Pubdate: Sat, 26 Jul 2003
Source: Vancouver Sun (CN BC)
Copyright: 2003 The Vancouver Sun
Contact:  http://www.canada.com/vancouver/vancouversun/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/477
Author: Angus Reid

CANADIANS ARE BALKING AT BECOMING BERKELEY NORTH

According to Rick Mercer, Canada's resident satirist, the summer of 2003 
witnessed the dawn of a new era when "we woke up and suddenly were a 
European country." What he's referring to is the simultaneous arrival, 
based of a string of recent court decisions, of gay marriage and legal 
marijuana.

During the last month or so, gay and lesbian couples from across North 
America have been flocking to Vancouver and Toronto to obtain civil 
marriage licences. And because of the federal government's failure three 
years ago to heed a court order to rewrite marijuana laws, Ontario courts 
have refused to convict users caught with small amounts of marijuana. Last 
week, the Toronto police had a call from a citizen reporting that her 
personal stash had been stolen -- they logged the theft as a crime, but not 
the possession of marijuana.

To the delight of some and the disgust of others, Canada appears to have 
become the Holland of North America.

Or has it?

Despite glib references in the media about "majority" support for both 
measures, my reading of recent polls, coupled with many in-depth but less 
scientific soundings I've taken over the past month, reveals a Canadian 
public deeply divided on both issues. Recent Ipsos polls show about 55 per 
cent of Canadians support both measures while about 45 per cent oppose 
them. However, these differences evaporate when voter turnout is factored 
in since supporters are disproportionately younger Canadians who are the 
least likely to vote. Also those opposing both measures (especially 
same-sex marriage) are more as likely to have "strong" feelings suggesting 
that, if anything, the political pendulum could tilt in their direction.

Even though the issues of gay marriage and legal pot involve very different 
principles and issues, they share a common sociological lineage. Both are 
major milestones along the path to a more permissive society in which 
behaviours and relationships once considered criminal, deviant or different 
are permitted, tolerated and ultimately seen as normal. Their simultaneous 
appearance creates the sense of an epochal moment in Canadian society; a 
time of high drama, big stakes and, depending on your perspective, feelings 
of excitement or dread.

These elements will create the biggest debate about the future of Canadian 
society in more than a generation. Social change may become as much a 
defining issue of the 2004 election as free trade was in 1988.

Both measures have a similar support base -- not only younger, but better 
educated and heavily concentrated in major metropolitan areas. These 
Canadians see legal pot and same-sex marriage as elements of a more open 
society that not only tolerates but celebrates diverse lifestyles. That we 
are becoming what the Washington Post earlier this month termed "Berkeley 
North" is seen as a point of pride.

The new Canada is hip and savvy -- leading the rest of North America in the 
march towards a world without boundaries. Naomi Klein, author of the 
international best seller No Logo, was almost giddy in her column this week 
in the U.S. magazine The Nation over the attention that Canada is getting 
south of the border because of gay marriage and legalized drugs. She said 
several friends in New York and San Francisco have been inquiring about how 
to apply for citizenship.

Although Canadian journalists (who also tend to be young, urban and well 
educated) have done a good job characterizing the excitement and expectancy 
surrounding this new era, their portrayal of voters who oppose these 
measures underestimates their strength and misreads the foundation of their 
beliefs. Opponents of this new Canada are drawn from a much larger 
constituency than the tired, old religious right that so often figures in 
media accounts.

On same-sex marriage, opposition is mounting less because of the words in 
the Bible and more because of the words found in Webster's Dictionary. Many 
middle-class, married Canadians who support full rights for same-sex 
couples are increasingly annoyed that the term used for centuries to define 
their lifetime relationship can so easily be suborned by others in 
decidedly different relationships. "Why can't same-sex couples find a 
different word to describe their lifelong commitment?" they ask.

It's virtually impossible to attend a social event in Canada without 
hearing opinions on gay marriage. I sense that opposition is starting to 
coalesce into a revolt about an excess of political correctness and a fear 
that the matter won't end with the definition of marriage. As a neighbour 
asks, "Will the next assault be aimed at the word 'mother' and 'father' 
because they are too gender-specific and create a possible emotional bias 
towards 'different sex' marriages?"

The emotional tone of opposition to decriminalized marijuana isn't as 
pronounced, but the fears are as palpable. Again, opponents are drawn from 
a broader constituency than the small cluster of cranky seniors and 
religious zealots often featured in media accounts. They include many 
parents (especially mothers) concerned about drug use in schools, business 
associations worried about tarnished relations with the U.S. and law 
enforcement agencies that are raising the alarm about the growth of 
organized criminals groups like Hells Angels that play a central role in 
drug production and distribution.

I suspect MPs have been getting an earful from constituents this summer on 
both same-sex marriage and legal pot. Though we won't know the impact of 
these consultations until Parliament resumes, there are already warning 
signs for Justice Minister Martin Cauchon, who is responsible for both 
files. Earlier this week, all four Liberal MPs from the Niagara region 
announced they will oppose legislation to permit same-sex marriages. Others 
- -- especially those from outside the major metro areas -- have also 
indicated deep reservations.

Expect an intense debate on marijuana when Parliament returns. In addition 
to the Canadian Alliance party, opposition to the government's proposed 
decriminalization bill will include several Liberals and a host of groups 
and and associations including Mothers against Drunk Driving, the Vancouver 
Board of Trade, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and several police 
organizations.

Contrary to the sense of finality on both issues that pervade media reports 
on Canada's "new era," this transformation of Canada is at best a work in 
progress that could ultimately be reversed. We've barely finished the first 
of what promises to be an intense three-round fight on the future direction 
of Canadian society.

In the first round, important decisions about the future of Canadian 
society were made by judges behind closed doors. In the next round, 
Parliament will be the focus of attention. But in the final, decisive 
round, Canadians themselves will get a chance to participate directly. 
Indeed, the next federal election may turn into a colossal battle over 
whether voters want Canada to keep the European characteristics that our 
judiciary visited upon us in the summer of 2003.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Larry Stevens