Scott Hart is the fool.Going into this two party race, young Mr.Hart should recognize, that by showing respect to the true liberals within Gordon Campbells Conservative usurption of their party, we will attract the much needed centre vote.
Shame on Scott for being so quick to denounce a legitimate protest against a very real threat.If we are to advance true progressive politics in this province and country we must begin to show the respect and create alliances that will begin to truly advance the goals of ordinary Canadians.We must put our arrogance and spite aside and begin doing the job we purport to be vying for.Representing the dreams and aspirations of all British Columbians.

Considering those YL's are probably from Victoria, I'll estimate that Scott Hart knows them a bit better than truth be told. I've only met a few, but some are good, and some are down right nasty.

What on earth is wrong for Young Liberals to stage a protest? Do you have to be a non-member of a political party to stage a protest? What are you trying to suggest, Sean Holman? That membership in a political party puts a gag order on you to express your views?

Good on the Federal Young Liberals at U-Vic. They are standing up for their principles -- and standing up against the Tories and their 1950's view of society.

Let's see, a really bad reception for Harper and the CPC will play out in the national media to the benefit of whom? Ahhh yes, the federal Liberals. So the benefit for the NDP is nothing.

Harper is not in power, he and his party represent a significant viewpoint within Canada. So protesting the CPC at a caucus retreat in Victoria will achieve nothing (ok, could push the CPC further to the right).

A useful protest would be against the various Martinis and their hatred of democratic processes. Or how about the federal minister of health that seems to have no understanding about how healthcare works in Canada?

I don't get what Bernard is trying to say. What is wrong with federal Young Liberals protesting Harper to:

a) benefit the federal Liberals
b) make their views known on the same-sex issue?

Sounds like a pretty legitimate thing for someone to do in our democracy. It sounds pretty legitimate to be promoting something that would help their political party as well -- why would they do something to hurt it?

Its unfortunate that the Young NDP can't seem to get beyond blind partisanship and support an issue where they can agree with the Young Liberals. THE NDP is always so self rightious in claiming that they will work with other parties for the greater good, yet when presented with the opportunity to prove themselves, they fall flat on their asses. Why can't these parties, as well as other organizations band together for the common cause and challenge the Conservatives. Im saddened to think that I once voted NDP for their stance on progressive social issue, since now when they are faced with an opportunity to speak up for their own party policies, they fail to rise to the occasion.

The Conservative Party of Canada has launched a national advertising campaign against same-sex marriage. Their entire caucus, including Stephen Harper, will be in Victoria next week. Since they are in our backyard this will be the perfect opportunity to make pro same-sex marriage voices heard.

I think its our duty to go out and let the conservative caucus and the national media know how we feel on this issue. We know that there are some Conservative MPs who are in favour of same-sex marriage and we want to encourage as many of them as possible to vote in favour of this issue.

Several gay rights clubs are showing interest in the friendly rally. The Young Liberals of Canada have been fighting for this issue for almost a decade and I am encouraging my club members to participate as well.

This is not a protest against something; this is a protest for something.

Taking a political viewpoint, we would like to encourage people from all parts of the political spectrum to participate and make the rally non-partisan, placing the importance back where it belongs - on the issue.

Adam Trombley
Director of Finance, UVic Young Liberals of Canada

Adam you'll have to forgive the NDP & YND. This concept of being positive about something is a bit foreign to them.

I have no problem with peopling protesting the CPC - though I think it is a pointless exercise. What do people really expect to happen from this? What that Stephen Harper will cross the floor and be a federal Liberal?

What is see as not smart is NDP and left types supporting something that could in anyway be tied to promoting the federal Liberal party.

I honestly do not understand why any that is young is a federal Liberal. If you believe in progressive issues, join or support the NDP. If you are social conservative or libertarian, join the CPC. But Liberal????

