Liberal Backbenchers and Same-Sex Marriage Deal

PM Paul Martin negotiated a deal with about 30 Liberal backbenchers who had been threatening to bring down the government.

The 4 amendments to Bill C-38 include:

They include:

* Stronger guarantees that Charter rights will not override religious freedoms
* Justices of the Peace who do not want to perform civil marriages of same-sex couples will not have to do so
* Churches are not required to rent out their halls for same-sex weddings
* Religious educational institutions will still be allowed to preach that homosexuality is against God’s law, without being subject to hate crime laws

These amendments are meant to protect individuals and organizations who are already finding themselves threatened with human rights complaints and with getting fired.

I need to do more digging to figure out whether there’s anything more specific to the 1st amendment. Otherwise, the remaining 3 simply constitute exceptions to an already oppressive law that fails to cover other, not yet thought of, victims.

The interesting thing about the amendments is that they address the ability of individuals and civil society institutions like churches to define their ways of life, without governmental interference. This is the point that the Conservatives have been focusing on. Will these amendments satisfy the Conservatives? Perhaps at least its libertarian wing. But, as I’ve argued before (and here), this voluntarist notion of marriage and society is inadequate (I’m sure Jeffrey Simpson thinks I’m “scary” for thinking that). Burkean Canuck also expresses some reservations about libertarianism.

UPDATE: Lorne Gunter argues that the amendments are worthless because judges have taken over the role of controlling those areas anyway. Moreover, Paul Martin’s word is worthless, as Pat O’Brien found out.

UPPERDATE: Burkean Canuck points out that the “amendments” are toothless because they fall under provincial jurisdictions (and he reiterates the power of human rights tribunals).