Madam Speaker, I am a bit concerned about the arguments I have been hearing from time to time from our friends across the aisle. Government members seem to be always presenting arguments that concentrate on their attempts to refute the arguments presented by my colleagues.
In other words what we have are negative arguments in opposition to the opposition. What I am waiting to hear are arguments explaining the civil and social purposes of the bill. What are its objectives? How can it possibly benefit society?
It is not good enough for the government to argue that the bill will do no harm. Although that premise in itself is questionable I do see some potential for harm there, but there must be, if this is to be reasonable legislation, a premise that it will somehow benefit the country. What is the advantage of devaluing the unique position of marriage with respect to social benefits? What is the government trying to prove?
Our society has lived for hundreds of generations without this type of recognition for homosexual relationships. These relationships have been essentially prescribed—