As far as I can tell the only thing the Liberals believe in federally is making members of the party rich at the expense of the working people/taxpayers of Canada. This is the same federally Liberal party that opposed same sex marriage and keeps having all these unsavory connections.

Same sex marriage is here to stay, people in all political parites support it and oppose it. The issue is done, move on and ignore it.

Though the left has got to quite getting sucked in by the federal Liberals.

How can you say us lefties have no sense of humour?! I laugh with great amusement whenever I read anything by poindexter. That contributor is a laugh and a half!

I have to say I did laugh when I read that New'ester. I'll take it as a compliment.

It was such. You are endlessly amusing in your rants. Keep it up. :)

Funny, I would have thought an upcoming vote in a fractious, minority parliament when the Supreme Court DID NOT strike down the traditional definition of marriage in its decision means the stakes are pretty high.

I guess I'll have to defer to the wisdom of New Democrats on this board who believe we oughta just dail it in at this point.

The Conservatives are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to target religious and minority groups to try and radicalize their views against gay marriage. And we should sit on our hands while this happens and snipe about what party card people hold?

Pathetic Bernard. Pathetic.

I support same sex marriage and would support a credible rally initiated by the community it really affects. I do not support opportunism on the issue. I just commented that it is funny that I've only been invited to a protest by a young Liberal twice. The first was to expose a wedge issue in the federal election between the Conservatives and the Liberals: abortion rights and the charter of rights and freedoms. The second was to bring attention to another wedge issue between the parties: same sex marriage. Canadians know where the NDP stands on same sex marriage. Without the binding decisions of the Supreme Court, I'm not sure Canadians could rely on the Liberals to support it. Only the Liberals gain from the proposed action. And really, same sex marriage is legal.... so what are we protesting?

Well said Scott. If the UVic pride Society or elements of the gay community issue a call to rally, I'm sure we would both be there. As they represent institutional power, liberals are not known to protest unless it plays to their electoral strategy in some way. That is the definition of being oppurtunistic. Considering Martin's comments on fighting an election on this issue today, it seems to me that there has been strategizing around this prior. Lefties shouldn't get suckered into a "common front" which seeks to co-opt progressive votes.

You just don't get it! The Federal Young Liberals take stands on issues because we care greatly about the future of justice, rights, and freedoms abroad and here at home. It is clear to me that the YND have a clear agenda and feeling here: "If we didn't organize it, it can't be good and we won't support it, even though we do (supposedly) support the issue." This is not a game of taking credit. This is about the Federal Young Liberals standing up for what we believe in and what we feel is right. If you feel the same way, let the partisan lines fall! With issues as serious and pressing as these, the more support the merrier.

Braeden Caley
Director of Policy, UBC Young Liberals of Canada

I also refer you to the Prime Minister's comments today in CBC and CTV News, that he would go to the polls if necessary to defend same-sex marriage. To me at least, that seems like a serious commitment. And perhaps the Federal Young Liberals made a positive difference?

See for yourself.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/01/21/same-sex050121.html

Braeden Caley

I thought that New Democrats wanted to work with Liberals on issues like this in the minority parliament. What happened to that?

I would think that, especially after Harper's outrageous comments equating gay marriage with polygomy, that people who favour gay marriage from across the political spectrum would want to come together and demonstrate their support.

Perhaps some on this board are just embarassed that they didn't think about the idea of having a rally first.

As for Bryan Skinner's comments, I would ask him: Are you so sure that their are no gays or lesbians in the Young Liberals? In every political party for that matter?

It sounds to me like it's the Young NDP who are the "electoral strategists" here, not the federal Young Liberals.

The message I am getting from Scott Hart is that, if you want to participate in issues, you should join the Young LIberals. If you want to sound like a cynical old hack, you join the NDP.

First off, of course there are gays and lesbians in the Young Liberals. Nobody in the NDP would suggest there aren't, so don't try to put words in their mouths. Secondly, what the YND and the Young Liberals do, whether working together or not, hasn't got much to do with how the party's behave in Parliament. Honestly, do you really think the Youth Wings control the party's? (I only wish... we'd have a hockey season under the Nationalized NHL).

