Content deleted Content added
m →LGBT rights opposition?: Yes, and ... |
Sub-Arctic (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 27:
:::Agreed. Given this ambiguity, and after all is said and done, I believe it appropriate that she ''should'' be included in the category (with others): let ''visitors'' determine how much of a proponent ''or'' opponent they may be by visiting wikilinks to the appropriate articles. [[User:E Pluribus Anthony|E Pluribus Anthony]] 08:12, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
==Nomination Issue: Same-Sex Marriage==
''The main issue in the nomination battle was same-sex marriage.''
It has commonly been interpreted by those outside of the riding that [[same-sex marriage]] was a big issue here: it was not. [[Same-sex marriage]] was not a part of the nomination debate, nor was BD's stance in regards to the issue. Neither of the major contenders in the nomination bid even mention [[same-sex marriage]] on their respective websites, though strangely Niki Ashton's section on 'Fairness' is down, for the moment at least. The real, or perhaps official, issue, was Northern Development. Behind closed doors though, there were some party insiders saying Bev had to go, but the majority of voters here did not care. Even after she voted her conscience on the issue in 1999, she still was able to win the elections in 2000 and 2004, despite everyone knowing where she stood on the issue. Let us be realistic: Churchill Riding is a far-flung and sparsely populated region, with small urban communities spread out over a Northern landscape. There is not much of a LGBT community here to speak of, or to speak out for that matter. That does not mean that there are no gay people here, rather there are not that many. So you can see, a person could easily get away with not supporting [[same-sex marriage]] here, where as in an urban riding with a larger LGBT community, Bev may have been toasted by a more liberal candidate. Perhaps [[same-sex marriage]] was the most well-known aspect of who Bev was, but that does not mean it was the 'main issue' during the debate. No, [[same-sex marriage]], as an issue, was avoided in much the same way that [[André Boisclair]]'s cocaine use as a cabinet minister in the nineties was in the [[Quebec]] party leadership race. In both instances, these non-issues have been made into issues by people outside of the internal process. I challenge anyone to prove that [[same-sex marriage]] was the main issue. Otherwise, that piece of information should be deleted, and the main issue should be replaced by Northern Development.
| |||