A roundup of Canadian news.
With the Conservative Party Convention over, the media can finally stop complaining about the involvement of social conservatives, which was the only story they wanted to discuss for weeks. Pro-lifers accounted for more than a quarter of the roughly 4,000 delegates (I was a delegate for Brant; many of my friends and colleagues were delegates, as well) and this enabled so-cons to vote in a majority on the National Council and achieve other policy successes. Press Progress, of course, described this grassroots effort as an attempt to “seize control of the Conservative Party” in an article cheerily titled “Anti-Abortion Groups Quietly Installed Activists Into Top Positions Inside the Conservative Party of Canada.” Considering the nonstop media stories, it was hardly quiet.
Despite the Trudeau Liberals moving full-steam ahead, Canadians are not actually supportive of the details of C-6 when actually asked their views on the so-called “conversion therapy ban.” From LSN:
A new poll conducted on behalf of one of Canada’s top constitutional legal groups shows that 91 percent of Canadians agree that adults should have the “right” to get the “sexuality counselling of their choice,” regardless of the desired goal of that therapy. The poll results come from a Nanos National Survey, conducted on behalf of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF), surveying 1,016 Canadian adults nationwide from February 28 to March 4.
Unfortunately, progressives—like with abortion and so many other issues—have framed this issue in such a way that the public doesn’t even know what is getting passed until it is law. That is precisely the intent. It is a very effective tactic.
Over in the National Post, Ben Woodfinden explains where he believes social conservatism needs to go—the Hungary model, which I’ve been beating the drum for here for a couple of years:
Take a classic conservative issue: family formation. You can’t seriously say the family is the bedrock of civilization and then prima facie reject, for ideological reasons, a proactive government role in supporting families. If you’re concerned with family formation and helping ensure Canadians are easily able to start families, you can’t just wax lyrical about family values, you’ve got to make sure the conditions under which people are making decisions and choices are ones that encourage and don’t discourage family formation.
We face social challenges exacerbated and exposed by the pandemic — from a baby bust to a loneliness epidemic to the appalling state of long-term care homes — that point to an underlying fragility of our social institutions and fabric that needs to be addressed. Conservatives should be among the loudest voices in trying to deal with these social challenges. But debates around social conservatism stunt the development of such an agenda, and conservatives would do well to move beyond siloed economic and social thinking and reintegrate their social concerns with a focus on economic conditions as well.
This, he makes clear, does not mean abandoning the fight to save pre-born lives from abortion—but merely expands the so-con response to multiple fronts. I agree with him.
American and international media are reporting on the story of a Canadian father arrested by authorities for refusing to obey a court gag order demanding that he remain silent as his daughter “transitions” by taking testosterone. I discussed the case on my podcast some time ago.