Scott Hart makes an excellent point that same-sex marraige is legal, so what is the protest. If Braeden Caley is correct, and the "natural ruling party" is willing to call an election if it looks as if the legislation won't pass the House, what is he worried about? And to suggest that the NDP is only concerned with who gets the credit? Well, when dealing with the Liberals, who could blame them if they were concerned (health care, Bill of Rights, employment protections, ect ect ect). Not a great track record for giving credit where credit is due, is it? That isn't to say that someone like Scott Hart gives a crap about credit (if you'd ever met him, you'd know that it doesn't matter at all).

And again, Scott was badly quoted, it would seem, if he was mentioning the pattern of Young Liberals expecting the YND to join with them to point out differences between the Liberals and the Conservatives- especially when many of us YNDers don't see much difference at all (in the larger party- youth wings are very different. And I'm not talking at all about same-sex marraige). If the Young Liberals want to protest Harper, or whatever, great. Do it. What do you need the YND for? If you only wanted more bodies at the protest, this wouldn't be an issue. So, what did you want?

The UVic Young Liberals the political birthplace of David Basi, Bobby Virk and Eric Bornman and now Scott Hart.

To me, this smacks of the quintessential difference between federal and provincial politics. The federal Liberals want to do something good by inviting other parties to a rally that their members find important, but the provincial NDP can't see past the polarized dynamic of the provincial political scheme. In my limited provincial political experience, it seems that people in both parties spend more time guessing what the other side is trying to get them to do than focussing on what they are doing for themselves. I bet that's part of the reason why you get such stupid moves from both provincial parties, like having the BC Liberals host a reception for federal Conservatives mere weeks before an election is called.

So the NDP, being too clever by half, take the offer by federal Liberals and rather than make a judgement based on the merit of the issue, they get their brilliant game theorists involved and try to guess what mischievous political quagmire the federal Liberals are trying to get the NDP into. And the end result is the issue of same-sex marriage is hurt just after the federal Conservatives dump millions of dollars into advertising against it. Good job, brilliant game theorists of the NDP. Too bad for same-sex marriage.

Chelsea,

If your email wasn't anonymous I would love to speak to you about this in greater detail. I have indeed met Scott Hart, at Universities Model Parliament. He was quite impressive - a strong leader of his NDP caucus there and very passionate when it came down to defending workers rights.

But this is no "model" world. I know very little about this planned YLC-initiated protest (I'm on the other side of the straight), but I cannot understand why someone as intensely interested in the issues as Mr. Hart would not support such an action, regardless of who the initiators may be. I really dont think Mr. Hart was misquoted though, because he made the comments himself on THIS website! Some people, like him and I, stand by what we say (and type) by signing our own names to it. I would encourage you to do the same next time.

An issue is an issue and a protest is a protest. I am not a member of the BCTF, but I have attended numerous education funding protests initiated by them. I am not a member of CUPE, but attended many of the anti-Iraq-war demonstrations I understand they were primarily responsible for organizing.

I am a Liberal, but that has no bearing on where I go or what I support. It's not about taking credit, it's about getting things done.

1) I'm not the NDP. I'm just one of many members. Commenters should stop that generalization because it's not accurate.

2) I didn't "laugh at" the issue same-sex marriage. I "laughed at" the Liberals for thinking they had the credibility to organize such an action.

Truth be told I also laughed at the word 'non-partisan' because whenever something is deemed non-partisan it usually means the organisers are trying to hide the fact that it's partisan. Surprise surprise the main people defending this are (drumroll) young liberals. This discussion is getting old. Good luck with your rally, I hope you get more than the "eight 20 somethings" that you got to the anti Harper/pro-choice rally you invited me to in June.

