Well, folks, a gang of microscopic germs have decided it would be convenient to set up shop inside my throat. I’m feeling lousy. So, I’m posting a response from the Slap Upside The Head Mailbag!

A visitor (from back in November) writes:

Why do you object to parents being notified if their kids are going to take a class on gay issues? And why does it bother you that some people do not wish to administer marriage vows to gay/lesbian couples?

Mark responds (again, back in November):

Thanks for writing; I appreciate your questions!

First, I’d like to clarify that I don’t have a problem with clergy refusing to officiate over same-sex weddings. Clergymen are performing a religious ceremony on behalf of the church, and are absolutely free to abide by the rules of the church. Many churches, for example, do not permit inter-faith marriage and will refuse to officiate over such ceremonies. This is within their constitutional right.

My objection is rather to the notion that a Justice of the Peace or civil marriage commissioner could refuse to perform their services to a same-sex couple. Unlike a clergyman, JOPs and commissioners are not religious ambassadors, and the services they are providing are on behalf of the state, not the church. For a state-sanctioned commissioner to refuse a marriage license to a gay couple would be kind of like a state-sanctioned private registrar refusing to issue a drivers license to someone of a profoundly different faith.

On a personal note, I absolutely agree with a person’s right to religious expression. However, I do think it’s a bit of a stretch for someone to claim their religious beliefs forbid them from interacting with same-sex couples in a job capacity.

As for the school notifications, I assume this is a reference to Ted Morton’s Bill 208, which stated that parents would have to be notified before a teacher acknowledges the existence of same-sex marriage in Canada.

Given that same-sex marriage does exist in Canada, I feel this is an awfully heavy-handed restriction to be written into law. The most outspoken opponent of this bill was the Alberta Teacher’s Association. My objections are the same as theirs. To require parental notification before acknowledging any potentially contentious topic effectively muzzles spontaneous discussion. A teacher would have to refuse to answer student questions on the topic and halt student reports. This gags discussions on the constitutional, social, political, and economic aspects, and I firmly believe that it’s important for students to develop sound discussion skills.

Beyond that objection, I also think that since other contentious topics (war, abortion, divorce) are not given the same treatment, this law would single out discussions about same-sex marriage as posing a unique hazard. This is not a fair message to gay and lesbian students, and their peers.

Incidentally, there are no courses in Alberta that discuss same-sex marriage as part of the curriculum. There is a new “Social Issues” course being offered in B.C. for 2008, and that includes a unit on gay issues. However, this course is offered to senior students in high school only, and is purely an elective. Parents should always discuss which electives their children take.

So there you have it: My lazy “Sick Day” post! Do you agree? Disagree? If you’d like to send a letter for a future mailbag post, don’t forget to visit the stupendous About Page!

Well, I’m off to get some rest and drink plenty of fluids. Until Wednesday, folks!

Update: Thanks to everyone who sent me “get well” notes, and to the very many more of you who wrote to point out the hilarious ambiguity in this post’s title. At my own discretion, I respectfully refuse to clarify which interpretation is accurate. ;-)

Related Posts:

• Anti-Gay Civil Marriage Commissioner Appeals
• Ted Morton Can’t Take a Hint
• Ted Morton’s Bill 208 Is Back

Ah, Halloween! That time of year when the undead drag their rheumatic limbs through the streets, assorted ghouls knock door to door, and the conservative campaign for a new Alberta premier kicks off…

Ted Morton, incidentally, is taking a shot at premiership. And what do you suppose is one of his top-two campaign promises? Why, a re-RE-introduction of Bill 208, which has now failed to make it through parliament twice! The bill, if passed, would remove all legal consequences for those “acting out on their beliefs” against same-sex marriage. (Restaurant waiter? Don’t like gays? Well, no need to serve ‘em!)

The bill also includes specific clauses that would force teachers to send out “parental warnings” before discussing gay issues, and allow civil marriage commissioners to deny their public services to gays.

Now, I’m not entirely sure why Teddy thinks 208 will survive legislature the third time around, but I gotta give him some anti-gay credit for persistence. And for those of you unsure of what to be for halloween, I’m delighted to announce that a Bill 208 “undead” costume pattern is in the works! In preparation, please put bury some ancient parchment for a week; instructions will follow.

