitude, when he's in no position to do so? You see, dear fellow anglophone readers, the charge of separtism itself just doesn't have the force it used possess, as we all learn in Canada that separatism in Quebec and Western Canada, too, is part of the heritage of the country. Separatism is as Canadian as maple syrup, and right now it has two French-speaking political parties, one on the provincial level, one on the Federal level. Demonization on this matter is just not an honest strategy; and plays into the hands of separatist vote-collecting, to which they are entitled under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms of the repatriated Constitution of the Queen's Dominion of Canada. So, a sleaze slide to demonization on the basis either of use of cocaine by the leader of a provincial party (albeit separatist, and albeit with Hamel's quesiton about what moral tone would a free and independent Quebec Republic aspire to), or on the basis of said leader's being a not-so-Gay homo, neither should function much at all in a campaign of Federal parties.

As for me, I urge Boisclair to give up cocaine and booze, while amelioratively trying the pill form of maryjane :-); and ready himself for a vow of celibacy, accompanied by many buckets of cold water and a supply of ice cubes to fill his bathtub ;-|; In my old age, I'm able to maintain my celibacy comfortably without any cold showers at all. And for that, dear Lord, I'm most thankful, but as You and I know that isn't the path You have in store for every homo across the continent, as we do have different levels of libido. And the level varies with health and age, for most. J'ai fini. - Owlb