To suggest that the Young Liberals do not have the credibility to protest anything is a farce. None of us have been Members of Parliament. We are not the government - we are young members of a political organization, whose prime objective at least in my mind is to ensure that the Liberal Party procedes with a progressive policy agenda in accordance with youth goals and ideas.

I don't think us, or any members of our organization, exercising our right to protest for the upholding of rights, is anything "funny."

I don't understand the logic, but I do know that I would never laugh at the Young NDP for standing up for what they believe in.

(Sorry this is a little out of place but it seems that this protest is focused expanding marriage rights to two same sex partners as a matter of human rights which in my opinion the Liberals are doing for political reasons rather than just doing what is right as the NDP has been advocating. Harper is taking actions for his political reasons but rather than to deny polyamorous relationships the option of legal marriage because Liberals and Conservatives are playing political games, NDPers should not be afraid of standing up for the rights of bisexuals who wish to be complete.

Here is a point of view from someone who is fighting that fight.)

How we met, fell in love and went Poly. MFF

I have been involved in a polyamorous
triad for just over 5 years now. I met a girl online named Michelle
who lived in Denver while I was living in New York. I was 20 years old
at the time.

Michelle asked me to fly to Denver to meet her and after a week or two
of chatting via AOL and the phone, I agreed. It did not take long to
realize I was falling in love with Michelle and wanted to be in her
life for as long as I could be.

There was one hang-up though: Michelle was married to a man named
Dennis and had been for 7 years. Even worse, as far as I was
concerned, was the fact they were happily married and Michelle had no
intention of leaving Dennis.

I spent the next month in Denver, spending all sorts of time with
Michelle. We shopped together, cooked dinner together and made love
several times a day. I was in heaven and had no intention of ever
going back to New York.

Michelle was the perfect woman for me and I knew it. Now, what to do
about her husband. To his credit, he never hit on me, made any advance
towards me and always treated me like I was a welcome addition to the
family. When I asked Michelle what I should do, she said I should
consider the idea of simply being involved with and loving Dennis
also. The idea floored me as I had never thought about having sex with
Michelle's husband because I just sort of thought he was off-limits. I
am not sure why I thought that, as it was quite
obvious Michelle was not off limits... so, why was Dennis? Right?

That night, we all went and had a wonderful dinner and spoke at great
length of the possibilities of a long term three-way relationship. I
learned that Dennis and Michelle were not new at this. They had been
married to another girl for almost 5 years, just previous to meeting
me. This girl had moved on due to matters unrelated to 3 way
relationships. I felt very comfortable with Dennis and Michelle and
asked them to take me back home so we could all three have sex. Since
I had quietly already been attracted to Dennis, having sex with him
was an easy decision. I was not entirely sure how it was all going to
work out, but I was game for trying something new.

That night I learned something. I learned that I love three way sex
and three way love. I could not have been happier than I was that
night. I was making out with a girl I loved dearly while being made
love to by a man I loved dearly. Then, I got to hold Michelle's hand
while she was being made love to. I feared I would get jealous or hurt
when Dennis moved to have sex with Michelle but I wasn't. Quite the
opposite. I was so happy that Michelle was happy and feeling good that
I almost cried. The three of us made love for several hours that
night, several different times. If I had written a script for the
perfect night of romance and sex, I could not have written it better
than the reality of that night.

When I awoke, I knew we would be a threesome for life. I was warm,
happy, sexually satisfied and ready to take on the world. We continued
this relationship for a year or so until we decided to take it to the
next level, marriage.
Of course, due to silly and antiquated laws, it would have been illegal
for Dennis to be legally married to Michelle and me at the same time.
So, we had to do the next best thing. We had a wonderful ceremony with
friends and family, exchanged rings and vows and then I simply changed
my last name to match theirs. It was a beautiful, magical night of real
love and warm sex. Of course, the conservative right would call that
night and our entire relationship a travesty and an immoral disgrace.