• Morton promises to change the status quo [Pincher Creek Echo]

Ted Morton—who seems to be recovering quite nicely from his anti-gay bill‘s delightfully brutal slaying—has now set his sights country-wide, urging MPs to ban same-sex marriage. At a press conference last Thursday, Morton announced that “the evidence is absolutely overwhelming that same-sex marriage is not a basic human right.”

Morton then provided all press attendees with a list of peer-reviewed studies backing up his claim, putting the issue to rest once and for all.

Nah, I’m totally kidding! He couldn’t provide jack squat.

Instead, Morton, surrounded by religious group representatives, re-iterated the same ostensible “protect the children” demagoguery. But, you know, that’s just as good as real scientific studies. Well, in Alberta.

Now, for the sake of our children’s future, could someone, uh, please repair the broken motorized sidewalk at Beaudry Métro station? It’s been idle for, like, two months. Thanks.

• Morton, religious groups unite to fight same-sex marriage [CBC News]
• Alberta group says Canada’s children are factor in same-sex marriage debate [Mcleans]

Ah, Labour Day, the ironically named holiday where we get absolutely no work done. And, of course, this site is no exception. However, I’ve prepared this lovely Labour Day Update in advance, especially for you!

So, without further ado…

Take THAT, Teddy!

The amazingly bigoted Alberta MLA, Ted Morton, was dealt a sweet, justice-ey blow last week, as his hate-filled Bill 208 was mercilessly killed by necessary opposition delay tactics. The bill would have permitted civil marriage commissioners to deny their public service to gays, forced teachers to “warn” parents before even acknowledging the existence of same-sex marriage in Canada, and remove all consequences for an individual “exercising their beliefs” against same-sex marriage. Ah, just think: waiters refusing to serve gay couples, bus drivers refusing to let them board public transit… How uniquely Alberta! (And mind-numbingly unconstitutional.)

And, I guess that’s it for the Labour Day Update. Just one story. Well, until Wednesday, folks, don’t labour too much!

Someone call a nanny! Alberta’s hysterical temper-tantrum over same-sex marriage is still going strong, apparently. Ted Morton (MLA and super bigot extraordinaire) resumed debate on Bill 208 Friday. The bill, which was presumed dead after legislature ended back in spring, was granted a surprise resurrection.

Here’s what the bill will do, if passed:

• Allow civil marriage commissioners to refuse their public services to gays
• Allow teachers to refuse to acknowledge the existence of same-sex marriage in Canada
• Force teachers to hand out “parental warnings” if they do choose to acknowledge reality
• Remove all punishment for an individual “exercising their beliefs” against gay marriage.

Un-freaking-believable!

Julie Lloyd, a local activist, is terrified.

The effects of this bill, should it become law in Alberta, would be devastating for gays and lesbians.

[Bill 208], if passed, would allow employers to fire gays and let landlords evict gay tenants with impunity because they’re “exercising a belief against same-sex marriage.”

Of course, the bill is also grossly unconstitutional, and certainly wouldn’t survive a court challenge (assuming the obscure notwithstanding clause isn’t used—which Alberta has done before to prevent court challenges to a ban on same-sex marriage from 2000-2005). But, really, even if the bill doesn’t survive, how much more of this hemorrhaging fit can Teddy produce?

Yeah, that’s totally a rhetorical question.

• Battle lines being drawn over Alberta same-sex bill [Globe and Mail]
• City gays & lesbians lash out [Edmonton SUN]

Well, I’m off enjoying Victoria Day today—the day where Canadians everywhere thank Queen Victoria for… whatever she did to give us a national holiday in her honour. In the meantime, though, I’ve prepared this special Victoria Day Update to let you, the astute reader, know what has been happening with some of those wacky stories I’ve been reporting on.

I assume it must be really hard to translate “gays deserve equal treatment” into legalese, because the Supreme Court’s decision on whether or not to give retroactive survivor’s benefits to same-sex couples has been delayed. I guess there’s no pressure for them to hurry up, though; the main claimant died in October waiting for a ruling.

Poor King Ralph and Ted Morton! Their beloved Bill 208—which would have allowed Alberta teachers to not only refuse to acknowledge the existence of same-sex marriage in Canada, but also force them to send out parental warnings before speaking a word on the subject—was effectively killed in parliament through brilliant opposition delay tactics. Now, I wonder if they’ll be able to effectively kill Ted and Ralphy’s temper tantrum?