How is it that Scott Hart has the god-given right to determine if the Young Liberals have "credibility" to stage a protest?

What on earth do you mean by "credibility", Scott?

Usually "credibility" is something that is determined by "general acceptance". Does this mean that the NDP only has "credibility" when it has power?

Or, has Scott decided that "credibility" means "lack of power", and that's why the Liberals have none. If so, I hope that Scott is working hard to make sure that the NDP does not win the next election.

Why do you keep trying to crucify Scott? I think it's quite clear that the Liberal caucus is divided on the issue of same sex marriage. The party lacks a cohesive philosophy on this issue. Thus, they lack "credibility" because we're talking about a protest that is initiated by a group that doesn't fully support the subject of the protest.

That said, I think it's perfectly legitimate for the Young Liberals to organize such an event. To be a positive force within a political party (especially one that holds power) is the role a youth wing ought to take.

But forgive the YND for not wanting to be associated with the apparent hypocrisy of the Liberals. Especially since, as was stated above, Paul Martin seems determined to keep gay marriage legal.

So what's to protest? You've already got the Prime Minister and thus the Liberals, plus the NDP and presumably the Bloc, on the case. So are you really angry that the YND isn't going to protest the politics of an alienated opposition?

Braeden: You'll have to excuse me if I come on without posting my real name and address, but I've learned to be wary (also, *we* met at UMP, too). Second, Scott may very well have been misquoted. Mr. Coleman posted two quotes, neither of them full sentences, just little splices of a conversation.

Everyone: Scott hasn't said "YNDers will not participate! End of story," but that the YND itself doesn't understand why there is a protest planned. We protest a lot, and need to conserve our energies and voices. That doesn't mean individual members wou;dn't show up. A few things, though; the BCYND is not the UVic NDP Campus Club. Nor is Scott a member of UVic NDP Campus Club, I shouldn't imagine, because Scott isn't a student any longer. Why have they gone to him? They should have gone to a member of UVic's club, or to the Lower Island Coordinator for the BCYND, Shea somebody or other. Beyond that, the UVic YND and the BCYND are two different organizations, related, but oddly, Scott is not the dictator of either. If someone wants to go to a protest, they go. This whole hoopla, if indeed its an issue at all, could be alleviated by a few posters up around campus and a bit of legwork by UVic YLs.

Let me get this straight... Campbell is putting on a reception for Stephen Harper, at which time the conservatives are going to outline their "plan of action" to mobilize against same sex marriage???

Gordon Campbell and Stephen Harper in the same room together for photo ops. And here I was thinking the Mr. Harper was opposed to Same Sex weddings when in fact you have a political one occuring right then and there. Oh sorry.... a "civil union" between Gordo and Stephen. Don't want to offend those people to the Christian Fundamentalist side of the spectrum.

Pete Smith -

Dear Penthouse...

I can't wait for another lame federal Liberal protest. Since when does the governing party protest something? Are you going to protest the offices of your own MPs who support preserving the traditional definition of marriage? I'm not surprised so many NDPers want nothing to do with this amateur hour.

Now Conservatives, on the other hand, are skilled protestors, as evidenced by the hilarious counter-protest of the CFS Day of Action in February 2004 and the satirical protest of Paul Martin in Vancouver the day before the election. Bring on the next election campaign, Mr. Martin! We'll gladly mock you again.

"I am a Liberal, but that has no bearing on where I go or what I support. It's not about taking credit, it's about getting things done. "
Posted by Braeden Caley at January 21, 2005 02:11 PM

Am I the only one who finds this pretty funny and rather sad? If you're so passionate, why not join a political party that actually does something about social issues (never mind that same sex marriage is about legal rights not votes-in or for the house), one that you can be proud of rather than one that maraudes pathetic, selfish, political posturing about as 'non-partisan' protesting, and uses its idealist, ignorant youth wing to do so. Cross the floor if you actually give a shit.